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.
Stan Kroenke s land buy could mean nothing for Rams move - ESPN Los Angeles
see unlike the saint louis apologists,"I" look at BOTH sides of the coin.
LOS ANGELES -- It could be the start of something big or yet another chapter in the seemingly never-ending story of nothing at all when it comes to the NFL in Los Angeles.
On Thursday, the Los Angeles Times and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke, by way of an affiliated holding company, purchased a 60-acre tract of land in Inglewood, Calif. within the past month.
The land is located between the recently renovated Forum and the Hollywood Park racetrack, which was shut down in December, and could potentially serve as the home of a future NFL stadium.
Since the Raiders and Rams left Southern California after the 1994 season, Los Angeles has been subjected to enough meaningless artist renderings to fill a museum and more empty promises to encompass two decades worth of failed campaign speeches.
There is, however, a big difference if Kroenke truly does have an interest in moving the Rams out of St. Louis and back to Los Angeles. He owns the Rams and now owns enough land in Los Angeles to build a stadium.
[+] Enlarge
Casey Sapio/USA TODAY SportsStan Kroenke certainly has the money to build a new stadium, but there is no indication that is his plan after it was revealed he recently purchased a 60-acre tract in Los Angeles.
Every vision, dream and blueprint for the NFL's return to Los Angeles has been backed by a millionaire or billionaire who had a plan to build a stadium if they could somehow secure an NFL team. Well, Kroenke has an NFL team, is worth $5.3 billion, according to Forbes, and is certainly capable of building a stadium on the parcel of land he now controls.
Kroenke is also in position to possibly move the Rams after the 2014 season. Last year the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission, which runs the Edward Jones Dome, announced the facility would not receive the publicly funded, $700 million upgrade the Rams requested to make the stadium a "first-tier facility." The commission's proposal for a $124 million upgrade was rejected by the Rams.
That potentially opens the door for the Rams to break their lease with the Dome after the 2014 season and possibly return to Los Angeles.
The Rams called Southern California home from 1946 to 1994 but bolted before they could celebrate their 50th anniversary in the Southland because then-Rams owner Georgia Frontiere, who died in 2008, got a sweetheart deal in St. Louis by which the city would pay for a new domed stadium and promise that the stadium would be ranked in the top quarter in the league 20 years later or the team could break its lease and move. Well, nearly 20 years later, St. Louis is still paying off the original construction debt of the dome -- now one of the league's older venues -- can't afford the renovations to make it a "top-tier" facility and the Rams could be looking to move again.
Kroenke, who owns a beachfront home in Malibu, Calif., made a failed bid to buy the Los Angeles Dodgers two years ago and has failed to commit to St. Louis publicly past the coming season.
Of course, all of this doesn't necessarily mean the Los Angeles Rams will be back in 2015. Kroenke has made much of his fortune by way of land development and owns large amounts of land in California and elsewhere. This could be nothing more than a leverage play to get what he wants in St. Louis. It wouldn't be the first time Los Angeles was used in such a way. Since the Raiders and Rams left town, 22 new stadiums have been built for 23 teams. Many of those teams using the prospect of moving to Los Angeles to receive public financing to build a new stadium in their home market.
Even if Kroenke is determined to move the Rams to Los Angeles, there are still several hurdles to cross before that can happen.
Under the NFL's "Policy and Procedures for Proposed Franchise Relocations" it states the NFL commissioner must receive written notice from the team wishing to relocate and that "the notice must be filed no later than February 15 of the year in which the move is scheduled to occur." That notice would also be published "in newspapers of general circulation within the incumbent community."
Any franchise wishing to relocate must apply between Jan. 1 and Feb. 15 of that year, and prove it has exhausted all attempts to remain in its current location.
The agreement that laid the foundation for the policy was a 1996 "Statement of Principles" between the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the NFL. The statement came on the heels of the Raiders' move from Los Angeles to Oakland in July 1995. It was a move finalized so late it wasn't official until days before the Raiders' opening preseason game against the Rams, who had just moved from Los Angeles to St. Louis.
