Share
2,929
Life MemberLife Member
2,929

PostOct 09, 2019#4051

Dredger: I do wonder about the Chargers coming to STL (and being rebranded so Sandy Eggo keeps the Chargers legacy). On one hand, STL has the size and demographics to be the top pick for relocating that team, as we're the largest US market without a franchise right now. I think London is a no-go for time zone differences, and I'm very doubtful on the chances for Mexico City, a city which I love, getting its own franchise. Non-US markets may best be served with "guest" games rather than their own team, as that model's been working well enough already. The one thing against the "STL Chargers" is the League's revenue sharing, that the franchise may still be profitable from TV broadcasts even if the stadium's empty. Otherwise, the empty stadium visuals will certainly hurt perceptions of the League itself, especially if they can't fill up a stadium in an LA home market, and empty stadiums definitely mean missed optimal revenues. 

Getting them to relocate likely is the best play to get any franchise to STL, as with 32 teams I don't think the NFL wants to create any more franchises. They could've made billions more from franchising LA with new teams instead of authorizing relocations from existing markets. It still amazes me that the Raiders are going to Las Vegas and not LA, as LA still cheers loudest for the Raiders, and the Carson partnership with Disney CEO Bob Iger would've made "Darth Raider" a giant cross-branding opportunity. 

A couple quick notes on the relocation and lawsuit... 
  • I remember the day the relocation was authorized, following breaking news on Twitter that day. There were a couple reports that StanK threatened to sue the other franchisees and the League itself in Federal court if they didn't authorize the relocation, citing certain teams' owners (i.e. Charlotte & Houston) intervening at the time with Peacock, etc. to help STL's efforts towards completing our proposal. This was supposedly after the Stadium Task Force voted 6-1 in favor of the STL proposal and recommending the Carson Raiders/Chargers stadium proposal for LA. Shortly after this threat was supposedly levied, another vote was taken by the franchise owners, which wasn't taken anonymously, and the Rams relocation got its first majority vote. 
  • I've also heard that, as a condition to the League authorizing the Rams' relocation, the owners made StanK assume a serious amount of risk liabilities should any "blowback" from relocation come back on the League or its franchisees. So, should the Defendants lose, it pretty much means StanK would have to pay all the damages. It won't stop the NFL's brand damages that may come from pre-trial Discovery, but financially it may all be on StanK's dime. 
  • Speculation, but perhaps the biggest variable would be former players testifying that the team had been set to relocate while saying otherwise. It's not just Cortland Finnegan. Chris Long apparently had told his father, Howie Long, that the team was going to LA long before the final decision; I remember Howie saying so on a live broadcast during the last season. Also, right after the team relocated, they cleared house and dumped around half the team for new players. Now, who knows if they put NDAs in the locker room or not, but maybe we could see James Laurinitus or some other veteran STL Ram testifying that the fix was in the whole time on relocation. Chris Long still donates heavily to STL-based nonprofits even as the NFL has abandoned them. 
  • Even more speculative... What if a witness could say the fix was in so the team wasn't a winner? Casually observing the team back then gave plenty of clues that they sought to be mediocre at best (No offense? Only defense? Our top WR was 5'7" Tavon Austin?!?!?). So, what if someone testifies that they were set to lose? If the integrity of the team's competitiveness comes into question, then the whole NFL would suffer. But if the head office knew, then here come the accusations of the fix being in on many other teams, and fan bases begin to crumble. That's maybe the biggest risk from Discovery...
3,767
Life MemberLife Member
3,767

PostOct 09, 2019#4052

^Good stuff!

It is kind of amazing that this story is not getting much play in the national media especially LA.  

I actually attended the Townhall down at the Peabody opera house. I met Eric Grubman.  he told me personally that the north riverfront stadium would not even fall into the top 50% of stadiums if built.
I was completely shocked. Howard Baltzer  was standing right next to me and  actually wrote about the comments Grubman made in the paper.  We all know that was total BS.  It seemed like he was trying to discourage me from believing our stadium proposal was good enough.  He was very negative.  Knowing what I know now there is no doubt that he knew the fix was in. The “Townhall“ was a total sham.
1,864
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,864

PostOct 10, 2019#4053

Even if they did have players sign NDAs, those would be null and void in Federal court.    And with what you've mentioned some players saying in public, and almost certainly recorded and easily available to replay in a courtroom, it would be very difficult for those specific players to then change their story once under oath.  

