NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

[STL FANATIC]

You're forgetting (or ignoring) that Stan can start construction of his stadium as early as June.

If part of your positioning is to attack mine, you should at least read what I write.

The will be interesting to follow. It would fit Kroenke's persona totally to amp things up and break-ground to re-gain his advantage. But it's also something of a billion dollar risk if something doesn't work out.

This is going to be fun. Or something.

That all sounds right. We'll see how much influence the league is able to exert, or perhaps more accurately how willing to be influenced the involved owners are.

If Kroenke sticks a shovel in the ground, the Rams are probably gone, but we could see one hell of a fight come afterwards.

[rams80]

The NFL would be nuts to abandon San Diego. St. Louis, you can take or leave, but San Diego doesn't seem worth missing out on.

Why is this? Because it's on the west coast and has amazing whether? When you get to the numbers, St. Louis seems to be the more valuable market.

St. Louis is the 21st ranked American TV market, and San Diego is the 28th. St. Louis has 9 Fortune 500 companies, San Diego has 2. St. Louis has 14 Fortune 1000 companies, San Diego has 5.

St. Louis has 4 teams that can easily fill any marketplace void. The San Diego has none, aside from the Chargers themselves.

[rams80]

You also have to wonder if Goodell has lost some of his clout with his year from hell. He may want to try to stop Kroenke but could the owners not named Kraft be tiring of his act?

If they haven't they probably would after the inevitable anti-trust lawsuit were Kroenke to be refused.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

Rams to Los Angeles and that's it would be the ideal scenario. St. Louis can't keep all three of its teams, San Diego isn't worth losing, and re-entry into Los Angeles has to be done right, which is to say without Raiders stink all over it.

I went to San Diego for the first time a month ago. I went for a conference so didn't get out much, but in my travels up and down I-5 (from San Diego to La Jolla), I kind of found it lacking. Petco Park looked neat from a difference though.

[IceCap]

If part of your positioning is to attack mine, you should at least read what I write.

I have no dog in this fight. I'm not from LA. I'm not from St. Louis. I'm not a Rams fan (though I am a Kurt Warner fan, for whatever that's worth). The Rams could end up in Sioux Falls for all I care. So objectively? LA has more monetary potential then St. Louis. So both the league and team have incentive to trade St. Louis for southern California. LA seems to be where the Rams' owner wants to build his own stadium (and has all the means do it). Everything, from an objective standpoint, points to the Rams moving west. Sure, the Raiders/Chargers news changes the dynamic, but nothing indicates that plan is as close to being a reality as Stan's plan is. The Rams still seem to have the inside track on LA. Primarily because everyone else, from the city of St. Louis to the Raiders/Chargers combo, has been reacting to Stan's actions. Stan and the Rams are still driving the scenario.

So I'm not picking a side to spite STL FANATIC. I'm saying I think the LA Rams will happen because that's how I see this thing shaking up. If there's anything more to that it's the Pollyanna act just wearing thin on me. It just seem like the Rams moving is more then likely and pretending otherwise is just an exercise in delusional daydreaming.

I'm not sure this is true. I think I had stopped commenting by that point. I was against the Preds moving. I don't even think I talked about Atlanta. I also don't think I doubted Canada's ability to support another team ever.

Well first off, rule of threes

Secondly I remember Mockba saying that he was tired of people acting like the Thrashers moving from Atlanta to Winnipeg was a good thing and you co-signing. That's what I was referring to.

[CubsFanBudMan]

It feels like it's Rams or Raiders-Chargers, not any other combo... today anyway. Who knows what next week brings. Based on the wording of yesterday's release, it had the NFL's approval. Not sure Kroenke had that. Seems doubtful now. If I had to bet on who has the NFL's blessing, it's not a hard choice.

The AFC West team-up and Chargers-Sachs scenarios were floated from unlikely insiders, first Bleacher Report, then Andy Strickland of CBS St. Louis, and now here we are. The Chargers and Raiders own land the NFL considered buying *three* times.

