[Elvis]

http://www.101sports.com/2016/01/10/rog ... -surprise/

Roger Goodell’s Anti-St. Louis Report Was No Surprise

Bernie Miklasz

When NFL commissioner Roger Goodell issued an official report Saturday that dismissed the proposed stadium solutions in St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland as “unsatisfactory and inadequate” to bind the Rams, Chargers and Raiders to their current markets, I can honestly say I wasn’t surprised.

The league offered a preview of its ruling in early December. NFL executive VP Eric Grubman set up a guest appearance on my radio show for Dec. 9 and used the time to disparage the St. Louis stadium efforts on the eve of a key stadium vote by the city’s Board of Aldermen.

“St. Louis will fall short of having a compelling proposal that would attract the Rams,” Grubman told me.

Grubman failed to intimidate the Board, which passed a bill to send the stadium-funding measure forward for final approval. But less than 24 hours before the final vote on Dec. 19, Goodell jumped into the fray to make his feelings known.

Things were looking good for the St. Louis mission to keep the Rams. Houston Texans owner Bob McNair — head of the league’s powerful finance committee — had spoken favorably of the STL stadium proposal, and he’d made a deal with St. Louis task force co-chair Dave Peacock in which the NFL would kick in an extra $100 million to the stadium funding in exchange to ticket-tax revenues being funneled by the city to the Rams. That additional $100 million, in theory, would raise the league’s G4 contribution to $300 million. The league’s policy is to cap such contributions at $200 million.

The extra $100 million was included in the financing package that was placed before the Board of Aldermen, which set off Goodell.

In a brusque response, Goodell fired off a letter to Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon and the task force, stating that a $300 million level of participation “is fundamentally inconsistent with the NFL’s program of stadium financing.” Goodell also accused Peacock of failing to inform the Board of Aldermen of the league’s policy. (Not true.) The Board, unswayed by Goodell’s sabotage attempts, approved the bill.

But at the NFL headquarters in New York, the only votes that mattered belonged to Grubman and Goodell, and they didn’t even try to conceal their contempt for the St. Louis stadium plan. After all, Grubman condemned the St. Louis proposal 21 days before the task force was required to formally file the plan with the league. Keep in mind that when Grubman launched his attack, the STL proposal wasn’t finalized. So how can a prominent league executive reject a stadium plan that hadn’t been submitted?

Answer: Grubman and Goodell had already made up their minds on St. Louis.

The Grub-Goodell attempts to undermine two Board of Aldermen votes were understandable. If the St. Louis proposal blew up before reaching the league level, the NFL wouldn’t have to explain and justify the decision to reject the St. Louis bid later. The league wouldn’t have gin up reasons for for walking away from $500 million in public money — including the sale of Personal Seat Licenses — being offered by St. Louis. And if the St. Louis proposal had been rejected by the Board of Aldermen, the league would face no questions after declaring Rams owner Stan Kroenke was eligible to move under the NFL’s relocation guidelines.

The same relocation guidelines that I’ve warned, all along, were as solid as a single tissue of used Kleenex. The NFL likes to pretend that the guidelines are real, and that they’re enforceable. Which of course is absurd. At minimum, the guidelines are suggestions. At best, they’re optional. And the guidelines are definitely flexible in a way that permits the league to shape them to fit a desired, predetermined outcome. In the end, the NFL would do what it wanted to do in filling the void in Los Angeles, the nation’s second-largest market.

Indeed, Goodell’s report — sent to all 32 teams Saturday — reaffirmed the league’s power to make arbitrary decisions and it doesn’t matter if the actual facts match the league’s evaluation.

By this point, no one should be surprised by that. I was fooled twice in the early stages of this STL drama when Kroenke and Goodell, in separate conversations, told me that the Rams weren’t going anywhere. That’s why I wrongly underestimated the danger of the Rams leaving. I’ve said this before, so let me state it again for the folks that missed it the first 100 times: shame on me for trusting the commissioner and the owner.

And even after Kroenke purchased land in Inglewood, Rams executive Kevin Demoff told me that the land deal was made to spur action on a new stadium in St. Louis. I was skeptical of that — but even then I held out hope that Kroenke would be interested in making a stadium deal in St. Louis. But once Kroenke’s aggressive ambition to move the Rams to Inglewood became public and obvious, there was no reason to believe a single word coming from the Kroenke camp or the league office.

