urbanSTL

With Peacock publicly acknowledging that Stan is committed to LA but suggesting the Rams could somehow stay anyways, things get even weirder.

This is all so weird.

jstriebel wrote:With Peacock publicly acknowledging that Stan is committed to LA but suggesting the Rams could somehow stay anyways, things get even weirder.

This is all so weird.

He's actually been publicly acknowledging that since his earliest radio interviews back over two months ago. You can hear it here: http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/R ... -Rams.aspx

or here's one more recently (April, starts about one hour into the show):

So, frankly, not really weird at all. He's been banking on this from the start. It's his whole game plan.

This would have to mean that Dave has been assembling an ownership group as well, assuming there will be a team here, not owned by Kroenke. This is very confusing, since the only teams in the mix are the Rams, Raiders and Chargers, none of which have expressed interest in being in STL. Could this mean either expansion (which the league has denied is on the table) or another team in the mix for relocation ( there does not seem to be any good candidates right now). This is not weird because of what has been said by Mr. Peacock. This is weird because without the Kroenke owned Rams being here, there does not seem to be a good option for a franchise in STL besides maybe the Raiders or an expansion team. I think San Diego somehow figures it out or moves in with Stan in LA. I think the Raiders will either move out of CA or move in with the 49ers. That leaves us with an expansion team or a relocation. That is not where we want to be. If that is the case, we will be used like LA was used for the last 20 years, as a pawn in the game owners will use to get a new stadium in their current markets. While Dave seems confident that a franchise will be here IF this stadium gets built, I just don't see a scenario, as it all sits today, that would allow Stan to be in LA and the Rams/a franchise in STL. Obviously, there could be some shocking, secret plans in the works, that keep the Task Force moving ahead, but as we all know, none of that is public right now. The saga continues!

In real news, the fact that the project now has a tax-funded tab, minus $100 million from the original tab, is good news. The less tax money, the less scrutiny from the opposition.

DogtownBnR wrote:This would have to mean that Dave has been assembling an ownership group as well, assuming there will be a team here, not owned by Kroenke. This is very confusing, since the only teams in the mix are the Rams, Raiders and Chargers, none of which have expressed interest in being in STL. ... This is not weird because of what has been said by Mr. Peacock. This is weird because without the Kroenke owned Rams being here, there does not seem to be a good option for a franchise in STL besides maybe the Raiders or an expansion team.

Or, the most obvious option, which is what Peacock is working toward: the Rams, only with different ownership.

DogtownBnR wrote:This would have to mean that Dave has been assembling an ownership group as well, assuming there will be a team here, not owned by Kroenke. This is very confusing, since the only teams in the mix are the Rams, Raiders and Chargers, none of which have expressed interest in being in STL. Could this mean either expansion (which the league has denied is on the table) or another team in the mix for relocation ( there does not seem to be any good candidates right now). This is not weird because of what has been said by Mr. Peacock. This is weird because without the Kroenke owned Rams being here, there does not seem to be a good option for a franchise in STL besides maybe the Raiders or an expansion team. I think San Diego somehow figures it out or moves in with Stan in LA. I think the Raiders will either move out of CA or move in with the 49ers. That leaves us with an expansion team or a relocation. That is not where we want to be. If that is the case, we will be used like LA was used for the last 20 years, as a pawn in the game owners will use to get a new stadium in their current markets. While Dave seems confident that a franchise will be here IF this stadium gets built, I just don't see a scenario, as it all sits today, that would allow Stan to be in LA and the Rams/a franchise in STL. Obviously, there could be some shocking, secret plans in the works, that keep the Task Force moving ahead, but as we all know, none of that is public right now. The saga continues!

In real news, the fact that the project now has a tax-funded tab, minus $100 million from the original tab, is good news. The less tax money, the less scrutiny from the opposition.

I believe this brings the state cost down to $10 million per year, which is exactly what the players pay the state in income taxes, and exactly double what the state pays now to subsidize the KC stadium upgrades. Makes sense since St Louis generates 40% of the state GDP vs 20% for KC.

GreatestStLouis wrote:
Or, the most obvious option, which is what Peacock is working toward: the Rams, only with different ownership.
Greatest St. Louis Full Member
Full Member Posts: 264Joined: Apr 17, 2014



Where would that leave Stan Kroenke in all of this? I doubt he gives up ownership of the Rams, unless he gains 100% ownership in another team. He has a major ego and wants to run a sports empire, as evidenced by his business moves with the Rams, Arsenal and in Denver. He would either have to be awarded an expansion team or the rights to another team. I am not aware of any other teams being for sale, nor am I aware of the NFL expanding. The only team that could be put up for sale, is the Broncos, but he would not move that team. Could he own that team and be the landlord in LA? That is a slight possibility. You solve the future ownership issue in Denver, you solve the LA problem, with Stan building the stadium for Oakland & SD, solve their stadium issues and sell the Rams to a Peacock led group, solving the STL issue. The only issue there is the fact that you have no team in SD. I guess the proximity to LA helps that situation and the 49ers already in the Bay, makes Oakland's exit a non-factor. I highly doubt Stan wants to be a landlord in LA, but it would solve his cross-ownership issue, allow him to own Denver and still be a major player in LA. However, that would be risky. If they (Raiders & SD) sign 30 year leases, what happens if they leave in 30 years. I know Stan will be 6 feet deep, but he being a good businessman, has to consider that. He could still make his money though. He could reap the benefits of Super Bowls and still be in the good graces of the NFL, if he owned the Broncos and the stadium in LA.

