Other NFL News

[I-10east]

St. Louis has sent a stadium plan to the NFL. One of these cities within the 'Three Card monty" has to seemingly stay; Looks like STL is in the lead to stay put. I admit, as not long ago I had the Rams one foot already in LA with Stan Kroenke building the Inglewood site and all, but it looks like STL is diligently fighting any Cali relocation efforts. 

A task force empaneled by Missouri's governor made its formal financing pitch Tuesday to the National Football League for a billion-dollar stadium along the Mississippi River, hoping to keep the St. Louis Rams from bolting for suburban Los Angeles or attract a new team if they do.

The nearly 400-page tome sent off by the group late Monday arrived at the league's New York offices Tuesday, said Brian McCarthy, an NFL spokesman. The league had set a Wednesday deadline for local governments in St. Louis, Oakland and San Diego to submit their plans for new stadiums amid the possibility of relocation as early as next season.

League owners meeting Jan. 12-13 in Houston are expected to decide if as many as two of the teams will be allowed to move.

Oakland city officials repeatedly have said they won't stick taxpayers with the bill for a new stadium, and they told the San Francisco Chronicle that no plan from them about a new Raiders stadium was coming.

Oakland and Alameda County still are $100 million in debt from an overhaul of the Coliseum's east end 20 years ago. Oakland's Assistant City Administrator Claudia Cappio said the city will send a letter to league officials updating them on the Oakland's efforts to persuade the Raiders to stay put. The city of San Diego plans to issue a statement Wednesday.

Rams owner Stan Kroenke is part of a group planning a $1.8 billion stadium in Inglewood, California. The Chargers and Raiders have teamed up on a joint venture for a stadium about 13 miles away, in Carson, California.

The St. Louis proposal for the open-air, $1.1 billion stadium along the Mississippi north of the iconic Gateway Arch calls for $150 million from the city, $250 million from the team owner, at least $200 million from the league, and $160 million in fan seat licenses. The rest of the money comes from the state, either through tax credits or bonds.

Members of the St. Louis stadium task force commissioned by Gov. Jay Nixon have said that even if the Rams move, a new stadium could lure another team.

"St. Louis has faithfully supported the NFL and, in particular, the St. Louis Rams since their arrival in 1995" from Los Angeles, said Bob Blitz, who along with Dave Peacock co-chaired the task force. "Our proposal this week to the NFL personifies that support."

Critics in St. Louis and elsewhere in Missouri say taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for yet another football stadium. Last month, Republican Missouri House Speaker Todd Richardson sent Nixon, a Democrat, a list of 120 House members opposed to funding the stadium.

The Edward Jones Dome — the Rams' current home — opened in 1995, built entirely with taxpayer money. The Rams converted their lease to annual terms after saying the facility was not deemed among the top 25 percent of NFL stadiums based on various criteria. The city's Convention and Visitors Commission proposed improvements of less than $200 million with the Rams picking up half of the cost, and the team countered with a more elaborate plan with a price tag of at least $700 million. The impasse helped prompt formation of the task force.

Peacock said the St. Louis plan for "an ultra-modern stadium on our downtown riverfront that the NFL and the St. Louis Rams will be extremely proud to call their own" culminated a 13-month effort "to deliver on the certainty that has understandably been requested by the NFL."

http://my.xfinity.com/articles/sports-general/20151229/FBN-NFL-Relocation/

[Steve]

^Same here - I thought they were gone. Now it looks like the Chargers are in LA, with Oakland behind them.

Although....this isn't a slam dunk. Apparently they want $300m from the NFL's loan program, where the most ever given was $200m, save for the Giants/Jets joint stadium. Also, apparently the number from the government is $400 million. I don't know what kind of funding they're using (possibly part of it is something akin to Jacksonville's bed tax), but $400 million is a lot. Plus, they're going to sell PSLs....always a hit with fans - buy the right to buy tickets.

This deal can't be popular with people....especially since there's no direct tie to this deal passing and the Rams staying in St. Louis. If I'm a taxpayer, I have a hard time with this considering that the Rams could move and "hopefully"a team shows up there.

[RattlerGator]

In this day and age, it's hard for me to believe that PSL thing is long for this world. It just doesn't make sense. You want me to pay for the "right" to purchase a ticket No thanks. I consider that for my college, because I know they need Boosters to make the project run. But that's a no-go for the pros.

[spuwho]

Excerpt from ESPN on the NFL coaching cycle:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14455796/chip-kelly-did-not-chance-keep-job-some-mystery-surrounds-next-move-nfl

It's fair to say that outside of the Steelers and Patriots, there are few NFL teams these days that demonstrate the type of patience that seemed to be more prevalent back in the day.

Former Cowboys head coach Tom Landry, now in the Pro Football Hall of Fame, finished with a losing record in each of his first five seasons as Dallas' coach. He compiled an 18-46-4 record during those years. In today's world, with today's NFL owners and sports climate, he would have been fired. Quickly. Yet Landry coached Dallas for 29 years, not winning the first of his two Super Bowl titles until his 12th season. Dallas exercised patience; Landry rewarded it.