Goodell’s report is a beauty.

But before we get into that…

Let’s talk about what Goodell’s report DOESN’T mean.

Goodell’s Saturday verdict is unmistakable: in the league’s view, Kroenke, San Diego Chargers owner Dean Spanos and Oakland Raiders owner Mark Davis are free agents that qualify for a move to Los Angeles. (I suspect this was also done for legal reasons, to protect the league from future lawsuits from any of the three applicants. And I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that the three owners agreed that they wouldn’t sue the league at a later date in exchange for a favorable ruling from the commissioner in his report.)

In the report, Goodell said each home market had “ample opportunity but did not develop their proposals sufficiently to ensure the retention of its NFL team.”

That doesn’t mean the teams will actually be allowed to move — which Goodell pointed out in his report. That’s up to the owners. The NFL owners will meet Tuesday and Wednesday in Houston to hash out this frantic three-franchise competition for one or (at most) two spots in Los Angeles.

As you know, there are two projects in this game: Kroenke and the Rams alone in the Inglewood stadium-entertainment complex, and the Chargers and Raiders teaming for a stadium partnership in Carson. Earlier this week, after talking with sources at the league and team ownership level, I wrote that the unofficial vote count was leaning strongly in Carson’s direction.

This is all subject to change once the owners begin haggling behind closed doors, but as I follow-up with this today the Carson proposal appears to have 19 or the 20 votes. The magic number for getting permission to move is 24 votes.

Kroenke and his strong supporters have to find a way to twist arms and change minds to get the momentum back to Inglewood.

That’s why Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, a loyal Kroenke advocate, is offering an alternative plan for the owners’ consideration. According to Scott Reid of the Orange County Register, Jones on Friday submitted a proposal that would put the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood. (With the Raiders apparently getting some league money to be used to fund a new stadium in Oakland at some point.)

But as Reid wrote, “Spanos and Mark Davis are opposed to the Jones plan. Allies of the Carson project view the proposal as a delaying tactic by Kroenke and his supporters and part of a strategy in which NFL officials and key owners put pressure on Spanos to agree to join the Rams in Inglewood. At the same time, some owners, including some close to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, have raised the possibility, although not formally, of the Rams joining the Chargers in Carson.”

The league’s desire to have Kroenke and Spanos share a home in Inglewood (or perhaps Carson) is nothing new. That’s been evident for many weeks, as signaled by Kroenke sending a letter to Spanos, offering the Chargers a chance to move into Inglewood. Kroenke’s proposal fell well short of making Spanos a full partner; the invitation was limited to sharing the football stadium only. Spanos wouldn’t have a stake in other pieces of Kroenke’s complex including entertainment venues and real-estate developments.

Kroenke’s offer was immediately rejected by Spanos, who reaffirmed his bond with Davis and their mutual desire to proceed with Carson. Again, don’t forget that Spanos despises Kroenke. Moreover, Spanos is adamant in his stance that the Chargers are first in line for LA because the Southern California-based franchise has been working in vain for more than a decade to come up with a stadium solution in San Diego.

Can Goodell, and several league owners convince Spanos to join Kroenke at Inglewood? The decision in Houston could come down to that. And despite Spanos hardened opposition to Kroenke, it would be naive to rule anything out, especially if the desperate Kroenke adjusts and makes a far more generous offer to Spanos to get it done.

Of course the owners could end up voting for the Chargers-Raiders plan in Carson — which at least up to now has gained strong support from the NFL’s six-owner committee on Los Angeles. The Carson plan benefited from the addition of powerful Disney CEO Bob Iger, who has installed to oversee the Carson stadium design and turn Carson into a compelling site for pure football-related entertainment. Iger and the popular former NFL executive Carmen Policy have been busy lobbying the undecided owners.

But even if the vote goes to Carson and the Chargers-Raiders, it doesn’t mean that Kroenke will settle back into St. Louis and make a stadium deal here. His trashing and burning of the city in a vicious attack on St. Louis in his relocation application reaffirmed Kroenke’s hatred for the market. It also underlined his plan — if he loses the LA vote — to stay in the Edward Jones Dome on a year-to-year basis until he can pounce on another relocation opportunity. But after nuking the city, how can Kroenke come back here? And why would anyone of sound mind and minimal integrity blame St. Louis fans for declining to support the team? Kroenke and the Rams in St. Louis on a year-to-year basis would be a disaster — and an embarrassment to the league. (Which presumes the league is capable of feeling embarrassed by anything.)