I know this is all like fantasy football, but these scenarios are possible, since we know nothing. As I've maintained, I expect the NFL to allow Stan to move the Rams into his Inglewood palace, leaving STL high and dry. The only X-factor, is the fact that the Task Force seem so confident and continue to push full-steam ahead. There must be a reason for that. Only the TF and the NFL, know what is keeping them motivated. It could be something totally unexpected and unknown to everyone, at this time.

Could Stan be ready to step in with Elway and take over as owner:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/sport ... .html?_r=0

He is very familiar with Bowlen and Elway, as they owned an Arena Football team together. I guess this all depends on whether the family wants to sell. I still think this is an x-factor. Bowlen is not even handling any day to day operations of his franchise any longer, due to his poor health. Something has to give, with regards to the future ownership of the franchise. Will a family member step up to take over?? Big unknown.

dweebe wrote:http://www.dailynews.com/sports/2015051 ... os-angeles

Interesting point I didn't think of.

Others will argue that doesn’t jive with NFL relocation guidelines, and as an NFL executive pointed out, Kroenke didn’t own the Rams when they moved to Los Angeles and had nothing to do with the lease.

Maybe, but he’s clearly using it to his benefit.

I don't understand what he means. Why does their move from Cleveland to Los Angeles play any factor here?

Did he mean he didn't own the Rams when they moved to St. Louis? In which case he's incorrect as he bought something like a 40% stake in the team contingent on the Rams moving to St. Louis. He was very involved in that process.

^ well he is bringing Jamba Juice to the masses and is on the board of several tech start-ups orgs. Unfortunately he can't lead by example in bringing corporate jobs back to downtown, but I think he could play a role in that.

Missouri Speaker of the House John Diehl just resigned over the fallout from his sexually charged texting scandal with a college freshman intern.

It's unclear to me whether he resigned just as Speaker or if he gave up his seat altogether. What I'm seeing now leads me to believe he resigned his seat altogether.

There's bigger impacts that the one I'm about to bring up, but Diehl was an ally of the Stadium Task Force. This could be a big deal as it concerns the stadium funding.

EDIT: Diehl did indeed resign his seat in the legislature.

All the bills related to the stadium are dead and next session is in January 2016, 3 months after the funding iss committed. So this will have a little effect

There is an upcoming owners meeting in San Francisco. Frank Cusamano mentioned today that Peacock will not be presenting to the owners HOWEVER he would (conveniently) be in the Bay area "on business."

He also mentioned that Blitz and Peacock "recently" ran into Davis (Owner of the Raiders) and they were very surprised at how knowledgeable Davis was with the Progress in StL.

This is how Kroenke will win. In Missouri, people like Kroenke can buy any election result he wants. And we will give it to him. It is no coincidence LA Times is running this story just before the NFL owners meeting.
http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp ... story.html

Gary, these are uncharacterisitically emotional posts for you. We have enough of that on this board for you to fall prey. I want my reasoned Gary Kreie back. I'll chalk it up to Sunday blues and maybe some Sunday libations.

Let's hope Peacock and Blitz are staying the unemotional course...

sirshankalot wrote:Gary, these are uncharacterisitically emotional posts for you. We have enough of that on this board for you to fall prey. I want my reasoned Gary Kreie back. I'll chalk it up to Sunday blues and maybe some Sunday libations.

Let's hope Peacock and Blitz are staying the unemotional course...

I like Ald. Ogilive a lot. I think he is great for the city, but I don't agree with him all the time. I'm not too worried about this letter. I think it is more posturing and positioning than a real roadblock.

sirshankalot wrote:Gary, these are uncharacterisitically emotional posts for you. We have enough of that on this board for you to fall prey. I want my reasoned Gary Kreie back. I'll chalk it up to Sunday blues and maybe some Sunday libations.

Let's hope Peacock and Blitz are staying the unemotional course...

Sorry. My sister was in town for my daughter's graduation, so I've been skipping wine the entire weekend. That pent-up spring-loaded frustration had to manifest itself somewhere.

well the bad news is that City of San Diego will present its offer to the Chargers today, the good news is the NFL doesn't like it already....

daniel kaplan
‏@dkaplanSBJ
hearing SD stadium proposal not going 2 b well received in NFL circles; too much team money, process, length of time, location.

gary kreie wrote:
Sorry. My sister was in town for my daughter's graduation, so I've been skipping wine the entire weekend. That pent-up spring-loaded frustration had to manifest itself somewhere.

this made me laugh!