|
Post by aztecbolt on May 21, 2015 11:49:41 GMT -8
The relocation fee is not something that needs to be paid up front but can be paid over the years. I doubt the NFL would waive it. It's never happened before and it's split between the other owners. That's incentive for them to raise the relocation fee and the other owners aren't going to let another team just waltz into a market like LA for free. Goodell has been pushing the international/London thing for a while now. I think that's his ultimate dream. Two new franchises in London and LA would bring in so much more money for the league. Probably $2-3B buy in for each team. That's why I will never buy the idea of the NFL approving the Chargers sharing a stadium with the Rams and Kroenke would never go for it anyway. What value does the Chargers bring to moving to LA? A $250M reloacation fee? Peanuts. This is all about shaking down SD/Oak/STL for new stadiums. I think Kroenke is the only one who has the money, the power and the backing of the NFL to make the move. Wait, so you don't think this is about bringing football back to the 2nd largest US market? I agree it certainly is helping pressure each city. But it would seem like a sound business decision by the NFL as a whole to have 1 if not 2 LA teams to ensure that market is being maximized. On top of that if the NFL has looked at the Lakers/Clippers situation and realize those 2 twos carry well in the OC and SD...well to me it looks like they are taking a page out of the NBA's play book. I think this is about both. It's obvious the NFL is pushing the LA issue to put pressure on SD/Oak/STL and the NFL also wants to return a team to LA. The NFL is killing two birds with one stone. The "2 teams in So Cal" is a bunch of BS IMO and has been put out there just to add even more pressure to the cities that might lose a team. There have been 3 teams in So Cal before so what's so different now? In fact, you can argue against having two teams in LA because LA lost the Rams and Raiders already.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on May 21, 2015 11:52:02 GMT -8
Money yes. Power and backing of the NFL... that is very much in question. There is at least a split in the evidence on this, if not a plurality suggesting that the Raiders/Chargers deal has more "power and backing" among fellow owners. If St Louis puts a very team-friendly deal on the table, it's potentially very bad business for the NFL to allow the Rams to walk away from that... it sets a potentially VERY bad precedent to other mid-market cities... "don't bother trying to build a new stadium, your team can just leave for a better deal / bigger market elsewhere... just like the Rams." No, I think the NFL has an interest in forcing a deal for the Rams to stay in STL as long as it is a very team-friendly deal. Looking again at what will help the LA market succeed for the NFL, I think Kroenke is the perfect owner for LA, deep pockets, a maverick with a desire to get things done. I think the Spanos family is too passive for such a big market and Davis is just an knucklehead who will sell the team at some point anyway after running it into the ground. I think honestly the NFL would love Kroenke to have the market but they also can’t have him making the NFL look bad, so my guess is some plan is in place to facilitate both. I wonder if that NFL master plan could be for Kroenke to sell the Rams (proving that if a city bend over backwards they could keep their team) -- and for Kroenke to buy the Raiders or Chargers (I would think the Chargers are more in line with what he would like to take to LA). Buying either team and moving them to LA would be punishing a city like SD or Oakland for not giving away the farm sooner ... a true cautionary tale for other cities thinking of playing hardball with the NFL.
|
|
|
Post by ignoranus on May 21, 2015 11:52:50 GMT -8
LA also lost the Chargers once.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on May 21, 2015 12:23:43 GMT -8
Buying either team and moving them to LA would be punishing a city like SD or Oakland for not giving away the farm sooner ... a true cautionary tale for other cities thinking of playing hardball with the NFL.Now you're thinking like a league executive!
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on May 21, 2015 12:28:35 GMT -8
LA also lost the Chargers once. Yep. There's no way the NFL is going to put two teams in LA right away because they don't know how the market will accept one team, let alone two. And the Rams are the obvious choice because of Kroenke's money, he has the most attractive site, and the fact that the Rams are the team that LA wants the most.
|
|
|
Post by zurac315 on May 21, 2015 13:56:55 GMT -8
An article in the Boston Globe today said that the Chargers or Raiders will be playing in LA by 2016.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on May 21, 2015 17:59:27 GMT -8
An article in the Boston Globe today said that the Chargers or Raiders will be playing in LA by 2016. Was the writer named Shallow Throat?
