Jump to content

NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay


duma
 Share

Recommended Posts

In possibly related news, MLS has purchased the Chivas from the Mexican club.

http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2014/02/20/major-league-soccer-purchases-chivas-usa

The club will play as Chivas USA during the 2014 MLS season and will be rebranded with a new team name and logo in connection with the sale to a new owner.

So Stan might yet have his LA Gunners, and his Hollywood Park land might well be a soccer stadium. Which may or may not impact the relocation of the Rams back to Los Angeles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Following up, I thought this quote from Garber was interesting:

He [Kroenke] is not a candidate to purchase the team, those days are over, Garber said, referring to the days when multiple MLS franchises were owned by the same families or organizations. We are not interested in any other owner owning multiple teams. Stan's been a great owner of the Colorado Rapids. I'm not familiar with what his plans are on the stadium site, we haven't spoken about that. But all those rumors that I heard about him buying the land so he could launch a second MLS team are unfounded.

So Kroenke didn't bother telling MLS about buying this little piece of real estate, but he did make sure that the NFL knew all about it. Hmmm.

Plus Garber refers to it as "the stadium site". But that's probably just referring to the media coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had heard (this may or may not be accurate) that as part of the NFL in LA agreement, owners are required (requested?) to disclose purchases like Kroenke's in LA.

Also, Garber doesn't really say whether he knew about the land purchase, just that they haven't discussed the plans for it.

I wouldn't expect Kroenke to feel the need to tell the MLS about it. In that situation, it's not different than when he buys land anywhere else in the country. It's different for obvious reasons as it relates to the NFL.

Still, we don't know why he told them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He told them, according to the Commissioner, because he had to. Kroenke is required to "keep (the NFL) informed of any developments or anything that is going on in the Los Angeles market".

I don't think I've ever seen it reported that he must report any unrelated business dealings that happen to be located in LA, though. Seems kind of silly that he'd need to alert Goodell every time he wanted to invest in a strip mall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you quote would imply just that though as it's very vague. Likely there's a common sense aspect to it. Strip malls have no impact on the NFL. 60-acre land deals could. But it's hard to say without seeing their policies.

And we'll never see them; the NFL likes it that way.

If he was going to build a Wal-Mart on this land, as they originally wanted to do, it seems very doubtful that he would have had to report it to HQ in New York. That he did speaks volumes about the seriousness of his relocation threat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had heard (this may or may not be accurate) that as part of the NFL in LA agreement, owners are required (requested?) to disclose purchases like Kroenke's in LA.

According to a February 1, 2014 piece in the Los Angeles Times, New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and San Diego Chargers owner Dean Spanos said its their understanding that an NFL owner "... would not have to inform the [NFL] league office about any type of [land] acquisitions in the L.A. area unless it had something to do with developing a stadium there."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had heard (this may or may not be accurate) that as part of the NFL in LA agreement, owners are required (requested?) to disclose purchases like Kroenke's in LA.

According to a February 1, 2014 piece in the Los Angeles Times, New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and San Diego Chargers owner Dean Spanos said its their understanding that an NFL owner "... would not have to inform the [NFL] league office about any type of [land] acquisitions in the L.A. area unless it had something to do with developing a stadium there."

I really don't want to believe in any speculation about the possibility of the NFL returning to Los Angeles. Normally, I'd just think to myself "oh, this *insert anything NFL related* will fall through. We won't get a team" but that quote from two different owners, I'll admit, has gotten my hopes up.

I, as an Angelino, don't want to be dicked around again by the NFL. I really believe Kroenke is serious and not messing around, but as STL Fanatic pointed out, he could have been obligated to inform the NFL of any stadium sized plot purchases in the Los Angeles (just because it's LA) regardless if he wants to build a fancy strip mall or a football stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, as an Angelino, don't want to be dicked around again by the NFL.

In fairness, the NFL has never dicked you around. They offered LA an expansion team, but no ownership group could get a serious plan together. Unfortunate, but not the NFL's fault.

I really believe Kroenke is serious and not messing around, but as STL Fanatic pointed out, he could have been obligated to inform the NFL of any stadium sized plot purchases in the Los Angeles (just because it's LA) regardless if he wants to build a fancy strip mall or a football stadium.

Except, as we just established on the word of two current owners, he doesn't. And they oughta know. He had to inform the NFL because he bought a stadium-sized piece of land that he's considering putting a stadium on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, as an Angelino, don't want to be dicked around again by the NFL.

In fairness, the NFL has never dicked you around. They offered LA an expansion team, but no ownership group could get a serious plan together. Unfortunate, but not the NFL's fault.

That, we'll pin on the developers (Eli Broad and Roski) opening up a cardinal sin on NFL owners: appeasing the Memorial Coliseum at USC as a viable renovation site. But ever since then, it seems that the only instance the NFL has mentioned Los Angeles is when legislators from other cities and league officials use it as a terror tool to get the city's taxpayers to subsidize their stadiums.

Every time an NFL team reaches a new stadium fleecing financing plan because of the leverage of Los Angeles, humiliation is felt here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But don't you think the NFL would prefer to find out about ANY stadium-sized piece of land from the owner, and not the LA Times?

It may have been a courtesy, not a requirement, so the NFL PR people could spin it how they saw fit, if at all. Plus the leverage goes away if it gets out that he didn't inform the NFL (even though none of us knew this rule existed until this transaction).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best thing would be for the Raiders to play in Santa Clara and represent Oakland only in spirit, then renovate the Coliseum once more to better host the A's (or build a new park in the parking lot, whichever is cheaper). I care about the A's more than the Raiders, to be honest.

I know you're not the only one, but the Raiders are as much a part of Oakland's identity as the Packers are Green Bay's. If only one team can remain in Oakland, it should be them.

PFFFFT! No they're definitely not. Not even close. Oakland is such a shell of what it used to be that it doesn't even have enough of an identity left to be that noteworthy. The Raiders came back to Oakland before I even was even really aware that pro football existed and I STILL associate them more with Los Angeles than I ever do Oakland. And I grew up going to Raiders games.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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