http://www.stltoday.com/sports/football/professional/goodell-jones-have-a-talk/article_a7578c2f-c649-51b3-b87e-9f5c00291b27.html

Goodell, Jones have a talk

By Jim Thomas

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell personally called Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones this week to get clarification on Jones’ comments to the New York Times suggesting Stan Kroenke can move the Rams to Los Angeles if he wants — with or without league approval.
“Put (Jones’ remarks) in context,” NFL executive Eric Grubman told the Post-Dispatch on Thursday. “This man’s trying to get to the Super Bowl. He was in Green Bay, Wis., and he just lost an incredible game. A lot of passion and emotion.

“And he gets hit with that question from an out-of-town reporter. … Jerry wasn’t even quite sure what he said beyond acknowledging historically teams have moved without (permission). So when asked — ‘Did you say that?’ — he wasn’t even sure.”

As in not even sure what he had said.

“Now, is that impossible?” Grubman said. “What if you just lost that game and somebody hit you with that question? … I’m not going to speak for him. But I’ll hazard a guess on this one, that he would not tell you this could be done without a vote.

“To suggest otherwise would be to suggest that any owner can pick which rules they want to go for a vote and which they don’t want to go for a vote.”

Grubman said Goodell didn’t talk to Jones in a critical way, but simply asked him what he meant by his comments.

“It quickly became obvious that there’s nothing really here,” Grubman said. “Because in the heat of the moment, you had an owner who wasn’t really focused on the issue at hand, and talked about history and remembers that but doesn’t remember much of the detail beyond that.”

In summary, Grubman characterized Jones’ remarks as a stray comment that needed to be put to bed.

“Everybody’s gonna follow the rules,” Grubman said.

Grubman was in St. Louis on Thursday meeting with local officials on the region’s stadium plan. He said he has been to St. Louis about a half a dozen times over the last two or three years.

Jones’ remarks cast doubt on whether Kroenke would try to follow relocation guidelines and gain owners’ approval to move. It would take approval of 24 of 32 NFL owners to move the Rams to Los Angeles.

Team and league officials have told the Post-Dispatch that Kroenke will not go rogue and try to relocate without approval. Grubman reiterated that on Thursday.

When asked if Kroenke has said he will follow league rules, Grubman replied: “Oh, yes. And he has followed the rules. Not on this (specifically), because there’s never been any suggestion that he wouldn’t.

“Here’s the better example: We’ve proscribed guidelines for how to approach the L.A. market for any club that was interested, including keeping the league staff informed and so forth and so on.

“All the clubs that have been acting in that regard have been doing that, including the St. Louis Rams. So there’s no hint of (going rogue).”

As much as Grubman underscored the fact that Kroenke would follow the rules, he pointed out that there could be subjectivity in how those guidelines are interpreted as well as subjectivity on how individual club owners might vote if it gets to that.

“I don’t know how to gauge the probability of votes,” Grubman said. “I do know how to look at history and I know in the time that I’ve been associated with the league, the league has made some tough calls to keep teams in their markets and to do things that are quite extraordinary to keep teams in their markets.”

He cited Minnesota, New England, and New Orleans as examples of franchises where the league was successful in helping to prevent a move.

If Kroenke did in fact try to move the Rams without approval, Grubman said he had no idea how the league would respond.

“But I do know there are tremendous tools available,” he said. “There’s a charter and by-laws, and there’s ample authority in the commissioner’s office to make sure that everybody follows the rules.

“That’s what we are. We’re a league of rules. So having something which is a subjective judgment, subjected to a vote, is very different than having a league without rules.”

In terms of what kind of penalties Kroenke could face for an unauthorized move, Grubman didn’t want to go there.

“That’s so far off topic and so hypothetical, let’s pick another time,” he said. “There are going to be recommendations that are analyzed and made. And then there’s gonna be votes, but everybody’s gonna follow the rules.”

If Kroenke plays by the rules and somehow gains approval from the league to relocate, what are the alternatives for St. Louis? Is there another path to get another team here, such as San Diego or Oakland — franchises that also have stadium issues and could potentially relocate to Los Angeles as well? Grubman didn’t offer much hope there for St. Louis.

“I view that as such an undesirable path to take that I haven’t even thought about the probabilities,” he said. “Because you not only have to do all the hard work that you’re already (doing), then you’re gonna have to convince somebody that this is the market that they want to go to as opposed to some other market, or some market that they can stay in.

“The objective is to give the St. Louis Rams the best opportunity to be healthy in this market.”

i wonder if the rams’ quarterback situation has offensive coordinators wary of taking the job.

zn wrote:

Now this ain’t the final word on the issue or nothin, but, what he looked like to me was a ferocious hitting LB/safety hybrid in nickel packages.

i wonder if the rams have bigger plans for him or if he is strictly a package player.

it just doesn’t seem like he and mcdonald could play together on a full-time basis.

• This reply was modified 11 years, 5 months ago by zn.

hmmm… interesting.

i guess it makes sense. a lot of this stuff is probably things individual teams had to do on their own in free agency.

i have actually read the opposite, but i’m hoping they’re just vicious lies!

i like mariota. if there was any chance the rams could move up, i’d be happy if they did. nothing like 3 first rounders. but i’d do it for 2 first rounders.

http://www.denverpost.com/kiszla/ci_27321112/kiszla-gary-kubiak-is-wrong-choice-denver-broncos

Kiszla: Gary Kubiak is wrong choice if John Elway wants strong coach
By Mark Kiszla
The Denver Post

Before he can drive the Broncos back to the Super Bowl, there’s one tough call franchise executive John Elway must make:

When looking for a new coach, does Denver want a strong, independent leader or a sidekick who respectfully walks two steps behind Elway, in the legend’s shadow?

