Jump to content

NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay


duma

Recommended Posts

No, but St. Louis could snag a team in the late 2020's, when the next round of "We want a new stadium or we're moving" cries start.

This exactly. The Oakland Coliseum nor Qualcomm in its current form (a LA reporter recently was saying renovation there is a possibility, albeit small one) will still be around. So the Ed Dome becomes a great threat since a relocating team could play in the indoor warehouse for 2-3 years while the Riverfront Stadium is built.

"I did absolutely nothing and it was everything I thought it could be." -Peter Gibbons

RIP Demitra #38

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 9.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Just saw an interview with St. Louis Post-Dispatch columnist Joe Strauss, who was asked about Joe Buck's rant. He said something that's in line with what I've been saying for years, so you know I'm going to quote it now. ;)

"I disagree (with Buck) a little bit...because in my mind, St. Louis played a part in this the whole time...I just think it was a lay-up that when Kroenke bought the team, the obvious move should've been to ask what his thoughts were on the stadium situation. I think he can do what he wants with it. I just think there was a lack of urgency to come to grips with this situation and now they're acting like they're the victim with their back against the wall."

We've known this was coming. The head of the CVC publicly called for a plan before Kroenke took control. And yet they got caught flat-footed, as though this was some total surprise they couldn't possibly have anticipated.

Now the victim card is definitely in play, especially if you wade into the sleazy mire that is the Post-Dispatch message boards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's some interesting tidbits from an Al Mark Davis interview with San Jose Mercury News sports writer Tim Kawakami via Twitter.

Just spoke to Raiders owner Mark Davis, who is in Seattle for tonight's game...


Asked Davis about Jon Gruden's comment that a move to LA was inevitable. Is that true? "Ask him," Davis said with a loud laugh.


More from Davis on the stadium situation: "I never say anything is inevitable. I'm not in control of it."


Davis said the situation hasn't changed. He wants to stay in Oakland but is excited by the progress in Carson.


I'll have much more from this interview tomorrow.


Oh and Davis wanted to make one thing clear: "I'm not going to Santa Clara." (Yes I'm the one who keeps suggesting that's an option.)


Ok I now believe sharing Santa Clara with the 49ers isn't on the table for the Raiders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw an interview with St. Louis Post-Dispatch columnist Joe Strauss, who was asked about Joe Buck's rant. He said something that's in line with what I've been saying for years, so you know I'm going to quote it now. ;)

"I disagree (with Buck) a little bit...because in my mind, St. Louis played a part in this the whole time...I just think it was a lay-up that when Kroenke bought the team, the obvious move should've been to ask what his thoughts were on the stadium situation. I think he can do what he wants with it. I just think there was a lack of urgency to come to grips with this situation and now they're acting like they're the victim with their back against the wall."

The victim card is definitely in play, especially if you wade into the sleazy mire that is the Post-Dispatch message boards.

Joe Strauss is an angry man who takes pride in pissing off his readership. He's not an insider on anything (so I don't believe for a second he knows if Kroenke was asked), and he regularly writes columns and tweets that deride his readers/followers simply to get a reaction.

Doesn't mean what you're saying is automatically wrong, but I'll be damned if Joe Strauss saying something is going to make me lend any more credence to it.

Sorry, but you touched a nerve with that one. (And that nerve is Joe Strauss, the topic of conversation doesn't matter. Guy is a real prick.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if Joe is a prick, Shane is a shill and Bernie is a talentless hack, does the city have any halfway-decent sports journalists? Scary thought: which one of these clowns has the Hall of Fame vote?

Here's some interesting tidbits from an Al Davis interview with San Jose Mercury News sports writer Tim Kawakami

More from Davis on the stadium situation: "I never say anything is inevitable. I'm not in control of it."

Not in control? The controlling owner of the Oakland Raiders, one of the marquee franchises in what may be the most powerful league in the world, is not in control of his own stadium situation.

Somewhere the spirit of his father is looking at Mark and laughing. And on the more earthly plane, Stan Kroenke is too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You won't see me calling Bernie a talentless hack. Bernie is extremely good at his job. One of the best local columnists in the country even if he gets a bit cranky sometimes. Sadly, he recently called it quits from the Post-Dispatch and moved to radio full-time (though he still writes for the radio station's website).

Bryan Burwell was also tremendous, but sadly he passed last year.

Derrick Goold and Jeremy Rutherford are tremendous journalists, working the Cardinals and Blues beats respectively. We also just got a couple of new columnists who seem pretty good, but I don't know much about them yet.

(By the way, Shane shouldn't even be mentioned in the same category. I don't mean to knock him, but he's essentially a blogger who established a big enough following—mostly because of the tone of his writing—that he got gigs writing for radio stations.)

Bernie has the Pro Football Hall of Fame vote (and does a great job with it). I believe Derrick Goold votes for the Baseball Hall of Fame, but I'm not sure.

Oh, we've also got "The Commish" Rick Hummel still writing a few pieces every so often. He's legit, too.

I know that's more than you wanted to know, but you asked. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't have to call Bernie a talentless hack; I'm more than happy to do it for you.

I'll give him this. He is a master at that special blend of petulance and entitlement that seems to characterize much of the St. Louis response, so maybe he's perfectly adapted to his environment.

I'll check into the others you mention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgot to mention it, but a couple of the Rams' preseason games have been on our local tv stations in LA. The first two actually.

EDIT: I should also add that we always get Charger games and Raider games too, but having more than one Rams game (their first was against the Raiders, like I said, we always get) is very unusual.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgot to mention it, but a couple of the Rams' preseason games have been on our local tv stations in LA. The first two actually.

EDIT: I should also add that we always get Charger games and Raider games too, but having more than one Rams game (their first was against the Raiders, like I said, we always get) is very unusual.

Wasn't one of those Rams games their national-TV game vs. the Titans?

Yeah, so the question is, have you had the Rams broadcasts with Andrew Siciliano, Marshall Faulk, and Torry Holt? Or did you have the Raiders broadcast and the national broadcast (which is all anybody had that night)?

I doubt you had the Rams broadcast, but I'd also probably believe you if you told me you did. I'd think that'd have caused a hubbub by now, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder if anything has progressed since then. Also curious what the realistic timing on that would be.

$50 million is relatively small peanuts in this billion dollar (nearly $2 billion in LA) stadium game. Seems like the length of time and certainty that it can actually be done would be the bigger concerns than the money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder if anything has progressed since then. Also curious what the realistic timing on that would be.

$50 million is relatively small peanuts in this billion dollar (nearly $2 billion in LA) stadium game. Seems like the length of time and certainty that it can actually be done would be the bigger concerns than the money.

True, if that's really all it takes I don't think it'll significantly delay the project. Of course, there's always the danger that they find more problems as they're cleaning the soil, but we don't have any particular reason to believe that's the case here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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