NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

[Rockstar Matt]

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.

Good points. I just don't want to get my hopes up more than I already have . I'd be absolutely crushed if the Rams decided to stay in St. Louis. I've never considered adopting a different favorite team before, but if the Rams were to come back, I'd seriously consider it. Either way, you're looking at a LA Rams season ticket holder if they come back.

And that Bring Back the Los Angeles Rams page is gaining follows at a increasing rate. End of 2012 they had 6,000 followers. End of 2013 they had 22,000 and they have 30,000+ now. Doesn't mean much except that people are starting to get excited about the possibility of the Rams coming back.

[Gothamite]

I think there's great reason for them to think that way. St. Louis can no longer force them to stay in town after next year, and unless they get very, very creative I don't see how they spend the money necessary to entice the Rams to stay without the muscle of that lease.

Good on those LA fans, though. If St. Louis fans continue to check out, and the California groups make more and more noise, it eases the Rams' path.

[colortv]

Kroenke's ties to Missouri run deep, though..

I get the impression the NFL wants it's return to LA to be perfect, a big splash. Are the Rams a big enough splash for them? Yeah, they've got the "LA's old team" thing going but they've been terrible for a decade and the remaining Raider fanbase dwarfs whatever they have.

I'd imagine the league would rather see a rebranded team or the Raiders.

[rams80]

Again, you don't marry a Walton if you give a crap about what people think of you.

[Gothamite]

Yeah, Stan's dripping with what you might call " -you money".

I get the impression the NFL wants it's return to LA to be perfect, a big splash.

What gives you that impression?

[colortv]

Again, you don't marry a Walton if you give a crap about what people think of you.

I think that's a pretty simplistic way of looking at it.

Yeah, Stan's dripping with what you might call " -you money".

I get the impression the NFL wants it's return to LA to be perfect, a big splash.

What gives you that impression?

All of the stipulations they've given to teams about LA, how they've made it clear that they are the ones in control of the process, and how they've dealt with the stadium groups in LA.

[rams80]

What, seeing Sam Walton's progeny and kin as greedheads who care little about the poors and their opinions is simplistic?

Ummmm....no.

[Gothamite]

I get the impression the NFL wants it's return to LA to be perfect, a big splash.

What gives you that impression?

All of the stipulations they've given to teams about LA, how they've made it clear that they are the ones in control of the process, and how they've dealt with the stadium groups in LA.

And from there, you go to "the Rams aren't sufficiently high-profile"?

[colortv]

What, seeing Sam Walton's progeny and kin as greedheads who care little about the poors and their opinions is simplistic?

Ummmm....no.

How many millions of people shop at Wal-Mart? You're making it sound like marrying a Walton is like openly calling for genocide or something.

I get the impression the NFL wants it's return to LA to be perfect, a big splash.

What gives you that impression?

All of the stipulations they've given to teams about LA, how they've made it clear that they are the ones in control of the process, and how they've dealt with the stadium groups in LA.

And from there, you go to "the Rams aren't sufficiently high-profile"?

Not saying that, just that there could be better options.

[teddthebucfan]

What, seeing Sam Walton's progeny and kin as greedheads who care little about the poors and their opinions is simplistic?

Ummmm....no.

How many millions of people shop at Wal-Mart? You're making it sound like marrying a Walton is like openly calling for genocide or something.

I get the impression the NFL wants it's return to LA to be perfect, a big splash.

What gives you that impression?

All of the stipulations they've given to teams about LA, how they've made it clear that they are the ones in control of the process, and how they've dealt with the stadium groups in LA.

And from there, you go to "the Rams aren't sufficiently high-profile"?

Not saying that, just that there could be better options.

Such as? The only other contenders for relocation at this point are the Jaguars, Chargers, Bills, and Raiders. Not the most prestigious of clubs.

[colortv]

What, seeing Sam Walton's progeny and kin as greedheads who care little about the poors and their opinions is simplistic?

Ummmm....no.

How many millions of people shop at Wal-Mart? You're making it sound like marrying a Walton is like openly calling for genocide or something.

I get the impression the NFL wants it's return to LA to be perfect, a big splash.

What gives you that impression?

All of the stipulations they've given to teams about LA, how they've made it clear that they are the ones in control of the process, and how they've dealt with the stadium groups in LA.

And from there, you go to "the Rams aren't sufficiently high-profile"?

Not saying that, just that there could be better options.

Such as? The only other contenders for relocation at this point are the Jaguars, Chargers, Bills, and Raiders. Not the most prestigious of clubs.

As I mentioned earlier, both the Raiders and Chargers have considerably larger fanbases in Southern California than the Rams.

Some developments in San Diego:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10498748/san-diego-chargers-pitch-plan-new-stadium-remaining-protective-la-market

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/02/21/chargers-pitch-new-downtown-san-diego-stadium-plan-but-la-still-an-option/

[rams80]

What, seeing Sam Walton's progeny and kin as greedheads who care little about the poors and their opinions is simplistic?

Ummmm....no.

How many millions of people shop at Wal-Mart? You're making it sound like marrying a Walton is like openly calling for genocide or something.

