NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

[IceCap]

(Before Ice posts it again, I realize the Rams were really, really good for a few years before reverting back to laughing stock.)

No need to get snippy

I bring it up because it's relevant. You keep talking about how the St. Louis fanbase has been saddled with this historically unique set of bad circumstances. That St. Louis' less then stellar track record as a NFL market is the result of these circumstances and not the fanbase's supposed lack of interest in NFL football.

It just doesn't line up to reality. Was the Greatest Show on Turf run an aberration in the entirety of the Rams' stay in St. Louis? Yes. Does that mean it never happened and we don't have to acknowledge it? Not at all. This fanbase got to experience a Super Bowl Championship and two NFC Championships. That HAS to factor into any analysis of the product St. Louis' fanbase has been fed during the team's tenure in the city. In my opinion? St. Louis' experience with the Rams doesn't come anywhere near being uniquely bad.

But I think the point I've been trying to get across is that I don't think there are very many amazing (insert sport here) markets in general. There may be a handful. But even those probably had to grow into it over time under the right circumstances.

That's true, but it doesn't vindicate St. Louis. No one is asking St. Louis to rise to the level of Buffalo, Cleveland, or Pittsburgh. Simply rising to the level of Miami or Jacksonville would suffice. They can't even do that. So no, St. Louis isn't an amazing NFL market. That's not the problem. The problem is that it isn't even an ok one.

[oldschoolvikings]

(Before Ice posts it again, I realize the Rams were really, really good for a few years before reverting back to laughing stock.)

No need to get snippy

I bring it up because it's relevant. You keep talking about how the St. Louis fanbase has been saddled with this historically unique set of bad circumstances. That St. Louis' less then stellar track record as a NFL market is the result of these circumstances and not the fanbase's supposed lack of interest in NFL football.

It just doesn't line up to reality. Was the Greatest Show on Turf run an aberration in the entirety of the Rams' stay in St. Louis? Yes. Does that mean it never happened and we don't have to acknowledge it? Not at all. This fanbase got to experience a Super Bowl Championship and two NFC Championships. That HAS to factor into any analysis of the product St. Louis' fanbase has been fed during the team's tenure in the city. In my opinion? St. Louis' experience with the Rams doesn't come anywhere near being uniquely bad.

Arizona

Detroit

Minnesota

Philadelphia

Carolina

Atlanta

Buffalo

Cleveland

Cincinnati

Houston

Jacksonville

Tennessee

San Diego

All the above teams have never won a Super Bowl. The Rams have... in this century. You'll notice my Vikings are on this list. If the fans in St. Louis aren't that impressed with their Super Bowl win, believe me, I'd be more than glad to have it.

[Sport]

A St. Louis fan once lectured me on here because there weren't enough fans at an early April 2012 Cardinals-Reds game in Cincinnati. His world champions deserved more respect than that.

I know not all Cardinals fans are also Rams fans or vice versa, but still the Rams can move to LA tomorrow.

[STL FANATIC]

The Reds have an awesome fan base, and it's about damn time your ownership stops messing around with friendships in the front office and builds a winner for you. I wouldn't pay to see that crap either.

To the other point, and it's clear many of you disagree, I just don't think a handful a good seasons—no matter how good—can be expected to erase the brutal nature in which the franchise has been run and performed in all of the other years.

But we disagree, and that's ok.

[The_Admiral]

To the other point, and it's clear many of you disagree, I just don't think a handful a good seasons—no matter how good—can be expected to erase the brutal nature in which the franchise has been run and performed in all of the other years.

I agree. ~50 years of crap, a terrible stadium, and a crowded mid-sized market add up to a portable franchise. Like Mac said, all that more or less describes Buffalo, too, it's just that the owner had some foresight and there's a filthy-rich fracking baron who's trying to atone for making people's tap water catch fire. I can't expect well-meaning fans to Whoville their way into the team staying in spite of all the forces working against it. As we can see with Quebec City getting shut out of the NHL again because of reasons, we're all just at the whims of cartels of billionaires (or, in the NFL, billionaires and a 501[c]3 that sells stationery made of magic beans).

[colortv]

Rams, Chargers marriage for Inglewood site may not work

But such a forced marriage may not be easy, and the reasoning goes deeper than general concerns about the Chargers being a Kroenke “tenant” in Inglewood.

