I'm sure the NFL would have Terry make this announcement for them, now that He Haw is off the air.
- 9,566
one thing that Peacock has said/texted privately about these stories and in all caps is IGNORE EVERYTHING MEDIA IS SAYING ON THIS
these "rams are gone" always seen to follow 2-3 days after a positive development for St.Louis.
there are so many angles at play here...oddly enough a lot of this "rams are gone" talk could be coming from the NFL to keep the pressure on STL to get its plan across the board...if BOA got a wind that the Rams are stuck here and that Chargers/Raiders have the green light for LA than they would not pass whatever it needs to be passed in its current form, they would ask more from the owner.
these "rams are gone" always seen to follow 2-3 days after a positive development for St.Louis.
there are so many angles at play here...oddly enough a lot of this "rams are gone" talk could be coming from the NFL to keep the pressure on STL to get its plan across the board...if BOA got a wind that the Rams are stuck here and that Chargers/Raiders have the green light for LA than they would not pass whatever it needs to be passed in its current form, they would ask more from the owner.
- 641
^oh very nice..you text with him or you know someone who does...give us more!
- 9,566
Someone i know who forwards me his interactions with Dave via text. Task force is way more confident than Bradshawsirshankalot wrote:^oh very nice..you text with him or you know someone who does...give us more!
Soon enough ill kinda be involved in this, looking forward to that
- 8,155
Oh dear god, if Peacock is texting in ALL CAPS the thing is freaking dead! All caps is the domain of the crazed and the worried!
On a more serious note, it probably is a good thing there is no presentation to the NFL next month as it gives more time for nailing down financing and property issues.... in the summer Slay had said he wanted to have a bill prepared for the BoA upon their return and obviously that hasn't happened yet.
As for TB, he is right on at least one thing, this is all about money and Kroenke has the most.... if this thing gets bogged down among owners on where to throw their support, I can easily see this coming down to Kroenke agreeing to a high relocation fee or similar that can help the odd man out (Raiders or Chargers) move forward on an acceptable resolution.
It would be awesome btw if the NFL followed the Vatican and had smoke come out of the chimney alerting the media when a decision is made. Then out comes the chosen owner.
As for TB, he is right on at least one thing, this is all about money and Kroenke has the most.... if this thing gets bogged down among owners on where to throw their support, I can easily see this coming down to Kroenke agreeing to a high relocation fee or similar that can help the odd man out (Raiders or Chargers) move forward on an acceptable resolution.
It would be awesome btw if the NFL followed the Vatican and had smoke come out of the chimney alerting the media when a decision is made. Then out comes the chosen owner.
- 2,419
That's fair to say, I suppose. But I don't believe the NFL or these other professional leagues need to continue expanding and watering down their product.dweebe wrote:Says the guy from the city that's not losing their NFL team.KansasCitian wrote:I will hate it if the league decides to create expansion franchises.
Keep the league at 32 teams. It works.
The NFL won't be worth following in 50 years when they've got 50 teams, with 15 overseas.
My hope is that St. Louis can just keep their team.
- 9,566
Bradshaw does give himself a lot of outs after he says 100%...roger wyoming II wrote:On a more serious note, it probably is a good thing there is no presentation to the NFL next month as it gives more time for nailing down financing and property issues.... in the summer Slay had said he wanted to have a bill prepared for the BoA upon their return and obviously that hasn't happened yet.
As for TB, he is right on at least one thing, this is all about money and Kroenke has the most.... if this thing gets bogged down among owners on where to throw their support, I can easily see this coming down to Kroenke agreeing to a high relocation fee or similar that can help the odd man out (Raiders or Chargers) move forward on an acceptable resolution.
It would be awesome btw if the NFL followed the Vatican and had smoke come out of the chimney alerting the media when a decision is made. Then out comes the chosen owner.
Stranger things have happened. I would not be surprised if they stayed, but who would be coming with them (to LA)? The Raiders? The Chargers? Their new stadium was voted down. More will be unfolding by Christmas. You are gonna have a concrete answer."
whats odd he also says he has known his for over a year...meaning last September...at that time the Rams/Demoff were saying we have to find a stadium solution here...Rams to LA from the Rams didnt happen until Jan 5th 2015.
- 3,767
Not to mention, Dumoff had been pushing the whole "Stan is a real-estate developer" "don't be too worried about Inglewood" message, from January after that. I recall him saying that on Fox 2 before last season, while trying to boost ticket sales.
