Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 43
  1. #1
    lordwhttgr's Avatar
    lordwhttgr is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    I live in Danville Illinois, I work all over the USA.
    Posts
    759
    Rep Power
    13

    Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    April 16 by Jeol Thorman
    For several years, LA businessman Ed Roski has been pushing for a stadium in Los Angeles. The goal is to eventually bring a NFL team to the area.
    More recently, another group has popped up proposing a LA stadium. The group, led by two businessman, .
    It turns out [Stan] Kroenke is a member of the league's Los Angeles Stadium Working Group committee. Roll that one around in your mind a few minutes. Everyone I mentioned that to Thursday was silent for a few seconds, and then said, "Oh, my God."
    The thinking is that Kroenke, who is trying to buy the Rams, would try to bring the Rams to LA.
    If Kroenke gains control of the Rams, he's sitting in a very nice place. He can either be the one that brings football back to LA or he can use the LA stadium as leverage for the best possible deal to stay in St. Louis.
    APR 21 by Joel Thorman
    In his first on-the-record interview since declaring his intentions to purchase a 100% share of the St. Louis Rams, Stan Kroenke has begun reassuring fans that football in St. Louis is here to stay, .
    "I'm going to attempt to do everything that I can to keep the Rams in St. Louis," Kroenke said in a phone interview Tuesday night. "Just as I did everything that I could to bring the team to St. Louis in 1995. I believe my actions speak for themselves."
    Some were worried because Kroenke had connections to a group that was trying to build a stadium in Los Angeles.
    "I'm born and raised in Missouri," Kroenke said. "I've been a Missourian for 60 years. People in our state know me. People know I can be trusted. People know I am an honorable guy."
    APR 13 FOX2 has learned that Kroenke is prepared to move the NBA Denver Nuggets and NHL Colorado Avalanche ownership from his name to another family member's name; allowing Kroenke to buy the remaining 60% in Rams shares from Chip Rosenbloom and Lucia Rodriguez. Kroenke has own a 40% stake in the Rams since they arrive in St. Louis.
    Fact: the man has said that he will give ownership of the RAMS to his wife.
    Fact: He is in league to build a stadium in Los Angeles.
    Fact: He also owns the Pepsi center in Denver. Three teams play there the Denver Nuggets and the Colorado Avalanche as well as the Colorado Crush.
    Fact: Stan Kroenke owns the Denver Nuggets, the Colorado Crush as well as the Colorado Avalanche as well as being a majority stock holder in an English football team.
    Fact: the NFL has stated that there will be an existing NFL Franchise in Los Angeles soon.
    Fact: the Colorado Avalanche moved cities to play in the Pepsi Center in 1995.
    Fact: he has stated that he was behind moving the Rams to ST Louis.

    Does this not look like the heck that went on between Indianapolis and Baltimore in 1984 with Bob Irsay. "I'm not moveing the Colts", said Bob Irsay to the press in an airport. Let me throw in that he was cussing up a storm and drunk to boot.

    If I'm not right tell me. Stan Kroenke is trying to back door his way into owning the Rams. Some one who loves our team would not try to destroy it for the purpose of moving it to another city. His whole purpose is to undermine the fans an get a peice of the LA pie. If he had our intrest at heart, he would have bought them in 2009. Why else wait so long? To get leverage on the LA stadium deal. A successful Rams team with tons of St Louis fans hurts his bid. There is no reason to move a team with a packed dome. Yes, I know that Georgia mismanaged the team for years, but it was hers to do so. It was also Georgia who brought in Dick Vermeil and ultimately won us a super bowl. We went to tree super bowls under her.

    Read my facts and look them up for yourself if you don't believe me.
    Last edited by lordwhttgr; -05-27-2010 at 12:31 AM.


  2. #2
    BrokenWing's Avatar
    BrokenWing is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    1,695
    Rep Power
    35

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    Wow, this has never been talked about before...certainly not with these exact same statements and arguments. I'm sure it won't be followed with exactly the same responses either. In fact, I bet I won't even make a sarcastic reply to it.

  3. #3
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,488
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    First of all, we don't know that Kroenke has said he would sell the Rams to his wife. That was merely something that was reported as an alleged SUGGESTION to get around the cross-ownership rule. Recent reports have indicated that this is not likely to occur, and that Stan would retain ownership of the Rams.

