Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Recommended Posts

"quality product"

:lmao:

:lmao:

:lmao:

Virtually anything compared to STL Rams football can be considered a "quality product". Truth is, the Chargers have not won a Conference title since 1994.

They've had some decent runs, but this is far from a quality franchise. It may be another 21 years until they win another AFC Title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spanos is saying that if the Rams or Oak moves to L.A. they will cannibalize 25% of his market.

He's full of it. His solution is to abandon San Diego for a city which will have another team, how much of "his" market is he cannibalizing by doing that? Here's an idea Dean - how about putting a quality product on the field? Maybe that would have more to do with maintaining support than keeping another team from moving to L.A. That's one of the more truly pathetic things about his tenure as owner of the Chargers. There hasn't been another NFL team within over 350 miles of Los Angeles in 20 years and he hasn't managed to make the Chargers the top team in the area. Now he's going to whine about "his" market? #### him.

If the Chargers move and the Raiders don't- it will be funny to see the sea of silver and black in the stands when the Chargers play the Raiders at home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spanos is saying that if the Rams or Oak moves to L.A. they will cannibalize 25% of his market.

He's full of it. His solution is to abandon San Diego for a city which will have another team, how much of "his" market is he cannibalizing by doing that? Here's an idea Dean - how about putting a quality product on the field? Maybe that would have more to do with maintaining support than keeping another team from moving to L.A. That's one of the more truly pathetic things about his tenure as owner of the Chargers. There hasn't been another NFL team within over 350 miles of Los Angeles in 20 years and he hasn't managed to make the Chargers the top team in the area. Now he's going to whine about "his" market? #### him.

If the Chargers move and the Raiders don't- it will be funny to see the sea of silver and black in the stands when the Chargers play the Raiders at home.

That's how it has been when the Raiders play the Chargers in San Diego, so it won't be much of a change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the distance issue, oakland current situation is a good comparison. it's practically walkable form the airport to the stadium. same for inglewood and LAX. and since the forum and hollywood park is already in that area, i don't see how a new football stadium adds much to the lights and such. maybe a little bit more. non-issue imo. traffic and parking on the other hand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spanos is saying that if the Rams or Oak moves to L.A. they will cannibalize 25% of his market.

He's full of it. His solution is to abandon San Diego for a city which will have another team, how much of "his" market is he cannibalizing by doing that? Here's an idea Dean - how about putting a quality product on the field? Maybe that would have more to do with maintaining support than keeping another team from moving to L.A. That's one of the more truly pathetic things about his tenure as owner of the Chargers. There hasn't been another NFL team within over 350 miles of Los Angeles in 20 years and he hasn't managed to make the Chargers the top team in the area. Now he's going to whine about "his" market? #### him.

If the Chargers move and the Raiders don't- it will be funny to see the sea of silver and black in the stands when the Chargers play the Raiders at home.

That's how it has been when the Raiders play the Chargers in San Diego, so it won't be much of a change.

I think there will be even more Silver and Black. The Raiders have a significant fan base in L.A.- I don't see many people jumping ship to Chargers. Rams will have a better go at the market but I just think that a lot of people are underestimating how much of a uphill battle the Chargers will have to make that market theirs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the distance issue, oakland current situation is a good comparison. it's practically walkable form the airport to the stadium. same for inglewood and LAX. and since the forum and hollywood park is already in that area, i don't see how a new football stadium adds much to the lights and such. maybe a little bit more. non-issue imo. traffic and parking on the other hand...

Is the Forum even used anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the distance issue, oakland current situation is a good comparison. it's practically walkable form the airport to the stadium. same for inglewood and LAX. and since the forum and hollywood park is already in that area, i don't see how a new football stadium adds much to the lights and such. maybe a little bit more. non-issue imo. traffic and parking on the other hand...

Is the Forum even used anymore?

They still book concerts and exhibition sports games as far as I know. U2 was there either end of 2014 or early 2015 so it couldn't have been that long if it's been decommissioned. I haven't heard any news on it and I'd imagine that would be a big deal in the local news if true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the distance issue, oakland current situation is a good comparison. it's practically walkable form the airport to the stadium. same for inglewood and LAX. and since the forum and hollywood park is already in that area, i don't see how a new football stadium adds much to the lights and such. maybe a little bit more. non-issue imo. traffic and parking on the other hand...

Is the Forum even used anymore?

