Kroenk Plays the 'Victim' Card

[OldSchool]

Had the CVC honored that deal it would've been the most one-sided stadium arrangement I ever heard of. The good people of St. Louis would be paying off that debt for generations.

No one's going to rage against them for not signing a nine figure check.

Which is 100% the point people are trying to make. The CVC and the political leaders of St Louis/Missouri at the time the deal was struck to move the Rams there was horrible. It was bad for the people in both city/state and it was bad for future generations in the city/state. The only person it was good for was Georgia. Georgia bent the people over and the people who created the lease had to have known it was bad but figured by the time this all went down they wouldn't be in their political positions anymore so they wouldn't have to deal with it or take the heat for it. Two Rams owners have screwed with the people because of their actions but only one person seems to be taking the heat for it.

You can avoid that taboo word default all you want but the simple fact of the matter is the CVC did not live up to their end of the lease which allowed the Rams to leave just as they did. You can complain that the $700 million arbitration that the Rams won was unreasonable or fair but the lease those city/cvc leaders signed put them under the obligation of either having to abide by the decision or opening up the Rams to move. It's been said already that Georgia would not have moved the team and signed the lease if not for the first tier clause. In reality the city of St Louis would have been better served if the Rams never moved there. In all of this there seems to be only one bad guy when there is plenty of blame to go around.

 

[Pancake]

Of course it's an absurd deal guys. That's part of the point. Why were your leaders making those kinds of absurd deals? But they did didn't they? So how can you not hold them in some way accountable? Lets be real about it. In their zealous quest for a team they offered the moon. Then they did not deliver the moon and it is those people who made it possible for the Rams to relocate if they did not. They opened up the exit door. They lost the team for you too.

 

[Yamahopper]

Demoff wasn't too tore up about it.

Kevin Demoff, the Rams’ top executive who helped make the presentation at the meeting, kept his event credential and room key as mementos of the historic occasion.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/l...istoric occasion.wners-meeting-htmlstory.html

 

[MrMotes]

Of course it's an absurd deal guys. That's part of the point. Why were your leaders making those kinds of absurd deals? But they did didn't they? So how can you not hold them in some way accountable? Lets be real about it. In their zealous quest for a team they offered the moon. Then they did not deliver the moon and it is those people who made it possible for the Rams to relocate if they did not. They opened up the exit door. They lost the team for you too.

They made that absurd deal because they were desperate to get an NFL team to play in the stadium they were already building. Without that lease, St. Louis might never have had a 2nd NFL team.

That lease got them 21 more years of NFL football. I know it sucks right now, but in the scheme of things, maybe the lease did what it was supposed to, and did the most that could be accomplished?

 

[bluecoconuts]

Demoff wasn't too tore up about it.

Kevin Demoff, the Rams’ top executive who helped make the presentation at the meeting, kept his event credential and room key as mementos of the historic occasion.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp-nfl-los-angeles-oKevin Demoff, the Rams’ top executive who helped make the presentation at the meeting, kept his event credential and room key as mementos of the historic occasion.wners-meeting-htmlstory.html

He grew up an LA Rams fan and was a senior in High School (in LA) when they left for St Louis... I remember a while ago people said they felt Demoff was on the St Louis side (when people said that Inglewood was simply leverage) and I pointed out he was from LA, got into professional football in LA (Arena Football) and if Kroenke asked him his opinion he'd probably want the Rams in LA. I heard a segment of him on the radio and he was very happy, said he wanted to do it for a while.

 

[Ram65]

Which is 100% the point people are trying to make. The CVC and the political leaders of St Louis/Missouri at the time the deal was struck to move the Rams there was horrible. It was bad for the people in both city/state and it was bad for future generations in the city/state. The only person it was good for was Georgia. Georgia bent the people over and the people who created the lease had to have known it was bad but figured by the time this all went down they wouldn't be in their political positions anymore so they wouldn't have to deal with it or take the heat for it. Two Rams owners have screwed with the people because of their actions but only one person seems to be taking the heat for it.

You can avoid that taboo word default all you want but the simple fact of the matter is the CVC did not live up to their end of the lease which allowed the Rams to leave just as they did. You can complain that the $700 million arbitration that the Rams won was unreasonable or fair but the lease those city/cvc leaders signed put them under the obligation of either having to abide by the decision or opening up the Rams to move. It's been said already that Georgia would not have moved the team and signed the lease if not for the first tier clause. In reality the city of St Louis would have been better served if the Rams never moved there. In all of this there seems to be only one bad guy when there is plenty of blame to go around.

