urbanSTL

^ I agree. Kroenke is so adamant about getting out of STL, I would not be shocked to see him pursue other options, once the lease runs out officially in 9 years. (Assuming Carson wins the race to LA) I still see London as a threat, even though some do not. We've heard Goodell say he wants to be there. Stan obviously has ties to London with Arsenal. He knows London, the people and has made significant investments in London. While I am getting ahead of myself. London would become the next threat if Kroenke does not get to LA. (LA is threat #1 of course)
There's not doubt, he wants out of here very badly, which baffles me. STL is a great NFL market, especially with a great outdoor venue. Of course it doesn't hurt to put a quality product on the field and commit to the home market, but that would be the case in the majority of NFL cities.

Stan has literally said nothing.....meanwhile in San Diego, the spokesman for the Chargers comes out every week and says how much the SD plan sucks and that they are committed to LA but somehow people just ignore that and say well Stan will move to LA because he wants to....

I don't think Kroenke has some angle of trying to get out of St. Louis at all costs. Its hard to know regardless, because like DB said, he has said nothing. Its just about money and being able to make money with no risk. He has a chance to own a franchise of the most popular sport in America in the second largest market. And if that doesn't work out, his backup option is a brand new riverfront one billion dollar stadium. That's his second option. What an incredible backup option. He'd be dumb to not try for LA.

I can see your point. It truly is all about money. However, if he fails to get there, does he really want own a team in a city where he is hated? A city he gets booed off the field. I know, he is into money, not being popular. Going by the 'he is only out for money theory' If he fails to get to LA, in his pursuit of money, what's to stop him from trying to grab money again, in a place like London in 9 years. He could poison this market with bad PR, community involvement and of course, putting a mediocre product on the field. This is also assuming he refuses the new stadium and continues at the Dome, if that is possible. I think London would be a bad fit for the NFL, due to distance and other issues. It is all about what Goodell thinks and he thinks London is worth taking a serious look at. I also think JAX may be looking at a move there in the future. Nothing is out of the realm, but the most likely threat is LA, but London is lurking if he fails. I don't trust Stan or the NFL. Is the NFL going to force him to play ball with STL. Who knows!

If the Rams stay, make the playoffs this year...does anyone even care that Stan owns the team? i dont.

^^That's the thing. People care more about the sport and brand new stadium than the owner.

talk about an odd situation.... What if the Rams won the super bowl this year then moved to LA next year.

^ I agree. I could care less, but we'd love to have a Shad Kahn type, that is investing in the city and popular. If Stan is forced to stay and we are stuck with him until he dies, that is WAY better than losing the Rams. I just don't believe he will go down without a fight. I could be wrong, of course.

A good analogy ( sort of )- When AB was taken over, the thought was, even if they fend off INBEV, it may only be temporary. I look at the Rams situation in a similar manner. Even if we fend off LA this time, what's to say 9 years down the road, we are not trying to fend offLondon or some other emerging potential NFL city. Now I'll admit, we are better off having that 9 year window, but unless Stan stays, moves into the Riverfront Stadium and signs an ironclad lease, I am not 100% confident, he will not try to weasel his way out of town at some point in the future. (All assuming he is forced to stay)

Since the preseason starts today can we agree to put this thread to rest until a) Task Force releases the finance plan b) oct 6th Task Force Presentation to the owners c) NFL owners Jan meeting when they are expected to vote on these...

other then those 3 events everything else is just talking in circles.

^ I agree... In a way, it's fun. Like I've always said, this could end up being a story worthy of a book someday. It is such an interesting, weird, annoying, yet fun story to follow. I hoping for a great ending to the story for STL. I don't think I could resist following every little tidbit of info. ..

The season just has this dark cloud over STL, with regards to the Rams. I have had a hard time getting into the on the field activities. I'm sure I will, once the season starts. At the very least, for one more season for sure, the Rams represent St. Louis. I need to remind myself of that.

dbInSouthCity wrote:Stan has literally said nothing.....meanwhile in San Diego, the spokesman for the Chargers comes out every week and says how much the SD plan sucks and that they are committed to LA but somehow people just ignore that and say well Stan will move to LA because he wants to....

actions speak louder than words. He With The Grotesque Toupee has made it clear he wants to head towards I-70 West.

But he needs 24 other owners to agree. This isn't Walmart. You are not stand alone. Having a team is only half of playing a game. Nobody will pay to see a one team scrimmage. The real enemy here is the anti-trust exemption for the NFL. They can vote on wether or not to allow additional competitors sharing their market. Too bad small town America businesses didn't get that kind of exclusive vote when Walmart chose to expand to their towns.

Howard Baltzer tweeted this Sunday. I don't recall Grubman saying this. In any event, if true, would be a positive.

Wow! You are right. The Social Media Dept. was almost rubbing it in. This is getting almost comical. Why not have a player come out and say 'this is why the Rams need to be in LA' Then add pix of the players on the beach near Stan's compound or better yet, do a piece on the 'Bring Back the LA Rams' FB movement.

If I'm reading this correctly, JT is saying 56% chance the Rams stay. Insidestl this morning.
This is HUGE news! (sarcasm)

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/S ... lines.aspx

^ chargers have already said that report is nonsense.

If true, this article is very discouraging and proof that the NFL will not abide by their bylaws.

The NFL will “manage the outcome” in part because a traditional approach, with owners casting ballots regarding who can and can’t move, likely will fail. Farmer notes that Chargers owner Dean Spanos likely has nine votes to block the Rams from moving, and that Rams owner Stan Kroenke likely has nine votes to block the Chargers from moving

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... me-in-l-a/

To me, this says, Rams & Chargers to LA, Raiders wherever the end up, not likely St. Louis. I really feel like St. Louis ends up the odd man out. In this scenario, it almost benefits the NFL is STL fails to get the stadium done. I would guess Stan's backers within the NFL, are rooting for STL to fail, so it makes the decision easy and the PR side of it is even easier.

And meanwhile, back in Missouri, Bob Miserez, executive director of the finance board, recommends the tax credits for the stadium be approved.

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/morn ... 1439902636

^ That's his laid back Cali look. He always wears (wore) a suit here. He has really turned into a Malibu guy. He was definitely still a Missouri guy back in 1995. I think the fact that he has Jerry Jones in his corner, helps his cause. He can only benefit from that. Jerry has major pull with the league. Their relationship has really blossomed in recent years. Two good ol' Missouri boys, plotting to stab their home state in the back for the almighty dollar. Yep, almost comical!