[Elvis]

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/kroe ... adium.html

Reid: Questions answered about status of NFL relocation to L.A.

IRVING, Texas – Houston owner Bob McNair, a member of the influential six-owner NFL Committee on Los Angeles Opportunities, was talking this week about St. Louis owner Stan Kroenke’s offer to the committee to make a second team an equal partner at the $1.86 billion stadium Kroenke wants to build for the Rams in Inglewood.

McNair said he appreciated Kroenke’s flexibility, his effort to “find a solution that’s workable.”

Was Kroenke’s second team proposal workable, I asked McNair.

“That remains to be seen because, again, the first thing is you’ve got to decide who’s eligible to be considered,” McNair said. “You can’t get to the second step until you go through the first.”

McNair’s answer offered yet another hint to the way the committee appears to be leaning between the Inglewood project and a $1.75 billion stadium in Carson proposed by the Chargers and Raiders. It also underscored the committee’s and the league’s top priority between now and a special NFL meeting on the Los Angeles relocation issue Jan. 12-13 in Houston – finding out if St. Louis, San Diego or Oakland can deliver a viable stadium plan.

For months, the Los Angeles committee – especially McNair, Pittsburgh’s Art Rooney, John Mara of the Giants and Carolina’s Jerry Richardson – has pushed for NFL relocation guidelines to be strictly enforced in the Los Angeles situation. Under those guidelines, the committee maintains, a franchise cannot relocate if it has a viable stadium option in its current market. If St. Louis can deliver a bulletproof plan for a $1 billion-plus stadium on the city’s downtown waterfront, there is a feeling within the committee that it would be difficult for Kroenke to make the case the Rams are eligible to return to the Los Angeles-Orange County market.

So what’s the NFL’s next step?

The league on Friday set a Dec. 30 deadline for St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland officials to send final stadium proposals to the committee.

“We have to finalize those and make sure they’re firm proposals before we can make any judgments,” McNair said. “Until then, it’s conversation.”

St. Louis has submitted two term sheets to the league. NFL senior officials will respond to the second sheet in the next few days if they haven’t already.

San Diego officials submitted a term sheet to the league on Sept. 25 for a proposed $1.1 billion, 68,000-seat stadium in Mission Valley. In a Nov. 10 letter to Chris Melvin, the top consultant to the city and county on the proposed stadium, two NFL officials wrote that the term sheet’s “currently undefined” financial terms on “critical issues” “need to be better understood.” San Diego officials recently responded to the league’s questions.

Oakland so far has not submitted any proposal to the league.

“There’s really nothing definitive that has been presented from San Diego and Oakland yet,” Giants co-owner Steve Tisch said.

So how definitive is the St. Louis proposal?

Tisch described the latest submission as “a partial proposal from St. Louis that I think they’re sharpening their pencils on.”

But NFL officials and owners are encouraged, especially after the task force agreed this week to return proceeds from a naming rights deal to the stadium to the Rams. The St. Louis Board of Aldermen’s Convention and Tourism committee also removed another significant obstacle this week by voting down a proposal that would have required voter approval on $145 million in funding for the stadium. Had the committee voted for public approval, the earliest the issue could have been put on the ballot was March 15, and Kroenke could have started packing his bags for Inglewood.

The league, however, still has two primary concerns. The first is whether the aldermen will approve the financing plan before going on a holiday break on Dec. 11. The board does not return to work until Jan. 8, just four days before the special meeting opens in Houston.

“With action expected next week by the St. Louis Board of Aldermen following numerous public hearings, St. Louis is in a strong position to meet the Dec. 30 deadline,” Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon said Friday in statement.

The second issue is that league officials believe the true cost of the proposed downtown stadium is somewhere in the $1.2 billion-$1.3 billion range. The task force currently lists the price tag at just less than $1 billion, meaning they have three weeks to identify and secure another $250 million in funding.

"They’ve restructured their deal somewhat and so I think they’ve made some good progress, but there’s a lot that remains to be seen in their proposal," McNair said.

The NFL has done market analysis on St. Louis, Oakland and San Diego and some Kroenke allies among the league’s owners have suggested St. Louis is no longer an NFL market. Will this be a factor?

Apparently not with the committee.

“The markets are OK,” McNair said. “There’s nothing wrong with the markets, but they have to have a place to play where they can be competitive. And that’s the real issue for them, and they do need some new stadiums.”

How firm is the Dec. 30 deadline?

When asked about the deadline this week, Tisch, a film and television producer who lives in Los Angeles cracked, “I thought it was 10 years ago.”

This deadline, he said, is “a hard date and I think they’re going to be held to that date.”

NFL senior staff, however, said the deadline is “not final” and there could still be additional time for officials in the home markets to submit material.

What should be made of Kroenke’s meeting this week with Nixon?