In 2013, Spanos approached Kroenke about pairing up on the Inglewood/Hollywood Park site, according to league sources speaking on the condition of anonymity. It’s the same general area the Oakland Raiders and even the NFL itself had previously considered as a stadium site.

Initially, Kroenke was not aware the 60-acre tract owned by Wal-Mart was available, according to sources. In any event, Spanos didn’t hear back from Kroenke for weeks. Spanos later learned that

Kroenke had excluded Spanos and purchased the land himself.

With that in mind, it’s difficult to imagine Spanos wishing to now join forces with Kroenke in Inglewood.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/football/professional/rams-chargers-marriage-for-inglewood-site-may-not-work/article_4b000071-4bd7-54b4-9f32-be4223d3d057.html

Well, looks like it's Kroenke or Spanos with Davis potentially joining whoever wins.

[colortv]

Gray: Momentum Builds To Keep Rams in St. Louis

And as things have begun to crystallize and the murky waters have started to clear, it has become increasingly evident that St. Louis will be strongly positioned to keep the Rams if the Task Force can successfully finalize their riverfront stadium proposal -- and I continue to be reassured that the hurdles remaining to secure the project are very likely to be cleared.

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/STLSports/STLRams/tabid/137/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/19091/Gray-Momentum-Builds-To-Keep-Rams-in-St-Louis.aspx

Due to the expectation of continued Task Force progress shared above and the updates to be shared below, I get the definitive sense that things are looking up in regard to the region's long-term NFL aspirations.

For one, I continue to hear that the six man Committee on L.A. Opportunities is leaning heavily towards supporting the Chargers/Raiders Carson collaboration rather than Rams owner Stan Kroenke's Inglewood initiative and that there is strong sentiment that St. Louis should not be stripped of its team if they seal the deal for a new venue.

On an LA investor possibly buying a stake in the Raiders:

"What we know is Mark Davis has had discussions with an LA businessman...who is likely in the...real estate development arena. And Mark Davis by selling a portion of the Raiders to this person...would help assure and olay any fears among NFL owners about moving the Raiders to Los Angeles and that the move would be done with the best chance of success. Which would then help the Carson project...so you've got a better chance of a Raiders/Chargers pairing in Carson rather than the Rams and probably the Chargers in Inglewood, which some of the owners may force that to happen...if they prefer (Stan Kroenke). I've gotten that verfied from four different people."

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/STLSports/STLRams/tabid/137/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/19092/Jason-Cole-LA-Committee-Has-Very-Strong-Support-of-St-Louis.aspx

^This link as quotes from a Jason Cole interview which I think is very informative...he leans towards Spanos and the Chargers making more sense moving but still thinks the Rams staying in St Louis is a 55% proposition.

[bosrs1]

Rams, Chargers marriage for Inglewood site may not work

But such a forced marriage may not be easy, and the reasoning goes deeper than general concerns about the Chargers being a Kroenke “tenant” in Inglewood.

In 2013, Spanos approached Kroenke about pairing up on the Inglewood/Hollywood Park site, according to league sources speaking on the condition of anonymity. It’s the same general area the Oakland Raiders and even the NFL itself had previously considered as a stadium site.

Initially, Kroenke was not aware the 60-acre tract owned by Wal-Mart was available, according to sources. In any event, Spanos didn’t hear back from Kroenke for weeks. Spanos later learned that

Kroenke had excluded Spanos and purchased the land himself.

With that in mind, it’s difficult to imagine Spanos wishing to now join forces with Kroenke in Inglewood.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/football/professional/rams-chargers-marriage-for-inglewood-site-may-not-work/article_4b000071-4bd7-54b4-9f32-be4223d3d057.html

Well, looks like it's Kroenke or Spanos with Davis potentially joining whoever wins.

As of right now neither will win. Reportedly both Spanos and Kroenke have enough votes to :censored: block the other project. They'll have to come to some kind of arrangement before either project will move forward. And in a situation like that... it'll be David on the outs seeing as no one in the NFL establishment really gives a crap about the Raiders.

[Gothamite]

I wouldn't count on any lingering resentment keeping Spanos from joining Kroenke in Inglewood - money has a way of smoothing over plenty of hurt feelings.

[IceCap]

Not to mention the money saved on signage!

