Sources: Rams and Chargers relocation agreement could be reached Tuesday

[Eleazar]

NFL consensus builds for a Rams-Chargers stadium project in Inglewood



On the brink of a vote that could return the NFL to Los Angeles, a consensus is building within the league for the St. Louis Rams and San Diego Chargers to share a stadium in Inglewood.

Multiple league officials and owners not involved with the Inglewood project, or the competing proposal in Carson, say there is momentum to pair the two franchises in what one owner describes as a "transformational" project backed by the Rams.

The Chargers and Oakland Raiders want to build a stadium in Carson, and to this point, Chargers owner Dean Spanos has stood by his partnership with Raiders owner Mark Davis.

The league insiders, who spoke on the condition they not be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter, say Spanos doesn't want to be seen as turning his back on a partner. This makes the path to what is emerging as the preferred pairing more difficult. But the insiders believe the matter can be resolved during the special meeting that starts Tuesday in Houston, where owners hope to find an answer to the two-decade L.A. vacancy.

One influential owner whose preference has not been apparent in public or private, touted Inglewood over Carson, saying "the deals aren't even close."

In the past week, there has been a flurry of behind-the-scenes activity among owners and NFL staff in an attempt to clear the way for a decision to be made at these meetings.

It is extremely rare for the NFL to devote a full day to a single topic, much less two days in the middle of the playoffs. It underscores how determined the NFL owners and Commissioner Roger Goodell are to reach an accord that would bring professional football back to the country's second-largest market.

It is widely thought that the L.A decision will help define the legacy of Goodell, and shape the financial future for a league that generates $10 billion in annual revenue.

All three teams want to relocate to L.A. for the 2016 season, meaning time is of the essence to move their franchises and begin selling tickets.

Although the general meetings start Tuesday, the Los Angeles committee is convening Monday.

There's a sense that most owners want the Chargers and Rams in Inglewood, but aren't sure of the best way to make it happen. The idea of the Raiders returning to L.A. is not popular among many owners.

One owner said that the NFL has to realize that "we just can't solve all three stadium problems in one fell swoop."

It would mean striking a bargain that keeps the Raiders out of L.A. but doesn't leave them empty handed. Such a maneuver could mean that the Raiders return to Oakland in the short term, but can explore relocating to other cities, among them San Diego, St. Louis or joining the San Francisco 49ers in their new stadium in Santa Clara.

There is some sentiment among owners that the L.A. matter should be determined by secret ballot to avoid the awkwardness of league partners voting against partners. A secret vote -- now used only for the selection of a commissioner or awarding a Super Bowl to a city -- would need the approval of 17 of the league's 32 owners, a simple majority.

The idea of putting the Chargers and Rams in Inglewood has been floated for months and was formally proposed last week by Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones in a one-page letter to Goodell.

There's a belief among some owners and league executives that Spanos would be willing to make a deal with Rams owner Stan Kroenke to share Inglewood if it were a 50-50 partnership that wouldn't put the Chargers at an economic disadvantage.

When news of Jones' letter became public late Saturday, Mark Fabiani, the Chargers' point man on stadium issues, reached out to The Times and asked that a December letter Spanos sent the L.A. committee be referenced. The two-paragraph letter rejected Kroenke's offer to partner with a second team in his planned Inglewood stadium.

"Nothing in Stan's letter gives me any reason to reconsider my partnership with Mark Davis and our chosen stadium site," Spanos wrote.

The one thing everyone can agree upon is that this is a very fluid process and plans can shift very quickly.

Three-quarters of owners must approve any franchise relocation. It's believed both projects have the nine votes to block the other, although that could be shifting in favor of the Rams after last week's meetings of the finance, stadium and L.A. committees at league headquarters in New York.

It's unclear if the six-owner L.A. committee will recommend a stadium plan or whether such an endorsement would be unanimous. Two members of that committee, Carolina Panthers owner Jerry Richardson and Houston Texans owner Bob McNair, have made it clear in public that they favor the Carson plan.

