- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,441
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
expect Rams to be back in LA next year.
- Thread starter LA RAM FAN
- Start date
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,442
Special Interview with NFL Super Agent Leigh Steinberg
Leigh will reveal what he thinks about NFL commissionerRoger Goodell, what he thinks will happen in regards to the NFL's attempt to return toLos Angeles, potential solutions to theNFL concussion issueas well as why he stresses to all of his clients the importance of setting up charitable foundations.
Leigh will reveal what he thinks about NFL commissionerRoger Goodell, what he thinks will happen in regards to the NFL's attempt to return toLos Angeles, potential solutions to theNFL concussion issueas well as why he stresses to all of his clients the importance of setting up charitable foundations.
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,443
whine ,whine whine.lol
The Rams are expected to file for relocation in early January, but the city is putting up a good fight to get a new stadium built. The city’s Board of Aldermen is in the process of passing their piece of the financing for a new $1 billion riverfront stadium on the north edge of downtown. At this point, it doesn’t appear that (Rams owner Stan) Kroenke has the votes to move the team to Los Angeles. I can tell you this: The city doesn’t deserve this. This is a pure greed move. It’s hard to believe the NFL would turn its back on a city in the process of building a second new stadium for an owner in less than 25 years. And while Kroenke wants a “first-tier” stadium, he has fallen way short of putting a “first-tier” product on the field. At 4-8, the Rams are assured of their 12th consecutive non-winning season. From 2007-2011, the team was 15-65, marking the worst five-year stretch in NFL history.
The other side: St. Louis deserves to keep its NFL team
Somebody should clue Vinny Bongisnore in that the NFL is not immune to the same laws which every major corporation in the world is subject to. You cannot conspire between two parties to freeze out a 3rd party's ability to profit or make money.
YEP.
The Rams are expected to file for relocation in early January, but the city is putting up a good fight to get a new stadium built. The city’s Board of Aldermen is in the process of passing their piece of the financing for a new $1 billion riverfront stadium on the north edge of downtown. At this point, it doesn’t appear that (Rams owner Stan) Kroenke has the votes to move the team to Los Angeles. I can tell you this: The city doesn’t deserve this. This is a pure greed move. It’s hard to believe the NFL would turn its back on a city in the process of building a second new stadium for an owner in less than 25 years. And while Kroenke wants a “first-tier” stadium, he has fallen way short of putting a “first-tier” product on the field. At 4-8, the Rams are assured of their 12th consecutive non-winning season. From 2007-2011, the team was 15-65, marking the worst five-year stretch in NFL history.
The other side: St. Louis deserves to keep its NFL team
Somebody should clue Vinny Bongisnore in that the NFL is not immune to the same laws which every major corporation in the world is subject to. You cannot conspire between two parties to freeze out a 3rd party's ability to profit or make money.
YEP.
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,444
interesting stuff here.lol
Vincent Delgado - Photos/Videos of Bring Back the Los... | Facebook
more interesting stuff.
The Penultimate game in the LOO!! And the Penultimate reason for hating the slut-o-matic who killed her husband to gain control of the team (see last weeks #3 reason for hating GF) So, without further ado....It wasn't enough for GF to have her husband "Suffer a Heart Attack and Die while swimming", no, this gets even better. The casket is barely closed on Carroll Rosenbloom before she marries Dominic Frontiere,and NOW THAT THE RAMS FINALLY GET TO THE SUPER BOWL in '80(against The Steroid Steelers), these 2 UPSTANDING CITIZENS launch a plan to rip off Ram fans by scalping tickets meant for season ticket holders.
(fromWikipedia.org)
In 1986, Dominic Frontiere was incarcerated for nine months in a federal penitentiary for scalping tickets to the 1980 Super Bowl, which he obtained through his then-wife, Los Angeles Rams owner Georgia Frontiere. He was estimated to have scalped as many as 16,000 tickets, making a half million dollars in profit that he failed to report to the Internal Revenue Service. Frontiere pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a year and one day in prison, three years probation, and fined $15,000 for failing to report income from the sale of the tickets and for lying to the IRS. Georgia Frontiere filed for divorce shortly after Dominic's release from prison
Vincent Delgado - Photos/Videos of Bring Back the Los... | Facebook
more interesting stuff.
The Penultimate game in the LOO!! And the Penultimate reason for hating the slut-o-matic who killed her husband to gain control of the team (see last weeks #3 reason for hating GF) So, without further ado....It wasn't enough for GF to have her husband "Suffer a Heart Attack and Die while swimming", no, this gets even better. The casket is barely closed on Carroll Rosenbloom before she marries Dominic Frontiere,and NOW THAT THE RAMS FINALLY GET TO THE SUPER BOWL in '80(against The Steroid Steelers), these 2 UPSTANDING CITIZENS launch a plan to rip off Ram fans by scalping tickets meant for season ticket holders.
(fromWikipedia.org)
In 1986, Dominic Frontiere was incarcerated for nine months in a federal penitentiary for scalping tickets to the 1980 Super Bowl, which he obtained through his then-wife, Los Angeles Rams owner Georgia Frontiere. He was estimated to have scalped as many as 16,000 tickets, making a half million dollars in profit that he failed to report to the Internal Revenue Service. Frontiere pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a year and one day in prison, three years probation, and fined $15,000 for failing to report income from the sale of the tickets and for lying to the IRS. Georgia Frontiere filed for divorce shortly after Dominic's release from prison
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,445
The Raiders' involvement in Carson bid could mean no LA teams in 2016
Let's see what happens when ESK breaks ground on his Inglewood project. Never mind project developers announced back in January that this month was the estimated time for such to happen. This would be the shot that dares the league to stop him. If theNFL either delayed or denied his L.A. move, ESK relocates his team while filing antitrust action against the NFL. Remember not only that Al Davis won similar action against the NFL over his moving his Raiders to LA. ESK was at the time minority shareholder of the Rams when Georgia Frontiere threatened legal action if the league blocked her from moving the Rams to StL. Seems like it's hard for the league, some owners, and national media members to learn from history on this matter.
