Skip to content

Is Kroenke trying to make it impossible to stay it in St. Louis?

Stan Kroenke AP

In any campaign that relies on the eventual casting of ballots, candidates can either promote their own attributes or trash those of the alternative. In the quest for the 24 NFL ownership votes needed to secure a golden ticket to Los Angeles, Rams owner Stan Kroenke has opted to do both.

But the negative campaigning focuses not on the other L.A.-area projects as much as it focuses on the other potential location for the Rams. And in trashing St. Louis on his way out the door, Kroenke may be trying to make it impossible for him to stay in St. Louis, if he doesn’t get the 24 votes to move.

“Any NFL Club that signs on to this proposal in St. Louis will be well on the road to financial ruin, and the League will be harmed,” Kroenke’s application for relocation said, via David Hunn of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

At a time when the NFL fears that a one-year delay in resolving the L.A. situation will result in a degrading of the fan bases in St. Louis, San Diego, and Oakland, Kroenke has made it clear that there definitely will be a degrading of the fan base in St. Louis, if the Rams don’t move now.

Here’s where it gets even more intriguing. According to Ben Frederick of the Post-Dispatch, the Rams tried to keep the submission secret, in defiance of the league’s relocation policy. Only after multiple requests did the Rams disclose the information to the Post-Dispatch.

Regardless of whether Kroenke leaked it or tried to hide it, he had to have known it would come out. And he had to have known it would make it hard to stay in St. Louis. And at some level he had to want the owners to realize this before deciding whether to let him leave.

So Kroenke thinks the league will be harmed if the Rams stay in St. Louis. Kroenke’s submission now ensures that the league will be harmed even more. Unless Kroenke no longer owns the Rams.

Which brings us back to the outside-the-box-or-just-plain-kooky notion that a swap of the Rams and Chargers may be the only way to get this done. If Kroenke and Chargers owner Dean Spanos trade pink slips (and if Kroenke gives Spanos a huge pile of cash), Kroenke can take the Chargers to Inglewood and Spanos can become the new favorite son of St. Louis.

Alternatively, it could mean that Kroenke may have to sell the team, if he doesn’t get the 24 votes to move. As some have speculated, he could then eventually buy the Broncos from the Bowlen family, given that Kroenke already owns the Denver Nuggets and Colorado Avalanche.

However it plays out, Kroenke’s aggressive move to get out of St. Louis underscores the fact that, as the owners get together next week, anything can happen. And pretty much everything will.

Permalink 79 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Los Angeles Rams, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers
79 Responses to “Is Kroenke trying to make it impossible to stay it in St. Louis?”
  1. pastanow says: Jan 6, 2016 1:38 PM

    Or he could move the Rams anyway and fight it out in court with the NFL.

  2. logicalvoicepft says: Jan 6, 2016 1:41 PM

    I keep thinking that’s Johnny Football with that bad toupe and mustache.

  3. radrntn says: Jan 6, 2016 1:41 PM

    one of the most profound things I haver read and agree with….This guy should buy the denver donkeys…His face could be the new mule mascot.

  4. nfloracle says: Jan 6, 2016 1:44 PM

    Billionaires… you gotta stand back in awe at the lengths they’ll go to when they have a new money making scheme.

    And at the same time they have no regrets about hosing the loyal fan base, in many cases folks barely getting by, who have supported a team for years and years.

  5. swortybounce says: Jan 6, 2016 1:44 PM

    All I see in the pic is Willy Wonka.

  6. vtsquirm says: Jan 6, 2016 1:45 PM

    just move out in the middle of the night and head for new digs. it worked for the Colts!

  7. chicagosportsfan11 says: Jan 6, 2016 1:47 PM

    Force him to sell the team. If St Louis doesn’t support the Rams and from seeing the stands on TV during games, then move them to OKC.