Well stated OldSchool.

My simplified thoughts:

Georgia made (got) a great deal. St Louis made a bad deal. Stan can and has moved Rams.

 

[bomebadeeda]

A couple of things on this topic...... first off, while some...blame can be thrown at the feet of the CVC..........most but be put squarely on the shoulders of Kroenke. He had an agreement in place to purchase the remainder of the team (the remaining 60%), but allowed Georgia's kids to go out and try to find a buyer. And they tried to keep the team here, specifying to Khan it would have to. But once the deal was set, in swept Stan, and he didn't have to adhere to the wishes of the owners. He already had a deal in place which allowed him to supercede the other, opening the door to the "negotiations". Which proceeded down the path he expected. But when he was minority owner.....he let others handle it. And he had the date circled once he was only owner. He could have built that same complex in STL and it would have cost less. But that wasn't his plans. It was all about the dollar. The team will double in value (on paper that is.......). And that was what this was about. Nothing else. STL is just a place on the map for him. And it gave him the foundation to blow the skirts up of the other NFL owners. Spin it however you want......but that's what happened.

 

[rdlkgliders]

There is and will always be a lot more to do with a business deal of this nature than anyone representing either entity will let on. Finger pointing and blame are the natural reaction.

What I am really trying to say is be leery of investing to heavily in the blame game. When Georgia,John and Jay took the team from L.A I found myself resentful of them making me resentful of the Rams. It was like trying to heal a cut with a razor blade. It took awhile but I came to realize that the Rams were my love and owners were necessary evil, by nature business men owning Pro Teams not owners of a team toying in business. Try to close the chapter and find your way back to what you love Ram Football.
sorry if this sounds preachy it is meant to be a sharing of one ROD members journey back from resent to help others not go through as long of process as I did

 

[fancents86]

Stan's not an idiot (that hurt to type) he knew what he was doing all along. He bought the team when talks of relocating we're starting to surface bc of the lease agreement. He had absolutely no intentions of keeping the Rams in STL. If he did he would have built a stadium here. So yes, I will blame him.

 

[RamFan503]

And at what point do you look into the crystal ball and forecast the number of stadiums that were built in the decade after they agreed to that clause?

And let's not forget that they continually tried to get something from the Rams in terms of potential upgrades only to have Georgia agree to waive the clause.

The whole top-tier clause was not an issue UNTIL Georgia died. In fact, the quality of the dome was not an issue until Kroenke took over.

Sorry but that clause is the part that is in writing. It is the contract that both sides signed. The waiver that Georgia signed (and I believe Stan signed as well) had stipulations to get up to top tier status and have an actionable plan by 2012 - not waiving the clause. The issue was there while Georgia was alive as they agreed to extend - not waive - back in 2007 after the CVC failed to meet the original 2005 timeline.

I'm not sure where you get that they tried to get potential upgrades from the Rams. The top tier clause - like it or not - was on the CVC - not the Rams. The Rams were under no obligation to pay for upgrades.

I think the whole thing is stupid and wish it never happened. Once the Rams were gone from LA for a spell, I was resigned to the fact. Over the past few years, I developed a mood that the Rams should just stay in St Louis as there was now history there as well and I just didn't want to see my team move yet again for the fans sake in the Lou and just not wanting this musical chairs BS.

But in all of this, I place probably the biggest blame on the CVC and what they did to essentially save their asses for building a stadium with no team. They agreed to put that clause in there out of desperation. They did it because they built a stadium and needed a team to fill it - as is obvious by the red seats. They only later figured out that convention business might be more lucrative and therefore, had no motivation to do their best at keeping the Rams happy.

Hell - Dierdorf himself was on the board in 2005 (I believe that is the right timeline) and railed at the CVC for making it inevitable that the Rams would some day leave due to their inactions. He even told them that if they were not going to improve the Dome, they would need to start preparing and negotiating for a new venue down the road. I get that it was only ten years after construction but he wasn't saying build it now - only plan for it now and show them you mean business. They did none of it as by all accounts I have seen, they thought they were in the power position. And maybe they were with Georgia - spend your kid's inheritance - Frontiere in power.

