InvaderRam wrote:

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.

InvaderRam wrote:

don’t see why the nfl would be against this move.

Well the argument for them possibly being against it is to be found in their own relocation rules, which they put in place as a response to precisely this kind of thing (Cleveland to Baltimore, Baltimore to IND etc.) They didn’t want that then…meaning, not teams moving, but teams moving whenever ever they felt like it without a league-wide approval process etc.

Now if they violate their own rules they are setting it up to encourage more teams to do the same, which is precisely what they set out to avoid.

In terms of being in LA, in a lot of ways, having no team in LA is just as viable for the league as a whole. It means every NFL fan in LA watches NFL games every Sunday, just lots of different games. Having a team there doesn’t change that. It doesn’t increase revenue one bit. It might be nice to have a showy stadium in LA…I think that’s hopelessly superficial myself and kind of like wishing for the wrong things…but then that has to balance with whether or not they prize their own rules.

Now it’s clear why Stan wants to move. His one abiding concern is “increasing value” which trumps absolutely everything else. Personally I don’t admire those characteristics. In fact I think they’re socio-pathic. (Really, I do.) So we know why Stan needs to own the biggest and brightest. But that does not automatically mean everyone in the league prizes that over other considerations. I might mean that in the long run…but it’s not a slamdunk that it means that.

So there’s lots to unfold yet here, and lots to talk about still.

Support, timing key to Rams plan

By Jim Thomas

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/football/professional/support-timing-key-to-rams-plan/article_7e2fb1d3-e88c-5e7d-8317-60fc286b74dc.html

The St. Louis stadium/Rams relocation saga reached another milepost Friday with the unveiling of a stadium project on the north edge of downtown that would cost between $860 million and $985 million.

For now, the proposal presented at Union Station by Dave Peacock and Bob Blitz is the life raft that’s keeping NFL football afloat in St. Louis.

“I think to the degree that we progress on a plan and demonstrate the viability of it, we’re in good shape — the community — because the NFL bylaws have certain stipulations that relate to moving and relocation that we will have met in the local community,” said Peacock, who with Blitz was appointed by Gov. Jay Nixon to develop a plan to keep professional football in St. Louis.

But if the situation reaches the level where the Rams are lobbying with the league to move to Los Angeles, two areas are almost certain to be discussed:

• Is the St. Louis effort to address its stadium situation a case of too little, too late?

• Is there sufficient support in the business community and corporate sector to keep the Rams profitable and viable in St. Louis?

Peacock, a former Anheuser-Busch executive, seemed almost eager to address both topics during an hour-long presentation and news conference.

“We have a sense of urgency,” Peacock said. “But I can tell you, San Diego’s been slogging away for years trying to get a stadium and has not been able to achieve it. The Minneapolis project took several years. Atlanta. San Francisco.

“If we are actually able to raise the financing and start a project in 2016 based on where we started, this would be lightning speed in the stadium world relative to what’s been done at other places.

“So I don’t necessarily buy the too little, too late. Because if you also read the NFL bylaws, they’re very clear that they don’t have a time parameter associated with them. They basically say that the team has to exhaust all of its opportunities in the local market before it can move, and that no team can move just for the opportunity to make more money. I believe in those NFL bylaws.”

Although the Rams have said next to nothing during the entire stadium process, the team’s statement in response to Friday’s unveiling of the stadium plan spoke volumes. It read in part:

“The St. Louis Rams have worked for many years, with several agencies and commissions, and their senior management, responsible for stadium facilities in St. Louis. This includes multiple discussions with the Governor (Jay Nixon)’s recently formed NFL Task Force (Peacock and Blitz) …”

It may sound like bureaucratic jibberish at face value, but the underlying point is that the Rams want it known that they’ve been working hard at a stadium solution for “many years” with no success. While also pointing out that the task force is “recently formed.”

It’s a message designed as much for the league office and the 31 other franchise owners as it is for St. Louis. And those franchise owners could be voting on relocation as early as spring 2016.

Meanwhile, as of Monday, Rams owner Stan Kroenke has already reached an agreement to build a stadium in Inglewood, Calif., not far from the Los Angeles airport.