  8. ravens2016 says: Jan 6, 2016 1:49 PM

    Move the team anyways…Raiders to play in 49 ers stadium

  9. bigdawg24 says: Jan 6, 2016 1:53 PM

    My wish list:
    – Arizona Cardinals move back to St Louis.
    – Rams move back to L.A.
    – Oakland gets a new stadium & stays put
    – San Diego gets a new stadium, or moves to L.A.
    – Jacksonville moves to Arizona

    And all is back well in the NFL Universe.

  10. govtminion says: Jan 6, 2016 1:53 PM

    I’m a diehard Denver sports fan. I’ve watched what the Nuggets and Avalanche have become under Kroenke’s watch. The LAST thing I want is for him to get the Broncos too.

    I would genuinely rather have Jimmy Haslam end up running the Broncos than Kroenke. No humor intended.

  11. purplengold says: Jan 6, 2016 1:54 PM

    The players, the fans and the stadiums don’t harm the league. What’s left after that?

    Owners like Kroenke.

  12. barneyrumble says: Jan 6, 2016 1:54 PM

    The picture of Kroenke looks like he should have had a part in the Mel Brook’s movie ‘Blazing Saddles’.

  13. 2since96 says: Jan 6, 2016 1:54 PM

    Does anyone think this Billionaire isnt going to move his team to the city he wants them in? Of course he’s going to try and do it by the book, but if he doesnt get the votes, he’s going to move them anyways, and then look at the NFL and say, “what?”. The NFL can’t stop this guy from moving through legal action, as Kroenke is allowed to run his business where he wants, and what do they have to threaten him with? Would they kick him out and play the season with 31 teams?

  14. qdog112 says: Jan 6, 2016 1:54 PM

    Let me see … St. Louis or LA. The choices are too tough for me. Flyover country or La la land.

    I would have packed before the last game was over.

  15. scrp2 says: Jan 6, 2016 1:55 PM

    Kroenke would be welcome in San Diego to build his vision. Spanos wants everything for free and the city of San Diego is broke.

  16. DrSteveBrule says: Jan 6, 2016 1:55 PM

    Near to or dead last in home attendance every season and it seems like half of their defensive starters are free agents now. They aren’t likely to stick around which will make this team even worse. Move the team now to a much better market a rebuild.

  17. alonestartexan says: Jan 6, 2016 1:55 PM

    Kroenke is a POS, LA deserves him.

  18. granadafan says: Jan 6, 2016 1:55 PM

    Funny how he was able to find enough change in his sofas to propose a privately financed stadium here in LA, yet cries poor in St Louis and has demanded, threatened, and blackmailed the poor taxpayers of St Louis to give him a brand new and free stadium.

  19. feckyerlife says: Jan 6, 2016 1:57 PM

    Kroenke is a moron for being a filthy rich guy. The rams left LA because they were a bad football team, which they still are. LA is not a football town, it is a baseball/basketball town. If they bring the Rams to LA and its more of what it has been for the last couple season (pretty much since Kurt or even Marc left) then the seats will be empty and they he will be losing money just like the 49ers this season. And it will be bad taste in the mouth of the LA fans.

  20. don2074978 says: Jan 6, 2016 1:58 PM

    He might have the momey to buy the Donkeys but if it plays out that way I doubt he gets 24 votes, especially if Elway can lead an effort to buy the team

  21. dogfromduckhunt says: Jan 6, 2016 1:59 PM

    Rams last in attendance
    Nuggets last in attendance
    Avalanche 22nd in attendance

    There’s a common variable and it’s not the fans.

  22. fluiddarkness says: Jan 6, 2016 2:00 PM

    “Financial ruin”?? Kroenke, the NFL has made you so much money. Don’t be such a liar.

  23. mack2x says: Jan 6, 2016 2:01 PM

    Pretty dumpy looking for a billionaire.

  24. doctorrustbelt says: Jan 6, 2016 2:03 PM

    Anheuser-Busch is a Belgian owned company.