Enter Stan Kroenke - or any other capable businessman including Khan - and you are no longer playing with amateurs. That top tier clause was going to be an issue no matter who bought the team. Acting like it didn't exist was the grand lie perpetrated by those who were either trying to cover their own asses or trying to find a way to keep the Rams in the Lou against severe odds.

I applaud Dave Peacock for his efforts. I condemn the CVC/RSA or whoever was empowered to live up to the contract signed in 1994. I don't like the silent routine from Stan as a fan but I get it just the same.

 

[Username]

He grew up an LA Rams fan and was a senior in High School (in LA) when they left for St Louis... I remember a while ago people said they felt Demoff was on the St Louis side (when people said that Inglewood was simply leverage) and I pointed out he was from LA, got into professional football in LA (Arena Football) and if Kroenke asked him his opinion he'd probably want the Rams in LA. I heard a segment of him on the radio and he was very happy, said he wanted to do it for a while.

And he did 25 hundred on Stl radio exclaiming how great of a town it is, and that "he expects" the team to be "right there" when the lease runs up. I'm not saying you're wrong at all, it's just further proof he's as full as shit as Kroenke. They're both as honorable as the league they operate in.

 

[RamFan503]

A couple of things on this topic...... first off, while some...blame can be thrown at the feet of the CVC..........most but be put squarely on the shoulders of Kroenke. He had an agreement in place to purchase the remainder of the team (the remaining 60%), but allowed Georgia's kids to go out and try to find a buyer. And they tried to keep the team here, specifying to Khan it would have to. But once the deal was set, in swept Stan, and he didn't have to adhere to the wishes of the owners. He already had a deal in place which allowed him to supercede the other, opening the door to the "negotiations". Which proceeded down the path he expected. But when he was minority owner.....he let others handle it. And he had the date circled once he was only owner. He could have built that same complex in STL and it would have cost less. But that wasn't his plans. It was all about the dollar. The team will double in value (on paper that is.......). And that was what this was about. Nothing else. STL is just a place on the map for him. And it gave him the foundation to blow the skirts up of the other NFL owners. Spin it however you want......but that's what happened.

The only thing I would differ with is the cost of building a stadium. Contrary to popular belief, it is actually not a lot more expensive to build in LA versus the Lou. It may seem like $1.86 billion is a lot more than $1.1 billion but try extrapolating out what Stan has planned for Inglewood and what it would cost to build in St Louis.

I have heard from a couple people in development and construction that it actually costs a fair bit more to build in the Midwest but you can count on tax incentives and low property costs to offset that.

So I ask people to unemotionally look at the Inglewood project and think of how much it would have cost in St Louis. Then try to figure the ROI on that project. Then figure how Stan giving $700 million for a project he wouldn't own versus the apparently $800 million in equity he is actually putting down on the Inglewood project as well as be able to take advantage of numerous revenue streams and tax offsets and really tell me how that was even close to the deal he was working on in Inglewood.

Then tell me how his $700+ million put into a stadium that he would not own and would have to rent actually is a good investment. Then tell me why he would waive a clause that said he didn't have to pay that $700 million and how that would make sense to him or any other businessman.

 

[fearsomefour]

.

He's only the victim of a bad toupee.

.

Yeah, what is going on there?
As someone who has real hair that can look toupee-ish if I let it grow out I can't tell if his hair is real or not.
What is it with super rich guys and weirdo hair?....Im talking to all three of the Rams, Chargers and Raiders owners....

 

[fearsomefour]

The only thing I would differ with is the cost of building a stadium. Contrary to popular belief, it is actually not a lot more expensive to build in LA versus the Lou. It may seem like $1.86 billion is a lot more than $1.1 billion but try extrapolating out what Stan has planned for Inglewood and what it would cost to build in St Louis.

I have heard from a couple people in development and construction that it actually costs a fair bit more to build in the Midwest but you can count on tax incentives and low property costs to offset that.

So I ask people to unemotionally look at the Inglewood project and think of how much it would have cost in St Louis. Then try to figure the ROI on that project. Then figure how Stan giving $700 million for a project he wouldn't own versus the apparently $800 million in equity he is actually putting down on the Inglewood project as well as be able to take advantage of numerous revenue streams and tax offsets and really tell me how that was even close to the deal he was working on in Inglewood.

Then tell me how his $700+ million put into a stadium that he would not own and would have to rent actually is a good investment. Then tell me why he would waive a clause that said he didn't have to pay that $700 million and how that would make sense to him or any other businessman.

