[Elvis]

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jas ... nd-to-stay

A new St. Louis stadium deal doesn't force Rams owner's hand to stay

Jason
La Canfora

http://cbsprt.co/1Gava09

October 18, 2015 8:52 am ET

The NFL is poring over the terms sheet St. Louis provided last week detailing plans for building a new stadium, and that project could become viable as the window for teams to file for relocation to Los Angeles moves closer. However, a St. Louis stadium proposal that meets all NFL criteria still does not ensure that Rams owner Stan Kroenke ever has his team play a game there, according to sources with knowledge of the situation.

St. Louis could, according to NFL regulations, present a stadium plan that makes it nearly impossible for Kroenke to move the Rams, but, given the nature of the team's lease with the Edward Jones Dome, Kroenke could not have to play in any new facility.

He has the capacity to go year to year with the Edward Jones Dome through 2025, sources said, and thus, even if blocked from moving in 2016 and potentially losing out on the LA market -- and no one knows what the ultimate outcome of relocation will be at this point in the process -- he could still essentially bide his time in his current stadium and wait for other options to emerge (London?) rather than enter into a binding, long-term agreement with a new St. Louis stadium.

Kroenke's desire to go to Los Angeles has been well-known inside league circles for years, and, if not for all of the NFL protocols teams must follow, he would have already moved his franchise to California last year, sources said. However, if the prospect of a new, state-of-the-art stadium in St. Louis met league requirements, many doubt Kroenke would "go rogue" and sue the league to move to his project in Inglewood or just attempt to pick up and leave anyway.

The need to go nuclear is mitigated further by the fact he could continue to operate as-is in St. Louis, which might force the issue for the league to placate him elsewhere to open the door for another team to move into the new stadium St. Louis would have constructed well before 2025 in this scenario.

All three teams seeking to move to LA -- St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland -- left the recent NFL owner's meeting in New York convinced that the league is going to do whatever is possible to complete this process by January and foster the move of at least one franchise to the Los Angeles market for the 2016 season, sources said, and it is obviously the top short-term priority for the league at this time. At least one team will be left at the altar, and no one knows for sure exactly how the process will play out at this point.

[bubbaramfan]

They can't build the Riverfront stadium without Stan's and the NFL's money. Their plan only finances half the stadium. I can't see Stan doing business with RSA after they didn't honor their end in the "top Tier Clause" or in arbitration. No businessman in their right mind would enter into another long term contract with an agency with that kind of track record. I'm sure if the other owners aren't aware of that, Stan has surely pointed it out to them.
I find it hard to believe St. Louis put RSA (CVC) in charge of their proposed stadium, and expect Kroenke to do business with them again.

Kroenke can just go year to year at the ED. Next year he can file for relocation. The majority of owners will eventually give in.

[BuiltRamTough]

Noting new nor is it a surprise. The Rams will never play in a new stadium in STL. He's holding all the cards imo. Basically telling the league if you think I'm ever going to contribute to a new stadium in STL then you're crazy. So why force me to stay there? I'll just try to go to another market anyway. I want out of STL.

[SoCalRam78]

the entire purpose of this "proposal" is to sway the NFL into blocking the Rams' move. They know there's literally ZERO chance Kroenke will partake in this stadium. He has a sweet lease at the EJD with the ability to leave every year, why would he invest half a billion and double down into a shitty market?

[Hacksaw]

The stl trying to block him long enough to allow something else to happen in LA is dirty pool.
I'm not going to offer an apple to the kid who just stole my lunch. I would think this would have distanced ESK from those hooligans even further.
The words St. Louis in front of Rams has become incredibly distasteful in my mouth. I can't wait till they are no longer connected to those skanks..

[The Ripper]

How would the NFL handle, the Rams opting out of the lease? He doesn't have to sign an extension.

[Hacksaw]

How would the NFL handle, the Rams opting out of the lease? He doesn't have to sign an extension.

Good question. Would he forfeit a season? Go play at Mizzou? What other plays would he have? And wouldn't that be a kin to going rogue lite? Seems to me, if he was to take that tact he'd be better off heading to LA so not to lose the advantage of his foresight and early start.
Just a hunch but he will opt out / not resign but with the leagues blessing, sign a 2 year deal with the Memorial Coliseum in LA, even if it might not be their decision entirely.

[Rams the Legends live on]

How would the NFL handle, the Rams opting out of the lease? He doesn't have to sign an extension.

Very true as well as if he is forced to stay in StL and lets assume he decides to keep that market. According to the bylaws his home market is a 75 mile radius. So he could always stay and build somewhere else in the same home market and not have the city and the RSA to deal with. Which he would be able to keep the whole 15 fans who show up for game day......LOL Anyway the fans would not be ticked or butt hurt if he stayed and built elsewhere, however the city would be a different matter.

[SoCalRam78]

The stl trying to block him long enough to allow something else to happen in LA is dirty pool.
I'm not going to offer an apple to the kid who just stole my lunch. I would think this would have distanced ESK from those hooligans even further.
The words St. Louis in front of Rams has become incredibly distasteful in my mouth. I can't wait till they are no longer connected to those skanks..

The thing is, without Kroenke, there is no LA relocation. If "the Rams can't move because viable proposal" becomes something the NFL stands by and SK decides to agree to this, no one will move to LA and the NFL loses it's golden to ticket to LA in Inglewood. San Diego or Oakland aren't moving to LA with the Rams out of the picture. Neither can do it alone and their fake Carson plan is dead. What ever happened to Carmen Policy and the pizza lunches anyway?

[Hacksaw]

How would the NFL handle, the Rams opting out of the lease? He doesn't have to sign an extension.

Very true as well as if he is forced to stay in StL and lets assume he decides to keep that market. According to the bylaws his home market is a 75 mile radius. So he could always stay and build somewhere else in the same home market and not have the city and the RSA to deal with. Which he would be able to keep the whole 15 fans who show up for game day......LOL Anyway the fans would not be ticked or butt hurt if he stayed and built elsewhere, however the city would be a different matter.

Good point Legends. The city would be PO'd. I think that would be pretty funny if he just moved out to the 'burbs' and did his own thing. It would take a few seasons so he'd still have to play in the ED unless he another venue was available.