LA update fwiw

I just want a new QB,
a healthy OLine,
and a No.1 WR.

They can play in
Barcelona for all i care.

w
v

wv wrote:

Well it would be kinda funny if Jeff Fisher finally
got his team built just the way he wanted it — to
compete with the NFC West teams — only to then
be moved into another division.

The football Gods, at work.

w
v

Not so fast, dark irony man. My own view is, that which makes you competitive in division games in the NFC west allows you to completely dominate the AFC west. But if the Rams did change conferences, it would be just their luck to draw the West as the NFC division they play that year.

There isn’t a rivalry between St. Louis and KC. Not in football. The Chiefs beat the crap out of the Rams. That doesn’t make a rivalry. That is a joke. Even 20 years of interleague MLB hasn’t created a rivalry between the Cardinals and the Royals. Even the Blues and the Scouts in the NHL didn’t have a rivalry. Blues rival is always the Blackhawks. Cardinals rival is always the Cubs and lately the Reds. Rams had a good rivalry with the Saints until realignment screwed that up.

What Roger Goodell’s “Letter” Really Means

Bernie Miklasz

http://www.101sports.com/2015/12/18/roger-goodells-letter-really-means/

Let’s talk about “The Letter,” which you can read about through David Hunn’s report at STLtoday.com.
OK, what does this mean? It was a little startling to see NFL commissioner Roger Goodell drop a tough messag on St. Louis stadium task force co-chair Dave Peacock the day before the St. Louis Board of Aldermen is scheduled for a vote (Friday, 3 p.m.) on final passage of the city’s share of the funding for the proposed north riverfront stadium.
About that extra $100 million from the NFL to the St. Louis project?
Not so fast, Goodell warned. The NFL guarantees nothing.
On the surface, it seemed harsh. Ominous.
Another smackdown from a league that doesn’t hesitate to bully anyone to get what it wants.
But was this some horrible development that will bring down STL’s plans for a new football house?
Will it ensure an escape to Los Angeles for Stan Kroenke, the LA-obsessed Rams owner?
Two answers to those questions: (1) In this instance, no. It doesn’t mean the riverfront-stadium project is doomed, or that Kroenke will be set loose by the NFL, into the open field, running off with the Rams. (2) As always, and as I have said 1,000 times over the last year or so …do not trust the NFL under any circumstances. At the end of this game the league will do whatever the hell it wants to do. Actual rules — the relocation guidelines — don’t matter. And the general rules of decency do not apply, either.
After talking to multiple sources Thursday night (including one NFL owner), here’s my bullet-point analysis:
— The NFL just wanted to reaffirm — strongly — that no one at league headquarters guaranteed an extra $100 million to the STL project. (Beyond the normal $200 million that the NFL contributes to league-market stadium projects.) And that St. Louis shouldn’t count on the money. But we knew that already. I wrote it last week. Talked about it a bunch of times on my radio show. The NFL is in no position to guarantee any money at this point — not even the $200 million. The decision on the NFL’s financial commitment to a STL stadium won’t come until after the NFL votes on LA. That’s the first step. And the financial contribution won’t materialize unless the NFL rejects Kroenke’s relocation bid, which would open the next door — setting the terms attached to the new stadium in St. Louis. St. Louis. None of this has ever been guaranteed. That’s one thing I will say for the league: when asked many times if funding a new stadium would assure St. Louis of keeping the Rams (or securing another NFL team), Goodell or league executive VP Eric Grubman have always made it clear: No. There are no guarantees of anything. And there is no guarantee that Kroenke would agree to contribute $250 million to the project; ownership financial participation is custom in the league’s stadium-funding program. But not if the owner wants to reject public financing and walk away from a potential new stadium.
— Goodell wrote the letter to reaffirm that he runs the league, he’s the boss. It’s interesting. Goodell empowered the six-owner committee on Los Angeles to take charge of the process. Take a thorough look at the three markets that were at risk of losing their franchise — STL, Oakland, San Diego. Assess the probability of each market coming up with a viable plan for a new stadium. Study the financials. Evaluate Kroenke’s plan in Inglewood. Scrutinize the Chargers-Raiders stadium partnership in Carson. Do all of the hard work. Then tell us what you think we should do. Except: Goodell clearly felt motivated to put on a show of power. I think it’s safe to assume Goodell doesn’t like an owner (or owners) from the league’s influential LA committee and financial committee, making off-the-grid deals with Peacock and Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon. The connected Daniel Kaplan of the Sports Business Journal was a guest on our Friday-morning show, and said: “This was Goodell flexing his muscle, saying ‘How dare you offer St. Louis $100 million. I’m in charge.’ ”