  25. sfm073 says: Jan 6, 2016 2:05 PM

    Kroenke never had any intention of staying in St. Louis. So what would his feelings have been about St. Louis if the city had a stadium plan in place at the beginning of this? This is clearly posturing by him and the NFL to help explain why they left a city that was willing to build 2 new stadiums in 25 years, something that’s never been done by the way.

  26. kane337 says: Jan 6, 2016 2:06 PM

    St. Louis didn’t feel sorry for L.A fans when they got the Rams. Karma sux doesn’t it?

  27. tformation says: Jan 6, 2016 2:06 PM

    Kroenke looks like he owns the bank in Mary Poppins. That picture just exudes English old money and more money than God.

  28. stl45fan says: Jan 6, 2016 2:08 PM

    If he misrepresents St. Louis on his way out, then he will misrepresent what he claims to be bringing to LA. Is he lying now or was he lying when he 1st came to STL?

  29. purpleguy says: Jan 6, 2016 2:08 PM

    The best story of how out of touch this guy is with the real world was when the Rams played the Vikes this year at the temporary TCF Bank stadium (and those in the Rams’ owners box had to share the bathroom with the press box) — this guy would have NFL security clear everyone out of the bathroom before he took a whiz so he wouldn’t get stage fright in front of all the little people.

  30. beavertonsteve says: Jan 6, 2016 2:11 PM

    There won’t be any team swap. The Rams will either move to L.A. (with or without league approval) or they will pick another location they prefer to St Louis.

    The proposal spelled it out in no uncertain terms. The city of St Louis broke their lease which clearly states the Rams were free to relocate if that happened.

    If the NFL votes to approve the Carson deal I wouldn’t be shocked if the Rams immediately applied to move to San Diego.

  31. kane337 says: Jan 6, 2016 2:11 PM

    “feckyerlife says:
    Jan 6, 2016 1:57 PM
    Kroenke is a moron for being a filthy rich guy. The rams left LA because they were a bad football team, which they still are. LA is not a football town, it is a baseball/basketball town. If they bring the Rams to LA and its more of what it has been for the last couple season (pretty much since Kurt or even Marc left) then the seats will be empty and they he will be losing money just like the 49ers this season. And it will be bad taste in the mouth of the LA fans.”

    ——————-

    Correction: The Rams left LA because the owner wanted a new stadium and the city of Los Angeles wasn’t going to buy her one. She got a free new stadium in St. Louis and left town. LA is an entertainment town. It will support any team from any sport as long as there is an entertaining product.

  32. doctorrustbelt says: Jan 6, 2016 2:12 PM

    kroenke reminds me of an older, more eccentric, more dominating, and more broken American version of French NASCAR driver Jean Girard.

  33. middy84 says: Jan 6, 2016 2:13 PM

    Goofdelll will be in court the way Pete was when Davis moved to LA. It worked then , it will work now.
    Your new Los Angeles Rams!!!

  34. ebdug says: Jan 6, 2016 2:14 PM

    The fans will support the team regardless of how they feel about the owner. To a true fan, ALL owners are just a pile of animated slime after the lockout, the sounds they make are just noise coming from a sleaze pit.

    Besides, everyone knows that “Owner” is a term that’s in use in name only. The NFL is owned by a board of 32 members, all grabbing a piece of the TV revenue. Few of them even own a majority of the team they’re associated with.

    One thing about owners opening their mouths: Football will survive if they don’t do it.

  35. daysend564 says: Jan 6, 2016 2:15 PM

    Crime Index (100 being safest)

    St. Louis: 22
    Inglewood: 1

    Chances of becoming a victim:
    St. Louis: 1 in 63
    Inglewood: 1 in 147

  36. ravensfan56 says: Jan 6, 2016 2:16 PM

    Kroenke is like Irsay. They will move your favorite team in the middle of the night and never give the city’s famed history.