The Chargers can't move to LA by themselves. I thought that was already established.
The stadium committee may not endorse the Inglewood project, but the NFL may not have a choice. The Rams are the obvious selection for a return to the Los Angeles area. The NFL wants to get it right. Simultaneously placing the Chargers and Raiders in the same market will come with too much fiscal risk.
Let's see what happens when ESK breaks ground on his Inglewood project. Never mind project developers announced back in January that this month was the estimated time for such to happen. This would be the shot that dares the league to stop him. If theNFL either delayed or denied his L.A. move, ESK relocates his team while filing antitrust action against the NFL. Remember not only that Al Davis won similar action against the NFL over his moving his Raiders to LA. ESK was at the time minority shareholder of the Rams when Georgia Frontiere threatened legal action if the league blocked her from moving the Rams to StL. Seems like it's hard for the league, some owners, and national media members to learn from history on this matter.
The Chargers can't move to LA by themselves. I thought that was already established.
The stadium committee may not endorse the Inglewood project, but the NFL may not have a choice. The Rams are the obvious selection for a return to the Los Angeles area. The NFL wants to get it right. Simultaneously placing the Chargers and Raiders in the same market will come with too much fiscal risk.
Last edited:
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,446
Anthony Rocca on Twitter
raiders not going to LA.lol
There is no Carson without the Raiders. Spanos never would have taken on a partner unless he really had to.
And guys like Florio, Cole, and LaCanfora roll with Solo Spanos theory. That would put him over 2 billion in debt. He could invest $500 million in SD, host SB's, and his sons would hold keys to the kingdom.
No way the Chargers come to LA alone. Could mean bot Inglewood and Carson Get Approved. Rams In Inglewood and Chargers in Carson.
For someone not following story perhaps it is news. But to paint picture of Chargers by themselves when Carson is pitched as a two-team financed stadium is not accurate in any way.
Spanos going 900k in debt for stadium + relocate fee is a lot different than funding it by himself. And Carson is not seen to be multi-use like ING so revenue streams are fewer.
raiders not going to LA.lol
There is no Carson without the Raiders. Spanos never would have taken on a partner unless he really had to.
And guys like Florio, Cole, and LaCanfora roll with Solo Spanos theory. That would put him over 2 billion in debt. He could invest $500 million in SD, host SB's, and his sons would hold keys to the kingdom.
No way the Chargers come to LA alone. Could mean bot Inglewood and Carson Get Approved. Rams In Inglewood and Chargers in Carson.
For someone not following story perhaps it is news. But to paint picture of Chargers by themselves when Carson is pitched as a two-team financed stadium is not accurate in any way.
Spanos going 900k in debt for stadium + relocate fee is a lot different than funding it by himself. And Carson is not seen to be multi-use like ING so revenue streams are fewer.
Last edited:
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,447
I read today that richardson and others think that the NFL should help out the california teams who both badly need new stadiums. I agree, they should help them out, they should do the RIGHT thing and help them build new stadiums in their OWN cities, not let them move. people in san diego and oakland, want to keep their teams, st louis, I'm not so sure. why not really help out these two by figuring out a way to keep them in their home cities. meanwhile, the only team with the real history of being in LA, are ready to move, have the stadium all ready to go, have all the money to make it work, need no public financing, and st louis fans mostly are saying, they suck, let them go. why not when it comes to the char/raiders, just wait another year? give them both another year to work out new stadium deals, and let the friggin rams move and build their new palace, home for ESPN west and the NFL network,your really going to tell stan he can't move and let him sit there in st louis while nobody goes to rams games and everybody hates him in st louis for trying to abandon them?
I believe Richardson and others who support Carson have other motives than a new stadium for SD and Oakland. The stadium argument doesn't make sense. Weather it's Inglewood or Carson, the NFL is only going to get one new stadium product. If they move the Rams only they still can work to get new stadium products in the two strong markets of SD and Oakland. If they move SD and Oakland to Carson they abandon those markets. St Louis is a weak market in comparison in a State with two teams and only 6 million people. The smart business decision is Rams to LA only. 4 teams spread out in a State of 49 million people. -- The owners for Carson have other motives and it all has to do with not wanting Kroenke, who is willing and able to finance a stadium without public money to gain so much power in the league. It's the small market teams and inheritance owners against the money owners and strong market teams.
I believe Richardson and others who support Carson have other motives than a new stadium for SD and Oakland. The stadium argument doesn't make sense. Weather it's Inglewood or Carson, the NFL is only going to get one new stadium product. If they move the Rams only they still can work to get new stadium products in the two strong markets of SD and Oakland. If they move SD and Oakland to Carson they abandon those markets. St Louis is a weak market in comparison in a State with two teams and only 6 million people. The smart business decision is Rams to LA only. 4 teams spread out in a State of 49 million people. -- The owners for Carson have other motives and it all has to do with not wanting Kroenke, who is willing and able to finance a stadium without public money to gain so much power in the league. It's the small market teams and inheritance owners against the money owners and strong market teams.
