44 posts
  • 2 / 5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 5
 by Elvis
9 years 9 months ago
 Total posts:   41492  
 Joined:  Mar 28 2015
United States of America   Los Angeles
Administrator

I think Florio has it right.

And yes Kroenke's stadium is built for two. So at the very least L.A. can and will remain a viable threat for teams negotiating with their home markets.

OTOH we have Randy Karraker saying he's hearing it's 6-0 on the relocation committee that the Rams have not met relocation guidelines.

And Roggin, has he said anything on the subject since Friday?

 by SoCalRam78
9 years 9 months ago
 Total posts:   1087  
 Joined:  May 25 2015
United States of America   SoCal
Pro Bowl

The Rams negotiated and went to arbitration with the CVC regarding their lease, that's their guidelines. San Diego has put together a proposal (not very different than the Riverfront one) that the franchise has tried to block at every step. The Rams have as much an argument to make as SD.

 by Hacksaw
9 years 9 months ago
 Total posts:   24523  
 Joined:  Apr 15 2015
United States of America   AT THE BEACH
Moderator

One would think that what they did or didn't do in StL would be considered. The way they are talking perhaps not. All 6 owners say ESK didn't do the relocation process properly? Or at least that is what RK was told??? (Talk about a gigantic leak if that's the case.)
I tend to agree in general that ESK hasn't met the spirit of the guidelines,, but telling him no are two entirely different things. Remember Grubman said he could see a scenario where the Rams move to LA even if StL came up with land and cleared financing.

ESK appears to be horns up about the Inglewood project. Not much coming from StL other than how they are going to get 1/2 the stadium funded if they have to rob borrow or steal.

If all 6 committee members aren't going to recognize the arbitration as the last attempt by ESK to get the stadium done, even if it was a bad plan, then I could see the Rams winding up in the news over moving to LA without full consent and the subsequent lawsuits that will further tarnish the leagues respectability,,

 by OldSchool
9 years 9 months ago
 Total posts:   1750  
 Joined:  Jun 09 2015
United States of America   LA Coliseum
Pro Bowl

Elvis wrote:I think Florio has it right.

And yes Kroenke's stadium is built for two. So at the very least L.A. can and will remain a viable threat for teams negotiating with their home markets.

OTOH we have Randy Karraker saying he's hearing it's 6-0 on the relocation committee that the Rams have not met relocation guidelines.

And Roggin, has he said anything on the subject since Friday?

We also have Grubman say they have met the guidelines. I'll take Grubman over a St. Louis homer.

 by TSFH Fan
9 years 9 months ago
 Total posts:   699  
 Joined:  Jun 24 2015
United States of America   The OC
Veteran

Elvis wrote:OTOH we have Randy Karraker saying he's hearing it's 6-0 on the relocation committee that the Rams have not met relocation guidelines.



And on the other, other hand, back in the day, the Rams' move from Los Angeles to St. Louis failed to meet relocation guidelines. The failure to satisfy the guidelines didn't stop the move back then -- it just became a money thing and Stan's got a lot of that [assuming, strictly for argument, the current Rams failed to satisfy the guidelines].

The NFL had "the right to assess whatever fee they thought necessary" since the initial relocation proposal had not satisfied the league guidelines.

https://www2.bc.edu/~yen/Sports/St%20Lo ... %20NFL.doc


The vote was a drastic change from the one taken at the owners annual meeting in Phoenix on March 15, when the owners voted 21 against, 3 for and 6 abstentions.

At that time, the league said the Rams did not meet criteria that allowed franchise movement -- primarily they failed to show loss of revenue over a consistent period. It said a move would throw the league's $1.58 billion contract with the Fox Network into a bind. Losing the Rams meant losing the only National Conference team in the Los Angeles area, the nation's second-largest market.

The Rams threatened to sue the league and to move anyway.

What happened on the road from Phoenix to Dallas?

"It was a major business decision and one of principle," said Commissioner Paul Tagliabue. "Obviously, TV and our current contract was a significant consideration. But having a league without internal strife was very big. We desire to be at peace and not at war.

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/13/sport ... -move.html

 by BuiltRamTough
9 years 9 months ago
 Total posts:   5357  
 Joined:  May 15 2015
Armenia   Los Angeles
Hall of Fame

OldSchool wrote:
Elvis wrote:I think Florio has it right.

And yes Kroenke's stadium is built for two. So at the very least L.A. can and will remain a viable threat for teams negotiating with their home markets.

OTOH we have Randy Karraker saying he's hearing it's 6-0 on the relocation committee that the Rams have not met relocation guidelines.

And Roggin, has he said anything on the subject since Friday?

We also have Grubman say they have met the guidelines. I'll take Grubman over a St. Louis homer.

That makes the 2 of us.

Bernie,Randy and Shane Gray...fart.

 by Rams the Legends live on
9 years 9 months ago
 Total posts:   1990  
 Joined:  Aug 26 2015
United States of America   Colorado Springs
Pro Bowl

Stranger wrote:I don't believe the "Spanos is loved by the owners" BS... so NFL could still do a deal that supports the Chargers plans even though it doesn't make sense. That entire line sounds like PR created to keep everyone guessing... and bidding.


They might love Spanos bro, however they are hopelessly devoted to money. So in the end could end up being the old cliche for Spanos..........It's nothing personal just business.

 by moklerman
9 years 9 months ago
 Total posts:   7680  
 Joined:  Apr 17 2015
United States of America   Bakersfield, CA
Hall of Fame

I wonder why they supposedly love Spanos? What does he offer? On top of everything else, didn't he inherit the team? He's not one of the good ol' boys, is he?

Kroenke is the one who's playing ball with the league. He was ready to move this year and amended that plan for the league's sake. He was ready to start construction in Inglewood on a stadium for "his" team but amended those plans to include a second home locker room just in case, at the request of the league. We don't know what kind of effort was put in by him to keep the Rams in St. Louis but I'm sure the league does. And I think it was something along the lines of what he's building in Inglewood. We all know how dysfunctional and greedy St. Louis has been in all of this so I don't think the league is going to sympathize with them.

Also, the West Coast headquarters of the league offices are going to be at the Inglewood site aren't they? That's already been decided I thought. Are they really going to have that in place and then tell Kroenke he can't move his own team?

 by Hacksaw
9 years 9 months ago
 Total posts:   24523  
 Joined:  Apr 15 2015
United States of America   AT THE BEACH
Moderator

Makes sense to me molker. Now I just hope it makes sense to those with a vote.

  • 2 / 5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 5
44 posts Jun 30 2025