And seriously, how do the Raiders and Chargers put up money in L.A. but cry poor in their current homes? How do they go through so far as buying the land? Kroenke buying a site once slated for a Wal-Mart made sense... this surprised me.

Speaking of unlikely sources, the Forbes guy I found this morning said this:

The other thing to look at here is that the Chargers wouldnt necessarily be moving too far from their home base. While the fans in that southernmost California city might be upset about a potential relocation, a move to Los Angeles surely beats the alternative. The same can be said for Raiders fans in Northern California, who would be about a 45-minute plane flight from Carson.

So the Raiders-Chargers shakes things up the least, keeps the relocating teams at least remotely accessible and gives the NFL the palace they want on land they must at least like.

I don't know how appealing San Diego would be as a vacant market with two teams in L.A. and their own claim that 30 percent, (later 25 percent) of their revenue is L.A.-based. It would top London, though.

[STL FANATIC]

I just plain don't think you're being fair. There are a LOT of possible outcomes right now. Nothing has been decided. There may be a time when it's clear cut that the Rams are moving to LA, but it's very much not right now. It's absolutely not delusion to make that suggestion.

I never thought this was personal against me. I know that's not how you operate. I know that about Gothamite too. But sometimes you're writing off what I think are pretty valid points. There's a lot of people without a dog in the fight who don't think this thing has been decided yet.

And you're probably right about that last part. Franchise relocation is sucky, so celebrating it when it may not have been totally necessary isn't something I'd feel good about. But I have no problem with Winnipeg getting a team. They're obviously a great hockey market.

[colortv]

The NFL wants two teams in LA, and it looks next to impossible for the Raiders to stay in Oakland. The Chargers have been trying for over a decade to get a stadium and haven't gotten anywhere. The Chargers wouldn't be moving far and the NFL could still maintain some sort of connection with San Diego.

Stan is also from Missouri, so in this scenario maybe it's possible he could be reasoned into staying.

[Mac the Knife]

And seriously, how do the Raiders and Chargers put up money in L.A. but cry poor in their current homes? How do they go through so far as buying the land? Kroenke buying a site once slated for a Wal-Mart made sense... this surprised me.

I don't know how appealing San Diego would be as a vacant market with two teams in L.A. and their own claim that 30 percent, (later 25 percent) of their revenue is L.A.-based. It would top London, though.

The Raiders and Chargers don't put up the money. Outside financiers did, and do, that. They pull a Dan Snyder, leveraging everything their franchises own as collateral on the stadium, borrowing every last dollar they can before the NFL puts a stop to it. In fact, a small part of me is surprised, given his wanting a new stadium himself, that Snyder's not entered into this race to L.A. somehow.

It'd be bad, but not catastrophic, for San Diego to be out of the NFL mix. A Chargers return to Los Angeles is the only potential move being contemplated which doesn't completely screw over fans in the market being departed; as I noted earlier, it's a hundred-mile trek one direction. Die-hard Charger fans live in either San Diego proper or the towns north of it, so while they'd lose a ton of them, they won't lose them all.

If San Diego loses the Chargers, they likely don't get a replacement. If Oakland loses the Raiders, they definitely don't get a replacement because the 49'ers will block that in a heartbeat. If St. Louis loses the Rams, they'd at least be in the mix with the right stadium deal in place.

[colortv]

Although if the Rams do find a way to LA I wouldn't discount the possibility of the cash strapped Raiders trying to get Farmers done.

[Still MIGHTY]

Rams to Los Angeles and that's it would be the ideal scenario. St. Louis can't keep all three of its teams, San Diego isn't worth losing, and re-entry into Los Angeles has to be done right, which is to say without Raiders stink all over it.

I went to San Diego for the first time a month ago. I went for a conference so didn't get out much, but in my travels up and down I-5 (from San Diego to La Jolla), I kind of found it lacking. Petco Park looked neat from a difference though.