Anyway, let’s end with some comments on Goodell’s report.

Not that it matters. The fix is in and nothing is going to change Goodell’s mind. For those that want the Rams to play in St. Louis in 2016, the hope is that the owners will vote in favor of Carson and the Spanos-Davis combination.

— Goodell wrote that “The State, City and RSA believe that they have all necessary authority in connection with the public funding. Nonetheless, nearly three-fourths of the Missouri General Assembly members have publicly expressed their opposition, arguing that such public funding should be approved by the legislature or by public vote, and, as noted above, that issue is in litigation. The prospect of opposition by a substantial majority of the Missouri General Assembly, as well as the pending litigation, could result in appropriation risk and uncertainty that cannot be entirely dismissed.”

Bernie comments: Goodell’s math is off base here. But never mind the facts. Some legislators have made plenty of noise in opposition to Nixon’s actions with state bonds, and they have claimed that a large percentage of the legislature would try to block the use of the bonds. But claiming that 75 percent are opposed is a lot different from actually having 75 percent opposed. But this was good enough for Goodell; this was all he needed to sound the alarm. The dissidents in Jefferson City gave Goodell cover. But even if the lawmakers passed a bill to shoot down Nixon’s use of the bonds for the stadium, he would veto it with virtually no chance of that veto being struck down via override. And such a bill would also do extensive damage to the state because it would de-fund the entire state budget. And despite the tough talk, the state legislature wasn’t about to imperil state finances with a grandstand populist move that had no shot at succeeding. As for the potential of lawsuits, it’s hard for me to challenge that, but for an obvious reason: anyone can file suit at any time for any reason. It is simply impossible to rule out a lawsuit. There’s no way that this or any sports-related project in this or any other state that requires the use of public dollars is 100 percent protected against lawsuits.

— Goodell wrote: “The public funding obligations would be contingent on, among other things, $300 million of NFL League-level funding, $250 million from the Rams, and a minimum of $160.4 million of net proceeds from PSLs. This proposal would require the League to provide $100 million more than the maximum amount for which any club is eligible under the League’s G-4 program.”

Bernie comments: The $100 million was pledged by McNair and at least one other owner, probably Carolina Panthers’ owner Jerry Richardson. Peacock never would have included that money in the stadium-funding plan presented to the Board of Aldermen unless he was confident in its legitimacy. Goodell as commissioner can flex his muscle as he chooses. He chose the St. Louis proposal to reassert his authority, and apparently got McNair and the other owner to back down on the $100 million pledge. But this is the same commissioner that had granted extensive power to the LA committee to work independently of the league office in coming up with a decision on Los Angeles. And the committee was, in fact, following the commissioner’s instructions — at least until the committee came up with a pro-St. Louis offer that would work against the league’s not-so-secret agenda.

— Goodell wrote: “Notwithstanding the fact that the amount of public funding proposed by the City and State is substantial, the Rams have expressed concerns that the market potential would not yield an economic return sufficient to justify the very substantial private investment (for both construction as well as 30 years of maintenance and improvements) that the task force’s proposal would require. The Rams have estimated that the club’s overall financial position would deteriorate under the proposal, even utilizing the revenue projections of the public authorities.”

Bernie comments: If you’re still wondering if the pro-Kroenke, anti-STL fix was in, Goodell provided the answer. If the NFL wanted to have an objective assessment of the St. Louis stadium economics, then the NFL should have use an independent analysis that contained a definitive and trustworthy outlook. Instead, the NFL relied on the team’s own analysis. The Rams obviously want to leave St. Louis, and it was in Kroenke’s best interest to present a negative and bleak assessment of the STL stadium’s economic viability. As Daniel Kaplan of the Sports Business Journal tweeted: this was akin to the fox guarding the henhouse. Kroenke obviously didn’t have to work hard to convince Goodell and Grubman that playing in the new STL stadium would lead to “financial ruin.” This, coming from an owner already has nearly tripled the value of his holdings during his time as the Rams’ owner in St. Louis. That’s based on what Kroenke paid become the full owner: $80 million to buy 40 percent of the team in 1994-1995, and $450 million to purchase the remaining ownership shares in 2010. That’s $530 million. In the fall of 2015, Forbes listed the Rams’ value at $1.45 billion.