    Other than that, I fail to see your point. So what if Stan Kroenke has business interests in other cities? He has strong ties to St. Louis and has stated that his primary goal would be to keep the Rams there.

    If you look at this from a more optimistic standpoint, you'd see that Kroenke is a deep pocket who is the person most likely to bring the Rams stability and, ultimately, a new (or upgraded) stadium.

    I guess there will ALWAYS be people who think this is all a conspiracy to move the Rams back to Los Angeles. I find the "logic" supporting those theories to be extraordinarily weak.

  4. #4
    MauiRam's Avatar
    MauiRam is online now Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Maui, Hi.
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,779
    Rep Power
    79

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    Wasn't there an article recently that mentioned Stan either bought or was looking to buy a huge tract of land in the St. Louis outskirts which would be a perfect location for a new stadium? Stan has enough money in his coffers that he wouldn't have to try and hold a city hostage .. Should Stan become the owner, the better the Rams do, the better Stan does business wise. Also, having been a minority owner for several years now, I think it is safe to assume he is a full blown Ram fan .. I'm rooting for Stan all the way !!!

  5. #5
    Varg6's Avatar
    Varg6 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,612
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    Kroenke has a good reputation with virtually all of the owners-- whether that's a good thing or not remains to be seen. I thought the whole "selling to his wife" deal was his way of working around the cross-ownership rule. Regardless, I'd bet that he'd be as much a part of the Rams whether he's the "official" owner or not.


    Always and Forever a fan of the St. Louis Rams

  6. #6
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    If the team moves, it is because the market has failed and/or a stadium is not forthcoming. There is no grand conspiracy to just take the team to Los Angeles. That said, I don't think Kroenke is willing to personally foot the bill for a stadium anywhere, so you guys might want to start lobbying your local politicians if you want to keep the team. There needs to be serious movement on a stadium in the next year or so.

    Interestingly, since you bring up the case of the Avalanche, that is an example of a team that bailed on its market due to having an old, obsolescent stadium. Perhaps rather than treating this as a sign of obvious "villainous" intent regarding the Rams' long term presence in St. Louis, we should consider this to be a cautionary tale of warning. Also, Kroenke didn't buy the Avs until well after they were established in Denver.

  7. #7
    lordwhttgr's Avatar
    lordwhttgr is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    I live in Danville Illinois, I work all over the USA.
    Posts
    759
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    First of all, we don't know that Kroenke has said he would sell the Rams to his wife. That was merely something that was reported as an alleged SUGGESTION to get around the cross-ownership rule. Recent reports have indicated that this is not likely to occur, and that Stan would retain ownership of the Rams.

    That was exactly the point I was trying to get across

    Other than that, I fail to see your point. So what if Stan Kroenke has business interests in other cities? He has strong ties to St. Louis and has stated that his primary goal would be to keep the Rams there.

    Bob Irsay said that to Baltimore in 1984. Strong ties ,,,,so strong he ownes several teams in Denver.

    If you look at this from a more optimistic standpoint, you'd see that Kroenke is a deep pocket who is the person most likely to bring the Rams stability and, ultimately, a new (or upgraded) stadium.

    Bingo,,,you nailed this on the head as well...He is in the works to build a stadium in Los Angeles. It's a nice dome with a removeable roof.

    I guess there will ALWAYS be people who think this is all a conspiracy to move the Rams back to Los Angeles. I find the "logic" supporting those theories to be extraordinarily weak.
    AV you are right on the money with everything else I stated. If my point is so weak, then why not rubber stamp this in the NFL league meeting this week. If he is so cut and dry "the man" Why is he not the man today? Why?

    I will tell you why, he intends to run the franchise down to move it. It's not good for buisness in the NFL to have a non competitive team. It's not good for the city of ST Louis. And the fans in LA are not going to support a team comming in 1-15 two years in a row. The NFL is going to milk this till he caves and lets Khan buy the team. Thats why the wait game is being played.
    Last edited by lordwhttgr; -05-28-2010 at 07:18 AM.