  37. dmnirican says: Jan 6, 2016 2:16 PM

    As a LONG time, die-hard Broncos fan, please – PLEASE! – keep Kroenke away from us.

    I wouldn’t want him as the team owner in any circumstance, but to go from one of the best owners in all of sports (Pat Bowlen) to this guy would make it even more painful.

  38. beavertonsteve says: Jan 6, 2016 2:16 PM

    Goofdelll will be in court the way Pete was when Davis moved to LA. It worked then , it will work now.
    Your new Los Angeles Rams!!!
    ————————-
    The funny thing is most people believe Goodell is sold on the Inglewood project. This will be an interesting test of how much power he has.

  39. jshawaii22 says: Jan 6, 2016 2:17 PM

    He doesn’t want to move the team ‘in the darkness of night’. He wants full league approval. He wants to build the NFL “next generation” stadium complex that includes moving the NFL films and other rent-producing projects into his building along with becoming the regular Super Bowl rotation stadium.

    None of that will happen if he goes rogue.

  40. deathspiralx says: Jan 6, 2016 2:18 PM

    I find it very distasteful and hypocritical that the NFL professes its love for the game and fans, then ruthlessly executes and makes it all about the best deal that can be negotiated.

    I actually don’t have problem with the latter behavior, but quit trying to have it both ways. It comes across as talking out both sides of your mouth. It’s quite ugly.

    As I recall, the NFL distributed $7 Billion in a year in shared revenue per the last numbers made public by the Green Bay packers. If so motivated, the NFL could handle any and all new stadiums with private funding.

  41. fishyinalittledishy says: Jan 6, 2016 2:20 PM

    I am not familiar with the reasons the Rams moved from Anaheim to St. Louis or even if the Kroenke’s had anything to do with the team then but none the less St Louis have had a bit of a bum deal when it comes to a team staying the course there. As usual it’s the fans the get screwed. The other owners should tell The Rams to stay put and stop jumping ship when things get tough. Same with the Chargers and anybody else.

  42. cgsuddeath says: Jan 6, 2016 2:23 PM

    Don’t make me laugh.Perhaps you didn’t read the proposal sent to the NFL.

  43. lscratchingthesurface says: Jan 6, 2016 2:23 PM

    Please buy the Broncos!!!!

  44. Walt Gekko says: Jan 6, 2016 2:29 PM

    If Stan Kronke is that determined to get out of St. Louis, the NFL in my view may be forced to do what they and the other owners don’t want to do and that is broker a deal where Kronke and Chargers owner Dean Spanos swap franchies, with:

    The current Chargers moving, becoming the Los Angeles Rams and taking the current Rams’ spot in the NFC West with the team eventually moving into the stadium Kronke plans to build on the former Hollywood Park site.

    The current Rams remaining where they are, but becoming the St. Louis Chargers and moving to the AFC West to replace the current Chargers. Perhaps Spanos is compensated for agreeing to this both monetarily and by being given the #1 overall pick in the 2017 and ’18 drafts (in addition to their regular pick each year).

    This would solve that problem and allow the NFL to separately deal with the issue the Raiders have.

  45. psubeerman21 says: Jan 6, 2016 2:31 PM

    Financial ruin? Dude had stones to ever begin to imply an nfl franchise would ever actually lose money

  46. cgsuddeath says: Jan 6, 2016 2:35 PM

    He just doesn’t want to be there

  47. dukeearl says: Jan 6, 2016 2:40 PM

    floracle says:

    And at the same time they have no regrets about hosing the loyal fan base, in many cases folks barely getting by, who have supported a team for years and years.

    *************************************

    That is just it.. lowest attendance in the NFL.
    Rams don’t have fans that are just barely getting by. They barely have fans.