Kroenke has largely avoided Missouri officials in recent years, so his meeting with Nixon at Rams Park on Tuesday is something of a breakthrough. In searching for a deeper meaning to the meeting, there are two ways of looking at it. The first is that Kroenke could be just going through the motions and trying to demonstrate to the committee that he has pursued – and exhausted – all options in St. Louis. The second is that sensing a distinct shift in momentum behind the Carson project, Kroenke realizes he might be stuck in St. Louis and is now focused on getting the best deal possible, especially before a potential Jan. 13 vote, after which he would lose the leverage of moving west.

What are the chances of Kroenke working out a deal with Chargers owner Dean Spanos?

Right now? In a word: slim.

Spanos has never liked the Inglewood site, believing it has major traffic and parking issues. Spanos and the Chargers are more confident than ever that they can get the 24 votes needed to relocate. That confidence has been bolstered in recent weeks with Disney chief Robert Iger’s agreement to chair the company overseeing the development and construction of the Carson project, pending its league approval.

The Chargers also don’t view Kroenke’s proposed partnership as “equal,” a perception shared by others in the league. Funding for the stadium would come from loans from the league, personal seat licenses, sponsorship and naming rights revenues, as well as contributions from the two teams. But the design, development and construction of the stadium would be controlled by Kroenke. The second team would also have no financial interest in a 238-acre development surrounding the stadium or have any say on the nature of that development. So far Kroenke has also not addressed a formula for distributing non-NFL events at the stadium. Spanos is also committed to Davis and their partnership in Carson.

Kroenke has told NFL officials he began the process toward building the Inglewood stadium as far back as August 2013. He purchased the 66 acres for the stadium site for $90 million, according to NFL officials, and has a $71.7 million loan out on the tract. Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said millions of dollars are being spent on the project on a monthly basis. So Kroenke might be willing to make further compromises to salvage the project.

There is also always the possibility of, after hours of deadlock in Houston, the league and key owners could lean on Kroenke to make concessions and Spanos to do a deal with the Rams boss. This likely would also entail the league helping Davis finance a 50,000-seat stadium in Oakland.

Which is more likely: One or two teams being approved for relocation?

“I think there’s a stronger feeling towards two at this point,” Indianapolis owner Jim Irsay said. “I don’t think anyone is opposed to two.”

Could the league really rule that the Rams are ineligible for relocation?

Yes.

“We have to decide first, in terms of relocation guidelines, have the clubs met the relocation guidelines,” McNair said not speaking about the Rams specifically. “If they have, they're eligible for consideration for relocation. If they haven’t met the guidelines, then they’re not eligible for consideration.”

Will the committee make a recommendation and if so what will it be?

The committee will make a recommendation and right now the majority of the committee is leaning toward the Carson project. The one wild card is Kansas City owner Clark Hunt, a committee member, who remains undecided and has even said he would be open to the possibility of the matter being rolled to March, something Kroenke supporters have pushed for in recent weeks.

Who’s supporting Kroenke?

A number of high-profile owners: Jones, Woody Johnson of the New York Jets, Daniel Snyder of Washington, Jeffrey Lurie of Philadelphia and Miami’s Steve Ross. This week Ross said who the best owner is should a leading factor in deciding which team should be approved for relocation, an apparent reference to the fact that Kroenke’s worth is substantially more than Spanos’ and Davis’ combined.

So does either side have the 24 votes needed for relocation approval?

No.

“If we were voting today, I don’t see anything getting 24 votes right now,” Irsay said. “That certainly can change with more discussion.

“I don’t think we’re extremely close right now.”

Will there actually be a vote in Houston?

Privately, NFL officials say Houston will produce a decision, a view shared by at least a significant portion of the owners.

“I think there’s a lot of hope that it will be the definitive vote,” Tisch said. “But this has been so unpredictable, very predictable to give a really accurate timeline. So it’s a bit of a moving target. So can I tell you today that on Jan. 13 we’re going to walk out of a meeting saying here’s who’s coming to L.A.? No. I think everybody on the committee, and I’m sure most of the 32 owners in that room, would like there to be something definitive sooner than later.

“We’re going to have some kind of decision made on the 13th. If there are issues that prolong a vote beyond Jan. 13 that are not under our control or the committee’s control, that’s one thing. To the extent that the committee can present to full ownership on the 13th and say it’s time to vote, guys, let’s vote, that’s in everybody’s best interests. This does need to get done.”

Said McNair: “I think one way or another we’ll get this resolved, yeah.”

Contact the writer: [email protected]

[RamsFanSince82]

More Reid propaganda showing his Carson/Spanos bias.

Here's one of the key points.


The second issue is that league officials believe the true cost of the proposed downtown (STL) stadium is somewhere in the $1.2 billion-$1.3 billion range. The task force currently lists the price tag at just less than $1 billion, meaning they have three weeks to identify and secure another $250 million in funding.

[BuiltRamTough]

More Reid propaganda showing his Carson/Spanos bias.

Here's one of the key points.


The second issue is that league officials believe the true cost of the proposed downtown (STL) stadium is somewhere in the $1.2 billion-$1.3 billion range. The task force currently lists the price tag at just less than $1 billion, meaning they have three weeks to identify and secure another $250 million in funding.

