[ramsfan1977]

To the fine fans who live in St. Louis and the A-holes as well on the PD board. Willy Wonka sums it up best:

adu, adu parting is such sweet sorrow - Willy Wonka

[laram]

Some of these ST Louis media yahoos make me ill with this, "LA hasn't worked, they've had teams yanked from them" They have no earthly idea why any of the teams left.

They always resort to that narrative, its Bush league!!!

Please can this be over already!!

[Stranger]

OMG, I'm listening to the interview now, and I think i'll have to turn it off. Bernie is making me sick. He wants ESK to eat the $300M for the benefit of the StL market, and says that he [Bernie] would do it if he was worth $7.7B. What a joke.

[Hacksaw]

OMG, I'm listening to the interview now, and I think i'll have to turn it off. Bernie is making me sick. He wants ESK to eat the $300M for the benefit of the StL market, and says that he [Bernie] would do it if he was worth $7.7B. What a joke.

I laughed out loud when Bernie said he would take a $100MM in the shorts if he was worth $7BB, to which Grubman called BS.. literally. LOL

Bernie has always been an emo StLoo homer. It was on full display in that interview and the NFL rep called him on it.
It's worth listening to what I believe is the first public statement that speaks to their demise. And the NFL official made that remark to insulate ESK.

[Jacksnowfan]

I think its funny how Bernie talks about NFL loyalty to the fans but no mention how the L.A. fans were screwed when the Rams left to go to St Louis. To me this is righting a wrong if the Rams come home to L.A.

[SWAdude]

Very interesting interview. Grubman stayed on point respectfully well.

I have mentioned before, and I will mention again, this proposal has a fundamental issue with the cost overruns, and Kroenke not wanting to pony up the bucks for a basic stadium. The lease the Rams are in require the venue to be in the top 25% of all the stadiums. The reason he is year to year because it does not meet that metric. Ironically, neither does the new St Louis stadium proposal. Therein lies another rub.

Nothing is certain, but the owners do see the problems with this St Louis stadium proposal. Kroenke has them in a corner.

[OldSchool]

I loved how Grubman put Bernie in his place on many of his arguments. He turned him around on the net worth and I especially liked how he called him out twice on the entertainment tax. How the Cards and Blues are exempt from it but the Rams won't be so they can fake the numbers and pay for the stadium. Their financing the longer this goes on is more and more exposed as smoke and mirrors.

[Elvis]

No surprise, the NFL is lukewarm on St. Louis stadium deal

http://www.insidesocal.com/nfl/2015/12/ ... dium-deal/

Posted on December 9, 2015 by Vincent Bonsignore

National Football League Executive Vice President Eric Grubman went on St. Louis radio today to talk about the Rams potential relocation to Los Angeles and, more specifically. his perspective of the St. Louis stadium offer to keep them in Missouri.

To the surprise of no one who has been paying attention, Grubman made it clear the plan has issues.

By no means is this new news. I’ve been writing for more than a month now the NFL has serious misgivings about St. Louis dipping into revenue streams the league considers team property to pay for part of its end of construction cost.

And as Grubman pointed out, while the cost of the stadium has gone up recently the deal has actually worsened from a league perspective.

By NFL math – and this jives with NFL sources I’ve talked to – when Personal Seat Licence fees are included the St. Louis plan is essentially a $310 million public and $690 million private/team split on the. Depending on who you talk to, the team portion might actually be $700 million.

And that is nowhere near the near 50/50 split the Vikings agreed to with Minnesota and Minneapolis leaders for their new stadium.

The Vikings new stadium is considered a litmus test as that is the most recent public/private NFL stadium deal.

Grubman made it clear this doesn’t mean the Rams are a shoe-in to relocate to Los Angeles. That decision is currently in the hands of NFL owners, who could vote in January between the Rams Inglewood stadium plan and the Oakland Raiders and San Diego Chargers Carson plan. The winning bid requires 24 votes.

But he also made it clear the Rams losing out on Los Angeles doesn’t necessarily mean they will sign on to the St. Louis stadium plan.

While NFL owners can block Rams owner Stan Kroenke from moving to L.A. they can’t force him to sign off on a stadium deal he isn’t satisfied.

Again, that is consistent with NFL sources who have told me if Kroenke is denied L.A., he might just return to the Edward Jones Dome on one-year leases and contemplate a different move.

Among the cities sources have told me the Rams might consider in that scenario are Toronto, London and perhaps San Diego and the Bay Area, depending what happens with the Chargers and Raiders.

Again, this doesn’t mean it’s a shoe-in the Rams get the nod to Los Angeles.

But it’s pretty clear St. Louis faces an uphill climb convincing them to sign on to their current plan.

[Hacksaw]

Well now it's just 2 against 1.

[RedAlice]

Shane is now calling Grubman an NFL "employee doing the Rams dirty work on the radio" -- I'm sure the NFL loves a St. Louis sports "writer" saying that. And, you'd think an actual journalist wouldn't make that puncuation mistake.


At this point, the future of the St. Louis Rams is in the hands of 32 owners, and out of the hands of any of their employees at the NFL league office. So, in spite of concerns you may have over comments made by a high ranking NFL executive Wednesday, the fact remains that ownership -- and not an employee doing the Rams dirty work on the radio -- will decide how the league's relocation saga ultimately ends.

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/S ... ctive.aspx