  48. taeh324 says: Jan 6, 2016 2:43 PM

    granadafan says:
    Jan 6, 2016 1:55 PM
    Funny how he was able to find enough change in his sofas to propose a privately financed stadium here in LA, yet cries poor in St Louis and has demanded, threatened, and blackmailed the poor taxpayers of St Louis to give him a brand new and free stadium.

    ______________________

    It’s simply obvious that he doesn’t want to be in St. Louis. Why pay out of your own money for somewhere that don’t want to be.

  49. sdcharger123 says: Jan 6, 2016 2:49 PM

    The NFL sure has some quality sleazeballs as team owners.

  50. sindiegosage says: Jan 6, 2016 2:51 PM

    purplengold says: Jan 6, 2016 1:54 PM

    The players, the fans and the stadiums don’t harm the league. What’s left after that?

    *********

    NFL Management, most notably its Commissioner.

  51. middy84 says: Jan 6, 2016 2:56 PM

    beavertonsteve
    Jan 6, 2016, 11:16 AM PST
    Goofdelll will be in court the way Pete was when Davis moved to LA. It worked then , it will work now.
    Your new Los Angeles Rams!!!
    ————————-
    The funny thing is most people believe Goodell is sold on the Inglewood project. This will be an interesting test of how much power he has.

    I am positive Goofdell is against the Rams leaving that crime ridden area, but I am sure he does not want to go to court and be the new Rozelle of the modern era.
    All that is needed is for him to hand Stan the 2015 Super Bowl after a court battle.

  52. patsfan says: Jan 6, 2016 2:59 PM

    He looks like Uncle Rico from Napoleon Dynamite, but he sure can put a deal together.

  53. mongo3401 says: Jan 6, 2016 3:02 PM

    what really sad about this whole thing is the people of St Louis are finding excuses why Kroenke is doing this. such as, he is just using it as leverage. He is just threatening to move to get a better stadium on our Polluted as heck River, etc

    Its sincerely so sad that when the Moving trucks leave Earth City the fans will probably be saying, hey, they are just doing renovations on the Earth City facility and they are putting the stuff in storage.

    With no disrespect meant to anyone but. St Louis and the Media in St Louis please accept the fact, approved or not approved, the Rams are leaving town. Kroenke has no thought of selling the team because he just made it basically worthless unless he does move to LA. Besides, he bought it for a song from Georgia’s kids.

    It sucks but its happening. The sooner the people of St. Louis accept this fact, the better they will be and then can move on.

  54. captainwhodat says: Jan 6, 2016 3:05 PM

    …just getting better and funnier…probably wants to see how many Hollywood starlets will visit his skybox in Inglewood and rub his toupee…

  55. beepbeepbeeplgb says: Jan 6, 2016 3:06 PM

    dogfromduckhunt says:
    Jan 6, 2016 1:59 PM
    Rams last in attendance
    Nuggets last in attendance
    Avalanche 22nd in attendance

    There’s a common variable and it’s not the fans.

    Don’t forget the MLS:

    Rapids – last in the MLS

  56. aarownhere says: Jan 6, 2016 3:08 PM

    La come pick up this crap team and weird owner please

  57. americanfootballarchive says: Jan 6, 2016 3:20 PM

    Enough with this absurd notion that Spanos will trade franchises!!!

    Spanos is after one thing, $$ in LA. Even IF Kroenke were to give him some cash it’s still a lateral move and makes zero sense to have gone through all this for the same team and stadium situation but in a different city.

  58. tjacks7 says: Jan 6, 2016 3:20 PM

    I really hope this guy gets forced to stay in St. Louis for no other reason than that he seems like a total prick.

  59. ramfanmatt says: Jan 6, 2016 3:40 PM

    The cardinals aren’t leaving baseball in financial ruin. If you learned how to run a winning organization the city would be spending loads of money on you. During the GSOT era the Rams were kings of the town. The Cardinals had playoff runs during that time too. It’s hard for a city to wrap it’s arms around a team that has had only 4 winning seasons here.