  8. #8
    lordwhttgr's Avatar
    lordwhttgr is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    I live in Danville Illinois, I work all over the USA.
    Posts
    759
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    Quote Originally Posted by MauiRam View Post
    Wasn't there an article recently that mentioned Stan either bought or was looking to buy a huge tract of land in the St. Louis outskirts which would be a perfect location for a new stadium? Stan has enough money in his coffers that he wouldn't have to try and hold a city hostage .. Should Stan become the owner, the better the Rams do, the better Stan does business wise. Also, having been a minority owner for several years now, I think it is safe to assume he is a full blown Ram fan .. I'm rooting for Stan all the way !!!
    What is the biggest market in the NFL? Los Angeles.
    Where does Kroenke stand to make the most money off the Team? Los Angeles.
    Where is Kroenke building a stadium? Los Angeles.
    Ask yourself, Why build a stadium in LA if your going to build one in St Louis. Because they are super cheep? They make great stocking stuffers?

  9. #9
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    Quote Originally Posted by lordwhttgr View Post
    What is the biggest market in the NFL? Los Angeles.
    Where does Kroenke stand to make the most money off the Team? Los Angeles.
    Where is Kroenke building a stadium? Los Angeles.
    Ask yourself, Why build a stadium in LA if your going to build one in St Louis. Because they are super cheep? They make great stocking stuffers?
    1. Point of Order: New York is the biggest market in the NFL.

    2. Kroenke isn't funding that LA stadium. Or, in all likelihood, a new St. Louis stadium. He's going to try to get his team into a modern stadium built with somebody else's money, with St. Louis as a likely first choice, but with him prepared to move to Los Angeles if a locally funded stadium is not forthcoming in the immediate future-as would be the case with any buyer of the Rams, including Khan.

  10. #10
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    Quote Originally Posted by lordwhttgr View Post
    AV you are right on the money with everything else I stated. If my point is so weak, then why not rubber stamp this in the NFL league meeting this week. If he is so cut and dry "the man" Why is he not the man today? Why?
    Because the league still must perform it's due diligence on all of the candidates to confirm they'd do a good job. Because the NFL must still honor its bylaws, at least until some kind of compromise arrangement is hammered out. Oh, and because the league has slightly bigger fish to fry regarding labor unrest at the moment.

    I will tell you why, he intends to run the franchise down to move it. It's not good for buisness in the NFL to have a non competitive team. It's not good for the city of ST Louis. And the fans in LA are not going to support a team comming in 1-15 two years in a row. The NFL is going to milk this till he caves and lets Khan buy the team. Thats why the wait game is being played.
    Where is this evidence that Kroenke is running the team down to move it? He's currently not involved with the team in a decision-making capacity. And running a team down is not a prerequisite to moving it; Houston was in the playoff hunt until the end of 1996. Cleveland was a playoff team in 1994.

  11. #11
    lordwhttgr's Avatar
    lordwhttgr is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    I live in Danville Illinois, I work all over the USA.
    Posts
    759
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    Where is this evidence that Kroenke is running the team down to move it? He's currently not involved with the team in a decision-making capacity. And running a team down is not a prerequisite to moving it; Houston was in the playoff hunt until the end of 1996. Cleveland was a playoff team in 1994.[/QUOTE]

    ok here we go. Cleveland and Houston were in dire need of new stadiums. Cleveland suspended operations and started a new franchise in Baltimore in a new stadium. Houston moved away from a disaster of a stadium to Memphis Tenn till a new stadium was built in Nashville. Cleveland resumed play once a new stadium in Cleveland was finished.

    The precidence is from Los Angeles in the first place. Georgia F cited lower crowd turn out as her reason to move the Rams in the first place to Baltimore. The NFL blocked the move on grounds that she mismanaged the team in the first place causing the lower fan turn out. She countered with moving to ST Louis and the NFL reluctantly allowed the move. Seatle tried to move to Los Angeles and were blocked because the most loyal fans in the NFL sued the team stating that there was no reason to move because there was no problem with filling seats in Seatle.

  12. #12
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    59

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    Quote Originally Posted by lordwhttgr View Post
    ok here we go. Cleveland and Houston were in dire need of new stadiums. Cleveland suspended operations and started a new franchise in Baltimore in a new stadium. Houston moved away from a disaster of a stadium to Memphis Tenn till a new stadium was built in Nashville. Cleveland resumed play once a new stadium in Cleveland was finished.