They still book concerts and exhibition sports games as far as I know. U2 was there either end of 2014 or early 2015 so it couldn't have been that long if it's been decommissioned. I haven't heard any news on it and I'd imagine that would be a big deal in the local news if true.

The place was ancient and run down the last Clipper game I went to which has to be around 1998.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see Stan's next move when he loses Inglewood to Carson

Not going to happen.

Stan Kroenke's plan to win the race to Los Angeles

Today, in a report filed by the St. Louis Business Journal, Inglewood Mayor James Butts confirmed that the stadium in Inglewood would be built with or without the St. Louis Rams being granted relocation to Los Angeles.

That means a couple of things.

  • The Inglewood project does not need to wait around for a decision from the NFL or the other NFL owners before they can start construction.
  • By building a better venue than the Carson stadium, and therefore stealing big events away from Carson (World Cup, Olympics, international soccer matches, etc.), Kroenke can rob the Carson stadium project of much of its value.
Inglewood Mayor Butts says that's not true. http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2016/01/05/inglewood-calif-mayor-nfl-stadium-construction-not-guaranteed/

Was going to say, I heard this was shot down too. I think it's a distinct possibility that Kroenke doesn't get awarded L.A. and he moves to London. After going all scorched Earth in STL, don't see how he could stay.

Why would he go to London and not L.A.? Might as well pull an Al Davis.

SD & Oak are already there. IMO, one of those two get awarded L.A. They both tried for a lot longer to get a new stadium with no progress at all so I think the other owners will be sympathetic to that. Plus Spanos is saying that if the Rams or Oak moves to L.A. they will cannibalize 25% of his market. I understand Spanos is well like by all of the owners. Kroenke, and Davis for that matter, not so much. So then Kroenke will lobby to move to London which, pretty obviously, has been his back up plan all along. Oakland stays in Oakland and the NFL "figures something out" so they get a new venue.

I think you are giving owners too much credit here. When it comes down to it, the final decision is made by money. Sure, there are other considerations, but the bottom line is always money. Why else would Oakland and SD ever imagine joining forces? Money. Eventually for these guys it always comes down to money. There might be a few owners that actually care about some of their fellow owners, but I truly believe the vast majority will only care about which situation will eventually help them get more money or increase the worth of their own team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the distance issue, oakland current situation is a good comparison. it's practically walkable form the airport to the stadium. same for inglewood and LAX. and since the forum and hollywood park is already in that area, i don't see how a new football stadium adds much to the lights and such. maybe a little bit more. non-issue imo. traffic and parking on the other hand...

Is the Forum even used anymore?

Extensively. They renovated it a few years ago and it's a fantastic concert venue now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the distance issue, oakland current situation is a good comparison. it's practically walkable form the airport to the stadium. same for inglewood and LAX. and since the forum and hollywood park is already in that area, i don't see how a new football stadium adds much to the lights and such. maybe a little bit more. non-issue imo. traffic and parking on the other hand...

Is the Forum even used anymore?

They still book concerts and exhibition sports games as far as I know. U2 was there either end of 2014 or early 2015 so it couldn't have been that long if it's been decommissioned. I haven't heard any news on it and I'd imagine that would be a big deal in the local news if true.

The place was ancient and run down the last Clipper game I went to which has to be around 1998.

Do you mean the Lakers? If it was a Clipper game, they didn't play at the Forum. They played at the Sports Arena, which is downtown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the distance issue, oakland current situation is a good comparison. it's practically walkable form the airport to the stadium. same for inglewood and LAX. and since the forum and hollywood park is already in that area, i don't see how a new football stadium adds much to the lights and such. maybe a little bit more. non-issue imo. traffic and parking on the other hand...

Is the Forum even used anymore?

They still book concerts and exhibition sports games as far as I know. U2 was there either end of 2014 or early 2015 so it couldn't have been that long if it's been decommissioned. I haven't heard any news on it and I'd imagine that would be a big deal in the local news if true.

The place was ancient and run down the last Clipper game I went to which has to be around 1998.

Would that be the LA sports Arena where the Clippers played their home games? That place is ancient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see Stan's next move when he loses Inglewood to Carson

Not going to happen.

Stan Kroenke's plan to win the race to Los Angeles

Today, in a report filed by the St. Louis Business Journal, Inglewood Mayor James Butts confirmed that the stadium in Inglewood would be built with or without the St. Louis Rams being granted relocation to Los Angeles.

That means a couple of things.

