- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,975
- 17,349
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #681
- If you too time to read Bernie's article, he mentioned two reasons Stan will not sue, go read them before you pull rules out of you ass. Why didn't Bernie mention them? because you fucking made shit up and put it on our page rodent! The NFL owners agreed on guideline for NFL moving a franchise: 3/4 of the owners must approve. Why David Wrong would the owners give up or limit their power to move ? because just in case their own team tanks (like the Rams did in St Louis) in their respective market they would like to have the option to move. It doesn't make sense son. Another thing is there is a transfer fee that will be divided equally amongst the other owners of at least $250, again it doesn't make sense. And yet again, moving a team in the bottom 3 in revenue to a the 2nd largest market in LA (the largest if you consider New York is divided between the Giants and the jets) makes the owners and NFL super money in negotiations, in other words the NFL and the owners will sell more expensive advertisement in the LA market due to it's size. Ok, let us assume you are right, even with your made up information of a "signed legal document" Stan can file a grievance in court, look up the word grievance in a law dictionary rodent, if he can establish that the NFL's "signed legal document" is causing him grievance in implementation, a judge can side step and pierce the veil of this document, it happens all the time that in our courts, for example a legal prenuptial agreement can be pierced if the court judge deems it unfair (look up former Dodger owner Frank McCourt's legal prenup was invalidated by a judge) please send me a copy of the "NFL signed legal documents"
- Hollywood park is already under construction. Drove by last week and the racetrack is already under demolition. How come Bernie is not talking about that. Rams will be home soon !!!