by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #41 Last edited by max on Nov 27 2015, edited 2 times in total. My view on this thing now is:1. Nobody wants to invest in rust belt STL, and that includes NFL owners. They don't want to put their money in STL anymore than Kroenke does. Stop listening to the STL media and their cheerleaders, they are irrelevant.2. Davis is a strap hanger, he's not a player in the NFL primary decision.3. Inglewood and Carson are not major discriminators, they are both in LA and can work.4. Kroenke's deep pockets are the biggest edge he has, that's why Goodell has been behind him from the start.5. Kroenke will end up in LA one way or another. He may have to concede some form of joint ownership with Spanos in Inglewood assuming going rogue is less lucrative and I imagine it is.6. Kroenke's 3 options are (in order of his preference): a) LA alone for now, b) LA w/ Spanos as tenant, c) LA in joint ownership w/ Spanos.7. Iger adds nothing more than a boost for Spanos to hold onto his share of owners to block Stan. Iger is basically irrelevant beyond a little sizzle to make Carson appear valid, which it really didn't need. Carson is purely leverage for Spanos not to get railroaded by Kroenke's.This is what this ongoing battle is all about. Spanos is fighting against what Kroenke wants most, but will probably accept Kroenke in LA if he gets joint ownership. As a point of reference, the Jets and Giants share 50/50 joint ownership of MetLife Stadium. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #42 willasdad wrote:This is my conspiracy theory thinking mind but the LA committee is comprised of a bunch of the old school owners, eah of whom garner respect among the other owners but maybe have more influence than Goodell would like them to have. Maybe Goodell foresaw that by sticking them in a committee together, he knew that they'd likely recommend Carson. What a great way to discredit their influence than by embaerassing them and getting the other owners to vote against their recommendation.I think this is very likely one of Goodhell's goals, and would be consistent with how someone in his position might think. Geesh, on other boards, it's usually me coming up with these kinds of theories, and having to take hits to my credibility for suggesting them. It's really nice to see others thinking this way too. Demonstrates experience and maturity.max wrote:My view on this thing now is:1. Nobody wants to invest in rust belt STL, and that includes NFL owners. They don't want to put their money in STL anymore than Kroenke does. Stop listening to the STL media and their cheerleaders, they are irrelevant.2. Davis is a strap hanger, he's not a player in the NFL primary decision.3. Inglewood and Carson are not major discriminators, they are both in LA and can work.4. Kroenke's deep pockets are the biggest edge he has, that's why Goodell has been behind him from the start.5. Kroenke will end up in LA one way or another. He may have to concede some form of joint ownership with Spanos in Inglewood assuming going rogue is less lucrative and I imagine it is.6. Kroenke's 3 options are (in order of his preference): a) LA alone for now, b) LA w/ Spanos as tenant, c) LA in joint ownership w/ Spanos.This is what this ongoing battle is all about. Spanos is fighting against what Kroenke wants most, but will probably accept Kroenke in LA if he gets joint ownership. As a point of reference, the Jets and Giants share 50/50 joint ownership of MetLife Stadium.Everything you say here makes absolute sense. I would just say that option (c) is a very distant option, and ESK will only capitulate if he feels he has no other option. I just can't see someone as sophisticiated as ESK wanting to have the immature-Spanos as an equity partner in a $2B stadium. And quite frankly, I double Goodhell or NFL Corp would want such a childish equity holder having influence over their crown jewel stadium in the 2nd largest market. So, while (c) is an option, I say it doesn't happen. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. by majik 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 1269 Joined: Aug 31 2015 New Jersey Pro Bowl Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #43 Unless the NFL is a communist organization, joint ownership would require CAPITAL from Spanos to be a partner, which I don't know if he has. While Stan is willing to cut a deal to provide Spanos with generous lease terms (as has been reported earlier), I cannot imagine Stan making him a partner without capital upfront, unless future revenue streams from Spanos' equity stake is to be paid to Stan to re-pay for the capital than Spanos currently does not possess. by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #44 Well boys, it sounds like we may have gotten closer to the truth. Good deducing by all. I agree max's (C) scenario is a possibility but not a likely one. I totally agree with Strangers take on that. Carson is in LA and another option, but I cant see how it could be considered on equal footing other than in it being an option.Pretty cruel of the NFL if the 'rust belt' reference figuratively has any validity. I'm not complaining if the Rams come back, but pretty chitty for the good fans in the Loo.To majiks point, I'm sure that is the billion dollar question. I doubt ESK want's to take any of Spanos' money and give up ownership. A creative revenue split I could see happening. Most of the streams are unknown to me so a deal will likely come down to a series of things I/we don't even know about.I would imagine, since the owners last 2 meetings, the owners have been increasingly spending more time on this. That effort will increase up to D (decision) day. I image that is what all of the "2 minute warning" references are about. That and seasons end. Until then, the lobbying will continue and the results of that will dictate/contribute to how much Kroenke has to give. If Strangers assessment of Spanos has any legs (immature partner) that could also be a determining factor on Kroenke's side.Dean really is brokering his failures in SD and LA, overstating his market share and trying to extort ESK to improve his position. Since Davis is only a crutch for Carson which is problematic and the San Diego court ruling Dick84 brought to our attention the other day, I don't think he will get anywhere near 50% of anything,, but he gets the nice new digs to play in he truly needs. Too bad he's going to lose so much of his fan base.I don't know about JT's meter, but mine is going up. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by SoCalRam78 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 1087 Joined: May 25 2015 SoCal Pro Bowl Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #45 Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance. by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #46 We should always keep in the back of our minds that Kroenke has the most to lose in this high stakes relocation game.He does not under any circumstance want to get stuck in STL for an extended period if at all.Obviously, he has all the financial number figure out, and my guess is that he is better off brokering a deal with Spanos in LA than in hanging around in STL.The question to ask is does Kroenke make out better in joint ownership with Spanos in LA, or going rogue in LA, or hanging in STL until something better comes along. Personally, I think a back-up plan of moving to London, Toronto, or Timbuktu is a joke. Regardless, the answer is to that question is Kroenke's back-up plan if he can't pull off holding onto complete ownership of Inglewood.So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #47 SoCalRam78 wrote:Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance.There are 3 entities within the NFL that are part of this decision. The relo committee, the body of the owners and the NFL exec offices. Fred's scenario, albeit overly dramatic, makes sense. Who ever his 4 sources were compelled him to call it the way he did and again it makes sense.No nothing has changed overall, but it is nice to know or at least have good reason to believe that 1 of those 3 entities are on the side of Inglewood. I sure wouldn't be pleased if it was the other way around. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #48 max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #49 Hacksaw wrote:max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him.I think that's exactly what the Pro Carson owners (Richardson et al) are trying to do, force Kroenke into a choice between purgatory in STL or caving in to Spanos.Kroenke is fighting for control of Inglewood. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #50 max wrote:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.I guess what I'm say is that Option 1 is probably the ONLY option. I just don't see Option 2 happening. Option 3 gets ESK to Option 1. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. Reply 5 / 7 1 5 7 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 62 posts Jul 09 2025 FOLLOW US @RAMSFANSUNITED Who liked this post
by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #42 willasdad wrote:This is my conspiracy theory thinking mind but the LA committee is comprised of a bunch of the old school owners, eah of whom garner respect among the other owners but maybe have more influence than Goodell would like them to have. Maybe Goodell foresaw that by sticking them in a committee together, he knew that they'd likely recommend Carson. What a great way to discredit their influence than by embaerassing them and getting the other owners to vote against their recommendation.I think this is very likely one of Goodhell's goals, and would be consistent with how someone in his position might think. Geesh, on other boards, it's usually me coming up with these kinds of theories, and having to take hits to my credibility for suggesting them. It's really nice to see others thinking this way too. Demonstrates experience and maturity.max wrote:My view on this thing now is:1. Nobody wants to invest in rust belt STL, and that includes NFL owners. They don't want to put their money in STL anymore than Kroenke does. Stop listening to the STL media and their cheerleaders, they are irrelevant.2. Davis is a strap hanger, he's not a player in the NFL primary decision.3. Inglewood and Carson are not major discriminators, they are both in LA and can work.4. Kroenke's deep pockets are the biggest edge he has, that's why Goodell has been behind him from the start.5. Kroenke will end up in LA one way or another. He may have to concede some form of joint ownership with Spanos in Inglewood assuming going rogue is less lucrative and I imagine it is.6. Kroenke's 3 options are (in order of his preference): a) LA alone for now, b) LA w/ Spanos as tenant, c) LA in joint ownership w/ Spanos.This is what this ongoing battle is all about. Spanos is fighting against what Kroenke wants most, but will probably accept Kroenke in LA if he gets joint ownership. As a point of reference, the Jets and Giants share 50/50 joint ownership of MetLife Stadium.Everything you say here makes absolute sense. I would just say that option (c) is a very distant option, and ESK will only capitulate if he feels he has no other option. I just can't see someone as sophisticiated as ESK wanting to have the immature-Spanos as an equity partner in a $2B stadium. And quite frankly, I double Goodhell or NFL Corp would want such a childish equity holder having influence over their crown jewel stadium in the 2nd largest market. So, while (c) is an option, I say it doesn't happen. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. by majik 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 1269 Joined: Aug 31 2015 New Jersey Pro Bowl Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #43 Unless the NFL is a communist organization, joint ownership would require CAPITAL from Spanos to be a partner, which I don't know if he has. While Stan is willing to cut a deal to provide Spanos with generous lease terms (as has been reported earlier), I cannot imagine Stan making him a partner without capital upfront, unless future revenue streams from Spanos' equity stake is to be paid to Stan to re-pay for the capital than Spanos currently does not possess. by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #44 Well boys, it sounds like we may have gotten closer to the truth. Good deducing by all. I agree max's (C) scenario is a possibility but not a likely one. I totally agree with Strangers take on that. Carson is in LA and another option, but I cant see how it could be considered on equal footing other than in it being an option.Pretty cruel of the NFL if the 'rust belt' reference figuratively has any validity. I'm not complaining if the Rams come back, but pretty chitty for the good fans in the Loo.To majiks point, I'm sure that is the billion dollar question. I doubt ESK want's to take any of Spanos' money and give up ownership. A creative revenue split I could see happening. Most of the streams are unknown to me so a deal will likely come down to a series of things I/we don't even know about.I would imagine, since the owners last 2 meetings, the owners have been increasingly spending more time on this. That effort will increase up to D (decision) day. I image that is what all of the "2 minute warning" references are about. That and seasons end. Until then, the lobbying will continue and the results of that will dictate/contribute to how much Kroenke has to give. If Strangers assessment of Spanos has any legs (immature partner) that could also be a determining factor on Kroenke's side.Dean really is brokering his failures in SD and LA, overstating his market share and trying to extort ESK to improve his position. Since Davis is only a crutch for Carson which is problematic and the San Diego court ruling Dick84 brought to our attention the other day, I don't think he will get anywhere near 50% of anything,, but he gets the nice new digs to play in he truly needs. Too bad he's going to lose so much of his fan base.I don't know about JT's meter, but mine is going up. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by SoCalRam78 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 1087 Joined: May 25 2015 SoCal Pro Bowl Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #45 Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance. by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #46 We should always keep in the back of our minds that Kroenke has the most to lose in this high stakes relocation game.He does not under any circumstance want to get stuck in STL for an extended period if at all.Obviously, he has all the financial number figure out, and my guess is that he is better off brokering a deal with Spanos in LA than in hanging around in STL.The question to ask is does Kroenke make out better in joint ownership with Spanos in LA, or going rogue in LA, or hanging in STL until something better comes along. Personally, I think a back-up plan of moving to London, Toronto, or Timbuktu is a joke. Regardless, the answer is to that question is Kroenke's back-up plan if he can't pull off holding onto complete ownership of Inglewood.So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #47 SoCalRam78 wrote:Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance.There are 3 entities within the NFL that are part of this decision. The relo committee, the body of the owners and the NFL exec offices. Fred's scenario, albeit overly dramatic, makes sense. Who ever his 4 sources were compelled him to call it the way he did and again it makes sense.No nothing has changed overall, but it is nice to know or at least have good reason to believe that 1 of those 3 entities are on the side of Inglewood. I sure wouldn't be pleased if it was the other way around. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #48 max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #49 Hacksaw wrote:max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him.I think that's exactly what the Pro Carson owners (Richardson et al) are trying to do, force Kroenke into a choice between purgatory in STL or caving in to Spanos.Kroenke is fighting for control of Inglewood. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #50 max wrote:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.I guess what I'm say is that Option 1 is probably the ONLY option. I just don't see Option 2 happening. Option 3 gets ESK to Option 1. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. Reply 5 / 7 1 5 7 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 62 posts Jul 09 2025 FOLLOW US @RAMSFANSUNITED Who liked this post