Just driving that stretch of the 5, yeah, I could see that being the opinion one would pull from it. I assure you there is a whole lot more to San Diego, especially downtown, Gaslamp, on the water, Balboa Park, Old Town and even if you stop off anywhere between La Jolla and Pacific/Mission Beach down the coast. Really one of my favorite places to go.

But for the sake of further discussion, I really don't think my optimism is that unwarranted. Side note: I still don't know if optimism is the right word, either. I walk around talking about how my Rams gear will be collectors items in a year. I've assumed they're gone for a while, and I won't be terribly bummed if that's the outcome. Saves my city money, helps me stop following a league I hate and a sport I struggle with. But I keep very abreast of the developments. This mornings, I think, changes the dynamic a bit.

Oh, I call so bull on that.

If that were truly the case, you wouldn't be in here 5-10 times a day defending or spinning every single bit of information that comes across the wire with lengthy discussions on how this works in the Rams favor. I don't mind optimism or trying to keep your team, but the extent that you go to just comes off as kind of... idk, pathetic's not the right word here. Sad, maybe? And you're so damn defensive about it. It's not a personal thing about you or your character, it's a football team that you have claimed or now claim that you don't actually like.

Again, like Ice Cap said:

[rams80]

Stan is also from Missouri, so in this scenario maybe it's possible he could be reasoned into staying.

The 1% really doesn't have a homeland.

[STL FANATIC]

Oh, I call so bull on that.

If that were truly the case, you wouldn't be in here 5-10 times a day defending or spinning every single bit of information that comes across the wire with lengthy discussions on how this works in the Rams favor. I don't mind optimism or trying to keep your team, but the extent that you go to just comes off as kind of... idk, pathetic's not the right word here. Sad, maybe? And you're so damn defensive about it. It's not a personal thing about you or your character, it's a football team that you have claimed or now claim that you don't actually like.

You're all welcome to your opinions, but that doesn't make you a good judge. I assure you I've pretty much assumed they were gone for most of 2015 so far. Some of the developments with the stadium and now with this have made me think it's no longer a certainty, and in fact today's news makes me think it's back to being a toss up.

I've also argue to many St. Louisans that supporting the stadium plan is bad business. I'm not in favor of it, and I don't think having an NFL team has tangible positives.

But I'm for better or worse a stupidly diehard Rams fans, and an incredibly passionate St. Louisan, so I do keep up with every move as it concerns how this might play out.

Some of you act like I'm the only one saying these things lol.

I do appreciate y'all making sure to clarify that when you call me delusional, sad, and pathetic, that it's not personal.

[CubsFanBudMan]

How about we don't make this about each other? Just a thought. This thread has gone on for years and most of our tendencies are out there. Just another thought.

I offer the sacrificial lamb of Bernie Miklasz:

http://m.stltoday.com/sports/columns/bernie-miklasz/bernie-kroenke-double-teamed-in-la/article_2d8c287c-e385-5a39-b944-26c116ea31de.html?mobile_touch=true

Again, he's all over the place, as I and others have been over the past 24 hours, and I'm not reading it as whiny, but he poses more hypothetical scenarios than the guys on "Ancient Aliens" in this piece. Spoiler alert: The Broncos make an appearance.

But he says what I've been thinking and others in this thread have denied: There are three lame ducks as of now. I know they can't officially announce the move, but doesn't buying land and releasing renderings make the intentions clear?

I mean, the Vikings only needed the Farmers Field drawings' endzones changed to purple and gold to get Minnesota to cave. These guys are buying land and we're going to question their intentions?

Sure it could be a bluff, but they are putting money where their mouths haven't been willing to go. But how is this not a threat? If you think St. Louis shouldn't be optimistic, then what should San Diego and Oakland be with nothing on the table and a decade of debate behind them?