And many may think poorly of the Waltons and that their business model is harmful while having little alternative but to shop there.

[CubsFanBudMan]

From that Chargers article above:

"It would devastate us economically. It would be catastrophic for the team financially if the league were to allow another team to go into the Los Angeles market and wipe out 30 percent of our premium sales."

Not sure how to read that. Does a new stadium in SD really solve that problem, or just soften the blow?

[Gothamite]

From what I read, the San Diego stadium won't affect that much at all.

By premium sales, Fabiani said he's referring to advertising, sponsorships, club seats and suites sold by the Chargers in the Los Angeles market.

Not things suppressed by having an older stadium, but things they'll still need even if they get a new one.

Yeah, well, tough titty, Chargers. If Los Angeles is so important to your business model, move there. The NFL is not going to hold the market vacant just because you can't raise enough advertising revenue in San Diego.

[colortv]

That's just leverage talk for the Chargers.

[CubsFanBudMan]

From what I read, the San Diego stadium won't affect that much at all.

By premium sales, Fabiani said he's referring to advertising, sponsorships, club seats and suites sold by the Chargers in the Los Angeles market.

Not things suppressed by having an older stadium, but things they'll still need even if they get a new one.

Yeah, well, tough titty, Chargers. If Los Angeles is so important to your business model, move there. The NFL is not going to hold the market vacant just because you can't raise enough advertising revenue in San Diego.

Right, I didn't see it as a convincing argument to stay in SD if three fourths of the owners could "betray" you at any time and make you "poor."

Extreme words are mine, but that's what the quotes in both articles seemed to be suggesting.

If you want to make an argument for a new stadium, that wasn't it.

EDIT: Full quote: "We have to be cognizant of the fact that if three-quarters of the owners were to allow a team to move to Los Angeles, it would devastate us economically."

Since LA appears to be an eventual reality, that does suggest they should get there first. And they are among those in the best position to do so quickly.

And it doesn't make a new stadium seem like a sound investment if a few years from now they claim they can't compete because one or more teams moved in up north.

[BBTV]

What, seeing Sam Walton's progeny and kin as greedheads who care little about the poors and their opinions is simplistic?

Ummmm....no.

How many millions of people shop at Wal-Mart? You're making it sound like marrying a Walton is like openly calling for genocide or something.

I get the impression the NFL wants it's return to LA to be perfect, a big splash.

What gives you that impression?

All of the stipulations they've given to teams about LA, how they've made it clear that they are the ones in control of the process, and how they've dealt with the stadium groups in LA.

And from there, you go to "the Rams aren't sufficiently high-profile"?

Not saying that, just that there could be better options.

There are so many stars that have to align just perfectly to make the return to LA work. If ownership, a stadium, TV deals, etc. are all ready to go, they're not going to hold back on the move and jeopardize any of those factors in order to wait for a really good or high profile team to be in position to be sold and/or get out of their lease and move there. If this is to happen within the next couple of years, they're limited to the teams that are in position to go at the exact moment that the other issues (which are far harder to work through than moving a team) get worked out. That would seem to limit them to the Rams, Chargers, Buffalo, and I don't know who else. If any of those teams happens to be good at that time, it's just a bonus. No high-profile team would go there, because, well, the fact that a team is high-profile would seem to indicate that it's relatively stable and not ready to move anywhere.

It would seem like it's a race between SD and Oak in the AFC, and STL in the NFC, or both SD and OAK and just re-doing the conferences. From what I've been reading here, and with no additional knowledge, my bet would be SD and STL.

[Crash]

I love the speculation as much as you all do, but I just can't take anything about a relocation to L.A. seriously until it actually happens.

Why? Here's a quick rundown of vacated markets, post-merger:

Cleveland - 3 years - 1996-1999

Houston - 5 years - 1997-2002

St. Louis - 8 years - 1987-1995

Baltimore - 12 years - 1984-1996

Los Angeles - 20+ years -1995-2015+

I don't think many would argue that any of the other markets are stronger markets than L.A., so if there were serious, pressing interest in making sure a team was in L.A., it would have happened already. Yes, the situation in L.A. is different than the others in many respects, but at this point, it seems more valuable as a threat than as a market.

[Gothamite]

They were absolutely stronger markets, since they had ownership groups and stadium deals.

You have to remember that if LA had been able to put that together, they had a set-aside.

That's what makes the Rams' situation so interesting; the first time one man owns both a team in need of a stadium and the land to put one on.

[Crash]

They were absolutely stronger markets, since they had ownership groups and stadium deals.

You have to remember that if LA had been able to put that together, they had a set-aside.

That's what makes the Rams' situation so interesting; the first time one man owns both a team in need of a stadium and the land to put one on.

I meant stronger in the way these thread imagine stronger, the theoretically stronger due to population version, not the actuality of stronger that actually puts a team in a city. Obviously, the "real" stronger that you speak of is the one that matters for a team actually showing up. But the theoretical stronger works great for leverage.

Which kind of strength Kroenke's Hollywood Park land deal fits is still really unsure.