Expect the NFL to try to delay and drag this out as much as possible.  They probably already have a number in mind for a settlement, but you also know they will try to use every legal loophole to resist having the big names testify or even provide dispositions.
6,123
Life MemberLife Member
6,123

PostOct 10, 2019#4054

gone corporate wrote: ↑
Oct 09, 2019
  • Even more speculative... What if a witness could say the fix was in so the team wasn't a winner? Casually observing the team back then gave plenty of clues that they sought to be mediocre at best (No offense? Only defense? Our top WR was 5'7" Tavon Austin?!?!?). So, what if someone testifies that they were set to lose? If the integrity of the team's competitiveness comes into question, then the whole NFL would suffer. But if the head office knew, then here come the accusations of the fix being in on many other teams, and fan bases begin to crumble. That's maybe the biggest risk from Discovery...
Ooh! Now this I like. Might be the most exciting thing out of the NFL in their history. Smacks of Chicago throwing the World Series and ending up in the Supreme Court. Imagine the headlines: "Rams Pull the Wool Over Nation!" "Something StanKs in River City!" "Move Over Black Sox: Meet the Black Sheep Scandal!" Nearly 100 years later. Perfect anniversary celebration. Heck, there's even owners abusing players and failing to adequately address their health care and retirement needs in both cases. Financial speculation. Back room deals. Oh yeah! I like it!
60
New MemberNew Member
60

PostOct 10, 2019#4055

I think the NFL is a dying league. It'll soon go the way of Boxing. 
I think you choose B or C, whichever you think results in a bigger payout, invest a portion in the city, and use the rest to lure the Pelicans away from New Orleans. Absolute pipe dream, but I think an NBA team would be wildly successful here, and that league is constantly growing.
1,610
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,610

PostOct 10, 2019#4056

"The one thing against the "STL Chargers" is the League's revenue sharing, that the franchise may still be profitable from TV broadcasts even if the stadium's empty" -GC

I've never understood this argument in regards to team values in the NFL.  Teams don't get local broadcast rights like they do in the other leagues, so they can't get more value that way.  LA already has a team in the league, so if Rams & Chargers are playing at the same time (which I assume they do, as most west coast teams kickoff at the 3:15 time slot), it doesn't generate significantly more eyeballs for ad revenue which would lead to increased broadcast rights league-wide.  I can't imagine there's a huge number of LA folks who 1) Have an interest in watching the NFL   and 2) Don't have an interest in the Rams   and 3) Do have an interest in the Chargers.  Would it be larger than the number of fans turned off in STL? 
64
New MemberNew Member
64

PostOct 10, 2019#4057

sc4mayor wrote: ↑
Oct 09, 2019
John Coctostan wrote: ↑
Oct 09, 2019
DogtownBnR wrote: ↑
Oct 09, 2019
Let’s say the settlement ends up being huge for St. Louis. (I have no idea what the end game will be, but let’s assume it is very favorable. Would you rather have the following result:

Please choose the option you most prefer and explain. Thanks!


A) St. Louis is given a new team (expansion or rebranded Charger franchise w/ local owners) with ironclad 30-year lease, Dome renovations to get up to 2020 standards, Rams park lease and all expenses paid back from effort to keep Rams ($20M).

B) $200-$350M cash back to the CVC, City, County etc.

C) No settlement. Will take our chances so we can see stanK, Goodell and his cronies take the stand and admit the fix was in & the process was rigged. Under this scenario, nothing is guaranteed, we are at the mercy of the judicial system. What we have to gain could be similar to option B, but we also get to expose the corrupt cartel-like behavior of the NFL. There is also a chance we lose and get nothing. Then we have egg all over our faces. If STL prevails there could be more attorney fees, appeals and delays,  before the money gets back to the region’s coffers.

As much as I hate to say it, I would choose option A. Assuming the franchise has a local majority, an ironclad lease and is not treated unfairly by the league.
A shouldn't even be an option for a multitude of reasons. Assuming the team wouldn't be treated unfairly by the league is a pipe dream. There is absolutely zero trust between ST. Louis and the NFL.  After the Rams, St. Louis should want nothing to do with another city's current franchise. You'd certainly want local ownership for an expansion team. Who has that kind of money to step up?  The Taylors have already gone above and beyond for this community. Is the Dome even an option at this point? Getting the Dome up to 2020 standards would cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Over half a billion to include a retractable roof. Are they not making improvements to the convention center that include portions of the Dome? Who'd pay for a stadium if the Dome wasn't an option? A new practice facility would also have to be built since Kroenke was awarded Rams park.  3 franchises in 35 years....don't see it happening.

