but he makes money off of psls too. and i’m guessing he’ll make way more in psl’s than he would in st. louis.

psls in san francisco are expected to raise around 500 million dollars. atlanta i think is expected to generate around 200 million dollars in psls.

staples center generates 345 million dollars a year in revenue. that’s from the lakers, clippers, kings, sparks, and concerts.

now obviously. in the nfl. a lot of that would end up being shared with other teams. also. i don’t know what a stadium in st. louis would generate. i also don’t know what an nfl stadium could generate compared to an nba stadium.

and if a second team moved in i don’t know what money kroenke would get from that.

there’s also naming rights to the stadium. merchandising. again. i don’t know how much of this is shared. i also don’t know how much this would compare to st. louis. my guess is it’s higher.

cowboys generate 560 million dollars in revenue. compare that to the rams which is 250 million in revenue. that’s a difference of 310 million. again. i don’t know how much of this is shared. the new york giants is 353 million. that’s a difference of 100 million. and those number are from forbes. and that’s probably just football related. and also. the cowboys’ operating costs are significantly higher than other teams. so that’s a factor.

i just don’t know. but i think that the numbers are more obscene than we could even imagine. and i think the potential for a los angeles rams team compared to a st. louis rams team is way way higher.

• This reply was modified 10 years, 2 months ago by InvaderRam.
• This reply was modified 10 years, 2 months ago by InvaderRam.

i don’t think we have any idea what kind of revenues he can get from building this. thing.

i still think it’s an issue. i think the potential for revenue compared to st. louis is a lot higher than we can imagine. it’s not just nfl games.

it’s concerts. it’s other sporting events. corporate sponsorships. i know st. louis said it’s got plenty of corporate partners in st. louis, but it’ll be nothing like what’s available in los angeles.

i don’t think it’s JUST about the value of the franchise.

well there ya go.

that’s how he would make his money back.

st. louis is in a real bind here. the only way i see the rams staying at this point is if the broncos do go on sale this year, and kroenke is inclined to sell the rams quick.

also.

With a new TV contract that started this year and runs through 2021, the league won’t see much immediate financial impact from a move of any team to Los Angeles.

is that what owners are waiting for? would a team in los angeles mean more tv dollars in the next contract? well. all the more reason the league wants a team or two there.

• This reply was modified 10 years, 2 months ago by InvaderRam.

very interesting. wow.

well. the difference i see between the vikings situation and the rams situation is that the vikings didn’t have a great option in play at los angeles. at least not as good as the deal offered by minnesota. i believe the only way a move to los angeles was possible was selling part of the team to the people building the stadium. and that was a worse option than keeping complete ownership of the vikings in minnesota.

the difference as i see it is the rams have a better option in los angeles. or at least kroenke does. that’s something no other team had before.

the only way i see the rams staying in st. louis is if kroenke sells the team. the rams stay put. and kroenke turns around and buys the raiders and then moves them to oakland. i think that was mentioned in the bernie article. i see that as being likely.

the only problem with that is what does the new ownership do with the front office? do they stay the course or do they start bringing in their own ideas? maybe that would be a good thing… it isn’t like kroenke’s rams have been lighting up the league.

i still think the cash flow will be way more than anything he could get in st louis.

so he’ll spend a couple billion while the value of the team increases by a couple billion. at least. although really my guess is that’s a very conservative estimate. it probably increases considerably more than that.

and on top of that the cash flow will be even greater than at st louis considering the non football retail space.

and on top of that he could collect additional cash through leasing the stadium out to a second team.

plus if he rents the stadium out to a second team. is that money shared?

i wish they’d make a decision already. all this uncertainty is getting to me.

from reading some pre-draft articles people seem to think mason would be a great fit in a zone blocking scheme.

but i’m not sure fisher used a zone blocking scheme at tennessee. i read that chris johnson ran in a power blocking scheme at tennessee.

someday. they will make a documentary about this. i wonder if we’ll learn anything from it.

we all realize that this is just a silly game and tell the owners and players to go screw themselves?

It depends on whether the league believes in its own rules, and how much, and whether or not they are willing to live with the obvious “SK is an exception” thing. In other words, whether or not they will countenance obvious hypocrisy in the name of expedience for something they like.

yeah. i think they’ll learn to live with it.

i’m still on the boras bandwagon. keep continuity. and if it’s really true. that he’s regarded as a bright offensive mind. then go for it. instead of playing the oc musical chairs game.

well. we’re going to disagree.

i really believe the nfl will look the other way if it isn’t approved. in fact. kroenke would probably rather they not approve it.

normally i’d agree with you. and if this was a move to any other city. i’d believe it. but this is a move to los angeles. if it’s purely for vanity. if it’s just to squeeze a couple more million dollars a year out of us. if it’s to have superbowls. pro bowls. the draft. the combine. whatever.

i believe the nfl wants more of a presence in los angeles. yeah. it’s just a guess. but it makes sense to me. does it suck in a lot of ways. of course it does.

but yes. i would bet that the nfl would be willing to ignore its own rules just to do this.

if this was a move to san antonio. sure they’d enforce the rules hard. in this case, they won’t. and law enforcement will bend the rules if it favors them. i don’t think that’s impossible to imagine.

wv wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>zn wrote:</div>

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>InvaderRam wrote:</div>
you don’t get numerous proposals of stadium projects because they weren’t serious about it.

But you also didn’t get stadiums.

So how serious were they.

If you are an NFL Owner, who votes,
what is the Downside to letting Stan take the team
away from St.Louis and bring it back to Los Angeles ?

I’m trying to understand the possible downsides,
from the point of view of various Owners.

Whats the downside? Why would owners vote against it?

I wonder if there is a group of owners that dont
care one way or the other.

w
v

they could lose leverage when negotiating with their own cities.

jerry jones. kraft. i bet they don’t care. not sure about others. new york owners? the bears? washington? i guess wouldn’t care.