Jump to content

NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay


duma

Recommended Posts

Another problem for Chivas is that if you're a fan of one of the OTHER big Mexican franchises that are rivals of it...why cheer for Chivas USA?

Anyway I can't imagine MLS putting a 3rd team in the same market...maybe Kroenke buys and rebrands Chivas?

I never understood that either. It'd be like a basketball league in Europe saying, "Hey, there's a lot of Americans who love basketball in this city... let's call their team the EuroBulls."

Nevermind that there's a perfectly good identity from the NASL days that could be resurrected and still mark the club as the Mexican/Chicano side:

LAA.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another problem for Chivas is that if you're a fan of one of the OTHER big Mexican franchises that are rivals of it...why cheer for Chivas USA?

Anyway I can't imagine MLS putting a 3rd team in the same market...maybe Kroenke buys and rebrands Chivas?

I never understood that either. It'd be like a basketball league in Europe saying, "Hey, there's a lot of Americans who love basketball in this city... let's call their team the EuroBulls."

Nevermind that there's a perfectly good identity from the NASL days that could be resurrected and still mark the club as the Mexican/Chicano side:

LAA.png

Meh. Aztecs name doesn't really have any cachet worth recovering. It was a failure of a team when it actually played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's official: Kroenke's purchase of the land in Inglewood is for an MLS team, the "Los Angeles Gunners." It was never for an NFL team, nor for a Wal-Mart.

http://www.pressreleasepoint.com/st-louis-rams-owner-might-not-move-team-los-angeles-after-all

What's funny to me is that he already owns an MLS franchise. Also isn't it politically incorrect to call an LA team the Gunners? I understand that it is because of Arsenal but stil.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's official: Kroenke's purchase of the land in Inglewood is for an MLS team, the "Los Angeles Gunners." It was never for an NFL team, nor for a Wal-Mart.

http://www.pressreleasepoint.com/st-louis-rams-owner-might-not-move-team-los-angeles-after-all

All that confirms is that Kroenke is trying to secure a MLS franchise. Even if the land purchase was just for a stadium for his soccer team, he wouldn't have had to tell the NFL about it. This confirms nor denies anything about the possibility of a relocation by the Rams.

Cowboys - Lakers - LAFC - USMNT - LA Rams - LA Kings - NUFC 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's official: Kroenke's purchase of the land in Inglewood is for an MLS team, the "Los Angeles Gunners." It was never for an NFL team, nor for a Wal-Mart.

http://www.pressreleasepoint.com/st-louis-rams-owner-might-not-move-team-los-angeles-after-all

"[O]fficial" according to who? The staff reporters at the St. Louis Business Journal? After all, it's the St. Louis Business Journal's story - notably devoid of a byline beyond the word "Staff" - that the press release you've linked to is citing as a source.

Please note that said St. Louis Business Journal story says nothing more than...

"Stan Kroenke reportedly is planning to buy a new Major League Soccer license to create a team to be based in Los Angeles."

"Kroenke reportedly has been given the green light to name the new team the 'LA Gunners'."

So, who is "reportedly" saying all of this? Who "reportedly" dropped a dime to the St. Louis Business Journal? The StLBJ story doesn't even cite an unnamed source - either from within Kroenke's organization or Major League Soccer - requesting anonymity. Nope. Just "reportedly"... from out of the ether.

Sorry, but I'm calling "taurine fecal matter" on the notion that Major League Soccer is ready to green-light a third franchise in Greater Los Angeles. First of all, one of the two existing teams in the market - Chivas USA - is barely solvent. Secondly, Major League Soccer as an entity has been moving away from having individuals serve as the investor/operator for more than one franchise; Kroenke already owns the Colorado Rapids. Third, David Beckham's agreement with MLS specifically prohibited him from exercising his expansion franchise option in Los Angeles, a market where his high-wattage star-power profile would have paid immediate dividends in establishing a third LA-based franchise... but, the league feels a nebbishy sexagenarian with a bad rug and a creepy-uncle 'stache is just what the doctor ordered for electrifying the masses in the City of Angels' crowded sports scene? Not to mention that Kroenke hasn't exactly set the world on fire as the investor/operator of the MLS franchise he already runs.

No. Sorry. Until the "official" word comes out of the mouth of MLS Commissioner Don Garber, I'm not buying this "report".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any chance he's buying (and rebranding) Chivas?