  • The Inglewood project does not need to wait around for a decision from the NFL or the other NFL owners before they can start construction.
  • By building a better venue than the Carson stadium, and therefore stealing big events away from Carson (World Cup, Olympics, international soccer matches, etc.), Kroenke can rob the Carson stadium project of much of its value.
Inglewood Mayor Butts says that's not true. http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2016/01/05/inglewood-calif-mayor-nfl-stadium-construction-not-guaranteed/

Was going to say, I heard this was shot down too. I think it's a distinct possibility that Kroenke doesn't get awarded L.A. and he moves to London. After going all scorched Earth in STL, don't see how he could stay.

Why would he go to London and not L.A.? Might as well pull an Al Davis.

SD & Oak are already there. IMO, one of those two get awarded L.A. They both tried for a lot longer to get a new stadium with no progress at all so I think the other owners will be sympathetic to that. Plus Spanos is saying that if the Rams or Oak moves to L.A. they will cannibalize 25% of his market. I understand Spanos is well like by all of the owners. Kroenke, and Davis for that matter, not so much. So then Kroenke will lobby to move to London which, pretty obviously, has been his back up plan all along. Oakland stays in Oakland and the NFL "figures something out" so they get a new venue.

The L.A. Daily News' writer, who covers the NFL, was on the radio yesterday afternoon, and discussed the situation. He thinks it's going to be the Chargers and Rams in Inglewood, but he said it sounds like it's up in the air and nobody really knows.

One note he made that I found interesting is that Oakland is being pretty idiotic (unless there's something he didn't know about) about the Raiders. Mark Davis isn't even demanding the city do anything. He's asking the Oakland for the land, so that he can get a developer and build his own stadium, and work with the A's to build a stadium. And, he's not even asking that they sell him the land. He's willing to lease it and make payments, and he's willing to do a 66 year lease (seems an odd number, but that's what he said). Oakland wouldn't have to put up any money or really do anything. Just lease him the land and allow the Raiders/A's to make improvements on it. Seems pretty reasonable to me, but what do I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the distance issue, oakland current situation is a good comparison. it's practically walkable form the airport to the stadium. same for inglewood and LAX. and since the forum and hollywood park is already in that area, i don't see how a new football stadium adds much to the lights and such. maybe a little bit more. non-issue imo. traffic and parking on the other hand...

Is the Forum even used anymore?

Extensively. They renovated it a few years ago and it's a fantastic concert venue now.

I've heard the FORUM is a great concert venue. I need to get over there for a show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see Stan's next move when he loses Inglewood to Carson

Not going to happen.

Stan Kroenke's plan to win the race to Los Angeles

Today, in a report filed by the St. Louis Business Journal, Inglewood Mayor James Butts confirmed that the stadium in Inglewood would be built with or without the St. Louis Rams being granted relocation to Los Angeles.

That means a couple of things.

  • The Inglewood project does not need to wait around for a decision from the NFL or the other NFL owners before they can start construction.
  • By building a better venue than the Carson stadium, and therefore stealing big events away from Carson (World Cup, Olympics, international soccer matches, etc.), Kroenke can rob the Carson stadium project of much of its value.
Inglewood Mayor Butts says that's not true. http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2016/01/05/inglewood-calif-mayor-nfl-stadium-construction-not-guaranteed/

Was going to say, I heard this was shot down too. I think it's a distinct possibility that Kroenke doesn't get awarded L.A. and he moves to London. After going all scorched Earth in STL, don't see how he could stay.

Why would he go to London and not L.A.? Might as well pull an Al Davis.

SD & Oak are already there. IMO, one of those two get awarded L.A. They both tried for a lot longer to get a new stadium with no progress at all so I think the other owners will be sympathetic to that. Plus Spanos is saying that if the Rams or Oak moves to L.A. they will cannibalize 25% of his market. I understand Spanos is well like by all of the owners. Kroenke, and Davis for that matter, not so much. So then Kroenke will lobby to move to London which, pretty obviously, has been his back up plan all along. Oakland stays in Oakland and the NFL "figures something out" so they get a new venue.

I think you are giving owners too much credit here. When it comes down to it, the final decision is made by money. Sure, there are other considerations, but the bottom line is always money. Why else would Oakland and SD ever imagine joining forces? Money. Eventually for these guys it always comes down to money. There might be a few owners that actually care about some of their fellow owners, but I truly believe the vast majority will only care about which situation will eventually help them get more money or increase the worth of their own team.

