St. Louis Rams Owner Ready To Move To LA

Sterlinghawk

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2014
Messages
300
Reaction score
0
Location
Sterling, AK.
Historically, Missouri has been one of the hardest states for the Hawks to win in I think...strange. KC owned us in the afc days and the St Louis games are Tough no matter the records. I would love to see the rams back in L.A.

Would love to see the Cardinals back in St Louis so maybe im just a sentimental traditionalist.

Terry Metcalf, Jim Hart. Conrad Dobler
 

RedAlice

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 24, 2012
Messages
5,290
Reaction score
975
Location
Seattle Area
It's getting exciting now. Hopefully rhe Rams are out of that horrible place soon. But, either way they will have a nice new stadium - either in LA or in St Louis.

St Louis proposal is supposed to be presented to the Govenor today and there should be something public about it soon.

Hopefully Kroenke hates it and off they go to LA.

Spanos is said to have enough votes to block it, and it's also rumored he wants the Chargers to share the stadium.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,612
RedAlice":3q97asjr said:
It's getting exciting now. Hopefully rhe Rams are out of that horrible place soon. But, either way they will have a nice new stadium - either in LA or in St Louis.

St Louis proposal is supposed to be presented to the Govenor today and there should be something public about it soon.

Hopefully Kroenke hates it and off they go to LA.

Spanos is said to have enough votes to block it, and it's also rumored he wants the Chargers to share the stadium.

Nothing warms the heart more than watching billionaires fight and jockey for tax payer funded stadiums.
 

RedAlice

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 24, 2012
Messages
5,290
Reaction score
975
Location
Seattle Area
The Inglewood stadium plan that was reported on Sunday is not tax payer funded.

The St. Louis one probably will be some - the funding hasn't been stated and I think is one of their problems.
 

dcbshowstopper

New member
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
The St. Louis proposal isn't supposed to be funded by taxpayer money either. It was one of Gov. Nixon's requirements when he made his appointments for the stadium task force.
 

jkitsune

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
3,339
Reaction score
0
Is this still rumored to push us back to the AFC West?
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,656
Reaction score
1,675
Location
Roy Wa.
-The Glove-":1p3s9gn4 said:
jkitsune":1p3s9gn4 said:
Is this still rumored to push us back to the AFC West?
Why would it?

Because the legacy NFC West can't and have not done much of anything since we set up shop, remember we have no history and no rivalry here.
 

Maulbert

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
8,604
Reaction score
1,432
Location
In the basement of Reynholm Industries
jkitsune":13cwiauj said:
Is this still rumored to push us back to the AFC West?

That was only possible if the Chargers and Raiders were the 2 teams to move to LA, since they don't want both LA teams in the same conference. If the Rams move, there's no reason to move a team over from the AFC. If the Rams move to LA, no way both the Chargers and Raiders move to LA.
 

RedAlice

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 24, 2012
Messages
5,290
Reaction score
975
Location
Seattle Area
dcbshowstopper":k52lfxve said:
The St. Louis proposal isn't supposed to be funded by taxpayer money either. It was one of Gov. Nixon's requirements when he made his appointments for the stadium task force.

Still waiting to hear how it will be funded. Kroenke isn't talking to them. Presser is at noon St. Louis time today. Hopefully it is not just a pretty drawing but also real facts including funding. Other rumor is they are pivoting away from calling it a Rams stadium and calling it an NFL and MLS stadium.

Quote from the St. Louis governor Slay:

Slay said Kroenke won’t meet with St. Louis leaders.

“We’ve all tried: the governor, the CVC, my office, we`ve all tried. Frankly, we`ve gotten nowhere there,” Slay said. “We have to be realistic. We`ve seen an ownership of the Rams that has not shown any indication that he has an interest in staying in St. Louis, which is somewhat telling…maybe we`re reading the tea leaves wrong. I don`t believe so.”

http://fox2now.com/2015/01/06/is-kroenk ... -st-louis/
 

MizzouHawkGal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
13,477
Reaction score
846
Location
Kansas City, MO
Spanos is said to have enough votes to block it, and it's also rumored he wants the Chargers to share the stadium.
And that's your fly in the ointment right there and St. Louis's only chance to keep them, personally I prefer they just go back to Los Angeles and be in the same time zone as the rest of the division like they should be.
 