    The precidence is from Los Angeles in the first place. Georgia F cited lower crowd turn out as her reason to move the Rams in the first place to Baltimore. The NFL blocked the move on grounds that she mismanaged the team in the first place causing the lower fan turn out. She countered with moving to ST Louis and the NFL reluctantly allowed the move. Seatle tried to move to Los Angeles and were blocked because the most loyal fans in the NFL sued the team stating that there was no reason to move because there was no problem with filling seats in Seatle.
    That's not really evidence that he's trying to move the team. Businessmen try to make money; they don't try to lose money to convince others that they should be allowed to relocate. Georgia wasn't trying to lose money in Los Angeles, and if she had one of the most profitable teams in the league (as one would expect if it was the best or second best NFL market), maybe she wouldn't have left.

  13. #13
    NJ Ramsfan1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    2,193
    Rep Power
    69

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    I grew up liking THE LOS ANGELES RAMS. If they end up moving there, it would hardly break my heart. They should have never left there to begin with. As I've stated in the past, I have no ill will against the people of St. Louis, and if they stay, that's fine too.

    The OP's post contains some valid points. It is certainly reasonable to suggest that Kroenke being on the stadium committee in LA is reason to think he might entertain the idea of relocating the team there if he gets primary ownership. Saying "I'll do everything I can to keep the team in (pick your city)" is one of those nebulous statements that really doesn't mean much. It doesn't lock a guy into any commitment one way or another- and he can always say someone else presented a better deal if they elected to move the team.

    Much as we'd like loyalty to play a bigger part of the equation, an owner's first loyalty is to his wallet. If he feels there's more money making potential elsewhere (in this case the 2nd largest media market in the country), he'll certainly at least listen to all possible scenarios. On the flip side, Kroenke is a native Missourian who has ties to the community.

    With all of that said, Stan Kroenke deserves to be taken at his word. We have no choice. Much dust must settle before he's approved as primary owner, so getting worked up one way or another is pointless.

  14. #14
    Rambunctious's Avatar
    Rambunctious is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    1,198
    Rep Power
    53

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    I respect everyone's opinion but I have yet to see anything connect the OP's reasoning to any logical conclusion.

    Kroenke isn't the only NFL owner on the committee and there have been others over the year.

    In the past owners of the Patriots, Dolphins, Panthers, Chiefs and Steelers.

    Current teams represented by owners are the Cowboys, Giants, Denver, Philadelphia and Seattle.

    By the OP's logic I guess Dallas may be endanger of losing the Cowboys? Giants may move? Philly?

    Getting a team to set-up in LA wouldn't just help that owner but it would help the NFL as a whole. This is why multiple owners may like to see it happen but without moving their teams.

  15. #15
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: Why I don't think Stan Kroenke is good for the Rams.

    Quote Originally Posted by lordwhttgr View Post

    ok here we go. Cleveland and Houston were in dire need of new stadiums. Cleveland suspended operations and started a new franchise in Baltimore in a new stadium. Houston moved away from a disaster of a stadium to Memphis Tenn till a new stadium was built in Nashville. Cleveland resumed play once a new stadium in Cleveland was finished.

    The precidence is from Los Angeles in the first place. Georgia F cited lower crowd turn out as her reason to move the Rams in the first place to Baltimore. The NFL blocked the move on grounds that she mismanaged the team in the first place causing the lower fan turn out. She countered with moving to ST Louis and the NFL reluctantly allowed the move. Seatle tried to move to Los Angeles and were blocked because the most loyal fans in the NFL sued the team stating that there was no reason to move because there was no problem with filling seats in Seatle.
    And guess what? There is a need for a replacement for the Edward Jones Dome. Dire or not in your mind, the need is there and the Rams need to act on it. Also the NFL didn't fight Georgia's move as hard as it could have because thanks to Al Davis, the NFL can't flat out refuse a franchise move without a really good reason.

    Seattle's abbreviated move didn't take because they didn't have an out in their stadium lease until 2005-which they discovered after they had moved business operations down there. As a result you have the sequence of events wherein old owner sells to Paul Allen, who buys on the condition that a Kingdome replacement is built. Note how the fans do not play a role here, but rather stadium issues again.
    Last edited by PeoriaRam; -05-28-2010 at 03:52 PM.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Jim Thomas Live
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: -11-23-2008, 08:57 PM
  2. Gordo Post Game Chat
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -11-03-2008, 02:27 PM
  3. Jim Thomas Live-Feb. 5th
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -02-06-2008, 12:24 PM
  4. Postgame With Gordo, Dec. 30
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -12-31-2007, 03:31 PM
  5. Jim Thomas Live, October 30
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -10-30-2007, 08:58 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •