New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL
- Thread starter STL-Rams
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
- Status
Interesting that JT would say that after Grubman was on the Radio in St Louis and said the Rams "won the argument" and it would be up to the owners. He also said that he could envision a scenario where St Louis has everything set up and ready to go and the NFL still allowed the Rams to move.
http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLc...With-St-Louis-Stadium-Financing-in-Place.aspx
He also had some interesting things to say about it all on a San Diego radio station.
http://www.mighty1090.com/episode/eric-grubman-dean-spanos-has-spoken-up/
What's interesting is the guy is out of Denver. Kroenke is about the only one that could call the Rams to LA "a virtual lock". Kroenke does own most of the sports life in Denver too. Dude is playing the media.
Ok, gotta take this tin foil hat off. No more conspiracies for me today.
Maybe he and Kroenke have tea together and talk about life. hahaha.
Does it specify who JT talked to. The quote just says that he's talked to "several people". Not owners, not other writers. I'd like some clarification on who he talked to.
Well shit, maybe one of Kroenke's other COO's is privy to the details and is leaking it.
If that were the case, the city of St. Louis should consider a lawsuit for not following their own bylaws. Maybe I'm way off on that but I don't see how the NFL can make a set or rules and totally ignore them, especially when it has significant financial repercussions against the city of STL.
If the Cardinals moved to Kansas City, do you think Cardinal fans would still follow them?
There might be a handful of San Diego Charger fans who follow the Los Angeles Chargers, but the vast majority will hate them with a passion IMO.
I could easily envision a settlement with the city of St.Louis that gives us an expansion team or allows the Rams to move but change the names (a'la Browns - Ravens type of scenario)... Either way, St.Louis remains an NFL City.. I can't see the NFL not wanting to capitalize on a city building a 2nd stadium within 25 years. Particularly when out of the 3 cities, St.Louis looks the most likely to have a plan that an owner will like
The Ripper
Starter
The Ripper
Starter
The name will go Kroenke owns the trademark. The difference was that there was a lease in place in Cleveland
http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/bal-modell020996-story.html
LetsGoRams
Pro Bowler
How in the world can the NFL allow a team to move when / if the city they are in does everything necessary to build a new stadium?? Can someone explain that to me? How can it be a 'virtual lock' if STL does in fact secure the financing / land and is going to build it?
The Ripper
Starter
That's an interesting blanket statement that doesn't match my experience. I spent years traveling to San Antonio for work and just about everyone I knew was a Texans fan and also wanted a franchise in San Antonio.
If that happens, the NFL is going to receive a package from me containing all official NFL gear I own. There might be an extra surprise or 2 in the box, but I can't divulge that information.
That agreement assumes there isn't another stadium being offered. St. Louis is the first city I know of in ANY sport to offer TWO stadiums in a span of 20 years for the same franchise. Also, the bylaws explicitly state that owners can't relocate for financial gain. That is 100% the reason Kroenke wants to move.
LetsGoRams
Pro Bowler
But it guaranteed them a team in return within 3 years. I doubt the league would do that now because they said there would be no expansion.
There had better not be an expansion fee, then. I also don't see how they can expand the league without messing stuff up.
Relocation is voted on by the NFL, it's not a lease provision.
- Status