As this scenario unfolds, the Rams’ argument at league meetings and behind the scenes is expected to include questions about the “sense of urgency” by St. Louis. One question that may have already been posed by the Rams in league circles: Why wasn’t this task force formed after the arbitration decision in January 2013?

(That decision favored the Rams’ estimated $700 million proposal to upgrade the Edward Jones Dome.)

Peacock said Friday he has been working on the stadium project “off and on” for more than a year, and has been doing intensive work over the past three months.

Providing examples of the level of activity, Peacock said there was a meeting with league officials in November shortly after the formation of the task force. He said there have also been meetings that involved both Rams and NFL officials together, as well as what he called “constant contact” with both entities.

Peacock also confirmed what previously had been reported through sources, namely, that Kroenke had yet to meet directly with the task force.

“I have not met, nor has Bob met Stan,” Peacock said. “I’m sure he’s seen these (stadium plans) because they’ve been shared early on in the process. I don’t know the impact or his reaction, because we haven’t met with him.”

It should be noted that Peacock said he has yet to meet formally with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell so far in this process.

“I’m sure we’ll meet with Stan Kroenke when the time is right,” Peacock said. “His representatives have represented him well. At the same time we’re dealing with the right people at the league and we’ve been given, I’d say, the right level of support to continue on our path.”

As for the question of business and corporate support, the NFL relocation guidelines specify that a team requesting to move must demonstrate it has exhausted all opportunities to be successful in its market. A perceived lack of corporate support is an area the Rams are expected to attack as battle lines are drawn in the team’s increasingly apparent attempts to relocate.

“I like to deal in fact and data,” Peacock said. “The facts are half of the NFL teams play in cities with less Fortune 1000 companies than St. Louis has. We have seven of the top 200 private companies in the country.

“From just an economic standpoint, about 13 teams play in cities with a smaller GDP, if you will, or economy, than St. Louis. So it’s hard for me to say we don’t have the business support or the capability of business support.”

Stadium plans guarantee nothing in St. Louis or L.A.

By Nick Wagoner

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-rams/post/_/id/15357/stadium-plans-guarantee-nothing-in-st-louis-or-l-a

ST. LOUIS — It’s been a week of pretty pictures revealing elaborate plans not only for new NFL-sized stadiums in Los Angeles and St. Louis but also for trendy developments in and around those new venues. Those pictures sitting on an easel, coming across a wide-screen television, or printed on heavy stock as a handout look great but they don’t mean much more than the paper they’re printed on.

The intentions of St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke are clear. The intentions of Dave Peacock, Bob Blitz and the city of St. Louis are also clear. There will be plenty of negotiations and conversations had over the next, well, who knows how long it will all take? But there are still many difficult questions that need to be asked and answered.

In the grand scheme of things, though, the future of the Rams in St. Louis could ultimately fall in the hands of the people who reside at 345 Park Avenue in New York City. That’s home of the NFL offices, and if we’ve learned anything about the league in the past few years, it’s that it will do what it believes is best for the league.

Considering that, it’s no coincidence that as Peacock presented the St. Louis plan on Friday afternoon, he consistently referred to having an understanding of the bylaws and rules that dictate relocation in the NFL. He cited the league rules that say a team must exhaust all opportunities in its current city and referred to the rule that a team owner cannot move simply to enrich himself further.

There are other important to note provisions that say things like a team must put forth a “good faith” effort to negotiate with its current city before it can leave. That falls in line with the “exhaust all opportunities” portion of the rulebook.

To that end, Peacock, who has been working on the project for more than a year and putting in long hours for the past three months, emphasized the expedient efforts with which the St. Louis plan has come together.

“If we were moving in ’16 or ’17 on a new stadium, based on when this process started, I think that would be half the time a lot of other teams did,” Peacock said. “I don’t necessarily buy the ‘too little, too late.’ … I believe those NFL bylaws have been governing actions of the league for a while now and I have faith.”

Of course, Kroenke’s counter to that would point to the failed arbitration process to revamp the Edward Jones Dome as well as the time after that in which St. Louis made no real offers to keep the team. Even in the statement the Rams issued Friday afternoon, there were subtle hints of a team implying that it’s been “good faith negotiating” well before Friday’s reveal.