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,448
not good for carson.lol
Vincent Bonsignore on Twitter
If everyone used common sense they would realize losing the Stl market is significantly less of an issue than losing half of the Bay Area or Sd!
Oakland (Bay area) is one of the largest markets in the nation and San Diego is arguably the greatest Super Bowl city out there. Abandoning those 2 markets for St. Louis is a crime and downright idiotic from a business perspective.
Oakland Raiders, San Diego Chargers, and Los Angeles Rams would be an absolute money maker for the NFL.
I Agree with the fact that san diego needs to be Kept... just like miami and yes pasadena and even future LOS ANGELES Home of the First super Bowl..... the worst thing about all this is that the NFL Doesnt get it about LOS ANGELES and Super Bowls....if Miami lost out on the recent Super bowl bid BECAUSE OF STADIUM ISSUES what makes them think that Carson would last if they wanted to bring la a super bowl and who is on the hook for the festivities??? the owner or the city... WHERE AS!!! INGLEWOOD and Stan Kronike can have that palace and things set up for EVERYTHING LONG TERM and for many many years...... and oakland should get to host 1, palo alto did with the whiners playing there.... but here is the super kicker... New Orleans is a smaller markety i think of all 3 cities AND IT HAS HOSTED THE MOST SUPER BOWLS 11 (old tulane stadium held i think 3 before the super bowl opened.......) stl. never even got 1 in 20 years
Vincent Bonsignore on Twitter
If everyone used common sense they would realize losing the Stl market is significantly less of an issue than losing half of the Bay Area or Sd!
Oakland (Bay area) is one of the largest markets in the nation and San Diego is arguably the greatest Super Bowl city out there. Abandoning those 2 markets for St. Louis is a crime and downright idiotic from a business perspective.
Oakland Raiders, San Diego Chargers, and Los Angeles Rams would be an absolute money maker for the NFL.
I Agree with the fact that san diego needs to be Kept... just like miami and yes pasadena and even future LOS ANGELES Home of the First super Bowl..... the worst thing about all this is that the NFL Doesnt get it about LOS ANGELES and Super Bowls....if Miami lost out on the recent Super bowl bid BECAUSE OF STADIUM ISSUES what makes them think that Carson would last if they wanted to bring la a super bowl and who is on the hook for the festivities??? the owner or the city... WHERE AS!!! INGLEWOOD and Stan Kronike can have that palace and things set up for EVERYTHING LONG TERM and for many many years...... and oakland should get to host 1, palo alto did with the whiners playing there.... but here is the super kicker... New Orleans is a smaller markety i think of all 3 cities AND IT HAS HOSTED THE MOST SUPER BOWLS 11 (old tulane stadium held i think 3 before the super bowl opened.......) stl. never even got 1 in 20 years
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,449
TV money is a big deal to the NFL. What do the Networks want in LA might be a huge question. Can you see CBS being okay with just an NFC team (Rams) in LA? How about Fox being okay with just an AFC team (Chargers) in LA? Are the networks not letting the commissioner know that if the NFL returns to LA then they want the conference they cover to be part of it? So, how much does TV money mean to the league? Both the NFL Network and Fox have their game day shows and studios in LA. CBS shares the Thursday night games with the NFL Network. NBC has the Sunday night package. Do you think that either CBS or Fox want to be shut out? Of course ESPN has Monday Night which means they broadcast any game regardless of conference.
My guess and its only a guess but the Network execs may play a huge part in deciding this outcome.
The real audience for the NFL are advertisers. They are the entities buying the product. The best media story line for the return of the NFL to LA is the Rams. It doesn't help the NFL to move The Chargers because 1) No one in LA wants them, and 2) Advertisers lose the San Diego region.
The Rubes are upset with Chris Myers and can't even spell his name right.
View topic - Didn't know about Chris Meyers
After listening to Ram broadcast for the last 3 weeks, I couldn't believe how broadcaster Chris Meyers kept making comments about Rams attendance and backhanded comments about moving to LA. After the game today I looked him up and sure enough, he lives in LA and has a radio show on TheBeast 980. No wonder he calls the game in an unprofessional manner with comments that have nothing to do with the game. Just another stinking LA Troll. At least he is not doing the next game.
My guess and its only a guess but the Network execs may play a huge part in deciding this outcome.
The real audience for the NFL are advertisers. They are the entities buying the product. The best media story line for the return of the NFL to LA is the Rams. It doesn't help the NFL to move The Chargers because 1) No one in LA wants them, and 2) Advertisers lose the San Diego region.
The Rubes are upset with Chris Myers and can't even spell his name right.
View topic - Didn't know about Chris Meyers
After listening to Ram broadcast for the last 3 weeks, I couldn't believe how broadcaster Chris Meyers kept making comments about Rams attendance and backhanded comments about moving to LA. After the game today I looked him up and sure enough, he lives in LA and has a radio show on TheBeast 980. No wonder he calls the game in an unprofessional manner with comments that have nothing to do with the game. Just another stinking LA Troll. At least he is not doing the next game.
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,450
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,451
Well my esteemed Los Angeles Rams brothers and sisters, it looks like it's crunch time. Either we come home now or we do not come home ever. It seems so ironic that in a country where money is everything, we are still fighting to right a wrong committed by Frontiere 21 years ago. Stan has the deepest pockets, Stan will not use public funds.....end of story. But no......wait........Lets give LA to the Chargers and Raiders. Both teams demand public money because both teams arebroke, or at least can't afford to pay for the stadiums on their own. One of the teams would have to realign in the NFC because two AFC teams in the same publicly financed stadium won't work. It seems so counter productive that the man with all the money and a painless solution is the one that the committee seems to like the least. St. Louis Rams. Hell, that doesn't even sound right. It sounds akward. Stan's plan was never to keep the Rams in STL. Once he took control of the team, he began taking the necessary steps to return home to LA. He does not want to offend STL. He is just correcting a huge mistake. Yes he will become far richer with the team back in SoCal which is only fair, and we will finally be at peace with our boys back in town. Let's end this nightmare and get it dome.