[JayMac]

The Chargers organization are being whiny b**ches. They have been crying for years. The Raiders play in a dump and St. Louis is a below par city in terms of support. It should be the Rams and Raiders. But this thing will be drawn out and it will probably include the Chargers moving north and the Raiders being left in the cold.

[Gothamite]

San Diego is taking its case to the owners:

SAN DIEGO — Mayor Kevin Faulconer made the case for keeping the Chargers in San Diego directly to three NFL owners and Commissioner Roger Goodell this week during a whirlwind trip covering much of the East Coast.

The face-to-face, private conversations came just a few days before NFL owners are scheduled to meet Tuesday and Wednesday in New York City to discuss guidelines for potential franchise relocations to Los Angeles and the possible timing of such moves.

Representatives from the three cities that might lose their franchises to Los Angeles — San Diego, St. Louis and Oakland — had hoped to make presentations on their local stadium efforts to the NFL’s 32 owners this week in New York, but league officials recently decided against that approach.

Instead, Faulconer traveled to meet three of the six owners on a special committee focused on whether the Chargers, Rams, Raiders — or some combination of those franchises — will move to Los Angeles.

The mayor traveled to New York to meet John Mara of the Giants, to Massachusetts to meet Robert Kraft of the Patriots, and to Charlotte to meet Jerry Richardson of the Panthers.

Faulconer said with various factions of owners lobbying for different scenarios in Los Angeles, it was crucial for some pivotal owners to hear his case directly instead of from others.

“I wanted to make sure our efforts here are clearly communicated,” said Faulconer, who scrambled to make the visits amid a lobbying trip to Washington, D.C. that included 150 public officials and business leaders from San Diego. “It’s always beneficial when you can meet face to face — I’m a big believer in that.”

He was joined on the visits, which also included meeting with Goodell at NFL headquarters in New York, by Chris Melvin, the city’s lead stadium negotiator.

County Supervisor Ron Roberts joined Faulconer and Melvin, a New York City attorney whose negotiated several NFL stadium deals, in the meetings with Mara and Kraft.

“You can’t let them describe what you are doing, you’ve got to do it,” Roberts said Saturday. “You can’t let them define you.”

Faulconer and Roberts said the owners they met with didn’t say which way they were leaning on the Los Angeles situation or give any indication how they expected things to be resolved.

Faulconer said Saturday that he’s also requested private meetings with the other three members of the relocation committee — Art Rooney II of the Pittsburgh Steelers, Bob McNair of the Houston Texans and Clark Hunt of the Kansas City Chiefs.

“Any time we can be in front of the owners that are going to help make this decision, it is positive for us in San Diego,” he said. “It’s a chance to share all of the facts and information. We really focused on our ability to move forward in 2016 and my belief that we have a real opportunity to solve this issue.”

The mayor’s confidence stems from a joint county-city plan to build a $1.1 billion stadium on the site of aging Qualcomm Stadium.

The plan, which would need approval from city voters at the polls, requires city and county taxpayers to pay $350 million of the stadium construction costs — or 32 percent.

The Chargers, the NFL and revenue from personal seat licenses would cover the remaining $750 million — or 68 percent. The Chargers would also be responsible for all construction cost overruns, annual operating expenses of the stadium and future capital improvements.

An environmental impact report for the proposed stadium is nearly complete, making possible a public vote during the June 2016 primary if the Chargers agree to resume negotiations on the financing plan, Faulconer said.

“I think all of the owners were appreciative of learning more information,” said Faulconer, adding that he stressed how strong local support is for the Chargers. “I was very clear that I’m fighting for San Diego and we’re going to keep it up.”

The meeting with Goodell, which follows a phone conversation between the two men last spring, was more technical, Faulconer said.

“It was more of a nuts and bolts conversation about the work we’re doing on the financing and the EIR and timing issues,” he said. “There’s no substitute for sharing information directly with folks, and this was an opportunity to do that.”

Faulconer also focused in all of the meetings on the strength of San Diego as a longtime NFL market, stressing the proximity of densely populated Tijuana.

League sources said feedback after the meetings indicated the mayor didn’t tell Goodell or the three owners much they didn’t already know.

No votes on Los Angeles are expected this week, with a final decision likely coming closer to the Super Bowl in early February. Officials have said it’s also possible the league could delay any decision on Los Angeles a year, giving St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland more time to pursue local stadium efforts.