“The St. Louis Rams have worked for many years, with several agencies and commissions, and their senior management, responsible for stadium facilities in St. Louis,” the statement read. “This includes multiple discussions with the Governor’s recently formed NFL Task Force. We received the Task Force materials shortly before the press conference. We will review them and speak with the Task Force representatives.”

The argument that the city didn’t negotiate much during and after the arbitration process rings true but it also doesn’t mean that all options were exhausted. Pointing to the differences in required public money and the idea of retrofitting the Edward Jones Dome to guarantee 10 more years rather than a long-term solution, Peacock doesn’t see negotiations for a new stadium and arbitration for the old one as the same thing.

“Trying to compare that to our proposal is a little bit of apples and oranges,” Peacock said.

When all is said and done, through the many permutations of what could happen, the NFL and its owners will be the ones to decide on what it values most. Kroenke offers the most tangible Los Angeles plan in two decades, and the league has made no bones about its desire to return to that market.

St. Louis offers a real, seemingly feasible plan to continue as an NFL city. And while the league has rules and bylaws, it’s also showed plenty of willingness to alter direction toward what most benefits the overall health of the league.

For that reason, Peacock has been sure to keep the league in the loop every step of the way. He met with NFL executives in November and with the Rams and more league executives later on.

“We’ve had great discussions with the league,” Peacock said. “The NFL is extremely engaged in this.”

Meanwhile, some around the league were taken aback by the reveal of the Los Angeles plans on Monday but that doesn’t make Kroenke’s offer any less appealing.

It’s highly unlikely that there will be a resolution to any of this anytime soon. In the meantime, at least now we know where Kroenke and St. Louis stand. Unless Kroenke and the Rams surprise by simply agreeing to St. Louis’ plan, it’s up to the NFL to determine what happens next.

St. Louis unveils plan for stadium

By Nick Wagoner | ESPN.com

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-rams/

ST. LOUIS — Less than a week after news came that St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke is part of a group developing a new NFL stadium in Los Angeles, St. Louis revealed a plan for a new stadium of its own Friday afternoon.

The plan calls for the construction of a 64,000-seat open-air NFL stadium on about 90 acres on the north St. Louis riverfront, about a half-mile from the Gateway Arch.

According to former Anheuser-Busch president Dave Peacock and local attorney Bob Blitz, the two-man task force appointed by Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon to come up with the plan, the new stadium would cost between $860 million and $985 million, with construction to begin in 2016 and be completed in 2020.

In addition to housing a football team, the plan also accounts for the potential addition of a Major League Soccer team, some renovations of the Edward Jones Dome to attract major sporting events like the Final Four, and additional development in the currently blighted north St. Louis area. Peacock has been in contact with MLS commissioner Don Garber.

According to Peacock, the proposal isn’t just about keeping football in St. Louis but altering the way the city is viewed.

“It’s about the future of our region,” Peacock said. “It’s about how we are perceived, it’s about no longer accepting the notion that our assets can just dissolve in front of us or leave.”

===

Key bullet points from St. Louis stadium plan

By Nick Wagoner | ESPN.com

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-rams/

ST. LOUIS — As with any stadium proposal anywhere, there are plenty of moving parts when it comes to the new deal being put on the table in St. Louis’ attempt to keep the Rams in the city.

With that in mind, this is an effort to lay out some of the key points of the proposal. By no means is this comprehensive, and Friday’s news conference didn’t answer anything close to all of the tough questions and hurdles that remain, but here’s what the task force of Dave Peacock and Bob Blitz wanted to convey on Friday in bullet-point form:

The plan features an open-air, 64,000-seat stadium on the north riverfront with views to the south of the Gateway Arch and downtown St. Louis. There are an estimated 10,439 parking spaces provided in the plan, and the stadium will have access to multiple forms of public transportation.
The expected cost is between $860 million and $985 million.
The goal of the plan isn’t just to house an NFL team but also lure a Major League Soccer team. Peacock and Blitz have already discussed that possibility with MLS Commissioner Don Garber, and the plans have built in 30,000 lower-bowl seats for MLS and international soccer events.
The stadium will be a public asset owned by a public entity such as the St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority and would be leased to the Rams (or the NFL team it houses) with the ability to sublet to a possible MLS franchise. Any revenue splits, operating rights, management agreements, parking terms, signage, naming rights and other revenue generating initiatives would be negotiated with the NFL team.