I don't disagree. However if the money is the same, I hear they vote for Spanos to move since he has been waiting so long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see Stan's next move when he loses Inglewood to Carson

Not going to happen.

Stan Kroenke's plan to win the race to Los Angeles

Today, in a report filed by the St. Louis Business Journal, Inglewood Mayor James Butts confirmed that the stadium in Inglewood would be built with or without the St. Louis Rams being granted relocation to Los Angeles.

That means a couple of things.

  • The Inglewood project does not need to wait around for a decision from the NFL or the other NFL owners before they can start construction.
  • By building a better venue than the Carson stadium, and therefore stealing big events away from Carson (World Cup, Olympics, international soccer matches, etc.), Kroenke can rob the Carson stadium project of much of its value.
Inglewood Mayor Butts says that's not true. http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2016/01/05/inglewood-calif-mayor-nfl-stadium-construction-not-guaranteed/

Was going to say, I heard this was shot down too. I think it's a distinct possibility that Kroenke doesn't get awarded L.A. and he moves to London. After going all scorched Earth in STL, don't see how he could stay.

Why would he go to London and not L.A.? Might as well pull an Al Davis.

SD & Oak are already there. IMO, one of those two get awarded L.A. They both tried for a lot longer to get a new stadium with no progress at all so I think the other owners will be sympathetic to that. Plus Spanos is saying that if the Rams or Oak moves to L.A. they will cannibalize 25% of his market. I understand Spanos is well like by all of the owners. Kroenke, and Davis for that matter, not so much. So then Kroenke will lobby to move to London which, pretty obviously, has been his back up plan all along. Oakland stays in Oakland and the NFL "figures something out" so they get a new venue.

The L.A. Daily News' writer, who covers the NFL, was on the radio yesterday afternoon, and discussed the situation. He thinks it's going to be the Chargers and Rams in Inglewood, but he said it sounds like it's up in the air and nobody really knows.

One note he made that I found interesting is that Oakland is being pretty idiotic (unless there's something he didn't know about) about the Raiders. Mark Davis isn't even demanding the city do anything. He's asking the Oakland for the land, so that he can get a developer and build his own stadium, and work with the A's to build a stadium. And, he's not even asking that they sell him the land. He's willing to lease it and make payments, and he's willing to do a 66 year lease (seems an odd number, but that's what he said). Oakland wouldn't have to put up any money or really do anything. Just lease him the land and allow the Raiders/A's to make improvements on it. Seems pretty reasonable to me, but what do I know.

All of the other owners hate Davis because he goes out of his way to be a goof and needle them. I hear he has most of his important business dinners at chain restaurants for example. :lmao: Love the guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the distance issue, oakland current situation is a good comparison. it's practically walkable form the airport to the stadium. same for inglewood and LAX. and since the forum and hollywood park is already in that area, i don't see how a new football stadium adds much to the lights and such. maybe a little bit more. non-issue imo. traffic and parking on the other hand...

Is the Forum even used anymore?

They still book concerts and exhibition sports games as far as I know. U2 was there either end of 2014 or early 2015 so it couldn't have been that long if it's been decommissioned. I haven't heard any news on it and I'd imagine that would be a big deal in the local news if true.

The place was ancient and run down the last Clipper game I went to which has to be around 1998.

Would that be the LA sports Arena where the Clippers played their home games? That place is ancient.

Ooops, my bad. Nevermind.

Though the Forum was not overly great/young either but not as bad as the LA Sports Arena before moving to Staples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan Sileo tweeted (and then retracted) news that the Chargers and Rams had worked out a deal to share a stadium in Inglewood.

http://www.boltsfromtheblue.com/2016/1/8/10738990/report-chargers-moving-to-la-with-rams-in-inglewood

Well this sure was an interesting 30 minutes. At 2:22PM PST Dan Sileo of the Mighty 1090 tweeted this out:

Just heard that the @Chargers and @STLouisRams will play in Inglewood! Wow!
About 30 minutes later the 1090 got him on the phone and he did a 180 on this tweet explaining that earlier in the day people from the relocation committee were saying that a deal was being worked out between Rams owner Stan Kroenke and Chargers owner Dean Spanos, but that since tweeting that out, he had talked to people in the Chargers' camp that told him "absolutely not. We are all in on the Carson site." The full audio can be found here.