Shoot, I'm rambling. Sorry, I need sleep. Focus on Miklasz. He's the STL optimist you deserve. Because he can take it. Tear his hypotheticals apart, blame him for the brief picture that his column headline caused you to be forever haunted by, call him whiny, chase him down with dogs... or not:

http://m.stltoday.com/sports/columns/bernie-miklasz/bernie-kroenke-double-teamed-in-la/article_2d8c287c-e385-5a39-b944-26c116ea31de.html?mobile_touch=true

Zzzzz... see you tomorrow. Or Monday. I might need to put the phone down for a while.

[IceCap]

Spoiler alert: The Broncos make an appearance.

Then he's not worth listening to. The Broncos scenario only works if Stan opts to sell the NFL team he does own to buy a NFL team that's worth more from a family that has said it's not interested in selling. Anyone still peddling this as a possibility IS delusional.

Sure it could be a bluff, but they are putting money where their mouths haven't been willing to go. But how is this not a threat? If you think St. Louis shouldn't be optimistic, then what should San Diego and Oakland be with nothing on the table and a decade of debate behind them?

The difference is that the Rams' owner is pretty far along regarding his stadium/land in LA. He can break ground in June if things break his way (and it's very possible he has the means to pull strings to make it break his way). Everything else, from the city of St. Louis' "plan" to the joint Raiders/Chargers venture, has been reactive. Stan and the Rams still have the inside track. Obviously the Raiders/Chargers proposal is a threat, it's just not as likely as the Rams', due to Stan having more of his ducks in order.

And as Goth pointed out earlier, we only know that the land for the Raiders and Chargers proposal has been "bought." We don't know what that means, exactly. It's very likely that it's all fluid enough that both teams can pull out of the deal if need be. Whereas Stan owns his land outright.

As far as the Chargers go...I'm disappointed in them (not that this is a new feeling, really). They've gone on and on about how vital the LA market is to their survival. If that's the case? They should have made a move for LA years ago. Only a fool would have believed that Los freakin' Angeles was going to sit there without at least one team indefinitely. They should have made a push to relocate sooner if LA was that vital to them.

And what do they say when Stan starts making his attention re: LA clear? The complain about it, saying that it would be wrong for a team that abandoned the LA market to move back in. So what do they do next? Announce a partnership with the G-ddamn Raiders for a LA stadium!

I swear. Sometimes I think it might just be easier to commit to Cardinals fandom.

[HedleyLamarr]

Oh, I call so bull on that.

If that were truly the case, you wouldn't be in here 5-10 times a day defending or spinning every single bit of information that comes across the wire with lengthy discussions on how this works in the Rams favor. I don't mind optimism or trying to keep your team, but the extent that you go to just comes off as kind of... idk, pathetic's not the right word here. Sad, maybe? And you're so damn defensive about it. It's not a personal thing about you or your character, it's a football team that you have claimed or now claim that you don't actually like.

You're all welcome to your opinions, but that doesn't make you a good judge. I assure you I've pretty much assumed they were gone for most of 2015 so far. Some of the developments with the stadium and now with this have made me think it's no longer a certainty, and in fact today's news makes me think it's back to being a toss up.

I've also argue to many St. Louisans that supporting the stadium plan is bad business. I'm not in favor of it, and I don't think having an NFL team has tangible positives.

But I'm for better or worse a stupidly diehard Rams fans, and an incredibly passionate St. Louisan, so I do keep up with every move as it concerns how this might play out.

Some of you act like I'm the only one saying these things lol.

I do appreciate y'all making sure to clarify that when you call me delusional, sad, and pathetic, that it's not personal.

If your vote was the deciding vote...

Are you voting yes to the stadium so the Rams stay, or are you voting no to the stadium and watching the Rams...a team that you follow year-round, whether it's training camp or the preseason or regular season or draft or free agency, etc.....leave for Los Angeles?

Your head may say "Vote no", but seeing you go to all the great lengths at defending your teams over the years....your heart is going to make you vote "Yes", not only so you get to keep your team, but that you also can say "See, I kept telling you the Rams weren't leaving!".