Paying off the Dome and using a portion of the settlement to improve the convention center is infinitely more  profitable to the St. Louis region than any NFL team would be. 

Would love C just to watch Kroenke, Demoff, and Goodell squirm up on the stand......but if what some of the talking heads are saying ($500M +) then it's hard to turn that down.
THANK YOU!
I'm most likely in the minority here (allow me to zip up my flame suit first) but I hope St. Louis never sees another NFL team again.  We went down this road twice, and got burned twice.  Enough is enough.
As you pointed out, the idea that we'd get any favorable treatment or a favorable lease from the NFL or an owner is laughable.  These teams exists to f*** cities over and make their cartel of owners as much money as possible.  The sport itself is just a byproduct these days.
I'm all in for full discovery in terms of selecting one of the options above, though I'm not convinced it gets there.
No, thank YOU, because I thought I was taking crazy pills for a moment. The NFL is doing its best to compete with FIFA for most corrupt sports entity, they just bent us over, and people want another team? A very, VERY wise man once said: There's an old saying in Tennessee—I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee—that says, 'Fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again'

If the NFL produced even a slight economic return to our region then maybe I'd understand. But it doesn't. And NFL stadiums don't generate economic activity. Having an NFL team would allow us to stitch a social status patch on our shirt but that's about it.


The NFL is trending downward and in my (uninformed) opinion I honestly don't think the NFL (in its current form) is even around 20-30 years from now.
2,419
Life MemberLife Member
2,419

PostOct 10, 2019#4058

I enjoy watching the NFL, and I still do every week as a fan of the Kansas City Chiefs, but a significant (and growing) portion of me desires to see the league die a slow, painful death.

On top of the league's blatant disregard for the fans, you have CTE, the blind eye turned toward abuse against women and children, and ignored player health issues the very moment their career is over. 

I also find it insane and unjust that Colin Kaepernick was never given another shot at the NFL because he started a movement that lasted one season.

The NFL likes for their fans to be dumb and ignorant. Personally, I don't like subscribing to something that wants to bury my head that deep into the sand, but what stinks for me is how entertaining the play remains. I just hope St. Louis crushes them in court. 
2,929
Life MemberLife Member
2,929

PostOct 10, 2019#4059

DogtownBnR:
It is kind of amazing that this story is not getting much play in the national media especially LA.  
Actually, I think I get it. The NFL wants to win over the LA market and make them Rams fans, not just football fans (they already have USC & UCLA) or NFL fans (the city’s already full of transplants and Cowboys & Raiders fans). They want them to be Rams fans, and to a much lesser degree Chargers fans. If word got out that their new golden boy, Stan Kroenke, is really an a-hole and does a whole lot of underhanded crap, they’ll lose the goodwill they’ve been fighting to create. Plus, no one wants to look in the mirror, see their reflection wearing a Rams jersey, and incredulously say to themself: “I’m the bad guy?” 

As for the rest of the country, they don’t want to poison their own home market; can you imagine the press in, say, Philadelphia coming out and saying the NFL is crooked? All the Eagles fans would immediately hate that media source, and the team would shun them, maybe even get their preferred advertisers to do the same. When people self-identify in a brand, they’ll take any attack on that brand as an attack on themselves. Just look at the polarization of national politics today and make it more individualized on the consumer. That’s sports fanaticism, and the NFL branding most of all. 

That all changes once this enters pre-trial discovery. That’s why the League’s been seeking out the US Supremes; they’ll do whatever they can to keep their stink under wraps.

This whole thing will be the subject of a whole lot of books and case studies on modern ethics. I’m personally anticipating at least an HBO movie coming out of this dumpster fire (or Showtime, whichever one doesn’t have the Training Camp reality series anymore).
symphonicpoet: 
"Move Over Black Sox: Meet the Black Sheep Scandal!" 
"BLACK SHEEP" IS AWESOME!
sc4mayor
sc4mayor

PostOct 10, 2019#4060

^ I don’t think anyone, even those fickle LA folks, think Kroenke is a golden boy. Seems everyone knows this guy is a massive a**hole. Hell he even killed a guy a while back (well the guy killed himself but blamed it on Kroenke in his suicide note).