The league is due to get together in Houston for league meetings starting Tuesday to vote on all aspects of the LA move. If this series of events is any indication for how this week is going to go...it could be a long week for fans of the Rams, Chargers, and Raiders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/nfl-report-contends-home-markets-failed-rams--raiders--chargers-234422387.html

NFL report contends home markets failed Rams, Raiders, Chargers

View photo

.
A new NFL report distributed to all 32 NFL teams indicates that the stadium plans of Oakland, St. Louis and San Diego were "unsatisfactory and inadequate" as the teams of all three cities plot a move to Los Angeles.

The report, obtained by the Los Angeles Times, helps establish a baseline for the three markets as the NFL begins deliberations on how to handle the three teams' applications to move to Los Angeles.

The report does not make recommendations about which, if any, team should move to Los Angeles. At least 24 owners must approve any franchise relocation, and this report is designed to give owners a sense of each franchise's hometown situation.

In the report, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell contends that each of the cities was given "ample opportunity but did not develop their proposals sufficiently to ensure the retention of its NFL team." Both St. Louis and San Diego have sought to develop stadium proposals; Oakland has no such stadium proposal in the works.

The Rams are investigating the development of a site in Inglewood, while the Chargers and Rams are looking to partner on the development of a site in Carson.

According to the report, none of the three teams would be breaking its lease by leaving. Moreover, the report indicates that the Los Angeles area is capable of supporting two teams. That, of course, raises the question of how the three teams will resolve this particular game of musical cities, given that all three teams applied for relocation earlier this week on the very first day they could do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL report cited at least two issues with the St. Louis proposal.

1 - Legislators have threatened to block bond funding.

2 - St. Louis has asked for $100 million more than the $200 millionleague maximum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#inexorable

The Orange County Register mentioned the Inglewood stadium could cost significantly more than original estimates, upwards of $2.66 billion, that would be the most expensive stadium ever built by a billion. With the $550 million relocation fee, that is over $3 billion for Kroenke.

The Jerry Jones proposal notes an earlier agreement by Kroenke to share the Inglewood stadium as partners, with Spanos and the Chargers being the prohibitive favorite. Not sure, but that could involve a second $550 million relocation fee for the league coffer (NFL revenue currently in the $10 billion a year neighborhood?). Lack of partnership equity in the Inglewood project could have been a significant (insurmountable?) obstacle to getting a second team there, broker a marriage between the Chargers with Rams and get Spanos to abandon Carson and the Raiders partnership.

The league could kick in an extra $100-200 million above the usual $200 league stadium loan for the Raiders to build their own stadium in Oakland. Though it sounds like relocation to San Diego, St. Louis or sharing Levi Stadium with the 49ers could also all be explored as alternatives.

The Rams and Chargers would each get $200 million from the league to build the shared venue (projected to be ready by the 2019 season), and of course could generate additional money through stadium naming rights, PSL sales, etc. That would still leave a considerable gap if the stadium is indeed now estimated to cost as much as $2.66 billion. My only question, would Spanos be an EQUAL partner, and if so, would he be expected to split costs down the middle with the considerably more wealthy Kroenke.

Sounds like Carson could still be possible, even if the Chargers and Rams, but that may be losing momentum, and imo would be a surprise at this point. The Rams/Chargers pairing in Inglewood may be emerging as the consensus favorite, after a more than two decade absence from the nation's second most populous city.

The long wait could soon be over.

* Minor detail is the Coliseum could house one NFL team in the three season interim until the new venue is completed, but a second would require approval by USC. As many as three other stadiums have been batted around as possible (Dodger Stadium?), even Stub Hub Arena which wouldn't be ideal, with just 22,000 seating capacity. The Rose Bowl is not expected to be one of the viable options. Also, traditionally, new stadiums are favored for a future Super Bowl hosting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LA committee (Kraft, Rooney, Mara, Hunt, McNair, Richardson) recommended Carson over Inglewood, by a 5-1 vote. The 1 dissent was Hunt, who wants no more than 1 team in LA. IMO it would be rather surprising if the owners went against the committee, which includes some very long tenured and powerful NFL owners.

IMO this puts the possible outcomes in this order of likelihood:

  1. No teams approved to move at this time
  2. Carson, Chargers and Raiders
  3. Inglewood, Rams and Chargers
  4. Inglewood, Rams only

I assume this makes it much less likely than it has seemed at times as recently as yesterday that the Rams are moving to LA. They could certainly move somewhere else, though... San Diego?