Vatican white smoke.....I love it... Peacock vobiscum.
It also seems weird that Bradshaw is saying Carson was voted down. What's he talking about? I will admit that the sound of silence from Carmen Policy since the last owners' meetings is disturbing, but it's hard to believe that Carson would just fade into the sunset after all of the apparent work and money that went into it this year. One stadium plan will have to die, but not without more public recognition, I would think.
Regarding money, I agree that the most available is tempting for the owners, but for goodness sake, the fact that Stan will be ok footing the bill to save the NFL for another market (or two) but not for his own....and the league would ok it, is absolute dirty pool. I can't imagine how that could be publicly justified with a straight face, even by guys who make a living at lies and grandstanding, while STL is standing at the altar.
It also seems weird that Bradshaw is saying Carson was voted down. What's he talking about? I will admit that the sound of silence from Carmen Policy since the last owners' meetings is disturbing, but it's hard to believe that Carson would just fade into the sunset after all of the apparent work and money that went into it this year. One stadium plan will have to die, but not without more public recognition, I would think.
Regarding money, I agree that the most available is tempting for the owners, but for goodness sake, the fact that Stan will be ok footing the bill to save the NFL for another market (or two) but not for his own....and the league would ok it, is absolute dirty pool. I can't imagine how that could be publicly justified with a straight face, even by guys who make a living at lies and grandstanding, while STL is standing at the altar.
Demoff was either out of the loop or deliberately lying...or some combination of the both.
Even to this day he'll note that he understands why attendance is poor and puts the blame on the product. Yet the Rams will absolutely use this against St. Louis in trying to secure the votes to go to LA.
Which makes you wonder if the whole reason for telling St. Louis that he absolved them for their attendance was actually to encourage them not to show up.
Even to this day he'll note that he understands why attendance is poor and puts the blame on the product. Yet the Rams will absolutely use this against St. Louis in trying to secure the votes to go to LA.
Which makes you wonder if the whole reason for telling St. Louis that he absolved them for their attendance was actually to encourage them not to show up.
- 3,767
I think Kroenke has some very smart people working the NFL 'rooms', as well as PR people. I think he also has spin doctors, like Allbright, to print stories that Rams to LA is 100%. Maybe it is, but I still find it hard to believe the NFL would let STL spend all that money & effort, if they didn't want the stadium to work and have a team here. I think Stan is and will do whatever it takes to get to LA, but I don't believe he will sue the NFL or go rogue, from all reports. I believe Stan wants poor attendance and major indifference to the Rams in STL, so he can spin it in his favor. I think his presentation will be much more effective, showing pictures of the empty dome and throw numbers showing STL is bleeding population and losing corporations. I think a good spin doctor PR firm, could easily throw STL under the bus, considering our recent bad PR, has our stock at an all time low. I don't even think you have to believe in conspiracy theories, to know that Stan wants out and will do whatever it takes, within reason, to get there.
Is this such a bad idea?dbInSouthCity wrote:if BOA got a wind that the Rams are stuck here and that Chargers/Raiders have the green light for LA than they would not pass whatever it needs to be passed in its current form, they would ask more from the owner.
Why is that so hard to believe?DogtownBnR wrote:...but I still find it hard to believe the NFL would let STL spend all that money & effort, if they didn't want the stadium to work and have a team here.
- 9,566
Latest update from Bernie
"Rams rumbles: Dave Peacock, co-chair of the St. Louis stadium task force, has been busy speaking with members of the six-owner committee that’s in charge of the Los Angeles decision that will, among other verdicts, determine whether the Rams stay in St. Louis or move to team owner Stan Kroenke’s proposed football-entertainment complex in Inglewood. Peacock declined comment on these affairs but a source close to him tells us Peacock is encouraged by the feedback coming his way … unrelated to that observation: there’s been a new round of buzz — unconfirmed — of Kroenke exploring a bid to purchase majority ownership in the Oakland Raiders. But that one stays is in the rumor file for now …
And in another new theory being put out there, the NFL may put only one franchise in Los Angeles for the foreseeable future. That would seemingly favor Kroenke. But I did some snooping around, and I believe that theory is being dished by a pro-Kroenke NFL executive that has no real authority over the process. We’ll see. … Terry Bradshaw, LOL. Where I live there’s a neighborhood street cat that we take care of when kitty needs a meal. And Bradshaw knows about as much on Rams/LA as the cat does."