Rams / SoCal forever.
When was the initial exact date this month, the mayor of Inglewood said they would start construction on the Stadium? I never see it stated anymore.
Butts has said himself that he defers to the NFL and the developers regarding breaking ground on the actual stadium. We spoke to one of the guys from HPLC at the Inglewood tree lighting, and he said that they were ready to go, but that it would likely be delayed until Jan when the owners meet.
Rams / SoCal forever.
When was the initial exact date this month, the mayor of Inglewood said they would start construction on the Stadium? I never see it stated anymore.
Butts has said himself that he defers to the NFL and the developers regarding breaking ground on the actual stadium. We spoke to one of the guys from HPLC at the Inglewood tree lighting, and he said that they were ready to go, but that it would likely be delayed until Jan when the owners meet.
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
CremeBrulee
Gold Member
What cities will the owners use to leverage communities for new stadiums if they do move back?
Edit:
San Antonio
London
?
Edit:
San Antonio
London
?
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,454
on fred roggins radio show today roggin had this to say-jerry richardson who is suppose to be impartial going to Bob Igor to represent carson is insider trading in the real world.in the NFL doesnt apply though.richardson was in cohoots with him the whole time.that could come back to bite him
the committe is just suppose to gather information and make decisons,not plan it and put it together.
mo senator shaff called NFL and said they have a lawsuit against them cause they are not going to fund bonds for NFL stadium,we dont have a firm offer.richardson keep it confidential,to Igor,that is dirty pool.
some of the NFL owners dont want the raiders to move,not best run organization they think and some are sore at al davis for his lawsuit.
And now Bob McNair says Rams may not get approved to relocate. I'm hoping Kroenke starts making some noise after tomorrow nights final home game. Time for Kroenke to put up a fight to bring our Rams home.
Mc Nair said fan support will be a big factor. Clearly Rams are the least supported of the 3 right now in their market. Raiders by far getting most support
They are talking out of there ass. They also said they don't need Stans money to build a stadium. Well if you read there plans they need alot of Stans money. Which he said he won't do. Stan wants out of St Louis. So if the owners vote no he still can go.
Its going to be the Rams in LA 2016.
The Coliseum said only the Rams could play there. And said Hell no to.the Raiders
Fellow LA Rams fans this is what I think is going to happen.....the Chargers, Raiders and unfortunately our Rams will all get block from moving......BUT I believe Stan will go rogue......If Irsay, Modell, Davis, Georgia left without the NFL's blessing....you know Stan could care less what the NFL thinks and will do what is best for him and our 2016 LA Rams.
They can't force them to stay. Kroenke can go because St Louis has broken the agreement on the lease and Kroenke can move by taking the Nfl to court. And the Nfl don't want that
The Rams aren't going to sign any lease so just get used to it. There last game in St Louis tomorrow night. Remember this 20,000 fans at fan appreciate game that's sorry. You support a team No matter what.
Beth Schwartz25000 fans in 94 for last game in Anaheim
20,000 was the ticket count
I pointed this out on another thread but I'll repeat it here. All Peacock did yesterday was make the deal even worse for SK. He added another 100 million SK has to pay back. He doubled the rent and basically said if you want a top tier Stadium then you pay the extra costs upfront to make it one. Does that in anyway sound like he improved a deal for SK that was already said to be falling short?
3 hrs
Richard Anthony AlvaradoKroenke will have the last say in this . No way in Hell he lets these owners manipulate the process . Kroenke will drop a bombshell that will rock the NFL to its core .
It is interesting.... No one who is anti LA Rams seem to be forgetting some obvious problems with the Rams staying in STL. Like Stan having enough votes to block any move, the fact that he is not going to take the bad DOA stadium deal, the fact the state is suing over the state funded bond issue, the fact Stan has enough resources to move and sue, the collusion issue with Iger and Richardson, and the fact that Stan IS CURRENTLY BUILDING A STADIUM IN INGLEWOOD. These are all things that have been reported on and generally accepted. So for those who say the Rams are staying you have a very weak argument.
the committe is just suppose to gather information and make decisons,not plan it and put it together.
mo senator shaff called NFL and said they have a lawsuit against them cause they are not going to fund bonds for NFL stadium,we dont have a firm offer.richardson keep it confidential,to Igor,that is dirty pool.
some of the NFL owners dont want the raiders to move,not best run organization they think and some are sore at al davis for his lawsuit.
And now Bob McNair says Rams may not get approved to relocate. I'm hoping Kroenke starts making some noise after tomorrow nights final home game. Time for Kroenke to put up a fight to bring our Rams home.
Mc Nair said fan support will be a big factor. Clearly Rams are the least supported of the 3 right now in their market. Raiders by far getting most support
They are talking out of there ass. They also said they don't need Stans money to build a stadium. Well if you read there plans they need alot of Stans money. Which he said he won't do. Stan wants out of St Louis. So if the owners vote no he still can go.
Its going to be the Rams in LA 2016.