Also heard an interesting discussion on local radio this morning on the way to work. Rumor has it that the Inglewood project could cost as much as $2.6B+ to build. Kroenke can presumably afford it if approved, but it seems pretty clear that Spanos could not go in on that deal as an equal partner, since he doesn't have that kind of money, especially not if also having to pay a $550M relocation fee. This all suggests that any pairing of Rams and Chargers would force the Chargers to be a tenant rather than a partner. That, in turn, seems to make it less likely that Kroenke and Spanos can actually reach agreement to share Inglewood in some manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LA committee (Kraft, Rooney, Mara, Hunt, McNair, Richardson) recommended Carson over Inglewood, by a 5-1 vote. The 1 dissent was Hunt, who wants no more than 1 team in LA. IMO it would be rather surprising if the owners went against the committee, which includes some very long tenured and powerful NFL owners.

IMO this puts the possible outcomes in this order of likelihood:

  1. No teams approved to move at this time
  2. Carson, Chargers and Raiders
  3. Inglewood, Rams and Chargers
  4. Inglewood, Rams only

I assume this makes it much less likely than it has seemed at times as recently as yesterday that the Rams are moving to LA. They could certainly move somewhere else, though... San Diego?

Also heard an interesting discussion on local radio this morning on the way to work. Rumor has it that the Inglewood project could cost as much as $2.6B+ to build. Kroenke can presumably afford it if approved, but it seems pretty clear that Spanos could not go in on that deal as an equal partner, since he doesn't have that kind of money, especially not if also having to pay a $550M relocation fee. This all suggests that any pairing of Rams and Chargers would force the Chargers to be a tenant rather than a partner. That, in turn, seems to make it less likely that Kroenke and Spanos can actually reach agreement to share Inglewood in some manner.

Everything the local guys in L.A. are saying is that this is the first step in getting a better agreement for Spanos in Inglewood. If they recommended Inglewood, then there wouldn't be much leverage to force Kroenke to give up anything to Spanos. They could be wrong, though.

The Rams cannot move anywhere else right now (and neither can anyone else) because all three have agreed to be bound by whatever the NFL decides. So, no lawsuits (Rams).

With regard to the Inglewood costs, it doesn't sound like it matters. If Spanos goes to Inglewood, he's going to be backed by some huge bank that will work out the financing (Goldman Sachs is backing the Carson project), and there are no shortage of financiers that are ready if the Chargers go to Inglewood.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just heard on radio...NFL executives objected to the LA Committee's recommendation and wanted Chargers/Rams in Inglewood. The vast majority of the owners prefer the Inglewood project (not necessarily the Rams and Kroenke) by far over the Carson project.

And...a vote on the teams/project will happen mid-afternoon today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just heard on radio...NFL executives objected to the LA Committee's recommendation and wanted Chargers/Rams in Inglewood. The vast majority of the owners prefer the Inglewood project (not necessarily the Rams and Kroenke) by far over the Carson project.

And...a vote on the teams/project will happen mid-afternoon today.

Well, I assume Kroenke, Davis, and Spanos get no vote, leaving 29 owners to vote. 5 of them reportedly already recommended Carson over Inglewood. That means one of two things must happen for Inglewood to be approved:

1. All 24 remaining owners vote for Inglewood. This would have to include Hunt, and it is unclear if his dissent on the committee was because he favors Inglewood or for other reasons. This would seem to go beyond "vast majority."

2. Some of the owners who recommended Carson vote in favor of Inglewood. I suppose this is possible if the committee recommendation was just to gain leverage on Kroenke, and they secretly favor Inglewood. Seems like a stretch IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They just entered a team owners only meeting. :popcorn:

They are also under instruction not to speak about relocation until a decision is made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First vote coming up shortly. Chargers/Rams to Inglewood is one of the options on the ballot.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting strategy by Kroenke (thinly veiled threat of antitrust suit):


Hearing Stan Kroenke told owners this morning not to cross him; believes there would be collusion if chose Carson with Chargers-Raiders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting strategy by Kroenke (thinly veiled threat of antitrust suit):

3wnCBNfI_bigger.jpegHoward Balzer ‏@HBalzer721

Hearing Stan Kroenke told owners this morning not to cross him; believes there would be collusion if chose Carson with Chargers-Raiders.