The policy states that "because League policy favors stable team-community relations, clubs are obligated to work diligently and in good faith to obtain and to maintain suitable stadium facilities in their home territories, and to operate in a manner that maximizes fan support in their current home community."
Of course, if the Rams over the next 12 months get nowhere in negotiations on a new stadium in St. Louis, don't find a suitable alternate site to build a new stadium and their attendance remains in the bottom four of the league as it has for the past six seasons, they could easily make the case that they have exhausted all attempts to remain in St. Louis and would be better off in Los Angeles.
A move would not only return the Rams to their former home and the second-biggest market in the country but would raise the value of a franchise that is currently worth $875 million, according to Forbes, putting it in the bottom four of the NFL. A move to Los Angeles and into a new stadium could push that value past $1 billion and make it one of the most valuable franchises in the league.
Another hurdle would be getting past environmental and legal hurdles that often slow down large projects. Even a fast-tracked environmental impact report of that size would take about 16 months, with construction on a stadium taking about two years.
Coincidentally, last week city officials in Pasadena, Calif., cleared a legal hurdle in the effort to host an NFL team temporarily at the Rose Bowl if a team decided to play in the venerable stadium, which recently underwent a $182 million renovation and hosted the BCS National Championship Game earlier this month.
The stars may seem finally aligned for the NFL and possibly the Rams to return to Los Angeles but anybody who has been following this saga for the past two decades certainly isn't holding their breath until they see moving vans driving down Manchester Boulevard.
.vote-module { margin: 10px; }
Arash Markazi
ESPNLosAngeles.com
- Former columnist and writer after five years with Sports Illustrated
- Markazi has also written for Slam, King, Vibe and Playboy
Stan Kroenke s land buy could mean nothing for Rams move - ESPN Los Angeles
see unlike the saint louis apologists,"I" look at BOTH sides of the coin.
LOS ANGELES -- It could be the start of something big or yet another chapter in the seemingly never-ending story of nothing at all when it comes to the NFL in Los Angeles.
On Thursday, the Los Angeles Times and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke, by way of an affiliated holding company, purchased a 60-acre tract of land in Inglewood, Calif. within the past month.
The land is located between the recently renovated Forum and the Hollywood Park racetrack, which was shut down in December, and could potentially serve as the home of a future NFL stadium.
Since the Raiders and Rams left Southern California after the 1994 season, Los Angeles has been subjected to enough meaningless artist renderings to fill a museum and more empty promises to encompass two decades worth of failed campaign speeches.
There is, however, a big difference if Kroenke truly does have an interest in moving the Rams out of St. Louis and back to Los Angeles. He owns the Rams and now owns enough land in Los Angeles to build a stadium.
[+] Enlarge
Casey Sapio/USA TODAY SportsStan Kroenke certainly has the money to build a new stadium, but there is no indication that is his plan after it was revealed he recently purchased a 60-acre tract in Los Angeles.
Every vision, dream and blueprint for the NFL's return to Los Angeles has been backed by a millionaire or billionaire who had a plan to build a stadium if they could somehow secure an NFL team. Well, Kroenke has an NFL team, is worth $5.3 billion, according to Forbes, and is certainly capable of building a stadium on the parcel of land he now controls.
Kroenke is also in position to possibly move the Rams after the 2014 season. Last year the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission, which runs the Edward Jones Dome, announced the facility would not receive the publicly funded, $700 million upgrade the Rams requested to make the stadium a "first-tier facility." The commission's proposal for a $124 million upgrade was rejected by the Rams.
That potentially opens the door for the Rams to break their lease with the Dome after the 2014 season and possibly return to Los Angeles.
The Rams called Southern California home from 1946 to 1994 but bolted before they could celebrate their 50th anniversary in the Southland because then-Rams owner Georgia Frontiere, who died in 2008, got a sweetheart deal in St. Louis by which the city would pay for a new domed stadium and promise that the stadium would be ranked in the top quarter in the league 20 years later or the team could break its lease and move. Well, nearly 20 years later, St. Louis is still paying off the original construction debt of the dome -- now one of the league's older venues -- can't afford the renovations to make it a "top-tier" facility and the Rams could be looking to move again.