The Coliseum said only the Rams could play there. And said Hell no to.the Raiders
Fellow LA Rams fans this is what I think is going to happen.....the Chargers, Raiders and unfortunately our Rams will all get block from moving......BUT I believe Stan will go rogue......If Irsay, Modell, Davis, Georgia left without the NFL's blessing....you know Stan could care less what the NFL thinks and will do what is best for him and our 2016 LA Rams.
They can't force them to stay. Kroenke can go because St Louis has broken the agreement on the lease and Kroenke can move by taking the Nfl to court. And the Nfl don't want that
The Rams aren't going to sign any lease so just get used to it. There last game in St Louis tomorrow night. Remember this 20,000 fans at fan appreciate game that's sorry. You support a team No matter what.
Beth Schwartz25000 fans in 94 for last game in Anaheim
20,000 was the ticket count
I pointed this out on another thread but I'll repeat it here. All Peacock did yesterday was make the deal even worse for SK. He added another 100 million SK has to pay back. He doubled the rent and basically said if you want a top tier Stadium then you pay the extra costs upfront to make it one. Does that in anyway sound like he improved a deal for SK that was already said to be falling short?
3 hrs
Richard Anthony AlvaradoKroenke will have the last say in this . No way in Hell he lets these owners manipulate the process . Kroenke will drop a bombshell that will rock the NFL to its core .
It is interesting.... No one who is anti LA Rams seem to be forgetting some obvious problems with the Rams staying in STL. Like Stan having enough votes to block any move, the fact that he is not going to take the bad DOA stadium deal, the fact the state is suing over the state funded bond issue, the fact Stan has enough resources to move and sue, the collusion issue with Iger and Richardson, and the fact that Stan IS CURRENTLY BUILDING A STADIUM IN INGLEWOOD. These are all things that have been reported on and generally accepted. So for those who say the Rams are staying you have a very weak argument.
Last edited:
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,455
Look at the bright side Rams fans, when the NFL gives the green light to the Raiders and Chargers and helps to broker a deal with Kroenke in St. Louis, they'll likely make the Chargers and Rams swap divisions giving the Chargers a chance to start a new identity, allowing the Rams to have regional rivalries in KC and Denver, and allowing LA fans the chance to see their Rams once a year when they take on their new division rival Raiders.
Enjoy Raiders/Chargers football, I know I will!
Mike even if Carson happens, Stan becomes a year to year free agent in line to take the next big deal, what your seeing in St Louis with this bad attendance will get worse if that is even possible.
16 mins
Brett ShepherdOh another premature ejaculation person from the stinky louis
1·14 mins
Matt CovingtonMan. Reality is going to hit this guy hard.
1·10 mins
Ernie UlloaAnother fake account.
The only thing the Rams have going for them are those owners who do back them. Also, quite frankly, its going to come down to a legal tussell. If Kroenke lets the league beat him down and not take this to court I would be thoroughly shocked.
I told you, stan is going to lower the boom on dean and the rams will be back in LA. STAN WONT LOSE
2·56 mins
Kroenke will not go down without a fight. He has done so much already. The NFL as a whole has to declare the STL stadiam as viable. The LA commitee does not have that much power. We still have a ways to go.
.I agree. Somehow I think this is some bs to get through the rams home schedule. Watch for sudden positive news on the rams after tomorrow night
.I agree. Somehow I think this is some bs to get through the rams home schedule. Watch for sudden positive news on the rams after tomorrow night
4·51 mins
They are coming screw all this hoopla
Guys...the only reason these comments are being uttered and leaked publicly by certain "committee" members is because they are trying to strong arm Kroenke into giving Spanos a better deal. They are essentially using Spanos to negotiate with Kroenke.
Again, they can't make Stan take any deal on the table in St Louis PERIOD. They also cannot stop him from building the stadium in Inglewood and moving his team into it. They simply can't. Two things they have done though, is 1 ) Piss the living shit out of Stan, and 2 ) given him enough ammo to take both the NFL and certain owners to the cleaners in court should he so be inclined.
Fred is getting caught up in the narrative. Nothing has changed.
Fred has been a hack ever since he started hanging out with Vinny
Inglewood is the favorable site but Spanos is the favorable owner. That has always been the case. It's Spanos vs Kroenke and always has been.
Davis is a non factor.
So,Kreonke will be forced to file antitrust proceedings?
Changing his tune.
So Long Fred Roggin
Im amazed at what people don't understand....you cannot force a team to stay anywhere.
people are referring to Fred's Tweet. It is posted separately.
If I'm right here, only thing Fred is saying is Spanos is still the favored owner in this, not that Carson as site is favored. Therein lies the problem. For Spanos (and Davis) to have to reject Kroenke formally to NFL, Stan's pitch to share Inglewood was taken seriously by NFL. As many have reported, the ideal fit for NFL is Rams/Chargers in Inglewood.
Exactly. THAT is the NFL's best case scenario. Chargers are the most preferred team to move to LA. But Kroenke is favored over Davis. And there lies the problem and politics come into play.
That's how I read it . He's basically saying what he has been saying that Spano's has sentiment vote.
Fred Roggin has been remarkably consistent on this. It's never been Inglewood vs. Carson. It's been a large group of owners with ties to Dean Spanos. The question is whether Dean has enough of them to approve his project. The answer is neither he nor ESK have enough votes. So it'll then. come to negotiations between Dean and ESK. With the Iger/Richardson fiasco, however, ESK now has a BIG trump card to play along with his deep pockets and superior project. No matter how you massage this, the result will still be the same-- Rams get Inglewood and Spanos becomes co-partner under brokered deal.