Former Steelers head coach Chuck Noll, now in the Pro Football Hall of Fame, finished with a losing record in each of his first three seasons as Pittsburgh's coach. He compiled a 12-30 record during those years. In another time, this one, Noll likely would have been notified of his dismissal during that period. Yet Noll went on to coach the Steelers for 23 years, winning the first of his four Super Bowl titles in his sixth season. The Steelers supported Noll; he rewarded them for their support.

Chuck Noll is just one of a number of all-time greats who got off to slow starts. Could that happen today?

Today's world is as different as the way in which news once was delivered. Owners prefer not to wait and have deep enough pockets to handle it. When the Titans fired Ken Whisenhunt earlier this season, they agreed to absorb the roughly $16 million remaining on his contract. It was not an easy thing to do, but it was not overly difficult to absorb, either. Still, there's a lesson in there that should serve as a warning to any head coach whose job is in jeopardy.

Football is so lucrative, the money NFL owners now make is so much, that even though owners would rather not eat millions on coaches' contracts, they can -- and have. If that is the route owners choose, all they then have to do is start a marketing campaign for the new head coach, and inevitably, hopes and revenues rise. It's that simple and that cyclical, all at the expense of coaches and their families.

So as the NFL prepares to wrap up its regular season, certain owners presiding over teams that have had poor seasons will be forced to make difficult decisions. Many will not be as patient as Dallas once was with Landry and Pittsburgh once was with Noll. These NFL owners will perpetuate the cycle of instability in which the league averages close to seven firings a year, the exact number that occurred last year and the season before and the season before. Count on at least seven head-coaching changes this year, and there could be up to 10.

Patience no longer is a primary consideration. Tapping the next man up is.

[I-10east]

Boy, the AFC playoff teams are looking extremely weak; The Chiefs look to be the hottest team (winning nine straight, although not exactly murderers row) . Outside of Carolina, the NFC playoff teams aren't exactly juggernauts either. The Arizona Cardinals are frauds disguised as a playoff team. Bottomline it's (SB win) Carolina's for the taking; If they don't win, it will be a big disappointment for them. 

[Keith-N-Jax]

If there's any frauds in these playoffs its the Chiefs and Texans.

[Westside Guy]

It looks like the Colts decided to keep Pagano around for a little while longer.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000617775/article/colts-pagano-agree-on-contract-extension-to-stay-with-team

[spuwho]

It looks like the Colts decided to keep Pagano around for a little while longer.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000617775/article/colts-pagano-agree-on-contract-extension-to-stay-with-team

This is a surprise considering Pagano and Grigson are barely on speaking terms. 

[I-10east]

If there's any frauds in these playoffs its the Chiefs and Texans.

IMO the Chiefs can be a force in the AFC. They have beaten pretty much everyone (notable teams) in the AFC with the exception of New England who they didn't play.

[thelakelander]

Chargers, Raiders, Rams file for relocation to Los Angeles

SAN DIEGO
The San Diego Chargers, Oakland Raiders and St. Louis Rams filed for relocation to the Los Angeles area on Monday night, trying not to be left out in the race to return the NFL to the nation's second-largest market after a 21-year absence.

The Chargers want to partner with the AFC West rival Raiders on a stadium in Carson.

Chargers chairman Dean Spanos has had the right to leave San Diego since 2008, but the team's long, contentious efforts to replace aging Qualcomm Stadium became more aggressive after Rams owner Stan Kroenke announced plans to build a stadium in Inglewood.

The NFL confirmed it received the applications to move for the 2016 season. They will be reviewed by league staff and three committees of owners that will meet in New York on Wednesday and Thursday. All owners will meet in Houston next week and are expected to vote on whether to allow any of the teams to move. A team wanting to move needs 24 of 32 votes.

Los Angeles has been without the NFL since after the 1994 season, when the Raiders moved back to Oakland and the Rams moved to St. Louis. The Rams had been in the L.A. area since 1946.

The Chargers and City Hall have been at odds since 2000, when team owner Alex Spanos said the team needed a new stadium. That was just three years after the stadium was expanded to accommodate the Chargers and Super Bowls.

The stadium saga turned nasty this year as Mark Fabiani, an attorney for Dean Spanos, attacked Mayor Kevin Faulconer and his proposals to keep the team.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article53047920.html#storylink=cpy

[Noone]

BJP- Better Jacksonville Pigskin

[David]

So that thread I started in 2009 about LA coming for your NFL team was off by 5 years, sorry.

(I seriously was afraid of losing our Jags for a while there) It's interesting to see that 3 teams are trying to get in there but only two shall pass.  I knew the Raiders and Rams had roots in LA, but didn't know the Chargers started there as well until I googled it.

[I-10east]

BJP- Better Jacksonville Pigskin

Haha, clever.