"Rams rumbles: Dave Peacock, co-chair of the St. Louis stadium task force, has been busy speaking with members of the six-owner committee that’s in charge of the Los Angeles decision that will, among other verdicts, determine whether the Rams stay in St. Louis or move to team owner Stan Kroenke’s proposed football-entertainment complex in Inglewood. Peacock declined comment on these affairs but a source close to him tells us Peacock is encouraged by the feedback coming his way … unrelated to that observation: there’s been a new round of buzz — unconfirmed — of Kroenke exploring a bid to purchase majority ownership in the Oakland Raiders. But that one stays is in the rumor file for now …
And in another new theory being put out there, the NFL may put only one franchise in Los Angeles for the foreseeable future. That would seemingly favor Kroenke. But I did some snooping around, and I believe that theory is being dished by a pro-Kroenke NFL executive that has no real authority over the process. We’ll see. … Terry Bradshaw, LOL. Where I live there’s a neighborhood street cat that we take care of when kitty needs a meal. And Bradshaw knows about as much on Rams/LA as the cat does."
The thing about STL not working though, is totally bogus. Even with our poor attendance, fractured market-ownership relationship, and city suffering PR nightmare after PR nightmare, ownership is making a profit. During the nadir or this franchises' existence, Stan has coaxed the value from 32nd to 28th. It's an insult to the Bengals, Lions, Raiders, and Bills (and the other teams in the 20s who are very close the Rams' value....Jags, Titans, Browns, Bucs, Saints, Chargers, Chiefs, Cards) who are less valuable than the Rams to say, "My product is valued higher than yours, and I'm trying to sabotage it, but I'm going to take it over here to make it more valuable than almost everyone's." To coin a phrase from Joe Buck....Joke. As long as there are x number of teams in the league, someone will be at the bottom of the valuation list and that shouldn't be a free card to look around for a better deal. Also, what was STL's reputation in the early 90s when Stan helped move them here? What were the trends of the day at that time?
I like the rumor regarding Oakland. While skeptical of that entire can of worms, it would make sense to get the franchise in the most dire need to the owner with the easiest path. I also love the idea that Peacock's adventures to the owners is just as much about convincing them of a new and stable local ownership group (ideally with him as front man as he had established an impressive amount of equity in that arena) as it is about the viability of STL as a market.
I like the rumor regarding Oakland. While skeptical of that entire can of worms, it would make sense to get the franchise in the most dire need to the owner with the easiest path. I also love the idea that Peacock's adventures to the owners is just as much about convincing them of a new and stable local ownership group (ideally with him as front man as he had established an impressive amount of equity in that arena) as it is about the viability of STL as a market.
Every NFL team makes a profit. And if the Rams stadium was empty, they still would make a profit.blzhrpmd2 wrote:The thing about STL not working though, is totally bogus. Even with our poor attendance, fractured market-ownership relationship, and city suffering PR nightmare after PR nightmare, ownership is making a profit.
^Exactly. Hence, proving "financial hardship" is likely arbitrary nonsense.
- 9,566
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... e-by-rams/
Some owners actively opposing L.A. move by Rams
Some owners actively opposing L.A. move by Rams
As the game of musical chairs winds closer to the point at which the music stops, some owners will be trying to guide certain teams toward, or away from, the available seats.
Per multiple sources, a group of influential owners strongly opposes the relocation of the Rams to Los Angeles. That group includes Panthers owner Jerry Richardson, who is emerging as a leader of the NFL’s L.A. committee.
As one source put it, Richardson and other owners view the Chargers and Raiders as more eligible to move under the league’s relocation policy, especially since it appears that St. Louis has cobbled together a viable plan for building a new stadium and keeping the Rams in the place they’ve been for the last 20 years.
Also, a move by the Chargers, who have tried for more than a decade to build a new stadium in San Diego, is viewed as the least disruptive to existing fan bases.
In response to a request for comment from PFT, Richardson said only that “we have every reason to believe that re-entry of the NFL into the Los Angeles market will be successful.”
As to the potential timing of a vote on a return to L.A., Richardson said, “Additional work needs to be done before we move forward, but we are confident in our process.”
The process includes at least 24 owners approving any move. Recent suggestions that the inability of either the Rams or Chargers to get the necessary votes have been viewed by some as an effort by Kroenke to delay the process for a year, in the hopes that: (1) the current St. Louis proposal will be deemed not viable; (2) San Diego’s effort to keep the Chargers will be regarded as more viable; and (3) Kroenke’s proposed project at Hollywood Park will be viewed as more inevitable.