Don’t forget how much he’s hated in Denver and in England too...
64
New MemberNew Member
64

PostOct 10, 2019#4061

sc4mayor wrote: ↑
Oct 10, 2019
^ I don’t think anyone, even those fickle LA folks, think Kroenke is a golden boy.  Seems everyone knows this guy is a massive a**hole.  Hell he even killed a guy a while back (well the guy killed himself but blamed it on Kroenke in his suicide note).

Don’t forget how much he’s hated in Denver and in England too...
Agreed. I think it's common knowledge among NFL fans that: A) Kroenke is an a-hole; and B) the NFL is a crooked 
They just don't care.
As for LA, the Rams aren't even a blip on most Angelenos' radar: Dodgers, Lakers, college football (USC and UCLA), LAFC, Raiders, then maybe the Rams? Probably a hodgepodge of other teams before the Rams actually. Heck, the first year back in LA, I'm pretty sure the Rams did not finish in the top 3 in NFL ratings IN LA any week of the season!
2,929
Life MemberLife Member
2,929

PostOct 10, 2019#4062

^Rams broadcasts in LA had consistently been the least-watched Sunday NFL broadcast in their market. That may be changing now that the team is competitive again, but they surely don't have the brand strength as the other big SoCal teams. For LA football fans, Bruins and Trojans games are still preferred over Rams or Chargers games. Here's where I say they don't want to give the market another reason to hate StanK's products, because as they're just beginning to affiliate with their home market brand, they're certainly not yet loyal to it. This lawsuit could risk tarnishing the franchise's brand considerably, as well as that of the League itself. 
2,327
Life MemberLife Member
2,327

PostOct 12, 2019#4063

If it comes out that the move was fait accompli and the Rams tanked the team as GC speculated, the next thing I want to see is Goodall, Kroenke and the rest squirming and stammering before a House Judiciary Committee hearing.
947
Super MemberSuper Member
947

PostOct 13, 2019#4064

pattimagee wrote: ↑
Oct 09, 2019
Having option A and some ability to control the contract terminology would be pretty awesome... because I have a feeling that would be worth more in tax revenue than option B, just from TV revenue/earnings tax for the next 10-15 years... and at 30 years, that could be a lot of tax revenue. Throw a Superbowl or a few title runs in there and it would definitely be worth it... 

Now... make the NFL own the stadium, pay property taxes, and then restore the entertainment tax also... huge win. 
You would probably have more luck playing Powerball than expecting any of that to actually happen.
I won't say the NFL will never return to St. Louis, but... the soonest you might possibly be able to see St. Louis playing in a Super Bowl again will be when Uncle Rico Kroenke's $3 billion $5 billion SoFi Stadium in Inglewood is celebrating its 25th birthday.
2,056
Life MemberLife Member
2,056

PostOct 13, 2019#4065

DTGstl314 wrote: ↑
Oct 13, 2019
pattimagee wrote: ↑
Oct 09, 2019
Having option A and some ability to control the contract terminology would be pretty awesome... because I have a feeling that would be worth more in tax revenue than option B, just from TV revenue/earnings tax for the next 10-15 years... and at 30 years, that could be a lot of tax revenue. Throw a Superbowl or a few title runs in there and it would definitely be worth it... 

Now... make the NFL own the stadium, pay property taxes, and then restore the entertainment tax also... huge win. 
You would probably have more luck playing Powerball than expecting any of that to actually happen.
I won't say the NFL will never return to St. Louis, but... the soonest you might possibly be able to see St. Louis playing in a Super Bowl again will be when Uncle Rico Kroenke's $3 billion football palace in Inglewood is celebrating its 25th birthday.
This was a hypothetical so... I get to chose. 😇
947
Super MemberSuper Member
947

PostOct 13, 2019#4066

gone corporate wrote: ↑
Oct 10, 2019
^Rams broadcasts in LA had consistently been the least-watched Sunday NFL broadcast in their market. 
Lower than the Chargers?!? Wow.