Here’s the breakdown of the 64,000 seats for NFL games:

54,020 general seats
2,000 suite seats (includes private suites and on-field seating)
480 loge box seats (eight seats in each of 60 boxes)
7,500 club seats

The 90-plus acre site is a mix of publicly and privately owned property. The aforementioned cost includes the expected purchase and acquisition of the properties.
The plan also includes the financing of improvements to the Edward Jones Dome so it can be repositioned as a permanent convention center that can also be used to attract major sporting events such as college basketball’s Final Four.
From a financing perspective, the new stadium is not expected to add any new tax burden on taxpayers locally or in the state.

Here are the estimated costs:

Land/Demolition – $90-110 million
Stadium construction – $600-650 million
Parking/infrastructure needs – $170-225 million
Total – $860-985 million

Here’s how the financing is expected to work according to Peacock and Blitz:

Private financing

NFL team ownership – $200-250 million
NFL (committed to match up to $200 million through G4 loan program) – $200 million
Total – $400-450 million

Potential public sources (all contingent on commitment of private financing)

Extension of bonds on Edward Jones Dome – $300-350 million
Missouri Development Finance Board support – $15-25 million
Brownfield tax credits (for improving blighted areas) – $25-30 million
Personal seat license proceeds – $120-120 million
Total – $460-535 million

According to the plan, the land would be acquired, bids for contractors and site preparation would begin between June of this year and December 2016. The financing documents and lease documents would be negotiated and signed in 2017, with site preparation completed and permits obtained the same year. Actual construction and marketing of the seat licenses would begin in early 2018, with construction completed in time for the start of the 2020 NFL season.

I listed (alphabetically) Baltimore, Cincinnatti, Dallas, Green Bay, New Orleans, Pittsburgh.

PFF lists as their top 7 Dallas, PHiladelphia, Baltimore, Green Bay, Houston, Cleveland, Cincinnati.

That’s an overlap of 3: Dallas, Cincinnatti, Green Bay.

I didnt list Cleveland or Houston or Philadelphia (though Jack listed Phil)

They list Pittsburgh as 8th.

They list New Orleans as 11th.

Latest Thoughts on Stan Kroenke, the Rams and the NFL in St. Louis

Shane Gray

January 08, 2015

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/STLSports/STLRams/tabid/137/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/15973/Latest-Thoughts-on-Stan-Kroenke-the-Rams-and-the-NFL-in-St-Louis.aspx

By now, most everyone is aware of Sam Farmer’s Los Angeles Times report that broke the news of St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke’s plans to team up with Stockbridge Capital Group to construct an NFL stadium and multifaceted development at Hollywood Park — a location that has been rumored as a potential league venue site since the mid 1990s.

As Farmer points out, there have been more than a dozen L.A. area stadium proposals that have come and gone over the last 20 years. Will the aforementioned Kroenke plan, however, finally be the one that goes from conceptualization to reality and ultimately bring the NFL back to L.A.? At this point at least, the answer to that question would appear to be a yes.

With that said, I would like to touch on a multitude of topics in response to the prospective Kroenke/Stockbridge Capital Group stadium development:

-As I have pointed out previously, there has never been a team relocate with a state of the art venue plan approved in its current market, even prior to the introduction of the NFL’s relocation guidelines and certainly not since they were tweaked and tightened following the moving mayhem that took place in the 1990s. When considering how the NFL controls the L.A. market, that specific league guidelines are in place related to potential relocation and the above-mentioned historical precedence that no team has moved with an approved stadium plan in place at home, local fans have reason to maintain hopes of keeping the Rams in St. Louis.

-In spite of the thinking of a vast many observers, the Rams future is a long way from being decided.