by majik 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 1269 Joined: Aug 31 2015 New Jersey Pro Bowl Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #43 Unless the NFL is a communist organization, joint ownership would require CAPITAL from Spanos to be a partner, which I don't know if he has. While Stan is willing to cut a deal to provide Spanos with generous lease terms (as has been reported earlier), I cannot imagine Stan making him a partner without capital upfront, unless future revenue streams from Spanos' equity stake is to be paid to Stan to re-pay for the capital than Spanos currently does not possess. by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #44 Well boys, it sounds like we may have gotten closer to the truth. Good deducing by all. I agree max's (C) scenario is a possibility but not a likely one. I totally agree with Strangers take on that. Carson is in LA and another option, but I cant see how it could be considered on equal footing other than in it being an option.Pretty cruel of the NFL if the 'rust belt' reference figuratively has any validity. I'm not complaining if the Rams come back, but pretty chitty for the good fans in the Loo.To majiks point, I'm sure that is the billion dollar question. I doubt ESK want's to take any of Spanos' money and give up ownership. A creative revenue split I could see happening. Most of the streams are unknown to me so a deal will likely come down to a series of things I/we don't even know about.I would imagine, since the owners last 2 meetings, the owners have been increasingly spending more time on this. That effort will increase up to D (decision) day. I image that is what all of the "2 minute warning" references are about. That and seasons end. Until then, the lobbying will continue and the results of that will dictate/contribute to how much Kroenke has to give. If Strangers assessment of Spanos has any legs (immature partner) that could also be a determining factor on Kroenke's side.Dean really is brokering his failures in SD and LA, overstating his market share and trying to extort ESK to improve his position. Since Davis is only a crutch for Carson which is problematic and the San Diego court ruling Dick84 brought to our attention the other day, I don't think he will get anywhere near 50% of anything,, but he gets the nice new digs to play in he truly needs. Too bad he's going to lose so much of his fan base.I don't know about JT's meter, but mine is going up. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by SoCalRam78 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 1087 Joined: May 25 2015 SoCal Pro Bowl Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #45 Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance. by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #46 We should always keep in the back of our minds that Kroenke has the most to lose in this high stakes relocation game.He does not under any circumstance want to get stuck in STL for an extended period if at all.Obviously, he has all the financial number figure out, and my guess is that he is better off brokering a deal with Spanos in LA than in hanging around in STL.The question to ask is does Kroenke make out better in joint ownership with Spanos in LA, or going rogue in LA, or hanging in STL until something better comes along. Personally, I think a back-up plan of moving to London, Toronto, or Timbuktu is a joke. Regardless, the answer is to that question is Kroenke's back-up plan if he can't pull off holding onto complete ownership of Inglewood.So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #47 SoCalRam78 wrote:Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance.There are 3 entities within the NFL that are part of this decision. The relo committee, the body of the owners and the NFL exec offices. Fred's scenario, albeit overly dramatic, makes sense. Who ever his 4 sources were compelled him to call it the way he did and again it makes sense.No nothing has changed overall, but it is nice to know or at least have good reason to believe that 1 of those 3 entities are on the side of Inglewood. I sure wouldn't be pleased if it was the other way around. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #48 max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #49 Hacksaw wrote:max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him.I think that's exactly what the Pro Carson owners (Richardson et al) are trying to do, force Kroenke into a choice between purgatory in STL or caving in to Spanos.Kroenke is fighting for control of Inglewood. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #50 max wrote:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.I guess what I'm say is that Option 1 is probably the ONLY option. I just don't see Option 2 happening. Option 3 gets ESK to Option 1. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. Reply 5 / 7 1 5 7 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 62 posts Jul 09 2025 FOLLOW US @RAMSFANSUNITED Who liked this post
by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #44 Well boys, it sounds like we may have gotten closer to the truth. Good deducing by all. I agree max's (C) scenario is a possibility but not a likely one. I totally agree with Strangers take on that. Carson is in LA and another option, but I cant see how it could be considered on equal footing other than in it being an option.Pretty cruel of the NFL if the 'rust belt' reference figuratively has any validity. I'm not complaining if the Rams come back, but pretty chitty for the good fans in the Loo.To majiks point, I'm sure that is the billion dollar question. I doubt ESK want's to take any of Spanos' money and give up ownership. A creative revenue split I could see happening. Most of the streams are unknown to me so a deal will likely come down to a series of things I/we don't even know about.I would imagine, since the owners last 2 meetings, the owners have been increasingly spending more time on this. That effort will increase up to D (decision) day. I image that is what all of the "2 minute warning" references are about. That and seasons end. Until then, the lobbying will continue and the results of that will dictate/contribute to how much Kroenke has to give. If Strangers assessment of Spanos has any legs (immature partner) that could also be a determining factor on Kroenke's side.Dean really is brokering his failures in SD and LA, overstating his market share and trying to extort ESK to improve his position. Since Davis is only a crutch for Carson which is problematic and the San Diego court ruling Dick84 brought to our attention the other day, I don't think he will get anywhere near 50% of anything,, but he gets the nice new digs to play in he truly needs. Too bad he's going to lose so much of his fan base.I don't know about JT's meter, but mine is going up. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by SoCalRam78 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 1087 Joined: May 25 2015 SoCal Pro Bowl Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #45 Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance. by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #46 We should always keep in the back of our minds that Kroenke has the most to lose in this high stakes relocation game.He does not under any circumstance want to get stuck in STL for an extended period if at all.Obviously, he has all the financial number figure out, and my guess is that he is better off brokering a deal with Spanos in LA than in hanging around in STL.The question to ask is does Kroenke make out better in joint ownership with Spanos in LA, or going rogue in LA, or hanging in STL until something better comes along. Personally, I think a back-up plan of moving to London, Toronto, or Timbuktu is a joke. Regardless, the answer is to that question is Kroenke's back-up plan if he can't pull off holding onto complete ownership of Inglewood.So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #47 SoCalRam78 wrote:Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance.There are 3 entities within the NFL that are part of this decision. The relo committee, the body of the owners and the NFL exec offices. Fred's scenario, albeit overly dramatic, makes sense. Who ever his 4 sources were compelled him to call it the way he did and again it makes sense.No nothing has changed overall, but it is nice to know or at least have good reason to believe that 1 of those 3 entities are on the side of Inglewood. I sure wouldn't be pleased if it was the other way around. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #48 max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #49 Hacksaw wrote:max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him.I think that's exactly what the Pro Carson owners (Richardson et al) are trying to do, force Kroenke into a choice between purgatory in STL or caving in to Spanos.Kroenke is fighting for control of Inglewood. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #50 max wrote:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.I guess what I'm say is that Option 1 is probably the ONLY option. I just don't see Option 2 happening. Option 3 gets ESK to Option 1. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. Reply 5 / 7 1 5 7 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 62 posts Jul 09 2025 FOLLOW US @RAMSFANSUNITED Who liked this post
by SoCalRam78 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 1087 Joined: May 25 2015 SoCal Pro Bowl Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #45 Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance. by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #46 We should always keep in the back of our minds that Kroenke has the most to lose in this high stakes relocation game.He does not under any circumstance want to get stuck in STL for an extended period if at all.Obviously, he has all the financial number figure out, and my guess is that he is better off brokering a deal with Spanos in LA than in hanging around in STL.The question to ask is does Kroenke make out better in joint ownership with Spanos in LA, or going rogue in LA, or hanging in STL until something better comes along. Personally, I think a back-up plan of moving to London, Toronto, or Timbuktu is a joke. Regardless, the answer is to that question is Kroenke's back-up plan if he can't pull off holding onto complete ownership of Inglewood.So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #47 SoCalRam78 wrote:Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance.There are 3 entities within the NFL that are part of this decision. The relo committee, the body of the owners and the NFL exec offices. Fred's scenario, albeit overly dramatic, makes sense. Who ever his 4 sources were compelled him to call it the way he did and again it makes sense.No nothing has changed overall, but it is nice to know or at least have good reason to believe that 1 of those 3 entities are on the side of Inglewood. I sure wouldn't be pleased if it was the other way around. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #48 max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #49 Hacksaw wrote:max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him.I think that's exactly what the Pro Carson owners (Richardson et al) are trying to do, force Kroenke into a choice between purgatory in STL or caving in to Spanos.Kroenke is fighting for control of Inglewood. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #50 max wrote:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.I guess what I'm say is that Option 1 is probably the ONLY option. I just don't see Option 2 happening. Option 3 gets ESK to Option 1. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. Reply 5 / 7 1 5 7 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 62 posts Jul 09 2025