Collusion? Sounds like a dude in my ffl league who cries about every trade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting strategy by Kroenke (thinly veiled threat of antitrust suit):

3wnCBNfI_bigger.jpegHoward Balzer ‏@HBalzer721

Hearing Stan Kroenke told owners this morning not to cross him; believes there would be collusion if chose Carson with Chargers-Raiders.

Collusion? Sounds like a dude in my ffl league who cries about every trade

Apparently Kroenke has a very bad reputation as a business partner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There can't be an unnamed team. Only 3 teams submitted proposals to move.

Exactly. So, Rams + Raiders/Chargers. Not sure why he worded it that way. He's now saying a team TBD. That's odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There can't be an unnamed team. Only 3 teams submitted proposals to move.

:lmao: It's done. Rams/Chargers

These beat writers are so used to their stupid free agency rumors. Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just heard on radio...NFL executives objected to the LA Committee's recommendation and wanted Chargers/Rams in Inglewood. The vast majority of the owners prefer the Inglewood project (not necessarily the Rams and Kroenke) by far over the Carson project.

And...a vote on the teams/project will happen mid-afternoon today.

Well, I assume Kroenke, Davis, and Spanos get no vote, leaving 29 owners to vote. 5 of them reportedly already recommended Carson over Inglewood. That means one of two things must happen for Inglewood to be approved:

1. All 24 remaining owners vote for Inglewood. This would have to include Hunt, and it is unclear if his dissent on the committee was because he favors Inglewood or for other reasons. This would seem to go beyond "vast majority."

2. Some of the owners who recommended Carson vote in favor of Inglewood. I suppose this is possible if the committee recommendation was just to gain leverage on Kroenke, and they secretly favor Inglewood. Seems like a stretch IMO.

La Canfora is sort of addressing this right now:

Jason La Canfora @JasonLaCanfora now14 seconds ago

Other owners have long though Spanos had played game the right way, exhausted options and deserved to be part of an LA solution. On cusp now

Jason La Canfora @JasonLaCanfora 21s22 seconds ago

The carson project, as been reporting for weeks, had roughly 18 votes as we neared this meeting. Need 24 to pass ...

Jason La Canfora @JasonLaCanfora now9 seconds ago

Many owners, even some on LA committee that recommended Carson, believe Inglewood stadium would be superior in and of itself. But more to it

Jason La Canfora @JasonLaCanfora now15 seconds ago

As 1st reported sat, Jerry's proposal through a curve. Came after many of the prep materials for owners were already printed. But was...

Jason La Canfora @JasonLaCanfora now6 seconds ago

Allowed to come up for vote. Kroenke has deep pockets and the land. But will that be enough to swing the tide? Would love to be in the room

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I've watched too many old cartoons but I imagine the meeting today is just buckets of caviar and all the owners smoking cigars made out of 1,000-dollar bills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I've watched too many old cartoons but I imagine the meeting today is just buckets of caviar and all the owners smoking cigars made out of 1,000-dollar bills.

Lots of whores too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is about money and Kranky can provide more of it and has the idea of a better venue to make the league more of it.

STL will be in LA next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't the Rams/Chargers option mentioned multiple times? How is it now a surprise for the owners?

I don't think it was a "surprise," but was not a formal proposal by any of the players.

It doesn't sound like it was even one of the options presented during the morning session. It was Iger/Spanos presenting Raiders/Chargers to Carson and Kroenke presenting Rams to Inglewood. It's no surprise, then, that because the owners wanted to have two teams in L.A. that they went with Carson (and they like Spanos more than Kroenke).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First round of voting is over. Rams/TBD in Inglewood got more votes than Chargers/Raiders in Carson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the tea leaves, I think the Inglewood options is now being presented as Rams + TBD team because Spanos refuses to play ball on the marriage and the owners think that if they can get that proposal ratified without him officially on board, he will then acquiesce. Or even more dastardly, maybe they are trying to lure Mark Davis into suggesting he'd take that spot in order to make Spanos think he's being betrayed by the partner he's being so loyal to thus far. These owners are some shady ### mofos, so I wouldn't put the latter past them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just heard on radio...NFL executives objected to the LA Committee's recommendation and wanted Chargers/Rams in Inglewood. The vast majority of the owners prefer the Inglewood project (not necessarily the Rams and Kroenke) by far over the Carson project.

And...a vote on the teams/project will happen mid-afternoon today.