Largent80

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
36,653
Reaction score
5
Location
The Tex-ASS
Living down here near Inglewood and actually devastated by the loss of one of my favorite tracks in the world in Hollywood Park, I think this area has the most potential and there are freeways all around there and also would have plenty of parking, if they combine the Forums parking lot with all the land around there it is a nice spot.

The area around it is a dump however, similar to the colessium.
 

SeatownJay

Active member
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
10,745
Reaction score
6
Location
Hagerstown, MD
Of course, Kroenke can still move the Rams even on the off chance he doesn't get 24 votes.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... need-them/

But even if Kroenke doesn’t get to 24 votes, it may not matter. According to the source, Kroenke has informed the mayor of Inglewood on multiple occasions that he’ll move the team with or without the approval of the other clubs.

That would be an aggressive, risky move. If Kroenke moves without approval, he’d be entitled to no financial assistance from the league, and his stadium would be blocked from hosting Super Bowls. He also would avoid paying the relocation fee.
 

RedAlice

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 24, 2012
Messages
5,290
Reaction score
975
Location
Seattle Area
They have the pretty pictures. They don't have a clear path to funding it - very iffy on all of those answers.

Peacock said no "additional" taxes, but also said they need public funding and gave no clear answer on how that would happen. They are also dependent on the team owner contributing, however, it's a publicly owned stadium. Not sure how that works either since seems that Kroenke has plans to put his money into a stadium that he actually owns.

Guess we wait and see now.
 

Sherman4Prez

New member
Joined
May 24, 2014
Messages
136
Reaction score
0
Just stating the obvious here. Facts can be confused with speculation with these matters. Many want to say the Rams are gone. Just gotta check the facts to see if that's true.

Stan is a Missourians and was a big proponent in getting the Rams to STL.

There are two California teams with stadium delimas and no proposals, unlike STL.

Kroneke not on the record whatsoever about moving the Rams. Actually, it's quite the opposite.

You do the speculating
 

SeatownJay

Active member
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
10,745
Reaction score
6
Location
Hagerstown, MD
RedAlice":3gza46t6 said:
They have the pretty pictures. They don't have a clear path to funding it - very iffy on all of those answers.

Peacock said no "additional" taxes, but also said they need public funding and gave no clear answer on how that would happen. They are also dependent on the team owner contributing, however, it's a publicly owned stadium. Not sure how that works either since seems that Kroenke has plans to put his money into a stadium that he actually owns.

Guess we wait and see now.
One article I read stated that at least some of the public funding would come from extending the existing bonds currently being used to pay for the EJ Dome.
 

RedAlice

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 24, 2012
Messages
5,290
Reaction score
975
Location
Seattle Area
SeatownJay":35uik1cg said:
RedAlice":35uik1cg said:
They have the pretty pictures. They don't have a clear path to funding it - very iffy on all of those answers.

Peacock said no "additional" taxes, but also said they need public funding and gave no clear answer on how that would happen. They are also dependent on the team owner contributing, however, it's a publicly owned stadium. Not sure how that works either since seems that Kroenke has plans to put his money into a stadium that he actually owns.

Guess we wait and see now.
One article I read stated that at least some of the public funding would come from extending the existing bonds currently being used to pay for the EJ Dome.


Yes, that is what they are calling no "additional" taxes since they already exist.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,612
Sherman4Prez":1joi9mh3 said:
Kroneke not on the record whatsoever about moving the Rams. Actually, it's quite the opposite.

Well he didn't form a partnership with Stockbridge Capital Group with plans to purchase more land around his existing 60 acres in LA just for poops and giggles.

IMO this recent news is more of a strong arm tactic to get a new taxpayer funded (or at least partial) stadium in St. Louis, but if that falls through I have no doubt Kroenke would move the team.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,656
Reaction score
1,675
Location
Roy Wa.
Sounds like the Sonics all over again, Team asks for a viable venue and upgrades, Government stalls of offers proposals that are all on the team but want tax revenues from it's existence. Both are at impasses, Team goes to look at alternative options. Unlike the Sonics the Rams come up with one, and they don't have an existing lease any longer to hold them hostage. Now the Government is scrambling trying to save face and offer a midnight proposal again. Team is saying we have given you years to do this, and now are looking elsewhere, we will browse thru it but don't hold your breath.
 
Top