  60. mrtullymars says: Jan 6, 2016 3:52 PM

    Kroenke always looks like the villain in a Mel Brooks movie. He certainly does in this picture.

  61. ivanpavlov0000 says: Jan 6, 2016 3:53 PM

    Kroenke has already spent millions on his LA project. He’s proposing a 70,000+ seat stadium with room for another 30,000 for a big event like the Super Bowl.

    Kroenke’s vision is much larger than just a football stadium. His plans include using the new Rams stadium as an anchor for a large entertainment and retail complex. This will be a huge development site. Staying in St. Louis would not provide this kind of opportunity. So yes, he’s already decided he’s moving his team.

    It would not shock me if he threatens an anti-trust lawsuit against the NFL if the move is not approved (that’s what Georgia Frontiere did when she wanted to move the Rams to St. Louis).

    This proposal also hints that the Chargers would be the best option to share Kroenke’s stadium.

  62. BIG RED says: Jan 6, 2016 3:54 PM

    “All that is needed is for him to hand Stan the 2015 Super Bowl”

    That was played last February.

  63. NinersRule says: Jan 6, 2016 3:54 PM

    The idea that Spanos would even consider moving to St Louis is hilarious.

  64. tbearde says: Jan 6, 2016 4:18 PM

    Um, last time I checked, Kroenke doesn’t sell stuff.

    The fact of the matter is Kroenke laid claim to the LA market FIRST and the Charger/Raiders plan was a reaction to it.

    He has tremendous legal precedent here for him to proceed with his plans for Los Angeles.

    The best managed outcome here is for Spanos to get off his soap box and team with Kroenke in Inglewood while Davis is aided by an investor and the NFL to stay in Oakland.

    It makes no sense for three cities to loose NFL teams because it is apparent Kroenke will not stay in St. Louis.

    If the NFL approves only the Chargers and Raiders to LA, that’s exactly what is going to happen and that is a mess I don’t think they want to have to clean up.

    Regardless of how anyone feels about the approach of all of the owners involved, the Inglewood site is by FAR the best plan and will indeed make the league the most money.

  65. jgedgar70 says: Jan 6, 2016 4:25 PM

    Interesting takes on the picture. I see Pat McGurn, the bartender/nephew of Brad Wesley in “Road House.”

    This is definitely going to be an interesting battle.

  66. melsredmazda3 says: Jan 6, 2016 4:51 PM

    whats funny is that when Georgia move was rejected she threatened to sue. but STL turns the other way when its brought up…

  67. inallsincerity says: Jan 6, 2016 4:57 PM

    I get the feeling that there are a few owners jealous of Kroenke. L.A. has been without a professional football team long enough. The Chargers and Rams should share a stadium in Inglewood, similar to the way the Jets and Giants share MetLife in Jersey. I assume Kroenke’s grand plans has the other owners worried, because his stadium will be latest, state of the art facility with all of the amenities their stadiums don’t have.

  68. BIG RED says: Jan 6, 2016 5:16 PM

    “The idea that Spanos would even consider moving to St Louis is hilarious”

    Why?

  69. mmack66 says: Jan 6, 2016 5:37 PM

    captainwhodat says:
    Jan 6, 2016 3:05 PM

    …just getting better and funnier…probably wants to see how many Hollywood starlets will visit his skybox in Inglewood and rub his toupee…
    —————————–

    Sounds pretty good to me.

  70. dannyeggleston says: Jan 6, 2016 6:07 PM

    Kroenke was in the ownership group that hijacked the Rams out of LA to begin with, so don’t blame the fans of St. Louis for the Rams leaving, you can blame Kroenke. He doesn’t care about the fans in LA, STL, or anywhere, he doesn’t care about winning(see DEN teams), he only cares about climbing the list of richest people on the planet. When he got a sweetheart deal to make more money in STL he went there, and the same is true now.