Kroenke, who owns a beachfront home in Malibu, Calif., made a failed bid to buy the Los Angeles Dodgers two years ago and has failed to commit to St. Louis publicly past the coming season.
Of course, all of this doesn't necessarily mean the Los Angeles Rams will be back in 2015. Kroenke has made much of his fortune by way of land development and owns large amounts of land in California and elsewhere. This could be nothing more than a leverage play to get what he wants in St. Louis. It wouldn't be the first time Los Angeles was used in such a way. Since the Raiders and Rams left town, 22 new stadiums have been built for 23 teams. Many of those teams using the prospect of moving to Los Angeles to receive public financing to build a new stadium in their home market.
Even if Kroenke is determined to move the Rams to Los Angeles, there are still several hurdles to cross before that can happen.
Under the NFL's "Policy and Procedures for Proposed Franchise Relocations" it states the NFL commissioner must receive written notice from the team wishing to relocate and that "the notice must be filed no later than February 15 of the year in which the move is scheduled to occur." That notice would also be published "in newspapers of general circulation within the incumbent community."
Any franchise wishing to relocate must apply between Jan. 1 and Feb. 15 of that year, and prove it has exhausted all attempts to remain in its current location.
The agreement that laid the foundation for the policy was a 1996 "Statement of Principles" between the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the NFL. The statement came on the heels of the Raiders' move from Los Angeles to Oakland in July 1995. It was a move finalized so late it wasn't official until days before the Raiders' opening preseason game against the Rams, who had just moved from Los Angeles to St. Louis.
The policy states that "because League policy favors stable team-community relations, clubs are obligated to work diligently and in good faith to obtain and to maintain suitable stadium facilities in their home territories, and to operate in a manner that maximizes fan support in their current home community."
Of course, if the Rams over the next 12 months get nowhere in negotiations on a new stadium in St. Louis, don't find a suitable alternate site to build a new stadium and their attendance remains in the bottom four of the league as it has for the past six seasons, they could easily make the case that they have exhausted all attempts to remain in St. Louis and would be better off in Los Angeles.
A move would not only return the Rams to their former home and the second-biggest market in the country but would raise the value of a franchise that is currently worth $875 million, according to Forbes, putting it in the bottom four of the NFL. A move to Los Angeles and into a new stadium could push that value past $1 billion and make it one of the most valuable franchises in the league.
Another hurdle would be getting past environmental and legal hurdles that often slow down large projects. Even a fast-tracked environmental impact report of that size would take about 16 months, with construction on a stadium taking about two years.
Coincidentally, last week city officials in Pasadena, Calif., cleared a legal hurdle in the effort to host an NFL team temporarily at the Rose Bowl if a team decided to play in the venerable stadium, which recently underwent a $182 million renovation and hosted the BCS National Championship Game earlier this month.
The stars may seem finally aligned for the NFL and possibly the Rams to return to Los Angeles but anybody who has been following this saga for the past two decades certainly isn't holding their breath until they see moving vans driving down Manchester Boulevard.
.vote-module { margin: 10px; }
Arash Markazi
ESPNLosAngeles.com
- Former columnist and writer after five years with Sports Illustrated
- Markazi has also written for Slam, King, Vibe and Playboy
again you have to have diologue and communication between the the owner and they city for it to work.,stan isnt even returning phone calls from them. this is the ONLY team whos fans from the opposing team ALWAYS outnumber THEIR fans. saint louis fans dont care one bit at all about this football team.there are more chiefs fans there in saint louis than there are Rams fans.
I think all the saint louis apologists will find this very interesting.hee hee.
Raiders Reportedly Close to New Stadium Deal in Oakland insideSTL.com - St. Louis Sports Music Entertainment and Nightlife STL Rams
Let me get this straight... ????
Aren't the people you are really pissed at dead?
It seems to me that those that currently own the Rams are not obligated to repay you or anyone for anything.
It's not THAT hard to move a team. Ken Behring stole the Seahawks and was headed down the I 5 freeway with few obsticals from the NFL head offices. He lied to the Nordstroms and just did it. The only thing that changed his mind was Paul Allen's money.
If the present ownership of the Rams wanted to move the team they would just fuckin do it.