Though the cost of the Inglewood stadium proposed by Kroenke has been publicly estimated at $1.86 billion, the league insiders say the cost likely would significantly exceed $2 billion. That would make it the most expensive venue in U.S. sports history. At 3 million square feet -- including identical locker rooms, office space and owner's suites for two teams -- it would also be the NFL's largest stadium.

The project would be the centerpiece of a 298-acre entertainment, retail and housing development, something one owner called an "NFL Disney World."

According to the relocation application the Rams submitted to the league last week, the stadium would be ready for the 2019 season.

Disney Chairman and CEO Robert Iger, who would oversee the Carson proposal if it is approved and have the opportunity for a minority ownership stake in the Chargers or Raiders, is expected to make a presentation to owners in Houston.

On Saturday, Goodell sent a 48-page report to all franchises saying that the three home markets -- Oakland, San Diego and St. Louis -- failed to produce viable stadium plans.

In the report, which did not make any recommendations, Goodell said market research supports the conclusion that L.A. is capable of being a two-team market.

Though the L.A. Memorial Coliseum has expressed a willingness to temporarily host one NFL team starting next season, it's unclear where a second team would play. USC's lease to operate the Coliseum would need to be amended to allow two NFL teams.

Last summer, the Rose Bowl Bowl Operating Co. declined to respond to the NFL's request for a proposal to temporarily host a team.

League officials, who have also looked at Angel Stadium, Dodger Stadium and the 27,000-seat StubHub Center, say they aren't concerned about finding temporary homes for two L.A. teams.

Inglewood Mayor James T. Butts Jr. reiterated his city's support for the privately-financed stadium Monday.

"As we have believed all along, the Inglewood project is the best option for the NFL, from an economic and geographic perspective," Butts wrote in an email. "The companion development will make the stadium viable for year round uses. The HKS designed project will be the largest, most beautiful stadium in the world. We are hopeful that the NFL owners will agree."

Carson Mayor Albert Robles didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la...112-story.html

[philfree]

Originally Posted by tooge

I'm not sure what the tax revenue for Missouri is from the Rams being in the state. It's got to be pretty nice, when you consider some fans travel there to see their team on the road (Chicago, Tenn, Dallas, KC, Indy) if they are somewhat close.

Yeah, I think St. Louis fans suck as NFL fans, but I do hate to lose revenue that the state was getting from the Rams. Other than that though, the STL can suck it.

Probably a plus revenue situation for the state of MO. So much revenue generated and so much tax revenue from sales tax, income tax and that 10% entertainer tax levied on each player. Missouri loses when they lose a team.

[philfree]

Once the new stadium is built I expect it to become the Home of the SB.

[chinaski]

That's proposed, I'll get pics of the actual properties. I'm currently on the way right now.

Since I am a noob though, I don't think I am allowed to post links or pics. Somebody wanna post them up when I get them?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I live here and I say good ****ing riddance.

Shitty ****ing organization in a shitty ****ing building that wants to spend my tax dollars without a vote to build a new stadium to be shitty in.

**** that. More corporate and individual support for the Cards and Blues.

Rams have always been in 3rd place, even when they were winning.

This.

There are a few Rams fans I know that are genuinely disheartened, but by and large the city of St. Louis didn't give a shit until Kroenke launched a shot across their bow.

The Rams weren't generating any legitimate revenue for the city of St. Louis at this point; the stadium is a dump and nobody was inclined to do anything to fix it (on that point, Kroenke has legit beef).

St. Louis will be better off without the Rams.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by mikeyis4dcats.

Inglewood

That looks like a museum or Epcot attraction.

Carson


That looks like monument to football. Really cool...

[Lex Luthor]

Originally Posted by Rams Fan

Well, assuming the Rams move, I think I'm done following and watching the NFL on a regular basis.

It's absolute horse shit how Kroenke's treated St. Louis and because of that I don't really think I'll be interested in supporting the Rams or giving a shit about anyone of the other 31 teams in the NFL.

The solution is simple. Become a Chiefs fan. This team isn't going anywhere, and you're already a member of Chiefsplanet.