It will be the Rams and Chargers . After this weekend all three teams will be done with home games . Some type of big headline will come out about it . That's how I see it
I don't even know the Chargers are in question. They'll be the least favored by the fans and companies. Everyone knows who they want and it's the LA Rams!!!
So it sounds like Stan still needs to work with Dean or go to Carson or the NFL will ok the STL proposal.
At this point whatever it takes to get the Rams back!
That he had the whole thing switched when it came to Dean having to work with Stan. It's the other way around. Stan has to work with Dean. Either let him in on the stadium design in Inglewood or go into Carson. If he does one of those 2 things then theNFL will say no to the STL proposal. If he says no then they will say the STL proposal is good enough but that doesn't mean Kroenke will take it. He will move no matter what.
Enjoy Raiders/Chargers football, I know I will!
Mike even if Carson happens, Stan becomes a year to year free agent in line to take the next big deal, what your seeing in St Louis with this bad attendance will get worse if that is even possible.
16 mins
Brett ShepherdOh another premature ejaculation person from the stinky louis
1·14 mins
Matt CovingtonMan. Reality is going to hit this guy hard.
1·10 mins
Ernie UlloaAnother fake account.
The only thing the Rams have going for them are those owners who do back them. Also, quite frankly, its going to come down to a legal tussell. If Kroenke lets the league beat him down and not take this to court I would be thoroughly shocked.
I told you, stan is going to lower the boom on dean and the rams will be back in LA. STAN WONT LOSE
2·56 mins
Kroenke will not go down without a fight. He has done so much already. The NFL as a whole has to declare the STL stadiam as viable. The LA commitee does not have that much power. We still have a ways to go.
.I agree. Somehow I think this is some bs to get through the rams home schedule. Watch for sudden positive news on the rams after tomorrow night
.I agree. Somehow I think this is some bs to get through the rams home schedule. Watch for sudden positive news on the rams after tomorrow night
4·51 mins
They are coming screw all this hoopla
Guys...the only reason these comments are being uttered and leaked publicly by certain "committee" members is because they are trying to strong arm Kroenke into giving Spanos a better deal. They are essentially using Spanos to negotiate with Kroenke.
Again, they can't make Stan take any deal on the table in St Louis PERIOD. They also cannot stop him from building the stadium in Inglewood and moving his team into it. They simply can't. Two things they have done though, is 1 ) Piss the living shit out of Stan, and 2 ) given him enough ammo to take both the NFL and certain owners to the cleaners in court should he so be inclined.
Fred is getting caught up in the narrative. Nothing has changed.
Fred has been a hack ever since he started hanging out with Vinny
Inglewood is the favorable site but Spanos is the favorable owner. That has always been the case. It's Spanos vs Kroenke and always has been.
Davis is a non factor.
So,Kreonke will be forced to file antitrust proceedings?
Changing his tune.
So Long Fred Roggin
Im amazed at what people don't understand....you cannot force a team to stay anywhere.
people are referring to Fred's Tweet. It is posted separately.
If I'm right here, only thing Fred is saying is Spanos is still the favored owner in this, not that Carson as site is favored. Therein lies the problem. For Spanos (and Davis) to have to reject Kroenke formally to NFL, Stan's pitch to share Inglewood was taken seriously by NFL. As many have reported, the ideal fit for NFL is Rams/Chargers in Inglewood.
Exactly. THAT is the NFL's best case scenario. Chargers are the most preferred team to move to LA. But Kroenke is favored over Davis. And there lies the problem and politics come into play.
That's how I read it . He's basically saying what he has been saying that Spano's has sentiment vote.
Fred Roggin has been remarkably consistent on this. It's never been Inglewood vs. Carson. It's been a large group of owners with ties to Dean Spanos. The question is whether Dean has enough of them to approve his project. The answer is neither he nor ESK have enough votes. So it'll then. come to negotiations between Dean and ESK. With the Iger/Richardson fiasco, however, ESK now has a BIG trump card to play along with his deep pockets and superior project. No matter how you massage this, the result will still be the same-- Rams get Inglewood and Spanos becomes co-partner under brokered deal.
It will be the Rams and Chargers . After this weekend all three teams will be done with home games . Some type of big headline will come out about it . That's how I see it
I don't even know the Chargers are in question. They'll be the least favored by the fans and companies. Everyone knows who they want and it's the LA Rams!!!
So it sounds like Stan still needs to work with Dean or go to Carson or the NFL will ok the STL proposal.
At this point whatever it takes to get the Rams back!
That he had the whole thing switched when it came to Dean having to work with Stan. It's the other way around. Stan has to work with Dean. Either let him in on the stadium design in Inglewood or go into Carson. If he does one of those 2 things then theNFL will say no to the STL proposal. If he says no then they will say the STL proposal is good enough but that doesn't mean Kroenke will take it. He will move no matter what.
Last edited:
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,456
Hello fello Rams fans. I was in LA this summer and attended a Sunday night ballgame between the Cardinals and Dodgers and met these fine gentlemen. Being from St. Louis I stopped and had a nice friendly debate with them. They were real good guys and it was a pleasure meeting them. I even gave them permission to post these pictures on your guys page. Question for you guys. I hear the St. Louis spin on the Rams story everyday, and I am curious as to how the feeling is in LA right now? Are you gentlemen more confident, less confident, or have about the same confidence level as you did in early June that the Rams will be returning to LA? Let's please try and keep it classy and friendly as we did in June, I'm not here to start any fights, just looking to hear the other sides perspective.
I remember seeing this pic - awesome.
We are like family members fighting over a will. Definitely connected but geographically different.