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's official: Kroenke's purchase of the land in Inglewood is for an MLS team, the "Los Angeles Gunners." It was never for an NFL team, nor for a Wal-Mart.

http://www.pressreleasepoint.com/st-louis-rams-owner-might-not-move-team-los-angeles-after-all

"[O]fficial" according to who? The staff reporters at the St. Louis Business Journal? After all, it's the St. Louis Business Journal's story - notably devoid of a byline beyond the word "Staff" - that the press release you've linked to is citing as a source.

Please note that said St. Louis Business Journal story says nothing more than...

"Stan Kroenke reportedly is planning to buy a new Major League Soccer license to create a team to be based in Los Angeles."

"Kroenke reportedly has been given the green light to name the new team the 'LA Gunners'."

So, who is "reportedly" saying all of this? Who "reportedly" dropped a dime to the St. Louis Business Journal? The StLBJ story doesn't even cite an unnamed source - either from within Kroenke's organization or Major League Soccer - requesting anonymity. Nope. Just "reportedly"... from out of the ether.

Sorry, but I'm calling "taurine fecal matter" on the notion that Major League Soccer is ready to green-light a third franchise in Greater Los Angeles. First of all, one of the two existing teams in the market - Chivas USA - is barely solvent. Secondly, Major League Soccer as an entity has been moving away from having individuals serve as the investor/operator for more than one franchise; Kroenke already owns the Colorado Rapids. Third, David Beckham's agreement with MLS specifically prohibited him from exercising his expansion franchise option in Los Angeles, a market where his high-wattage star-power profile would have paid immediate dividends in establishing a third LA-based franchise... but, the league feels a nebbishy sexagenarian with a bad rug and a creepy-uncle 'stache is just what the doctor ordered for electrifying the masses in the City of Angels' crowded sports scene? Not to mention that Kroenke hasn't exactly set the world on fire as the investor/operator of the MLS franchise he already runs.

No. Sorry. Until the "official" word comes out of the mouth of MLS Commissioner Don Garber, I'm not buying this "report".

The source of the St. Louis Business Journal story -- mentioned in the second paragraph -- is Metro, a London commuter paper.

http://metro.co.uk/2014/02/05/arsenal-owner-stan-kroenke-to-create-american-sister-team-called-la-gunners-4291277/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The source of the St. Louis Business Journal story -- mentioned in the second paragraph -- is Metro, a London commuter paper.

http://metro.co.uk/2...unners-4291277/

Yes... and as far as identifying a source, Metro passes the buck onto the Sun. So, between PressReleasePoint, the St. Louis Business Journal, Metro, and the Sun, we're four outlets into the coverage of the story without having any idea of just who was initially responsible for revealing Stan Kroenke's purported plans to launch the "LA Gunners".

Further, none of the outlets in question address the fact that Los Angeles is already home to a pair of MLS franchises, that MLS as an entity is moving away from having lone investor/operators overseeing multiple franchises, and that Stan Kroenke - a 66-year-old who hasn't exactly covered himself in glory as steward of the Colorado Rapids and looks like he's attempting a second-rate impersonation of John Astin as Gomez Addams - strikes the MLS brass as the guy capable of cutting through the sports and entertainment clutter in the LA market, but David Beckham - who played a tiny role in captivating the attention of LA's jaded fans, was contractually barred from securing an expansion team in the city.

Sorry, but I'm calling "bull :censored:" until such time as "official" word comes out of the mouth of MLS Commissioner Don Garber.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly, Brian. I put no stock in these Kroenke/LA/MLS rumors, and it genuinely has nothing to do with how it affects St. Louis or the Rams.

Every single report boils down to one original unreliable report. Sadly, respectable journalistic outlets have continued to repeat the report hiding behind the very word "report" (or some such variation of it).

It's not beyond possibility that Kroenke could buy another MLS license nor that he might put that team in LA at a stadium on his newly acquired land. But it isn't particularly sensical with the current landscape, and one brief and unsubstantiated "report" isn't enough smoke to start looking for a fire.

I'd love to hear Kroenke is seeking an MLS team to share a stadium with the Rams... in St. Louis. But right now I don't think there's anything to a second Kroenke franchise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's official: Kroenke's purchase of the land in Inglewood is for an MLS team, the "Los Angeles Gunners." It was never for an NFL team, nor for a Wal-Mart.

http://www.pressreleasepoint.com/st-louis-rams-owner-might-not-move-team-los-angeles-after-all

"[O]fficial" according to who? The staff reporters at the St. Louis Business Journal? After all, it's the St. Louis Business Journal's story - notably devoid of a byline beyond the word "Staff" - that the press release you've linked to is citing as a source.