This is Chiefsplanet. We enthusiastically welcome all new Chiefs fans.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Rams Fan

Well, assuming the Rams move, I think I'm done following and watching the NFL on a regular basis.

It's absolute horse shit how Kroenke's treated St. Louis and because of that I don't really think I'll be interested in supporting the Rams or giving a shit about anyone of the other 31 teams in the NFL.

There's just a little bit of karmic justice at work here.

Let's not forget that for as badly as St. Louis hated Bidwell, he really really wanted to stay in St. Louis and spent years trying to make it work. He just couldn't get any traction on getting a new stadium built and as a guy who's football team wasn't profitable all that often, there really wasn't any way for him to build one himself nor was it tenable for him to just stay where he was for another 15 years. It was genuinely difficult for a team with a lousy stadium situation back then to make it work, especially if the team owner derived his income from the team, rather than many other owners who own their teams almost as a hobby.

Bidwell genuinely needed a new stadium and some help from the city of St. Louis - they told him to **** off. They called his bluff and it burned them.

It was a serious 'grass is always greener' thing. Had St. Louis not dicked around with Bidwell, the gridbirds would've been STL lifers. Instead they essentially ran him out, chased a carpetbagger and then acted surprised when new roots never took hold.

St. Louis is reaping a little of what they sowed here. It's still a shitty think for Kroenke to have done, but Kroenke never should've owned a team in St. Louis to begin with.

[Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan]

I still think the expansion offer that went to the Jaguars should have been given to St. Louis.

a) Jacksonville does not support their team and probably never will.
b) The Rams never would have moved to St. Louis in the first place, so all this current drama would have been avoided.

I honestly think St. Louis would have supported a home-grown team better than it did the Rams.

[ChiefsCountry]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

There's just a little bit of karmic justice at work here.

Let's not forget that for as badly as St. Louis hated Bidwell, he really really wanted to stay in St. Louis and spent years trying to make it work. He just couldn't get any traction on getting a new stadium built and as a guy who's football team wasn't profitable all that often, there really wasn't any way for him to build one himself nor was it tenable for him to just stay where he was for another 15 years. It was genuinely difficult for a team with a lousy stadium situation back then to make it work, especially if the team owner derived his income from the team, rather than many other owners who own their teams almost as a hobby.

Bidwell genuinely needed a new stadium and some help from the city of St. Louis - they told him to **** off. They called his bluff and it burned them.

It was a serious 'grass is always greener' thing. Had St. Louis not dicked around with Bidwell, the gridbirds would've been STL lifers. Instead they essentially ran him out, chased a carpetbagger and then acted surprised when new roots never took hold.

St. Louis is reaping a little of what they sowed here. It's still a shitty think for Kroenke to have done, but Kroenke never should've owned a team in St. Louis to begin with.

Basically everything I read up on that situation from the newspaper archives is was it a bitch fest between the city of St. Louis and St. Louis County. City didn't want to lose the stadium to the county. County wanted the stadium out of the city (where Riverport Amphitheater is). Basically a city vs suburbs battle that screwed both.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

Basically everything I read up on that situation from the newspaper archives is was it a bitch fest between the city of St. Louis and St. Louis County. City didn't want to lose the stadium to the county. County wanted the stadium out of the city (where Riverport Amphitheater is). Basically a city vs suburbs battle that screwed both.

Yup. A whole lot of egos ****ed that whole thing up.

I read a pretty comprehensive piece about it several years ago and it did a pretty nice job of being evenhanded. I just think the lack of publicly available information when this was all going on turned this whole thing into "Greedy Bidwell vs. St. Louis" when the reality was that his situation in St. Louis was really bad and the NFL was not the cash cow it is today.

People view his decision then through the lens of today's huge television revenues and that just isn't fair. The guy needed the team to be profitable; he had no other massive revenue streams to sustain it. He had no other business interests to speak of and television revenue was squat. He needed gate/stadium revenues to remain competitive. Players were getting more expensive and his revenues weren't keeping up. Fans were killing him for being cheap but his hands really were tied.

In hindsight, there's absolutely no question that St. Louis blew it when they ran the Cardinals out of town and the fact that they immediately got to work on a joint stadium proposal (I'm thinking within 3-5 years) shows that they knew it.