Riddle me this Batman... If they do move the team back to L A are YOU going to move to L A and support them...????
I mean...what EXACTLY IS your end game here??
congrats on proving as always what a hypocrite you are Hug.you wouldnt answer many of my questions I wanted answers from you on recently on another thread of yours and yet you actually expect me to answer a question of yours.
doesnt work that way. I suppose you already forgot my post when i said-I assume that means your not going to answer those questions of mine and you confirmed it that you would not by saying maybe.that was the ONLY answer i got out of you.thats why many people here in the sports section have a problem with you is your the biggest hypocrite here i know of .
when you're ready to grow up and stop being a hypocrite and arrogant constantly all the time refusing to admit when you have been proven wrong-"thats a rightwinger thing,he runs away changing the subject evertime i point out how dense he was to believe the donkeys would beat your seahawks," maybe one day I will consider answering that question.
you had your chance to answer mine earlier,you didnt,so you're just going to have to wonder that yourself if I am or not it looks like.
oh and dont expect if you answer them for me now i will answer this.you had your chance,you blew it.
Plus even if I decided to play your game and answer it,you would just not answer other questions of mine in the future either.
Oh and for your ludicorus statement that if he wanted to move them he would just do it,no he wouldnt bozo. there are certain guildelines NFL owners have to follow now in relocation moves that did not exist in 95 when the Rams,Raiders and Browns moved their teams.
after the Browns moved Einstein,again the NFL came up with much tougher rules that teams have to meet before being allowed to relocate..Rules that exist now that did not exist back then when they all relocated and when that former owner of the seahawks you mentioned almost moved your Seahawks.They got rules now that exist now that they did not have in place back then.
Its unfortunate that those rules were not in place back then especially after the colts were allowed to leave baltimore but they werent.Had they existed,the bitch would never have been allowed to leave.she would have violated many of them that exist now that were not in place back then.
That whats make the Rams situation so unique is because their situation is so much vastly different than the raiders and chargers situation to relocate.their situation is 100 times different than the rams situation is.they have many hurdles they have to clear before they can even consider thinking about moving.the rams dont.the rams meet the criteria,the raiders and the chargers dont.
that troll kissmy is so full of shit he's pathetic.
As i said from the very get go,I knew when HE first came on this thread he would make up lies.He does that ALL the time at this site,him and troll rightwinger BOTH.
kIssmy made up a lie saying stan would be charged a relocation fee which i know for a fact is bullshit because Goddell has already said there wont be a relocation fee.the NFL so badly wants a team there very soon they arent going to charge stan a relocation fee.especially since thats their rightful home.
again him and rightwinger have a long history here of telling outright lies so if you had any brains,you would listen when i tell you that because THOSE two trolls said it wont happen,its automatically a guarantee it WILL.
while i was watching the chargers/niners pre season game,the announcers matter of fact were saying in that game-"I wish the politicians of san diego would come up here and watch a game sometime.If they got a look at this stadium,they would get motivated to go out and get soemething done in san diego.if they're not careful out there,they could lose their team.The NFL is serious about getting a team out there in the next two years."
they never said anything like that in the past when talking about the NFL getting a team in LA someday.they never said back when there was an LA group trying to get an expansion team in LA when the texans were awared the expansion team instead of them,that there would be an LA team in LA in the next couple years.
they werent saying that back THEN.the texans were rewarded their team because they were serious back then about getting a team.the group in LA trying to get an NFL team back then was not.
they then talked about the raiders saying-The raiders are also looking for a deal to get a new stadium.they have their own issues on that.
they never said a WORD about the rams wanting a new stadium.gee I wonder why.since you only look at ONE side of the coin in all your debates with the logic you go into thinking because YOU believe it to be true that makes it true so you wont look at the other side of the coin and listen to an opposing view different than your own only seeing your own point of view which is why talking to you is like talking to a wall
because of that,it wont dawn on you that they did not mention that the rams are wanting a new stadium because its a lock and done deal and they are trying to keep a lid on it.