  71. jmoney74 says: Jan 6, 2016 6:27 PM

    If Stan fights the NFL on this.. get ready to be the most penalized team in the league. Raider fans will thank you.

  72. NinersRule says: Jan 6, 2016 7:30 PM

    “Why?”

    Because Spanos’ lifestyle wouldn’t fit there. He loves to golf year-round and travel and loves his life in SoCal. And he can easily fly his private plane back and forth to Stockton to see his parents and extended family.

    And he sees the family ownership legacy continuing in his sons who now run the team. He would never do that to his sons.

    Plus– it’s St Louis, man.

  73. savior72 says: Jan 6, 2016 7:46 PM

    So, St. Louis is an economic wasted huh? Then why Stan do you continue to develop commercial properties in the region? If owning an NFL team in St. Louis will leave them in financial ruin, why has the Rams value continued to go up? Why did you by them in 2010 unless it was your plan 6 years ago to leave the second you got the chance. His proposal is so full of lies and inaccuracies other owners should be offended he is trying to pass so of that BS off on them.

  74. aarontwalter says: Jan 6, 2016 7:47 PM

    What’s worse – Kroenke or the Davis boy?

  75. simon94022 says: Jan 6, 2016 8:54 PM

    Spanos doesn’t want St Louis, and LA fans don’t want the Chargers. So the franchise swap solves no problems and screws the fans of San Diego while disappointing most of the fans in LA.

    What kind of solution is that?

  76. simon94022 says: Jan 6, 2016 8:59 PM

    There are 2 ways this can play out:

    1). Chargers and Rams both go to LA with League approval.

    2). Chargers and Rams both go to LA, but with Rams in defiance of the League. In that case, Kroenke withholds the relocation fee, the NFL sues him, and Kroenke takes them to the cleaners in court.

    One way or another the Los Angeles Rams are coming home.

  77. justanotherfan101 says: Jan 6, 2016 9:26 PM

    The isn’t enough money in the world Kroenke could give Spanos to get him to move to St Louis. The NFL will collect a relocation fee of about $550 million from each team that moves. That and the teams that move will also pay over $1.4 billion of their own money to build new stadiums. With that much money at stake, how many more years will a no vote keep these three teams from moving.

  78. danmeadows30 says: Jan 6, 2016 10:51 PM

    ebdug says:
    Jan 6, 2016 2:14 PM
    The fans will support the team regardless of how they feel about the owner. To a true fan, ALL owners are just a pile of animated slime after the lockout, the sounds they make are just noise coming from a sleaze pit.

    Besides, everyone knows that “Owner” is a term that’s in use in name only. The NFL is owned by a board of 32 members, all grabbing a piece of the TV revenue. Few of them even own a majority of the team they’re associated with.

    One thing about owners opening their mouths: Football will survive if they don’t do it.

    == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

    I’ll give you MOST owners, actually the vast majority, but there are a select few that deserve fans respect, family owned teams since way before football was about profit, e.g. the Maras and the Rooneys. It’s especially commendable what they’ve when you factor in things like the estate tax. Neither family has threatened to move, and they’re not that rich outside of football, take away the Steelers and Mr. Rooney is worth just over 100 million; you’d have more if you hit the Powerball tonight. But yeah outside of a small select group NFL teams are status symbols for billionaires, and that’s why I always side with the players on labor disputes.

  79. ldloudin says: Jan 7, 2016 2:23 AM

    I find it very difficult to believe that, after taking it up the wazoo from Al Davis >30 years ago, the NFL failed to add clauses in the contracts w/ their franchisees that require them to sign an agreement to abide by league decisions on relocating in addition to other issues requiring league consent. What if Sweet Stan decided to set up his own nationwide cable deal like the Lakers’ 20 year, $3Bn deal w/ TWC; would the other owners roll over for that too? I seriously doubt that this collection of very well lawyered billionaires would leave issues so highly relevant to their own financial health in a position to be up for grabs in a court of law.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!