— Goodell wrote: “The proposal would provide substantially less public support for the Rams than the support to which the club was entitled, according to the independent arbitration panel, under the existing stadium lease; public officials estimated that the cost to complete the renovations endorsed by the arbitration panel would have been about $700 million.”

Comments: in other words, it was impossible for St. Louis to succeed unless it came up with $700 million in public dollars. No room for negotiations, no room to see if a fair outcome was attainable for both parties, the Rams and STL. Understand that no NFL market at any point in history has come up with anything close to $700 million in public dollars for a stadium — but only STL was required to do so. But there’s more to it than that. If $700 million was the drop-dead goal, then why did Goodell and Grubman repeatedly urge Peacock and the task force to keep going, keep working to attain the $400 million in public money to come up with a viable stadium plan? Why mislead Peacock and the task force by setting the bar at $400 million when the real number was an impossibly high $700 million all along? And if $700 million was the actual litmus test, then why did Bob McNair and other committee members encourage — and work with — Peacock to hit the $400 million mark when the $400 million was substantially short ($300 million) of what Goodell ultimately cited in his report? What was the point of the “Town Hall” dog and pony shows? The NFL could have made this anti-STL ruling many months ago instead of leading Peacock down a path that would have no way out.

When I first started referring to the NFL as a cartel, some of you suggested I was being a bit harsh. Do you still think that?

It’s a cartel. And like I said and wrote a few days ago, slang style — the cartel gonna cartel.

Goodell’s report made that perfectly clear.

Thanks for reading …

–Bernie

[OldSchool]

It was Bernie, I didn't read should I fedex him some kleenex?

[LoyalRam]

Thanks Elvis, but that story had about 10,000 more words than I wanted to read.....

[Ramfan46]

I gave up halfway through. If he had never written that "Fuck You LA" article when STL arrived he might have a leg to stand on. Now he looks like a ignorant and naive fool now that the shoe is on the other foot. Why would any person do a city a favor when the city never lived up to their end of the deal? Kroenke bought into the team and saw first hand how hard it was to get improvements to the Dome. Imagine what the city would provide with this garbage contract had it been forced?

[den-the-coach]

Bernie...Bernie....Bernie...

[Hacksaw]

"I was fooled twice in the early stages of this STL drama when Kroenke and Goodell, in separate conversations, told me that the Rams weren’t going anywhere. That’s why I wrongly underestimated the danger of the Rams leaving. I’ve said this before, so let me state it again for the folks that missed it the first 100 times: shame on me for trusting the commissioner and the owner.
And even after Kroenke purchased land in Inglewood, Rams executive Kevin Demoff told me that the land deal was made to spur action on a new stadium in St. Louis"

Excuses.;

"Bernie comments: The $100 million was pledged by McNair and at least one other owner, probably Carolina Panthers’ owner Jerry Richardson. Peacock never would have included that money in the stadium-funding plan presented to the Board of Aldermen unless he was confident in its legitimacy."

Is it possible Pisscock was set up?

[Elvis]

Is it possible Pisscock was set up?

Or he's playing the Jamba Juice in CoC angle...

[dieterbrock]

Yeah Bernie, Goodell sides with Kroenke because it is the right call.
St. Louis breached their contract
Kroenke has the right to move
Inglewood will be an NFL show piece
La gets back the team they shouldn't have lost
St Louis can villainize Kroenke all they want but they have only themselves to blame

[OldSchool]

Yeah Bernie, Goodell sides with Kroenke because it is the right call.
St. Louis breached their contract
Kroenke has the right to move
Inglewood will be an NFL show piece
La gets back the team they shouldn't have lost
St Louis can villainize Kroenke all they want but they have only themselves to blame

I would change the bolded to they only have the CVC and their political leaders to blame. There are some good fans in St Louis, and there are some grade A idiots. But this whole situation came about as we all know because the CVC and leaders promised something they never intended to live up to and that's the only reason the Rams moved.

[RedAlice]

There are some very good fans in StL. I sit by many of them every time I go there. I so adore the one family I am always by.

However, Bernie is a full on idiot with NO facts and only a homer.

I would like to like him, but he is just tooooo beyond.


eta: just to be clear: we are not hating on the real StL Rams fans. There are some awesome ones. I adore the ones I have by me in StL and they are so invited to anything I do in San Diego or LA for our Rams.