[spuwho]

Wow, did St Louis get ripped today. And notice that LA Rams updated their proposal to build what Jacksonville just approved (an entertainment center), to host what else....a draft day!

Kroenke blasts St. Louis in NFL relocation proposal

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/kroenke-blasts-st-louis-in-nfl-relocation-proposal/article_cc72f61a-0c35-53bd-8890-0efde6402509.html

ST. LOUIS • The St. Louis region is losing population and lags in economic drivers to such a degree that it cannot support three professional sports teams, St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke told the National Football League in his proposal to move to Los Angeles.

Moreover, despite "significant" investments in the team, game attendance "has been well below the League's average," Kroenke continued in the league submission, obtained late Tuesday by the Post-Dispatch.

And the local plan to build a $1.1 billion riverfront stadium? "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," the application said.

In contrast, Kroenke's proposal to build a $1.9 billion, 3 million-square-foot football palace in Inglewood, Calif., provides the league with "the best economic opportunity in Los Angeles," it said.

The document is part of a proposal required by league relocation guidelines. The NFL declined to release it publicly. The Rams, however, agreed to do so.

Its 29 pages amount to both a gushing celebration of Kroenke's Los Angeles stadium plan and a scathing review of the future economic well-being of St. Louis.

Kroenke's stadium is designed for two teams, is shovel-ready, can open by 2019, and would be the largest in the NFL, the application said. "We believe an Inglewood Super Bowl could generate as much as $50 million more in League revenue than the Carson proposed stadium ...," it said.

St. Louis, on the other hand, "lags, and will continue to lag, far behind in the economic drivers that are necessary for sustained success of an NFL franchise," the application said.

Dave Peacock, co-chairman of Gov. Jay Nixon's riverfront stadium task force, responded late Tuesday, arguing that St. Louis is a good market. The Rams' analysis of the St. Louis plan contains "inconsistencies and inaccuracies," he said.

Plus, the team picked St. Louis statistics they wanted to use. "And that's probably not surprising," Peacock said. "Their job is not to give a balanced argument."

Plenty of other cities — Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Buffalo — don't have the same growth you see in California or Texas, "yet they're very good NFL markets," Peacock said.

It's not just about market size, he continued. It's about the team's performance, on and off the field.

"The St. Louis Cardinals outperform their market size, and the Blues, with new engaged ownership, have dramatically changed their economics in the last few years," Peacock said.

But Kroenke's application doesn't rest on economics alone. It carefully builds a devastating argument that his L.A. proposal is better than his competitors', that he has a contractual right to leave St. Louis and that a Rams' move would make the league stronger.

Kroenke and his staff sent the proposal Monday to the NFL. The San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders also filed Monday, proposing a two-team stadium in Carson, a dozen miles south of Inglewood.

But the Rams publicly released just a two-sentence statement notifying the public of the submission.

Fans here were irritated. The public authority that runs the Edward Jones Dome wanted to see Kroenke's application, too, and wrote to the NFL.

Late Tuesday, Rams executive vice president Kevin Demoff provided the document.

In it, Kroenke describes building a "world-class, iconic structure," akin to those in Dallas and Minneapolis. It is designed with 70,000 fixed seats, plus 30,000 standing for large events. A clear roof protects fans, but open sides allow for "an outdoor fan experience."

And the facility, surrounded by 8.5 million square feet of office, hotel and dining space, would serve "as the epicenter for a NFL retail and entertainment district," according to the document.

The Rams are the right team to fill the stadium, the document says, with the "longest and strongest" connection to L.A. fans.

Moreover, Kroenke argues, the Rams have a contractual right to leave St. Louis.

St. Louis promised the team a first-tier football stadium without delivering, the application says. The Jones Dome is among the worst stadiums in professional sports, Kroenke said, and the team has negotiated with the stadium authority for years to get improvements.

But perhaps the most scathing section of the application comes at the end, when it attacks St. Louis.

It calls San Diego and Oakland "significantly more attractive markets than St. Louis." San Diego is the 12th most attractive metropolitan area in the country, it says, and Oakland's gross domestic product is expected to rise above San Francisco's in 10 to 15 years.

St. Louis' recent economic growth, on the other hand, ranks 61st among the largest 64 U.S. cities, according to the document. And it has the lowest rate of population growth of any major U.S. city since 2008.

"Compared to all other U.S. cities, St. Louis is struggling," the application says.

Key owner committees are set to review the application this week in New York. The league's full ownership will take up the issue, and may finally vote, in Houston next week.

Peacock, the St. Louis stadium task force co-chairman, hopes they've done their homework: "I would love for our submission and our plan to get its fair day in review."

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Wow, did St Louis get ripped today. And notice that LA Rams updated their proposal to build what Jacksonville just approved (an entertainment center), to host what else....a draft day!

An angle I didn't even consider.  Nice!

A little massaging and I bet it could be worked right around TPC time as well to give a little extra incentive for some fans to show up.