Please note that said St. Louis Business Journal story says nothing more than...

"Stan Kroenke reportedly is planning to buy a new Major League Soccer license to create a team to be based in Los Angeles."

"Kroenke reportedly has been given the green light to name the new team the 'LA Gunners'."

So, who is "reportedly" saying all of this? Who "reportedly" dropped a dime to the St. Louis Business Journal? The StLBJ story doesn't even cite an unnamed source - either from within Kroenke's organization or Major League Soccer - requesting anonymity. Nope. Just "reportedly"... from out of the ether.

Sorry, but I'm calling "taurine fecal matter" on the notion that Major League Soccer is ready to green-light a third franchise in Greater Los Angeles. First of all, one of the two existing teams in the market - Chivas USA - is barely solvent. Secondly, Major League Soccer as an entity has been moving away from having individuals serve as the investor/operator for more than one franchise; Kroenke already owns the Colorado Rapids. Third, David Beckham's agreement with MLS specifically prohibited him from exercising his expansion franchise option in Los Angeles, a market where his high-wattage star-power profile would have paid immediate dividends in establishing a third LA-based franchise... but, the league feels a nebbishy sexagenarian with a bad rug and a creepy-uncle 'stache is just what the doctor ordered for electrifying the masses in the City of Angels' crowded sports scene? Not to mention that Kroenke hasn't exactly set the world on fire as the investor/operator of the MLS franchise he already runs.

No. Sorry. Until the "official" word comes out of the mouth of MLS Commissioner Don Garber, I'm not buying this "report".

It would make so much sense for the Rams to return to Los Angeles. In this situation, it would make the most sense to bring in the L.A. Arsenal - the rebranded/relocated Chivas USA - at Hollywood Park. On the other hand, St. Louis should have a chance at a team (Rams or otherwise) that hasn't been so poorly run. At least that's my feeling summed up on the Kroenke matter.

I'm not reading too much into anything--the Inglewood land purchase, a 3rd (!) L.A. MLS franchise, "L.A. Gunners", or even a possible Rams stadium. Stan Kroenke himself is staying quiet and that "report" has no sources. Nothing's official - yet.

That said, I can totally see this land purchase being for an MLS team and nothing else. It doesn't make enough sense to not happen.* It makes more sense should Kroenke buy Chivas USA, but what, exactly, happens to the Colorado Rapids? Will MLS let 2 franchises be owned by the same person, let alone remain in the same family? What if, and this is a very big "what if", the Rapids move to Los Angeles?

But going back to the Rams, what does happen if Kroenke only brings MLS to Hollywood Park and St. Louis refuses to work toward a new stadium/EJD renovation?

*Between Glendale, the NBA's Kings almost moving to Anaheim, and this NFL/Los Angeles saga to date, I'm not holding any breath when it comes to franchise placement.

Edited by DustDevil61

Pyc5qRH.gifRDXvxFE.gif

usu-scarf_8549002219_o.png.b2c64cedbb44307eaace2cf7f96dd6b1.png

AKA @LanRovr0 on Twitter

LED Sig Credits to packerfan21396

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the prospects for the Bills getting a stadium in Buffalo after Ralph Wilson? Or even while he's still in control of the franchise?

Google it. All the answers are there if you open a new tab.
Googling it doesn't necessarily give you the best picture of what's going on... the political will and so on. The proposal that's out there for the outer harbor is never gonna happen and nobody asked for it. If the team gets sold to someone who looks like they could keep it in Buffalo, I could see the state coming up with a whole bunch of cash because off the "only team in New York" thing. It won't be a billion dollar stadium, though. And it won't be the one currently "proposed".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's official: Kroenke's purchase of the land in Inglewood is for an MLS team, the "Los Angeles Gunners." It was never for an NFL team, nor for a Wal-Mart.

http://www.pressreleasepoint.com/st-louis-rams-owner-might-not-move-team-los-angeles-after-all

What's "official" about that. It's a report, from a report, from the story in the Star over in the UK. Anyone who knows anything about the Star knows it's a tabloid with about as much journalist credibility as the National Inquirer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile...

JAX has not made an official proposal to the city for larger improvements aside from the scoreboards, the team has artist renderings of a sun shade on EverBank Field.

Everbank1_zpsa3ac4fcd.jpg

That's one hell of a tarp.

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.