For one, As Bill Plaschke of the L.A. Times emphasized here with supportive evidence, both the pro Rams to L.A. crowd and the keep the Rams in St. Louis contingent should take a wait-and-see approach in regard to anything NFL to L.A. related. Those who are suggesting the Rams to L.A. is somehow a done deal need a reality check.

As I detailed in this feature a few months back and as was covered this week by Farmer and Nathan Fenno of the L.A. Times, the league and its franchises have extensively used the nation’s number two market to help spur deals in other cities. In fact, the Farmer/Fenno column linked above reports that 18 teams have been connected to L.A. at some point in recent years.

For whatever reason(s) — in spite of lessons that should have easily been learned by the history shared above — people are completely convinced that this time it just has to be different. Inexplicably, people in the media and other interested observers alike have already decided that there is no chance that any of this could be leverage related.

But why in the world is that stance taken? Aren’t these people looking at this from a very close-minded and limited perspective?

How come people assume that there has to be a limit to a leverage play, rather than understanding that the bigger the play the bigger the possible reward? Short of loading up the moving vans and driving out of town, there is no official leverage limit that actually exists. Even then — as was evidenced with the Seahawks fiasco in 1996 — that doesn’t guarantee a move.

In short, the bigger the play the bigger the potential response in terms of getting a larger and better deal from a city and state. To think otherwise is foolish.

I guess the fact that The Kroenke Group voluntarily released this information days before the local proposal was to come out — and yes we are talking about “Silent Stan” here — could not have possibly involved other motivations other than the ones that people assume that it did. Apparently, it is inconceivable that this news broke intentionally for the reason of upping the ante for a better offer from Peacock/Blitz just before the proposal was submitted to Nixon and released to the public. Nixon, by the way, will get to recommend changes that he sees fit upon viewing the plan.

I mean, I know it is just beyond absurd to consider, but what if the potential L.A. project indeed was made known at this time to help ensure that the St. Louis proposal was pressured to the utmost at the last second to entice the very best offer possible in the next few days? Nah, that couldn’t possibly be something that a shrewd businessman would even consider doing. Impossible.

Sorry for the overly thick use of sarcasm, but it is as if people just assume there is some imaginary line in the sand that says if you cross this point then what is occurring just cannot possibly involve an effort to extract a more beneficial deal. It’s as if the thinking is that if it looks a little real and a little threatening then that could indeed be leverage, but when something is done that actually creates an even greater position of power and positioning and looks even realer, well, then that somehow eliminates the possibility of leverage.

Sorry, but just as it is silly to dismiss the potential that Kroenke could ultimately make a strong attempt to both build a venue in L.A. and move the Rams, it is also just as silly to assume that there is no chance that any of this is possibly related to coercing an optimal offer.

On that point, Brent Schrotenboer of USA Today and Woody Paige of the Denver Post are among many who have suggested the possibility of a very powerful leverage play being at work here in an attempt to get the very best deal conceivable in Missouri.

Secondly, even if a move is ultimately attempted, its approval is far from a lock. The league tightened and altered the moving guidelines since the musical chairs of relocation that occurred during the 1990s, as former Raiders CEO Amy Trask told Jim Thomas in this report. A team would have to prove it has exhausted all options in its current market and meet a plethora of requirements as detailed in the NFL’s rules for relocation — many of which the Rams have not yet met.

Let me be clear: the Rams did not meet relocation guideline requirements during the arbitration process, in spite what some desperately want to believe. They have certainly not “exhausted all options in the current market”, among other prerequisites which have not been met.

Yes, the Rams would be free to go due to the arbitration ruling if St. Louis was not trying to put together a viable new stadium plan. If that were the case, then yes, the arbitration process would have went a lot further towards placing the Rams in position of fulfilling the league’s relocation criteria. But with St. Louis working on other options and a stadium plan that the league is said to like, the arbitration process was not anything close to the be all/end all related to the Rams future in the STL.

In addition, Bleacher Report’s Jason Cole reports that Chargers owner Dean Spanos believes he has at least nine votes in place to block an attempted move even if Kroenke were to attempt to uproot the Rams.