|
|
|
Post by fredgarvinmp on May 21, 2015 20:44:52 GMT -8
Looking again at what will help the LA market succeed for the NFL, I think Kroenke is the perfect owner for LA, deep pockets, a maverick with a desire to get things done. I think the Spanos family is too passive for such a big market and Davis is just an knucklehead who will sell the team at some point anyway after running it into the ground. I think honestly the NFL would love Kroenke to have the market but they also can’t have him making the NFL look bad, so my guess is some plan is in place to facilitate both. I wonder if that NFL master plan could be for Kroenke to sell the Rams (proving that if a city bend over backwards they could keep their team) -- and for Kroenke to buy the Raiders or Chargers (I would think the Chargers are more in line with what he would like to take to LA).Buying either team and moving them to LA would be punishing a city like SD or Oakland for not giving away the farm sooner ... a true cautionary tale for other cities thinking of playing hardball with the NFL. Certainly not out of the question for some type of team swap, but I just don't see the Spanos family selling as they have made it a family business with John and AG being groomed for a long time to take over. I also don't see Davis selling his family legacy also until he runs it into the ground and is forced to. My belief is that for the NFL to thrive in LA it has to be Kranky as owner and the Rams OR an expansion team in that city. The Chargers AND Raiders just won't stick long term IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Spud on May 21, 2015 21:02:59 GMT -8
Looking again at what will help the LA market succeed for the NFL, I think Kroenke is the perfect owner for LA, deep pockets, a maverick with a desire to get things done. I think the Spanos family is too passive for such a big market and Davis is just an knucklehead who will sell the team at some point anyway after running it into the ground. I think honestly the NFL would love Kroenke to have the market but they also can’t have him making the NFL look bad, so my guess is some plan is in place to facilitate both. Buying either team and moving them to LA would be punishing a city like SD or Oakland for not giving away the farm sooner ... a true cautionary tale for other cities thinking of playing hardball with the NFL. How exactly does the City of San Diego get punished if the Chargers leave?
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on May 22, 2015 5:40:26 GMT -8
Listen to feed roggin. The only dude doing real research. Rams are first in inglewood. Stan has already spent 300 mil on inglewood.
Carson is dead.
I'm not saying the chargers aren't going. It just won't be in Carson.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on May 22, 2015 6:05:34 GMT -8
Listen to feed roggin. The only dude doing real research. Rams are first in inglewood. Stan has already spent 300 mil on inglewood. Carson is dead. I'm not saying the chargers aren't going. It just won't be in Carson. Not saying that this can't be how it plays out... but if the NFL decides it's in their best interests to keep the Rams in St Louis... then it doesn't matter how much money Kroenke has or how much he already has invested in Inglewood. And indicators are pointing to the Carson deal having greater support among the other owners. That doesn't mean Carson will happen, just that Kroenke likely has more of an uphill political battle ahead than might have been expected a month+ ago.
|
|
|
Post by ab on May 22, 2015 7:34:52 GMT -8
Looking again at what will help the LA market succeed for the NFL, I think Kroenke is the perfect owner for LA, deep pockets, a maverick with a desire to get things done. I think the Spanos family is too passive for such a big market and Davis is just an knucklehead who will sell the team at some point anyway after running it into the ground. I think honestly the NFL would love Kroenke to have the market but they also can’t have him making the NFL look bad, so my guess is some plan is in place to facilitate both. I wonder if that NFL master plan could be for Kroenke to sell the Rams (proving that if a city bend over backwards they could keep their team) -- and for Kroenke to buy the Raiders or Chargers (I would think the Chargers are more in line with what he would like to take to LA). Buying either team and moving them to LA would be punishing a city like SD or Oakland for not giving away the farm sooner ... a true cautionary tale for other cities thinking of playing hardball with the NFL. I posted that days ago.....Kroenke sells the Rams, they stay, he buys the Raydas and moves them to Inglewood. Chargers stay in San Diego. Carson - nobody cares.
|
|
|
Post by ab on May 22, 2015 7:38:10 GMT -8
I wonder if that NFL master plan could be for Kroenke to sell the Rams (proving that if a city bend over backwards they could keep their team) -- and for Kroenke to buy the Raiders or Chargers (I would think the Chargers are more in line with what he would like to take to LA).Buying either team and moving them to LA would be punishing a city like SD or Oakland for not giving away the farm sooner ... a true cautionary tale for other cities thinking of playing hardball with the NFL. Certainly not out of the question for some type of team swap, but I just don't see the Spanos family selling as they have made it a family business with John and AG being groomed for a long time to take over. I also don't see Davis selling his family legacy also until he runs it into the ground and is forced to. My belief is that for the NFL to thrive in LA it has to be Kranky as owner and the Rams OR an expansion team in that city. The Chargers AND Raiders just won't stick long term IMO. They're not going to get an expansion team. The league is at their optimum number of teams at this time. That's unfortunate because if the NFL wants a team in L.A. so damn bad they should have sold them an expansion team instead of talking out of both sides of their asses by stating that they don't want any team to move and the other hand stating that they want 2 teams in L.A.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on May 22, 2015 8:30:04 GMT -8
I wonder if that NFL master plan could be for Kroenke to sell the Rams (proving that if a city bend over backwards they could keep their team) -- and for Kroenke to buy the Raiders or Chargers (I would think the Chargers are more in line with what he would like to take to LA). Buying either team and moving them to LA would be punishing a city like SD or Oakland for not giving away the farm sooner ... a true cautionary tale for other cities thinking of playing hardball with the NFL. I posted that days ago.....Kroenke sells the Rams, they stay, he buys the Raydas and moves them to Inglewood. Chargers stay in San Diego. Carson - nobody cares. Why would he purchase and move the Raiders ... that organization really doesn't fit his personality. The Chargers have more net value and he could make an argument based on the Spanos' claim of 25% of the teams' fanbase comes from the LA market so he isn't really "relocating" the team -- just "moving" within his territory. He could make a case for zero or reduced relocation fee as well as access to the G4 loan for an LA stadium (something I am sure the Chargers are doing behind the scenes anyway). By Kroenke purchasing the Chargers, the Spanoi just end up looking like sellouts as they would not be the owners moving the team that would diffuse a lot of the public relations for both them and the team. The Spanoi could cash out on the potential value of the Chargers in SD so the team would sell for $1.5B. All these moves by both the Spanoi and then Kroenke would get the Chargers in LA in either an Inglewood Stadium or a Carson Stadium (because buying the Chargers would give Kroenke both options and enough money to do either). The Chargers under Kroenke could double in value -- and on top of whatever he sells the Rams for, would be a tidy profit for him. At the same time he would be protecting the entire So Cal market from other teams giving him the time to develop the market as the only LA team and in control of the stadium too.