Well, right....
that pretty much sums it up.

 

[bluecoconuts]

And he did 25 hundred on Stl radio exclaiming how great of a town it is, and that "he expects" the team to be "right there" when the lease runs up. I'm not saying you're wrong at all, it's just further proof he's as full as crap as Kroenke. They're both as honorable as the league they operate in.

That's part of his job though, per orders of the NFL, it doesn't speak to his character as a person. Unless you have never lied in your life about anything for any reason, I don't see how you can judge a man for doing his job.

 

[Mikey Ram]

I agree he's not a victim but he's playing to the crowd and furthering his agenda. The CVC is responsible for the Rams leaving. They and the political leaders put the clause in the contract in the first place knowing full well they couldn't and likely wouldn't live up to it. They rolled the dice that the Rams wouldn't call them on it. Kroenke is all kinds of a scumbag for the way he handled this and hate on him all you want. But the fact that nobody gives the CVC and the people who created the 1st tier clause and failed to live up to it deserve just as much of the blame as Kroenke does for the Rams going back to LA.

My question is this: If Georgia had not died, what were her feelings have been when she was in SK's shoes ??? (With regard to the dome, new stadium, leaving etc)... What would she have done ??? I'm just curious ...

 

[badnews]

It's just business, that stadium"s only a portion of the entire development....it's not personal, it's simply about the $$$$$...

It's not personal, it's only business is probably my single most hated phrase.

It's like saying "it's not you, it's me" when you dump a chick. It's always "you".

And it's always personal.

Boss: Hey Gary, we're going to have to let you go after working for us for 20 years. You make more than we want to pay, so your being let go. It's not personal, it's just business.

Gary: When I tell my family that we have to move, I'll be sure to let them know it wasn't personal...

Uggh I hate that crap.

 

[JUMAVA68]

You missed my point. Everyone keeps laying the "blame" at the feet of the CVC for declining that figure. And while I realize it semantics at this point. They didn't default on the lease. They chose to be exercise their rights within the lease to decline the arbiter's decision. The lease was still in effect with the only difference being the year to year clause was triggered. Which is exactly what Kroenke wanted to happen.

So the lease was never defaulted on. That is a huge misconception.

I don't think anyone in their right mind would pay hundreds of millions of dollars for something they were promised for free.As unfortunate as this is for Stl the blame the real blame is misplaced.That lease with the top tier clause was an ace in the hole that any owner in the league would have used.

 

[bomebadeeda]

The only thing I would differ with is the cost of building a stadium. Contrary to popular belief, it is actually not a lot more expensive to build in LA versus the Lou. It may seem like $1.86 billion is a lot more than $1.1 billion but try extrapolating out what Stan has planned for Inglewood and what it would cost to build in St Louis.

I have heard from a couple people in development and construction that it actually costs a fair bit more to build in the Midwest but you can count on tax incentives and low property costs to offset that.

So I ask people to unemotionally look at the Inglewood project and think of how much it would have cost in St Louis. Then try to figure the ROI on that project. Then figure how Stan giving $700 million for a project he wouldn't own versus the apparently $800 million in equity he is actually putting down on the Inglewood project as well as be able to take advantage of numerous revenue streams and tax offsets and really tell me how that was even close to the deal he was working on in Inglewood.

Then tell me how his $700+ million put into a stadium that he would not own and would have to rent actually is a good investment. Then tell me why he would waive a clause that said he didn't have to pay that $700 million and how that would make sense to him or any other businessman.

503, my friend, I'm not saying he didn't make a good business decision. I'm saying he stepped on STL in making it and had it mapped out from the first day he saw his chance to takeover. But I will say, whoever tried to sell you on the idea that real estate in LA is as cheap or cheaper than in STL (especially in Inglewood) ..........I would watch what they offer you next. He could have had several places for less. But I will admit..... the NFL wouldn't come a running if his table was in STL......but obviously they have that he's setting up shop in LaLa Land.
That been said.... I will admit.....it (the stadium....and everything else...) will be w/o peer once it's built. And probably all of the extra things he's set up to go into it, wouldn't have happened here.

 

[Force16X]

It was a business decision. simple as that.

that made $K 2 billion large (if you believe the reports that the Rams will be worth 3 billion large in LA.) thats some serious coin.