Here is what I look at:
Lease/Arbitration: caused divide and animosity between Stan and StL politicians. Also triggered escape clause.
NFL: no secret they've wanted to be in LA
Stan: Done everything by book to move team.
NFL Market Study: showed StL is not healthy market for NFL
Grubman: as NFL person closest to relocation, went on StL Radio last week saying StL does not have viable plan. Cost estimated too low, funding declining, stadium planned is not top-tier. No team is or would be interested.
Those are main key things that have me still under belief that Rams will move.
I think this is when Demoff basically said good bye and sorry to StL. The Market Study I mentioned is explained and Demoff touched upon it during event.
http://www.bizjournals.com/.../rams-exec-on-relocation-no...
I agree with some of your points. The one I would most strongly disagree with is your point of Stan doing everything by the book. You can call the NFL'S bylaws regarding relocation more guidelines if you like and they don't all necessarily have to be met, but regardless Stan very clearly did not meet all of them, and did not do everything "by the book".
23 hrs
Ryan ShipleyLet me ask another question. It's becoming increasingly more obvious that public financing in Sand Diego and Oakland just are not there, and it is in St. Louis. Does the NFL and it's owners want to turn their backs on a city and state that are preparedto build their 2nd stadium in 25 years? If the NFL allows Stan to leave and build his stadium in LA, and leave behind public funds, is that a president the owners want to set? Next time the Titans or Bills need a stadium, and they go to the city or state for finaning, are those cities and states not gonna say "build it yourself, the NFL obviously doesn't need public funding"? I don't know that is a Pandora's box the NFL and it's owners are willing to open.
23 hrs
What I meant by 'By the Book' is that he did work to resolve the stadium issue which lead to arbitration. Goodell commented on that earlier this year when reporter commented on 'Silent Stan'.
Team moves are not a science. Even the guidelines are outdated - still referencing newspapers as primary and only source of public notification. Stan did not try to get out of lease early. I don't believe he has intentionally put a poor product on field. I simply see it as a business man who had a contract breached and that forced his hand to look for options. If StL had stepped up as it has in last 12 months when arbitration happened, no way league would have let them leave. Even players like Faulk have commented negatively on the way the city/state handled the upgrade/stadium situation.
http://m.stltoday.com/.../article_daac5ff2-78aa-581e-a7af...
This is just a personal opinion, but I think Grubman and the NFL both see LA swinging towards Carson, and he came on StL radio to get a point across about excluding the Rams from the entertainment tax that the Cardinals and Blues and exempt from. Changes were made and the Rams would now be exempt.
22 hrs
.Funding update from Kaplan of Sports Business Journal:
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1so1oss
I think as he was picking apart the funding pieces, he saw the discrepancy of the Rams having to pay it while the other 2 teams were exempt. They had to make Rams exempt.
And now with Peacock admitting additional $100 million is barely a proposal at this point it puts StL further behind in funding, as Grubman stated.
22 hrs
Ryan ShipleyEven so there are light years ahead of San Diego and Oakland, so the NFL is going to punish the city that has done the most, and reward the 2 cities that have done the least? Naturally I don't work for the NFL nor do I own a team, but I just don't know if that's the kind of precident I would set.
22 hrs·Edited
F. Joseph Ambriz Jr.Hear what you are saying. But there would be the precedent set that a city basically broke a lease about 1/2 way into its existence to get a more favorable lease in place. That is something owners would want no part of.
22 hrs
Ryan ShipleyThe Rams chose to opt out of that lease.
I remember seeing this pic - awesome.
We are like family members fighting over a will. Definitely connected but geographically different.
Here is what I look at:
Lease/Arbitration: caused divide and animosity between Stan and StL politicians. Also triggered escape clause.
NFL: no secret they've wanted to be in LA
Stan: Done everything by book to move team.
NFL Market Study: showed StL is not healthy market for NFL
Grubman: as NFL person closest to relocation, went on StL Radio last week saying StL does not have viable plan. Cost estimated too low, funding declining, stadium planned is not top-tier. No team is or would be interested.
Those are main key things that have me still under belief that Rams will move.
I think this is when Demoff basically said good bye and sorry to StL. The Market Study I mentioned is explained and Demoff touched upon it during event.
http://www.bizjournals.com/.../rams-exec-on-relocation-no...
I agree with some of your points. The one I would most strongly disagree with is your point of Stan doing everything by the book. You can call the NFL'S bylaws regarding relocation more guidelines if you like and they don't all necessarily have to be met, but regardless Stan very clearly did not meet all of them, and did not do everything "by the book".
23 hrs
Ryan ShipleyLet me ask another question. It's becoming increasingly more obvious that public financing in Sand Diego and Oakland just are not there, and it is in St. Louis. Does the NFL and it's owners want to turn their backs on a city and state that are preparedto build their 2nd stadium in 25 years? If the NFL allows Stan to leave and build his stadium in LA, and leave behind public funds, is that a president the owners want to set? Next time the Titans or Bills need a stadium, and they go to the city or state for finaning, are those cities and states not gonna say "build it yourself, the NFL obviously doesn't need public funding"? I don't know that is a Pandora's box the NFL and it's owners are willing to open.
23 hrs
What I meant by 'By the Book' is that he did work to resolve the stadium issue which lead to arbitration. Goodell commented on that earlier this year when reporter commented on 'Silent Stan'.