The effort to keep the Chargers in San Diego soon will continue, according to one source, with a visit by San Diego’s mayor to owners like Richardson, in an effort to persuade him that the Chargers should be required to stay the course in their current hometown.
As of now, it appears that the Chargers definitely have the votes to block the Rams and that the Rams probably have the votes to block the Chargers. Which means that the NFL will be presiding over potentially delicate and highly political discussions at an upcoming meeting in October and again in December. Those politics likely will include Richardson and other owners firmly opposing the effort of Stan Kroenke to move the Rams to L.A.
- 3,767
stlien wrote:
-The NFL is smart and knows that STL is a top-20 MSA and media market, not to mention a great sports market.
-The NFL would find it hard to walk away from a brand new billion dollar stadium in a great sports town, even with the empty seats and jaded fanbase.
-There are cities in much worse shape than STL... OAK, SD, JAX......
-From what I've heard Carson is a real and viable project. The NFL preferred it at one time, due to highway accessibility.
-Dave Peacock built a very good relationship with the NFL over the years. I'd be surprised if they jack him around. Not to mention, I can't imagine them jacking around Jay Nixon and other politicians. I think there are some owners that would (ie..Jerry Jones) because they are on Stan's side. Fortunately for STL, Jerry is not on the LA Committee.
-Most of the long-time owners do not like relocation. They prefer stability. The Rams have been in STL for over 20 years. While not nearly as long as they were in LA, this game of musical chairs could open the door to great instability in the league, over the next decade or so. Most owners don't want that, according to what I've read.
Now, am I naïve to believe that the NFL owners are not greedy and will do the right thing. Heck no! I know they do what is best to line their pockets. At the same time, I think everything I listed, at the very least, gives STL a good shot to keep the Rams, regardless of what Terry Bradshaw thinks.
While I have very little trust in the NFL, here are a few reasons why I find it hard to fathom the NFL walking away from STL, if the riverfront stadium is shovel-ready.Why is that so hard to believe?
-The NFL is smart and knows that STL is a top-20 MSA and media market, not to mention a great sports market.
-The NFL would find it hard to walk away from a brand new billion dollar stadium in a great sports town, even with the empty seats and jaded fanbase.
-There are cities in much worse shape than STL... OAK, SD, JAX......
-From what I've heard Carson is a real and viable project. The NFL preferred it at one time, due to highway accessibility.
-Dave Peacock built a very good relationship with the NFL over the years. I'd be surprised if they jack him around. Not to mention, I can't imagine them jacking around Jay Nixon and other politicians. I think there are some owners that would (ie..Jerry Jones) because they are on Stan's side. Fortunately for STL, Jerry is not on the LA Committee.
-Most of the long-time owners do not like relocation. They prefer stability. The Rams have been in STL for over 20 years. While not nearly as long as they were in LA, this game of musical chairs could open the door to great instability in the league, over the next decade or so. Most owners don't want that, according to what I've read.
Now, am I naïve to believe that the NFL owners are not greedy and will do the right thing. Heck no! I know they do what is best to line their pockets. At the same time, I think everything I listed, at the very least, gives STL a good shot to keep the Rams, regardless of what Terry Bradshaw thinks.
Another positive article in this rollercoaster ride:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... e-by-rams/
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... e-by-rams/
This kind of stuff is likely just fluff but I still find the depth of Peacock's connection to the NFL too intricate to allow for STL to be abandoned indefinitely. His timing for this event was impeccable.
http://www.101sports.com/2015/09/21/eve ... -st-louis/
Edit: additional mild updates
http://www.insidesocal.com/nfl/2015/09/ ... in/itional mild updates:
http://www.101sports.com/2015/09/21/eve ... -st-louis/
Edit: additional mild updates
http://www.insidesocal.com/nfl/2015/09/ ... in/itional mild updates:
- 9,566
Disturbing quote from Lewis Reed
how does he NOT know that there is no stadium being built without the Rams committing their share & signing a 30 year lease.
Reed said aldermen may be “hard-pressed to build a stadium and commit the amount of resources that would be required to build the stadium” if the Rams were definitely bolting.
how does he NOT know that there is no stadium being built without the Rams committing their share & signing a 30 year lease.