Had the egos that sabotaged the stadium deal in the late 80s never gotten in the way, the Rams aren't losing a football team right now.

[ChiefsCountry]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Yup. A whole lot of egos ****ed that whole thing up.

I read a pretty comprehensive piece about it several years ago and it did a pretty nice job of being evenhanded. I just think the lack of publicly available information when this was all going on turned this whole thing into "Greedy Bidwell vs. St. Louis" when the reality was that his situation in St. Louis was really bad and the NFL was not the cash cow it is today.

People view his decision then through the lens of today's huge television revenues and that just isn't fair. The guy needed the team to be profitable; he had no other massive revenue streams to sustain it. He had no other business interests to speak of and television revenue was squat. He needed gate/stadium revenues to remain competitive. Players were getting more expensive and his revenues weren't keeping up. Fans were killing him for being cheap but his hands really were tied.

In hindsight, there's absolutely no question that St. Louis blew it when they ran the Cardinals out of town and the fact that they immediately got to work on a joint stadium proposal (I'm thinking within 3-5 years) shows that they knew it.

Had the egos that sabotaged the stadium deal in the late 80s never gotten in the way, the Rams aren't losing a football team right now.

Another thing was the NFL wasn't that happy he chose Phoenix. They wanted that to be the expansion team for a big pay day.

[Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan]

FWIW:


mike hiserman @MikeHiserman

BREAKING NEWS: It's looks like #Rams and #Chargers for #NFL-LA. Great reporting by @LATimesfarmer and @nathanfenno : http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la...112-story.html …


Retweeted by 506 Sports

[Rams Fan]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

There's just a little bit of karmic justice at work here.

Let's not forget that for as badly as St. Louis hated Bidwell, he really really wanted to stay in St. Louis and spent years trying to make it work. He just couldn't get any traction on getting a new stadium built and as a guy who's football team wasn't profitable all that often, there really wasn't any way for him to build one himself nor was it tenable for him to just stay where he was for another 15 years. It was genuinely difficult for a team with a lousy stadium situation back then to make it work, especially if the team owner derived his income from the team, rather than many other owners who own their teams almost as a hobby.

Bidwell genuinely needed a new stadium and some help from the city of St. Louis - they told him to **** off. They called his bluff and it burned them.

It was a serious 'grass is always greener' thing. Had St. Louis not dicked around with Bidwell, the gridbirds would've been STL lifers. Instead they essentially ran him out, chased a carpetbagger and then acted surprised when new roots never took hold.

St. Louis is reaping a little of what they sowed here. It's still a shitty think for Kroenke to have done, but Kroenke never should've owned a team in St. Louis to begin with.

I'm aware of why Bidwill left. Even if he's still hated here, he had a reason to leave.

Kroenke hasn't done shit with regards to solving the stadium situation in St. Louis and when the city bends over backwards for him and he still refuses to do anything on St. Louis, it's hard not to be pissed at him.

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

Basically everything I read up on that situation from the newspaper archives is was it a bitch fest between the city of St. Louis and St. Louis County. City didn't want to lose the stadium to the county. County wanted the stadium out of the city (where Riverport Amphitheater is). Basically a city vs suburbs battle that screwed both.

St. Louis City doesn't reside within St. Louis County. Until the 2 are united, the city won't be able to prosper, IMO. But that will never happen as the majority of people who reside in St. Louis county would be opposed to said measure.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan

FWIW:


mike hiserman @MikeHiserman

BREAKING NEWS: It's looks like #Rams and #Chargers for #NFL-LA. Great reporting by @LATimesfarmer and @nathanfenno : http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la...112-story.html …


Retweeted by 506 Sports

[ChiefsCountry]

Originally Posted by Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan

FWIW:


mike hiserman @MikeHiserman

BREAKING NEWS: It's looks like #Rams and #Chargers for #NFL-LA. Great reporting by @LATimesfarmer and @nathanfenno : http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la...112-story.html …


Retweeted by 506 Sports

That's old news from yesterday.