Well, I assume Kroenke, Davis, and Spanos get no vote, leaving 29 owners to vote. 5 of them reportedly already recommended Carson over Inglewood. That means one of two things must happen for Inglewood to be approved:

1. All 24 remaining owners vote for Inglewood. This would have to include Hunt, and it is unclear if his dissent on the committee was because he favors Inglewood or for other reasons. This would seem to go beyond "vast majority."

2. Some of the owners who recommended Carson vote in favor of Inglewood. I suppose this is possible if the committee recommendation was just to gain leverage on Kroenke, and they secretly favor Inglewood. Seems like a stretch IMO.

Sam Farmer @LATimesfarmer 16m16 minutes ago

First round of votes completed. Rams/TBD in Inglewood gets more votes than Raiders/Chargers in Carson. Nobody at required 24 yet.

The recommendation was to create leverage. As La Confora reported, the vast majority of the owners preferred Inglewood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the tea leaves, I think the Inglewood options is now being presented as Rams + TBD team because Spanos refuses to play ball on the marriage and the owners think that if they can get that proposal ratified without him officially on board, he will then acquiesce. Or even more dastardly, maybe they are trying to lure Mark Davis into suggesting he'd take that spot in order to make Spanos think he's being betrayed by the partner he's being so loyal to thus far. These owners are some shady ### mofos, so I wouldn't put the latter past them.

This all almost seems orchestrated (shocker).

L.A. Committee recommends Carson because they want two teams and they want to give Spanos leverage. Then, the league votes in favor of the Rams in Inglewood, but with not enough votes to get them all the way there to give Rams/Kroenke some leverage over Spanos to start playing ball with Kroenke and vice versa. Next vote -- Rams and Chargers in Inglewood with details for Raiders to be worked out later in Oakland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, they are now trying to work this out like some gentlemen...

Scott M. Reid @sreidocregister 18m18 minutes ago

A proposal for the Rams and Chargers to relocate to a $2.66 billion stadium received more votes on first ballot but not 24 votes...

Scott M. Reid @sreidocregister 18m18 minutes ago

...required for approval. Chargers, Rams, Raiders and NFL officials now working on potential compromise

Edited by GDogg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the tea leaves, I think the Inglewood options is now being presented as Rams + TBD team because Spanos refuses to play ball on the marriage and the owners think that if they can get that proposal ratified without him officially on board, he will then acquiesce. Or even more dastardly, maybe they are trying to lure Mark Davis into suggesting he'd take that spot in order to make Spanos think he's being betrayed by the partner he's being so loyal to thus far. These owners are some shady ### mofos, so I wouldn't put the latter past them.

This all almost seems orchestrated (shocker).

L.A. Committee recommends Carson because they want two teams and they want to give Spanos leverage. Then, the league votes in favor of the Rams in Inglewood, but with not enough votes to get them all the way there to give Rams/Kroenke some leverage over Spanos to start playing ball with Kroenke and vice versa. Next vote -- Rams and Chargers in Inglewood with details for Raiders to be worked out later in Oakland.

Rich greedy people are shady? Get out of here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just heard on radio...NFL executives objected to the LA Committee's recommendation and wanted Chargers/Rams in Inglewood. The vast majority of the owners prefer the Inglewood project (not necessarily the Rams and Kroenke) by far over the Carson project.

And...a vote on the teams/project will happen mid-afternoon today.

Well, I assume Kroenke, Davis, and Spanos get no vote, leaving 29 owners to vote. 5 of them reportedly already recommended Carson over Inglewood. That means one of two things must happen for Inglewood to be approved:

1. All 24 remaining owners vote for Inglewood. This would have to include Hunt, and it is unclear if his dissent on the committee was because he favors Inglewood or for other reasons. This would seem to go beyond "vast majority."

2. Some of the owners who recommended Carson vote in favor of Inglewood. I suppose this is possible if the committee recommendation was just to gain leverage on Kroenke, and they secretly favor Inglewood. Seems like a stretch IMO.

Sam Farmer @LATimesfarmer 16m16 minutes ago

First round of votes completed. Rams/TBD in Inglewood gets more votes than Raiders/Chargers in Carson. Nobody at required 24 yet.

The recommendation was to create leverage. As La Confora reported, the vast majority of the owners preferred Inglewood.

Still seem like a stretch?

Jason Cole @JasonColeBR 2m2 minutes ago

One of the keys to the first ballot is it was secret. That allowed many who had promised to vote with #Chargers to switch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.