I grudugingly watched that game today in saint louis against the vikings. two teams i have no interest in and they had the ENTIRE upper deck empty.
it was obviously closed off. as always at that place,the majority of the fans were from the opposing team.when the vikings scored toughdowns,you heard a HUGE roar from the crowd cheering.hardly any cheers for the rams when they did something good.
and the vikings HARDLY have good support on the road from their fans.Not like the broncos,raiders,chargers,steelers,cowboys,packers do.oh and of course your seahawks as well.
that LAMBS team in saint louis,is probably the ONLY team in the NFL other than maybe jacksonville, where the opposing teams fans ALWAYS greatly outnumber their fans.
attendance is so horrible there,you can get tickets as cheap as &11.00 and thats because they know they are as good as gone next year.
yet you saint louis apologists actually beleiver in your warped brainwas you have,that stan is going to want to keep that team there in that staduim that is a dump and wait it out year after year till they come up with a plan? better get off that crack you been smoking huggy.
they would be joining donald sterling as former owners of a professional sports franchise. so on the contrary to your belief that it wouldnt be hard to move a team now if stan wanted to,you are incorrect.
the cowardly post of a coward who knows he is licked.Oh my..someone must be getting blisters on his fingers.
LOL
I think I'll wait for the "Reader's Digest" version to come out.. LOL
oh we both know you are too arrogant to admit when you have been proven wrong and never concede.Onliest time I concede bein licked is when she starts slobbering on the knob.
Just sayin...
LOL
Dan Bickley, azcentral sports columnist 9:39 p.m. MST September 5, 2014
The NFL is king, but there are serious kinks in the armor, from no franchise in the country's second-largest market
• The league needs a team in Los Angeles, and this could happen very soon. Three current teams have expiring lease deals: San Diego, Oakland and St. Louis. The Los Angeles Times obtained a league memorandum that suggests mobilization at league headquarters. It's all starting to happen.
So who moves? Not the Raiders, a team reportedly on the brink of a new stadium in Oakland. Probably not the Chargers, which experienced a spike in fan support while making the playoffs last season.
But the Rams are vulnerable. They have an injured quarterback, the NFL's worst winning percentage over the past eight seasons, and a fan base that isn't exactly attached to the product.
St. Louis is also a throwback. It's the only city in America where the baseball team far surpasses the football team in popularity. I'll bet that bothers Commissioner Roger Goodell.
The Rams also offer a seamless transition. The geographic alignment of the NFC West would actually improve, with teams in California, Washington and Arizona. And Valley fans would have another instant I-10 rival, joining the Dodgers, Lakers and Kings in 2015.
.
Buckle up.
Reach Bickley at [email protected] or 602-444-8253. Follow him at twitter.com/danbickley. Listen to "Bickley and Marotta," weekdays from 12-2 p.m. on Arizona Sports 98.7 FM.
oh we both know you are too arrogant to admit when you have been proven wrong and never concede.Onliest time I concede bein licked is when she starts slobbering on the knob.
Just sayin...
LOL
I wouldnt be surprised at all matter of fact that when the announcement is made in mid march the return of them,that you do what chickenshit rightwinger always does everytime he is proven cluless in his ramblings. for instance everytime i bring up how he was an idiot picking the donkeys to beat your seahawks he changes the subject and acts like he never said that.
I unlike you two cowards at least can admit when I am wrong.I didnt run off back then when i picked the niners to beat your hawks,unlike you two,,"I" can always own up to when im wrong.something you might actually try and be mature for once in your life and try sometime.
so yeah,you're just telling me old news i already knew.
NFL Week 1 - Home Attendance I noticed that as well. I also turned my head to other tv screens where i was at and also saw that reliant stadium where the texans play had jam packed crowds EVEN in the upper deck. something the Rams USED to have when they played in LA. AL MICHAELS said that as i proved earlier. that place is a dump.it is so dark you cant see anything in that place when they zoom in on the whole stadium.they have lights only on the field,every other stadium,you can see clearly the people in the upper decks.lol especially since most were viking fans.i would say as far as ram fans there,there werent more than 10,000 there.thats embarrassing.
St. Louis is also a throwback. It's the only city in America where the baseball team far surpasses the football team in popularity. I'll bet that bothers Commissioner Roger Goodell.