You wouldn't be so optimistic about the Rams staying in St. Louis if you weren't this diehard fan of theirs. You wouldn't be looking for glimmers of hope, overlooking the fact that the team owner has made recent land purchases in Los Angeles...stated his hopes and intentions of moving his team there...and not once trying to get a deal done in St. Louis.

You may claim you hate the NFL and the sport and the team frustrates you to no end, but no way in hell are you voting against your emotions and your sports heart's football team. If you hate something, you'd have washed your hands of it a long time ago.

[IceCap]

I do appreciate y'all making sure to clarify that when you call me delusional, sad, and pathetic, that it's not personal.

It's a situation where the poster's position is criticized. Not the poster himself. It may come off as harsh but, hand to G-d, it's not meant to be personal. It's just that sometimes it comes off as such. It's made worse because it's the internet, and tone can be hard to gauge.

As I've said, I have no dog in this fight. I'm coming down on LA's "side" here because it honestly strikes me as the most likely given all the factors at work.

I just plain don't think you're being fair. There are a LOT of possible outcomes right now. Nothing has been decided. There may be a time when it's clear cut that the Rams are moving to LA, but it's very much not right now. It's absolutely not delusion to make that suggestion.

Your relocation math argument is compelling at face value. The Chargers, Raiders, and Rams are all in play. Only St. Louis is putting a stadium plan together (as slapdash and bare bones at it appears, in my opinion). At the end of the day though? This is just a redress of the "NFL bylaws will save us!" argument St. Louis fans have been putting forward. Stan has had nothing to do with that stadium proposal. He actually seems to have made an effort to ignore the city of St. Louis and governor of Missouri. So if he wants to move the team? The NFL's bylaws or the existence of a St. Louis stadium plan (which still hasn't had all of its kinks worked out) won't stop him.

In short? I don't see how the existence of a stadium plan Stan wanted nothing to do with keeps him in town.

[colortv]

Three NFL teams in Los Angeles? Not viable, experts say

http://news.yahoo.com/raiders-chargers-plan-possible-shared-los-angeles-area-084430159--spt.html

[CubsFanBudMan]

I guess it comes down to whether you believe the NFL is in charge here or the individual owners.

The St. Louis stadium team and now this Chargers-Raiders plan go out of their way to say they're working with the NFL "every step of the way."

Has Kroenke's plan ever said anything of the sort? Not that I'm aware of, and the NFL reacted to his announcement with "we're in charge" and now the (admittedly shady and dishonest) Chargers reveal a plan they've been working on for nine months -- so it was very much not as reactive as it seemed -- less than a month after a strong denial that they were doing anything of the sort.

I've said I'm impressed with just how much leverage Kroenke created for himself on all sides, and he's going to "win" somehow in this whole thing. Up until two days ago, I thought that could even mean staying put and having the NFL ultimately buy/control the site (as had been rumored months ago) for whichever teams need it and Super Bowls... even Chargers-Raiders, which also had been floated months ago.

Now it seems there is no backup plan involving Inglewood and that the NFL, Raiders and Chargers have no intention of partnering with him. Today Kroenke looks like an outsider again, one who might have to go full Al Davis to end up with the Rams in L.A. Tomorrow might bring news that makes it look like the NFL just wants a stadium, any stadium in L.A. But I've never believed that since the NFL dismissed what looked like a great idea in Farmers Field two years ago. Inglewood *sounds* great, but for all the criticism of the St. Louis and Carson designs, how many stadium renderings from Inglewood are out there?

Yes, Goodell and the NFL had a bad year and look more vulnerable than they have in a long time. But it's still the freaking NFL. I wouldn't dismiss its power in this so easily.

[Gothamite]

Inglewood *sounds* great, but for all the criticism of the St. Louis and Carson designs, how many stadium renderings from Inglewood are out there?

More than enough, considering that his is the only plan that's both fast-tracked for environmental approval and part of a larger development project that's already under construction.

Renderings are cheap. Actual movement is both expensive and hard, and Kronke's the only one who has it at the moment.