Team moves are not a science. Even the guidelines are outdated - still referencing newspapers as primary and only source of public notification. Stan did not try to get out of lease early. I don't believe he has intentionally put a poor product on field. I simply see it as a business man who had a contract breached and that forced his hand to look for options. If StL had stepped up as it has in last 12 months when arbitration happened, no way league would have let them leave. Even players like Faulk have commented negatively on the way the city/state handled the upgrade/stadium situation.
http://m.stltoday.com/.../article_daac5ff2-78aa-581e-a7af...
This is just a personal opinion, but I think Grubman and the NFL both see LA swinging towards Carson, and he came on StL radio to get a point across about excluding the Rams from the entertainment tax that the Cardinals and Blues and exempt from. Changes were made and the Rams would now be exempt.
22 hrs
.Funding update from Kaplan of Sports Business Journal:
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1so1oss
I think as he was picking apart the funding pieces, he saw the discrepancy of the Rams having to pay it while the other 2 teams were exempt. They had to make Rams exempt.
And now with Peacock admitting additional $100 million is barely a proposal at this point it puts StL further behind in funding, as Grubman stated.
22 hrs
Ryan ShipleyEven so there are light years ahead of San Diego and Oakland, so the NFL is going to punish the city that has done the most, and reward the 2 cities that have done the least? Naturally I don't work for the NFL nor do I own a team, but I just don't know if that's the kind of precident I would set.
22 hrs·Edited
F. Joseph Ambriz Jr.Hear what you are saying. But there would be the precedent set that a city basically broke a lease about 1/2 way into its existence to get a more favorable lease in place. That is something owners would want no part of.
22 hrs
Ryan ShipleyThe Rams chose to opt out of that lease.
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,457
St. Louis scrambles to get a viable NFL stadium plan in order
The NFL can put together as many committees as they want but if Kroenke wants to go to LA, all he has to do is pack up & go. Al Davis answered that question 35 years ago.
Nfl is a sleeve bag,they know the Rams belong in LA,it's their just public relations that will take the hit! They know they can't do anything to stop Stan K,they want it to appear as if they have done everything by the books and he moved anyway.
The NFL can put together as many committees as they want but if Kroenke wants to go to LA, all he has to do is pack up & go. Al Davis answered that question 35 years ago.
Nfl is a sleeve bag,they know the Rams belong in LA,it's their just public relations that will take the hit! They know they can't do anything to stop Stan K,they want it to appear as if they have done everything by the books and he moved anyway.
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,458
Andre Jeanbart - Photos/Videos of Bring Back the Los... | Facebook
looking more and more bad in st louis.lol
Today in a nutshell: G4 went up $100 million (not free money) AND stadium overruns, estimated at $250 million, were placed on the team's shoulders AND rent when from $700,000 to $1.5 million. So Stan you owe StL: $250 million in team contribution + $350 million loan from G4 + 250 million in stadium overruns = $850 million total AND double rent in a non top tear stadium that you don't own! Helloooooo
Can anyone tell me if the Los Angeles Coliseum really wants the Rams only??? Can anyone confirm if the Rams sign anything with them? Thanks,I live in South Carolina!
In the last week and a half, 2 people have said Rams are talking to the Coliseum...Jay Glazer and Pete Arbogast.
1·23 hrs
Manuel HerreraThey never said Rams only. They have only said they are open only to one team playing there. They have never said what team. And there are no commitments from anyone.
Pat Haden has been talking about it since summer of 2014 (as noted in article), about same time Kroenke was looking at purchasing Inglewood. Hmmmmm.
http://www.latimes.com/.../la-sp-sn-nfl-in-la-coliseum...
looking more and more bad in st louis.lol
Today in a nutshell: G4 went up $100 million (not free money) AND stadium overruns, estimated at $250 million, were placed on the team's shoulders AND rent when from $700,000 to $1.5 million. So Stan you owe StL: $250 million in team contribution + $350 million loan from G4 + 250 million in stadium overruns = $850 million total AND double rent in a non top tear stadium that you don't own! Helloooooo
Can anyone tell me if the Los Angeles Coliseum really wants the Rams only??? Can anyone confirm if the Rams sign anything with them? Thanks,I live in South Carolina!
In the last week and a half, 2 people have said Rams are talking to the Coliseum...Jay Glazer and Pete Arbogast.
1·23 hrs
Manuel HerreraThey never said Rams only. They have only said they are open only to one team playing there. They have never said what team. And there are no commitments from anyone.
Pat Haden has been talking about it since summer of 2014 (as noted in article), about same time Kroenke was looking at purchasing Inglewood. Hmmmmm.
http://www.latimes.com/.../la-sp-sn-nfl-in-la-coliseum...
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,931
- 17,316
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,459
Is the release of the movie Concussion the beginning of the end of football as we know it in this country? Find out tonight at 7pm Pacific, 10pm Eastern. Happy holidays, everyone.
Also, during the Ramscentric segment, we will have a panel discussing the shenanigans committed by Jerry Richardson in favor of Dean Spanos that is impacting Stan Kroenke's plans in a major way. That happens after 830pm Pacific.
Diehard Sports Radio Online Radio by Diehard Sports Radio
Also, during the Ramscentric segment, we will have a panel discussing the shenanigans committed by Jerry Richardson in favor of Dean Spanos that is impacting Stan Kroenke's plans in a major way. That happens after 830pm Pacific.
Diehard Sports Radio Online Radio by Diehard Sports Radio
- Aug 4, 2009
- 281,170
- 140,739
- 2,615
Similar threads
- Replies
- 4
- Views
- 218
- Replies
- 14
- Views
- 1K
- Locked
- Replies
- 16
- Views
- 1K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 14
- Views
- 25
- Replies
- 420
- Views
- 2K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8043
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 469
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-