|
|
|
Post by bnastyaztecs on May 22, 2015 8:36:46 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on May 22, 2015 8:43:34 GMT -8
Listen to feed roggin. The only dude doing real research. Rams are first in inglewood. Stan has already spent 300 mil on inglewood. Carson is dead. I'm not saying the chargers aren't going. It just won't be in Carson. Wow, you've really done a 180 as you were CERTAIN the Chargers were staying in San Diego just last week. I'm not sure you want to be relying on Fred Roggin as he's convinced the Chargers will join with the Rams in Inglewood. www.mighty1090.com/episode/fred-roggin-the-chargers-will-end-up-in-inglewood/
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on May 22, 2015 9:39:39 GMT -8
Certainly not out of the question for some type of team swap, but I just don't see the Spanos family selling as they have made it a family business with John and AG being groomed for a long time to take over. I also don't see Davis selling his family legacy also until he runs it into the ground and is forced to. My belief is that for the NFL to thrive in LA it has to be Kranky as owner and the Rams OR an expansion team in that city. The Chargers AND Raiders just won't stick long term IMO. They're not going to get an expansion team. The league is at their optimum number of teams at this time. That's unfortunate because if the NFL wants a team in L.A. so damn bad they should have sold them an expansion team instead of talking out of both sides of their asses by stating that they don't want any team to move and the other hand stating that they want 2 teams in L.A. The league is talking out of both sides of their mouth because I believe ultimately they want one team in LA and to get new stadiums in the other two teams cities that do not move. I think ugly negotiations happen between the city and the Chargers and break down but a 11th hour deal is done and they stay here. Rams are the ones to move to LA and who really cares about the Raiders? They'll have to move to St. Louis or shack up with the 49ers.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on May 22, 2015 10:06:36 GMT -8
They're not going to get an expansion team. The league is at their optimum number of teams at this time. That's unfortunate because if the NFL wants a team in L.A. so damn bad they should have sold them an expansion team instead of talking out of both sides of their asses by stating that they don't want any team to move and the other hand stating that they want 2 teams in L.A. The league is talking out of both sides of their mouth because I believe ultimately they want one team in LA and to get new stadiums in the other two teams cities that do not move. I think ugly negotiations happen between the city and the Chargers and break down but a 11th hour deal is done and they stay here. Rams are the ones to move to LA and who really cares about the Raiders? They'll have to move to St. Louis or shack up with the 49ers. Certainly possible. In fact, that might be the most likely among several scenarios. But take it a step further... the public vote. Even if not technically required, it appears that all sides are 100% committed to a public vote. Even if it's only a >50% requirement, would it pass... especially considering that due to the NFL's mandated timing it will probably have to be a special election?
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on May 22, 2015 10:33:43 GMT -8
The league is talking out of both sides of their mouth because I believe ultimately they want one team in LA and to get new stadiums in the other two teams cities that do not move. I think ugly negotiations happen between the city and the Chargers and break down but a 11th hour deal is done and they stay here. Rams are the ones to move to LA and who really cares about the Raiders? They'll have to move to St. Louis or shack up with the 49ers. Certainly possible. In fact, that might be the most likely among several scenarios. But take it a step further... the public vote. Even if not technically required, it appears that all sides are 100% committed to a public vote. Even if it's only a >50% requirement, would it pass... especially considering that due to the NFL's mandated timing it will probably have to be a special election? I think no one knows if it would pass a vote or not. So much depends on what kind of deal it is and so much could change between now and then.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on May 22, 2015 10:50:17 GMT -8
Certainly possible. In fact, that might be the most likely among several scenarios. But take it a step further... the public vote. Even if not technically required, it appears that all sides are 100% committed to a public vote. Even if it's only a >50% requirement, would it pass... especially considering that due to the NFL's mandated timing it will probably have to be a special election? I think no one knows if it would pass a vote or not. So much depends on what kind of deal it is and so much could change between now and then. Totally agree. My cynical bias is well known, however...
|
|