by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #46 We should always keep in the back of our minds that Kroenke has the most to lose in this high stakes relocation game.He does not under any circumstance want to get stuck in STL for an extended period if at all.Obviously, he has all the financial number figure out, and my guess is that he is better off brokering a deal with Spanos in LA than in hanging around in STL.The question to ask is does Kroenke make out better in joint ownership with Spanos in LA, or going rogue in LA, or hanging in STL until something better comes along. Personally, I think a back-up plan of moving to London, Toronto, or Timbuktu is a joke. Regardless, the answer is to that question is Kroenke's back-up plan if he can't pull off holding onto complete ownership of Inglewood.So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #47 SoCalRam78 wrote:Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance.There are 3 entities within the NFL that are part of this decision. The relo committee, the body of the owners and the NFL exec offices. Fred's scenario, albeit overly dramatic, makes sense. Who ever his 4 sources were compelled him to call it the way he did and again it makes sense.No nothing has changed overall, but it is nice to know or at least have good reason to believe that 1 of those 3 entities are on the side of Inglewood. I sure wouldn't be pleased if it was the other way around. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #48 max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #49 Hacksaw wrote:max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him.I think that's exactly what the Pro Carson owners (Richardson et al) are trying to do, force Kroenke into a choice between purgatory in STL or caving in to Spanos.Kroenke is fighting for control of Inglewood. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #50 max wrote:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.I guess what I'm say is that Option 1 is probably the ONLY option. I just don't see Option 2 happening. Option 3 gets ESK to Option 1. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. Reply 5 / 7 1 5 7 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 62 posts Jul 09 2025
by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #47 SoCalRam78 wrote:Fred Roggin is good at promoting his show and he's good on the NFL relo issue, but this was nothing of significance.There are 3 entities within the NFL that are part of this decision. The relo committee, the body of the owners and the NFL exec offices. Fred's scenario, albeit overly dramatic, makes sense. Who ever his 4 sources were compelled him to call it the way he did and again it makes sense.No nothing has changed overall, but it is nice to know or at least have good reason to believe that 1 of those 3 entities are on the side of Inglewood. I sure wouldn't be pleased if it was the other way around. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #48 max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #49 Hacksaw wrote:max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him.I think that's exactly what the Pro Carson owners (Richardson et al) are trying to do, force Kroenke into a choice between purgatory in STL or caving in to Spanos.Kroenke is fighting for control of Inglewood. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #50 max wrote:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.I guess what I'm say is that Option 1 is probably the ONLY option. I just don't see Option 2 happening. Option 3 gets ESK to Option 1. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. Reply 5 / 7 1 5 7 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 62 posts Jul 09 2025
by Hacksaw 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #48 max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him. GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #49 Hacksaw wrote:max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him.I think that's exactly what the Pro Carson owners (Richardson et al) are trying to do, force Kroenke into a choice between purgatory in STL or caving in to Spanos.Kroenke is fighting for control of Inglewood. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #50 max wrote:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.I guess what I'm say is that Option 1 is probably the ONLY option. I just don't see Option 2 happening. Option 3 gets ESK to Option 1. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. Reply 5 / 7 1 5 7 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 62 posts Jul 09 2025
by max 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 5714 Joined: Jun 01 2015 Sarasota, FL Hall of Fame Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #49 Hacksaw wrote:max wrote:So I have revised my options as follows:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.Your common denominator is Rams in Inglewood. I like that.I can't see Kroenke accepting purgatory, but agreed that it's leverage the pro Carson owners can use against him.I think that's exactly what the Pro Carson owners (Richardson et al) are trying to do, force Kroenke into a choice between purgatory in STL or caving in to Spanos.Kroenke is fighting for control of Inglewood. ~ max ~“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #50 max wrote:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.I guess what I'm say is that Option 1 is probably the ONLY option. I just don't see Option 2 happening. Option 3 gets ESK to Option 1. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. Reply 5 / 7 1 5 7 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 62 posts Jul 09 2025
by Stranger 9 years 7 months ago Total posts: 3213 Joined: Aug 12 2015 Norcal Superstar Re: Fred Teasing Today's Show POST #50 max wrote:1. Kroenke maintains ownership of Inglewood and plays there with/without Spanos.2. Kroenke yields to joint ownership of Inglewood with Spanos.3. Kroenke goes rogue.I guess what I'm say is that Option 1 is probably the ONLY option. I just don't see Option 2 happening. Option 3 gets ESK to Option 1. New HC. New L.A. Stadium. Future is Bright. Reply 5 / 7 1 5 7 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business