PostOct 13, 2019#4067

stladvocate wrote: ↑
Oct 10, 2019
I think the NFL is a dying league. It'll soon go the way of Boxing. 
I think you choose B or C, whichever you think results in a bigger payout, invest a portion in the city, and use the rest to lure the Pelicans away from New Orleans. Absolute pipe dream, but I think an NBA team would be wildly successful here, and that league is constantly growing.
Is there any reason to believe lifelong New Orleanian Gayle Benson has any interest in moving her team out of New Orleans? Especially given that she also owns an NFL team in that market?
60
New MemberNew Member
60

PostOct 14, 2019#4068

Probably not, but there were rumors, after the passing of her husband, that they might be on the move.
64
New MemberNew Member
64

PostOct 14, 2019#4069

Everyone's favorite NFL insider (EDIT - not sure how to clean this up):

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">There was a STRONG rumor floating around in recent weeks that the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NFL?src=has ... w">#NFL</a> had “offered” the city of St. Louis the <a href="https://twitter.com/Chargers?ref_src=tw ... hargers</a> franchise.... <a href="https://t.co/05YGLCnkiM">https://t.co/0 ... </p>&mdash; Taylor Twellman (@TaylorTwellman) <a href=" 14, 2019</a></blockquote>

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
sc4mayor
sc4mayor

PostOct 14, 2019#4070

^ Hopefully the city told them to get f**ked.

If I were city leadership, the ONLY way I would even entertain such a thing is if the NFL paid for every last cent.  Stadium, land, infrastructure, etc.  They'd also have to pay off the remaining debt on the Dome and reimburse the city for the failed stadium plan if it were up to me as well.
2,056
Life MemberLife Member
2,056

PostOct 14, 2019#4071

They should say the only way we'll get a team is if the city owns the Chargers outright, lol. 
2,929
Life MemberLife Member
2,929

PostOct 14, 2019#4072

sc4mayor wrote: ↑
Oct 14, 2019
^ Hopefully the city told them to get f**ked.

If I were city leadership, the ONLY way I would even entertain such a thing is if the NFL paid for every last cent.  Stadium, land, infrastructure, etc.  They'd also have to pay off the remaining debt on the Dome and reimburse the city for the failed stadium plan if it were up to me as well.
Reposting this because Bernie absolutely nails it in this article from last October... 
https://www.101espn.com/2018/10/23/if-c ... verything/

Also - DTGstl314: I bet that the LA Rams get better broadcast viewership than the LA Chargers, but neither of them have been holding their own against the other Sunday broadcasts. NFL fans in LA prefer non-market teams more than these two, meaning that if 4 NFL games were being broadcast in LA on a Sunday, then the one with the Rams would get at best third-most viewership, and often had been the least watched local game. 

PostOct 14, 2019#4073

Meanwhile, both the Rams and the Chargers under-drew fans to their home games yesterday. While it's not surprising to read about the Chargers being outdrawn by their opponents' fan bases (like, every game), the LA Coliseum was totally packed with Niners fans... Of all the teams to outdraw the Rams at home, that it's the Niners who did this so strongly is incredible. And also, not surprising. I think the LA market will continue to draw non-LA fans for a very long time. Say you're a Packers fan and want a vacation - why not LA, where you can catch a game (for cheap) as well as do all the tourist stuff in great weather while your home town is cold and damp? The LA market may in the end turn out to be what is forecast for Vegas with the Raiders: a draw for tourists. 

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2019/10/rams-c ... home-games

I mean seriously, I caught part of this broadcast yesterday afternoon, and the Fox Sports camera crews were having a hard time finding Rams fans there. Often, it was just a sea of Niners red surrounding a couple folk in blue. It was hilarious. The League's effed in LA. Bring on the lawsuit. 
2,327
Life MemberLife Member
2,327

PostOct 14, 2019#4074

I was saying at the time, 2015, they should have let Kroenke build his palace then have the key matchup ‘game of the week’ replete with pregame concert be played there Sunday night — ‘The NFL: Live from LA!’
There’s enough transplants and tourists to fill the stadium, the NFL will have its presence in LA, huge ratings and no team has to move.

They screwed the whole thing up.
597
Senior MemberSenior Member
597

PostOct 14, 2019#4075

Re-Brand (not the Stallions, that name sucks) and any new stadium comes with a Super Bowl within the first 5 years of the stadium. 

St. Louis leadership would cream itself to host a Super Bowl. It's been 115 years since the World's Fair and they still get a gleam in the eye whenever it's brought up.

There's no time for bitter feelings, if there's an opportunity to get a team back. I've watched less NFL than anyone here (as in none) and would welcome a team back under the right circumstances.
Read more posts (1427 remaining)
Share