Rams Fans United - Los Angeles Rams Fan Discussion Forum

He says people in the NFL keep telling him that the STL deal is not as good as the Minny deal. The numbers he's told are 70/30 public/private for Minny and 50/50 for STL.

Vinny said its going to be hard for owners to tell Kroenke he should take a deal that is inferior to the one in Minny.

And this assumes STL can actually get the deal done in time. It won't be done for the big meeting in NYC next week, and the committee will be nailing down their recommendations at that meeting. Goodell said a week ago that they have all the information they need now to make a decision. So these guys are ready to go while STL is hung up with BOA on a plan that is less than desireable.

If somehow Carson gets the nod, though I highly doubt it, it won't be because STL has a great plan on the table.

Vinny even said the SD plan is better than STL plan, but it has a lot of difficulties getting done.

The initial deal in in Minnesota had about the same overall cost so at least initially the STL deal should have started there. PSL sales and naming rights came in higher so the team was able to increase their contribution. The one thing that wasn't addressed was the overages which the team picked up in the first few years but they have caused major issues so the NFL wants that addressed in all deals going forward. The St Louis proposal says the RSA is responsible for overages but it doesn't say how they pay for it so in reality the promise is just as worthless as the top tier guarantee in the lease.

http://www.mprnews.org/story/2012/04/04 ... f-the-cost

Max, the numbers that you listed are in reverse. It's 50/50 public/private(Coming from the owner) for Minny and 30/70 for STL. Everything else that you mentioned is correct.

RamsFanSince82 wrote:Max, the numbers that you listed are in reverse. It's 50/50 public/private(Coming from the owner) for Minny and 30/70 for STL. Everything else that you mentioned is correct.

Got it. I read Vinny backwards, I guess.

Actually that's even worse than what I thought. Hard to believe owners are gonna want Kroenke to take a deal where he has to kick in more than 50%, probably a lot more when all is said and done, when they wouldn't take that deal themselves, especially in a market like STL.

The only thing holding this thing up right now, the way I see it, is the NFL being careful not to let the cat out of the bag while the teams, especially the Rams, are still playing and still in the playoff hunt.

If the Rams win the West, and that's a distinct possibility, they get a home game. That would be a huge problem if it was known that the Rams were the LA Rams (Elect).

StL should have figured it out and agreed to upgrade the dome. Big mistake that's going to haunt them.

Hacksaw wrote:StL should have figured it out and agreed to upgrade the dome. Big mistake that's going to haunt them.

They were never going to do that because their motivation all along was to get out of the lease. They screwed up when they went fishing back in 1994 and were tired of paying for it IMO. Either they got everything in their favor this time or they were ready to tap out.

Plus, STL didn't realize how vulnerable they were in losing the Rams.

They overestimated their value and position.

max wrote:Plus, STL didn't realize how vulnerable they were in losing the Rams.

They overestimated their value and position.

I wonder about that. To me, it seems like everything after arbitration went the Rams' way has been an act by STL. Much like the Rams knew their EJD upgrades would never be paid for, I think STL has proposed things in reverse. Sure, they'd take it if it happened but even they had to know that ESK wasn't going to be on board with what they're selling.

I kind of think that one of the things Kroenke liked about the Rams when he bought them was they had an easy out and, therefore, huge upside potential.

So i'm not sure St. Louis really ever had much of a chance to keep the Rams. They're just not that lucrative of a market.

Elvis wrote:I kind of think that one of the things Kroenke liked about the Rams when he bought them was they had an easy out and, therefore, huge upside potential.

So i'm not sure St. Louis really ever had much of a chance to keep the Rams. They're just not that lucrative of a market.

From everything I remember, I don't think ESK was particular about which team he bought into. He tried to buy into at least one or two other teams before purchasing his 40% of the Rams.

Also, I think he was sincere about making the Rams an international brand in St. Louis. At least up to a point. The more we all see STL and how it does things, I think it becomes clear that they are not easy to work with. Eventually, ESK's money-making genes were going to kick in and if he had to work his ass off to get something done for the Rams, why not focus that energy into a much more lucrative situation? But I don't really feel like his intention all along was to move the Rams. I think it just evolved to that point.

You could be right, he may have been looking at that "out" all along but I don't get that impression.