— The Letter absolutely reflects the league’s anxiety: If the NFL had a plan to attempt to “fix” this process by setting it up to ensure a successful outcome for Kroenke, it won’t be easy to pull off. Not anymore. Not with the Board of Aldermen ready to pass the final bill to fund the stadium. Please understand this: the NFL never believed, for one second, that Peacock and Bob Blitz and Nixon and Greg Carey (of Goldman Sachs) had a realistic chance to come up with the $400 million in public money for a stadium here. It was a long shot. A joke. No chance. Now that Peacock is close to coming through with his long shot bid, the NFL seems to be agitated. It’s fascinating to watch. If at the beginning of the process the league wanted to rig this so-called competition for Kroenke — again, “if” — well, Peacock has them scrambling. And this letter, at least in part, was a frustrated Goodell throw an elbow at his old friend Peacock.
The Letter raises more question about the NFL leadership: In the letter, Goodell implied that Peacock ran a misdirection play — by not telling the Board of Aldermen the full story on the $100 million. (Which isn’t true. Peacock didn’t do that.) The NFL sought to clarify all of this during a conference call late Tuesday afternoon, but the league placed the call about 20 to 30 minutes after the Board voted to send the bill forward for final passage. It was yet another telling glimpse of the out-of-step direction from the league office. I don’t know how Peacock and Nixon and officials in San Diego and Oakland can keep their heads on straight … because who exactly is in charge?
On one side there’s Goodell, who has kept his distance since choosing a trusted committee to supervise the Los Angeles process. But after months of deferring to his hand-picked committee — with committee members dutifully tending to assigned business and offering guidance to the three markets –Goodell suddenly jumps in the middle of it. If you’re Peacock, then who should you deal with? Do you deal directly with the commissioner? Deal directly with Grubman? Deal directly with the committees? A couple of months ago, Grubman was instructed to back off; the LA committee would direct the NFL process in its final stages. But Grubman — who is absolutely in the pro-Kroenke camp — remains in the middle of everything. And now Goodell reappears with his “I’m in charge of the White House” spiel. It’s almost as if there are two separate governments inside the NFL nation. The New York office of Goodell and Grubman. And the LA and finance committee, with owners such as Bob McNair and Jerry Richardson taking an aggressive approach in shaping the process.
Peacock is told to deal with McNair and Richardson and the committees. And then when Peacock gets down to talking serious business with the committees as St. Louis begins to finalize its stadium-package proposal in time for the NFL’s Dec. 30 deadline, Goodell big-foots his way back into the situation. If the NFL would make up its confused mind — should the group in St. Louis deal with Goodell and Grubman, or deal with the committees — it would ensure a smoother process. But this isn’t happening. Not with the NFL arguing with itself over who has the power.
— The Letter is the NFL’s way of covering itself legally. The NFL didn’t want the Board of Aldermen to vote on the final stadium bill based, at least partially, on the belief that an additional $100 million guaranteed and by the league. And that final passage of the bill would automatically trigger the NFL’s contribution to the project. Being misled, and casting a vote on a false pretense, is the kind of thing that leads to lawsuits. The NFL was smart to aim for transparency here. Peacock doubled back to make sure that the Board understood the NFL’s formal position, as explained by Goodell.
— The Letter was intended to appease officials in San Diego and Oakland. First, you had this highly publicized misunderstanding, with many in the media rushing to judgment and assuming that the $100 million pledge to St. Louis was an official action taken by the NFL’s front office. And then McNair came out and spoke favorably of the St. Louis proposal and our city’s chances of keeping the Rams. And then McNair canceled a meeting with San Diego’s Mayor. Well, I have to assume Goodell received some irate phone calls from San Diego and Oakland.
Oh, so this has been decided. You’ve made up your mind. You’ve given St. Louis an extra $100 million. You’re keeping Kroenke in St. Louis, and you’re allowing the Chargers and Raiders to move to Carson. This is terribly unfair, Mr. Commissioner. You didn’t even wait until the Dec. 3o deadline to tip your hand, and identify the winners and losers.
By sending the tough-guy letter, Goodell was also trying to convince San Diego and Oakland that nothing has been decided, determined, or guaranteed — especially the $100 million gift to St. Louis.
— The timing of The Letter was curious, to say the least: Last week the NFL booked Grubman onto our radio show the day before a critical Board of Aldermen vote on the stadium. As you know, Grubman launched an attack on St. Louis in an obvious attempt to ignite controversy, create doubt, and disrupt the momentum of a Board vote to advance the stadium here. The tactic failed. Now, a week later — on the day before the final stadium vote — Goodell throws down with this ominous letter. Two consecutive weeks …. two prominent NFL executives placing themselves in the middle of a crucial Board of Aldermen vote.
Gee, does anyone see a pattern here?
You don’t think the NFL was trying to cause trouble in St. Louis — late in the game — to jeopardize the stadium bill on Kroenke’s behalf?
Did the NFL office — sensing that the committees were favoring Carson over Inglewood — realize that desperate measures were required to block the STL stadium bill from passing?
Is that what happened here?
Nah.
We all know that the NFL is more honorable than that.
Of course we do.
Whatever the motive, the final vote will pass.