No wonder Peacock is keeping the term sheet secret.

I tell you what man this shit wouldn't fly in Cali.

[Stranger]

More Reid propaganda showing his Carson/Spanos bias.

Here's one of the key points.


The second issue is that league officials believe the true cost of the proposed downtown (STL) stadium is somewhere in the $1.2 billion-$1.3 billion range. The task force currently lists the price tag at just less than $1 billion, meaning they have three weeks to identify and secure another $250 million in funding.

No wonder Peacock is keeping the term sheet secret.

I tell you what man this shit wouldn't fly in Cali.

i don't know... Schwarzenegger pulled some incredible stuff.

[Hacksaw]

Interesting article. Sounds like Fabiani spin for SD leverage whatever. Is Reid in the Spanos camp like Trotter?

If this was the only article I had ever read on this subject, I would think that Carson is viable and favored to house the 2 new LA teams. Not the Rams.

Could the league really rule that the Rams are ineligible for relocation?
Yes.
“We have to decide first, in terms of relocation guidelines, have the clubs met the relocation guidelines,” McNair said not speaking about the Rams specifically. “If they have, they're eligible for consideration for relocation. If they haven’t met the guidelines, then they’re not eligible for consideration.”

This part is confusing. The owners should be fully up to speed whether or not the franchises have met those guidelines. It may not have been in a formal concluded discussion, but all the factors are well known. Not speaking to it is suspicious at this point.

The fact that Carson is still in the discussion seems suspect as well. Why don't these esteemed owners ever discuss the well documented problems with that building site?

Bottom line, we have to trust common sense to feel remotely comfortable about this. Articles, quoting owner like this make it harder because the thought of them all conspiring against the city of SD and OAK seems less and less realistic when the league keeps giving StLoo all the rope in the world. Moving the goal posts back and back again. They keep heaving praise upon them. All this after what StLoo didn't do for the Rams over the last 20 years. And in light of their weak proposal to say the least.

I'm beginning to think that they are breaking Kroenke down on Spanos' behalf,,,, and/or they know that StL will end up failing to get the votes or enough money in time. Placing that extra 1/4 billion dollar valuation on to the Gnat price tag didn't help StL's cause ,, if that sticks.

[RamsFanSince82]

Reid is absolutely pro Carson/Spanos. ALL of his articles have a Carson/Spanos bias.

Of course he never said anything about the possibility of the Chargers or Raiders being ineligible for relocation.

The traffic and parking excuse is so stupid. We're talking about a handful of Sundays a year.

[max]

Why doesn't the media ask any owner about the fact that STL didn't meet the top tier clause and why doesn't that give him relocation rights?

[Hacksaw]

Reid is absolutely pro Carson/Spanos. ALL of his articles have a Carson/Spanos bias.
Of course he never said anything about the possibility of the Chargers being ineligible for relocation.

Now that raises a question.

First the owners don't acknowledge the guideline for relocation issues as being resolved.
Then they consider the Chargers eligible because Spanos hasn't been able to agree to something in LA or SD for over a decade. Not that those plans weren't viable,,, just not exactly what he wanted. So is that exhausting all possibilities?

Raiders aren't really even trying. So do they even care? Is that exhausting all possibilities? Especially considering Levi Stadium and its 3 locker rooms are sitting their in their backyard.

The owners 'appear' to be allowing StLoo to break their lease and lose in an arbitration process and throw together a mediocre plan which no other owner would likely accept, with fuzzy math, circumvented votes and possible appeals as something that they are STILL considering ?

Something doesn't pass the smell test here.

Who said it is imperative to get new stadiums for all 3 teams? The owners. The fans could probably care less. And we are the ones who pay for a lot of it.

But the LA leverage is going to be gone. Not if the Rams come alone.

[Stranger]

How does the NFL pull off a huge splash without ESK, his resouces and real estate acumen?

[bubbaramfan]

Again, St. Louis lets a deadline come down to the last seconds. It doesn't give the owners much time for their lawyers to go over the stadium financing plan. Some of them will be put off by the last minute changes. BofA in St. Louis might be put off also, having to work during their Xmas break.

San Diego's plan has if's? So does St. Louis'. Doesn't that put Kroenke on even footing with Spanos?

SD. the NFL, and the media still continue to ignore the remediation factor in Carson. They have to know the biggest difference between the Inglewood plan and the Carson plan is that Carson will be ready at least two years later than Ingewood,
They have to know that before remediation can start in Carson, there has to be a completed stadium design, and both will take time to co-ordinate. Carson gets awarded, maybe they can play football in 2020.

It all smells of still dragging along on purpose to keep butts in the seats till the season is over.

I sure hope its Carson, it will be very entertaining. spanos and Davis with no capital to speak of, Carson political three ring circus, and with the remediation, the Calif State Board of Health and, EPA getting in the act will be hilarious.

Carson gets awarded and I garuntee a major boondoggle. Can the owners be that blind and stupid? I don't think so, we're just entering the last act of their dog and pony show they cooked up for the masses.