Gary Kubiak and Rick Dennison — two old Broncos who will forever bleed orange as loyal friends to the legendary No. 7 — are the obvious choices to be the next coach, if Elway wants a wing man to play Cougar to his Maverick.

Yes, we all know Elway is the top gun in Broncos Country. But wouldn’t hiring either Kubiak or Dennison from Baltimore as Elway’s new deputy be replicating everything good and bad about the past four years with John Fox, the avuncular coach who often seemed to be taking orders rather than giving orders?

When considering the essential quality Denver seeks in a new coach, however, here’s hoping Elway sincerely meant it when he said: “There is a huge jump from being at the Super Bowl and winning the Super Bowl … Can I put my finger on it? No. But I was around it and I saw it, so whether I know it consciously or subconsciously, I know what it feels like, and I know what it takes.”

There are coaches out there with championship pedigrees, Go ahead, dream big about a candidate as sexy and fanciful as TV analyst Jon Gruden. Or think outside the box, to somebody as solid and unassuming as Green Bay offensive coordinator Tom Clements, who won a national championship as Notre Dame’s quarterback and a Super Bowl ring as a Packers assistant.

But I wonder how much autonomy Elway is willing to give his coach. Or does Elway want to dress down Denver players when they give a subpar preseason effort against Seattle and advise Peyton Manning to relax when the veteran quarterback is in a funk?

During the past three NFL seasons, which saw the Broncos win an impressive 38 regular-season games but no championship ring, the unofficial pecking order at the team’s Dove Valley headquarters was evident:

1) Elway, the Duke of Denver

2) Manning, Hall of Fame quarterback

3) Fox, coach who took the blame

If the Broncos want to win the Super Bowl, the organizational chart needs to be tweaked. If offensive coordinator Adam Gase were to be elevated to head coach, it’s unlikely anything would change.

Elway has done a remarkable job of sweeping aside the mess left by Josh McDaniels and restoring Denver to its place as one of the few sports franchises in America that’s a daily part of the national conversation.

But, now, Elway can’t let his ego get in the way of winning the league championship.

During the crazy, bewildering and ultimately disappointing final hours of their NFL season, when the Broncos went from Super Bowl contender to a team left scrambling to find a new coach while praying a 38-year-old QB has one more good season left in his beat-up body, there were two telling moments.

The first indication all was not hunky-dory at Dove Valley was the revelation that Fox, the ultimate get-along guy faulted for being too conservative and unassertive, was exploring the possibility of leaving Denver before the loss against Indianapolis. Before Elway shoved Fox out the door, the 59-year-old coach was preparing to jump.

Then there was this slip of the tongue that brought a chuckle to what could have been a somber state-of-the-Broncos address Tuesday by Elway. “I’d like to start out this press conference,” Elway said, “with a thank-you to John Elway …” Oops. He meant to thank Fox.

It was an accident. But it accidentally revealed a lot: In Broncos Country, the sun rises and sets with Elway.

There are too many knuckleheads in the Denver locker room, even if some of them (Von Miller and Aqib Talib) make the Pro Bowl. At times, Fox struggled to place full trust in draft picks such as Cody Latimer, Montee Ball and Orlando Franklin, as the veteran coach quietly yearned for more say in personnel decisions.

What does it say if Gase, who has worked closer with Denver quarterbacks than anyone, chased so hard after a job with Colin Kaepernick in San Francisco, when he has an aging Manning and unproven Brock Osweiler in Denver? Or what are we to think when defensive coordinator Jack Del Rio departed the Broncos for Oakland, certainly among the most dysfunctional organizations in pro sports?

The message is clear: The Broncos have both talent and Super Bowl-or-bust expectations. But an NFL coach in Denver also works in the shadow of a legend and can get dumped after four straight playoff appearances. That’s not an easy gig. The next coach must command the respect of Elway.

What’s one of the hardest things for a legendary quarterback to do?

Hand off the ball and let somebody else run with it.

Mark Kiszla: mkiszla@denverpost.com or twitter.com/markkiszla

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000457765/article/elway-disagreed-with-fox-on-how-to-get-to-next-level

John Elway gave a simple answer when asked why John Fox was no longer the coach of the Denver Broncos.

“I think the main thing between John and I was we disagreed how to get to the next level,” Elway said during a Tuesday news conference at Broncos headquarters. “Because we accomplished so much, four AFC West championships. I think the biggest miss between us was how are we going to take that next step and what it was going to take to get to that next step. That’s where that disagreement came from.”

Hiring Fox was Elway’s first order of business after re-joining the Broncos four years ago. He repeatedly stated that Fox was the perfect person for the job “at that time.” Elway made it clear he was disappointed, not just by the losses to the Seahawks and Colts that ended the last two seasons, but by how they lost those games.

“If there’s one thing that you’d like to have and you want to feel is at least in the last game you want to feel like you go out kickin’ and screaming,” he said. “And that you’re right there. And I think two years in a row it didn’t feel like we went out kickin’ and screaming because of the way we played in the last game. So hopefully we get that turned around, that’s going to be our goal.”

i suppose that’s football reasons. it’s somewhat vague. is he saying that fox didn’t have the desire to win or is he saying that they both had a desire to win but couldn’t agree on how to get there?

sometimes change is good. change for the sake of change isn’t necessarily a good thing.

and i think the rams are at a very different stage than the broncos are. i think bernie’s argument is weak at best.

Agamemnon wrote:

Things were cheap back then.

funny. hahahaha!

to me that’s still significant. and it’s definitely a factor. and i still think it’s a conservative estimate.

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 11 years, 5 months ago by InvaderRam.
• This reply was modified 11 years, 5 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 11 years, 5 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.