The article also has this photo of the proposed Mission Valley stadium model. Hadn't seen this before.

Guess I haven't been paying attention; this is apparently the newest design with the latticework.

[STL FANATIC]

Here's an interesting read with quotes from mostly Kevin Demoff or Stan Kroenke over the past handful a years.

Don't even bother reading the spin from Shane Grey if you're not interested—and I know many of you aren't. That's fine. Just read the quotes. The ones from 2011, 2012, 2013...eh. Things change.

But man. Some of these are from 12 months ago. Craziness.

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/STLSports/STLRams/tabid/137/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/19119/Dear-NFL-Owners-The-Real-on-the-Rams-and-Relocation.aspx

[DustDevil61]

It's fairly old news, but indications suggest that Kroenke is still wiling to share the Inglewood stadium with another team, though it's not specified if said 2nd team would be a partner or a tenant. Also, it doesn't look like any vote for an LA relocation is going to happen in at the October meetings but is likely to happen in January.

More recently, according to the LA Times' Sam Farmer, Colts' owner Jim Irsay says that there's a "high likelihood" of a team playing in LA next season:

https://twitter.com/LATimesfarmer/status/651457626723721218

[Mac the Knife]

Jerry Richardson being on the Relocation Committee is like Josef Mengele being on the American Doctors' Association.

Not five years ago, Richardson was saying he was considering a move to Los Angeles if he didn't get a new stadium in Charlotte. The powers that be told him they'd provide some financial help to update the stadium he has, but that if he wanted a new one he'd best get the moving vans ready. That was the end of Richardson's bloviating.

[The_Admiral]

Even among NFL owners, Jerry Richardson is a particularly odious man. It's inexcusable that a guy who played in the league would have so much contempt for the people who play in it now. But aside from all that, a relative small fry in Charlotte has no business being on the relocation committee. It's like Peter Karmanos wielding significant power in the NHL because he's hung around a long time.

[DustDevil61]

Jerry Richardson being on the Relocation Committee is like Josef Mengele being on the American Doctors' Association.

Not five years ago, Richardson was saying he was considering a move to Los Angeles if he didn't get a new stadium in Charlotte. The powers that be told him they'd provide some financial help to update the stadium he has, but that if he wanted a new one he'd best get the moving vans ready. That was the end of Richardson's bloviating.

Even among NFL owners, Jerry Richardson is a particularly odious man. It's inexcusable that a guy who played in the league would have so much contempt for the people who play in it now. But aside from all that, a relative small fry in Charlotte has no business being on the relocation committee. It's like Peter Karmanos wielding significant power in the NHL because he's hung around a long time.

Coming from a Panthers fan, I couldn't disagree more with Richardson RE: The Rams and Los Angeles. For the reasons above, he's a hypocrite. And if these rumors on whose side is who true too, Jerry Jones may end up looking less scummy as far as the other 29 owners are concerned just as Stan Kroenke appears to be the least scummy of those involved with St. Louis.

[DaytonBlue]

This doesn't change much IMHO but maybe is a little nudge in STL's favor (whether for the Rams or another team, hypothetically)

Proposed riverfront stadium gets a name: National Car Rental Field

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/proposed-riverfront-stadium-gets-a-name-national-car-rental-field/article_2320de7e-3dbe-54e7-9daf-33796140dd4e.html

[STL FANATIC]

The St. Louis stadium has a (tentative, of course) naming rights agreement: National Car Rental Field.

I've suggested before that the Taylor Family of Enterprise seemed primed to be more involved with sports ventures than they have been in the past, and this make back that up. National is a subsidiary of Enterprise.

Enterprise would have sounded oh so much better, though. Going to have to think of a nickname for this one if it comes to pass.

The deal is for $158 million over 20 years, which apparently would rank in the top 10 in NFL stadium naming rights deals.

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news/2015/10/06/proposed-nfl-stadium-gets-a-name-and-sponsor.html

[LMU]

This doesn't change much IMHO but maybe is a little nudge in STL's favor (whether for the Rams or another team, hypothetically)

Proposed riverfront stadium gets a name: National Car Rental Field

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/proposed-riverfront-stadium-gets-a-name-national-car-rental-field/article_2320de7e-3dbe-54e7-9daf-33796140dd4e.html

Ask Farmers Insurance how guaranteed this is to work out.