Thirdly, even if Kroenke attempts to move without approval, an unapproved move could cost a rogue franchise their share of league-wide TV revenues, among other possible penalties. Obviously, such financial losses would be significant as each NFL team took in nearly $200 million in TV revenues a year ago.

With all that said, there are a plethora of possible outcomes regarding this situation, including but not limited to:

-The possibility of Kroenke developing and profiting from the land around the proposed new edifice and then leasing the football facilities out to another team or team(s) — even if done in the name of Stockbridge — and profiting from both the stadium and surrounding development while keeping the Rams in St. Louis in a new venue with added revenue streams that would significantly increase the value of his franchise while avoiding a relocation fee and other costs associated with a move. That would be quite the coup, but would anyone put it past him at this point?

As for Governor Nixon’s Dave Peacock/Bob Blitz stadium task force and their coming proposal, they will and should forge forward with the retention of the Rams being the first priority of their effort to secure a multidimensional development that would include a new stadium, the retention of the NFL, the prospects of an MLS franchise as well as extensive ancillary development surrounding the facility.

Rather than throwing their hands up and crawling into the fetal position due to the news of Kroenke’s L.A. interest, the Peacock/Blitz team should be all the more determined to fight for the Rams by continuing to work directly with the NFL to bring about a solution that makes it virtually impossible for the organization to relocate.

Some have said, why try to keep them if they want to go?

First, far too many are assuming the appearance of wanting to move equates to a fact that Kroenke indeed desires to move. In spite of the strong indications that this is the case, it is not necessarily so.

Secondly, there are but 31 cities in the world who play host to the National Football League, and hosting one of the franchises is a big deal. If the Rams leave, there are no guarantees that another team will ever again call the Gateway City home.

Thirdly, for those who are justifiably upset at Kroenke, why let him have what many believe he wants without fighting tooth and nail to keep the Rams? Why make it easy on him? Why not work with the NFL to do everything possible to stop him from removing the Rams from Missouri? For those angry with the Rams owner, what better way to get back at him than for the city and state to come up with a plan that prevents him from getting what many have decided he desires elsewhere?

Finally, if the NFL blocks a move of the Rams and Kroenke is dead set on getting to L.A., he might then decide to sell the franchise and buy another team to perhaps attempt to move to California rather than keeping ownership of the Rams in St. Louis. At that point, he could either be stuck in the Lou or sell the club to another ownership group.

With all that and more considered, leaders should clench their jaws and move ahead with steadfast determination to see this through and come away with their stated goals achieved. Now is not the time to quit, it is the time to start fighting with enhanced fervor.

While focusing on the Rams, it is wise that the Peacock/Blitz team continue to look into other alternatives (hello Raiders or Jags) and do what is reasonable to retain the NFL and move forward with a project that could do at least four things:

1: If done correctly, it will retain an NFL presence in some way shape or form — preferably with the Rams. After all, starting with a new fanbase for a third time would be far from an ideal outcome.

2: A new venue would free up the dome to add dates from August through January and increase revenues there substantially. At last report, the dome/convention center was bringing in north of $150 million per year. With the facility enhanced and adapted, it is possible that eventually those revenues could double (and certainly create a net gain annually over what new venue costs would be per year).

3: This project would facilitate development of blighted land and bring year round jobs to a region of St. Louis that could use them, as well as enhance tourist activity which also generates more revenue.

4: A new venue could also bring the MLS to the Gateway City, something that would generate added revenues at the stadium and in the city while making a whole lot of soccer lovers very happy.

–As for the possibility of adding another NFL team if the Rams indeed attempt a move and get away, a new venue could accomplish that feat with the increases in franchise value and revenue streams it would bring considered.

An educated guess would suggest that both the Raiders and Jaguars could be in play under that scenario.

The Raiders would bring a natural rivalry with the cross-state Chiefs (assuming they remained in the AFC West), and the Jaguars would bring owner Shad Khan and top executive Mark Lamping — among others — home to the St. Louis region.

–At this stage, the best thing for fans in both St. Louis and L.A. to do is to let the dust settle just a bit.

There are a lot of variables at play here, and this saga in St. Louis — and in L.A. — is far from over. In fact, there will be several more twists and turns before things are ultimately resolved.