Burning bridges, a.k.a. the relocation thread

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
It certainly looks like my prediction that Spanos & Davis would stick together might be wrong. From the Raiders perspective, what matters now is what they get from the rest of the league for getting abandoned by Spanos. If they are able to get some extra portion of the relocation fees directed their way to pay for a stadium in Oakland, I imagine that is a pretty big win for Marc Davis.

EDIT: Of course, as several journalists are reporting, sources from both the Raiders and Chargers are telling people they remain committed to each other.
 
Last edited:

Quintanariffic

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2002
5,141
The City of Studios
It certainly looks like my prediction that Spanos & Davis would stick together might be wrong. From the Raiders perspective, what matters now is what they get from the rest of the league for getting abandoned by Spanos. If they are able to get some extra portion of the relocation fees directed their way to pay for a stadium in Oakland, I imagine that is a pretty big win for Marc Davis.

EDIT: Of course, as several journalists are reporting, sources from both the Raiders and Chargers are telling people they remain committed to each other.
You continue to nail it. One thing is for sure: the Chargers are moving to LA. The only question is whether it's in Inglewood with the Rams or in Carson with the Raiders.

Given the lack of enthusiasm about a Davis-family owned franchise in LA, I guess the question comes down to this: Is the $100-200M kicker the NFL would have to pay Davis to make the numbers work in Oakland (and make Spanos feel OK about kicking Davis to the curb/working with Kroenke) more or less distasteful than having the Raiders in LA while engineering an ownership transition of some kind involving Iger and/or Ellison?

I think it's becoming clear that the Davis family will not be allowed to be majority owners of an NFL franchise in LA for more than a few minutes.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
That is what it comes down to. I can't stop thinking about how Al Davis had a stadium financed and approved at Hollywood Park in 1995 and then left LA because the NFL asked him to potentially share it. We know now that they would not have actually made him do it for almost 20 years. Can anyone think of a worse business decision made by any NFL owner in professional sports history?
 
Dec 21, 2015
1,410
My favorite part about this game of musical chairs is the possibility that Stan Kroenke gets voted down and then has to continue running his franchise in St Louis after having just shat all over it very publicly and vehemently. Maybe if that happens, the fans will force a Donald Sterling-esque situation on him.

Say what you will about Mark Davis's competence, haircut and eccentricities, he does seem to genuinely care about his team's success and, up to a point, his fans. If he can get what he needs for his franchise to remain stable amidst the lion's den of NFL ownership, more power to him.

For what it's worth LA is likely to have 2.75 million tickets to sell next fall for NFL, USC and UCLA football. That is a hell of a lot of tickets in a largely ambivalent NFL town for four teams that didn't qualify for a playoff or major bowl game this year.

There are a few midsize, passionate markets that sell more tickets relative to their population. Pittsburgh for example will sell about a million tickets for Steelers and Pitt football in a market about one fifth the size of LA. But I suspect there will be an awful lot of empty seats at NFL games at the Coliseum next year.
We do have a precedent: the NY Baseball Giants & Brooklyn Dodgers. Here's attendance pre and post 1957:



Both teams immediately and sustainably doubled their attendance, roughly. I'm not sure where the Raiders, Chargers and Rams rank on season-ticket waiting lists, but I strongly suspect attendance would not be an issue. There are enough people in southern california that a solid majority of them can give zero shits about the NFL in general, much less the new town teams, and have those teams still be fine.

edit: obviously, no analogy is perfect, but in those days MLB was not a national brand and there were few if any pre-existing Dodgers and Giants fans in california. The right product hit the right market at the right time. Obviously the Raiders would have the easiest path of the 3 franchises, but I don't think any of them would end up dead in the water, certainly not for any appreciable length of time.
 
Last edited:

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,126
My favorite part about this game of musical chairs is the possibility that Stan Kroenke gets voted down and then has to continue running his franchise in St Louis after having just shat all over it very publicly and vehemently. Maybe if that happens, the fans will force a Donald Sterling-esque situation on him.
I imagine he will sell the team or move it somewhere else. St Louis to me seems like it is in decline, so this is a good time to get out. I don't think you will see another team there once the Rams leave.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
I imagine he will sell the team or move it somewhere else. St Louis to me seems like it is in decline, so this is a good time to get out. I don't think you will see another team there once the Rams leave.
He'd probably sell and wait for Bowlen to die so he can have all Denver teams. The Rams' problem isn't STL. It's a decade of incompetence from Kroenke and his GMs and that the city and state won't foot the whole bill for a stadium.
 

Quintanariffic

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2002
5,141
The City of Studios
I imagine he will sell the team or move it somewhere else. St Louis to me seems like it is in decline, so this is a good time to get out. I don't think you will see another team there once the Rams leave.
I don't know if St. Louis will be w/o a team forever, but they certainly won't support one owned by Kroenke given the scorched earth approach he's taken.

Maybe San Diego? By most measures, it's a better market than St. Louis and I believe will be the largest market w/o a team once LA is occupied.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
Large Carson contingent, including Policy, Spanos, Davis + Raiders and Chargers staff meeting right now in private room hotel restaurant.


From Raiders beat writer Scott Blair


KLAC reporter David Vasseh just reported that Kroenke's people are letting it be know they expect approval to move tomorrow.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
Large Carson contingent, including Policy, Spanos, Davis + Raiders and Chargers staff meeting right now in private room hotel restaurant.


From Raiders beat writer Scott Blair


KLAC reporter David Vasseh just reported that Kroenke's people are letting it be know they expect approval to move tomorrow.

If the Rams are confident that they are getting approval tomorrow I assume that's bad news for the raiders. It could also mean that The Cowboys proposal of a SD/STL move will get enough votes.
 

Hoya81

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2010
8,457
If the Rams are confident that they are getting approval tomorrow I assume that's bad news for the raiders. It could also mean that The Cowboys proposal of a SD/STL move will get enough votes.
Will Kroenke really go along with giving up part ownership of the Inglewood site? That's a big hit in his bottom line in the long term.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,382
I imagine he will sell the team or move it somewhere else. St Louis to me seems like it is in decline, so this is a good time to get out. I don't think you will see another team there once the Rams leave.
As an uber-gorilla in terms of sponsors of major sports and headquartered in St. Louis, Budweiser being acquired by InBev may have been the tipping point for the Rams leaving the city:

While Boeing and General Motors have plans to expand their operations in Missouri, other economic news is not as promising. Just weeks after InBev, the Belgian beverage giant that acquired Anheuser-Busch in 2008, announced layoffs in the company’s St. Louis based marketing and finance departments, the company said last December it was shifting many of its top executives from St. Louis to a New York.

Register
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
“@JasonLaCanfora: LA relocation committee meeting with Roger Goodell ongoing. Expectation is they recommend one of 3 proposals by the AM before full meeting..”

“@JasonLaCanfora: The Jerry Jones proposal for Rams/chargers in Inglewood seems to be gaining steam”
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
Vincent Bonsignore ‏@DailyNewsVinny 12m12 minutes ago
Dean Spanos said he remains committed to Carson. Also said he will abide by what #NFL decides #Chargers #Raiders #Rams #NFL2LA

Fred Roggin ‏@FredNBCLA 17m17 minutes ago
#Raiders owner Mark Davis said he feels confident about tomorrow.

Perhaps because San Diego beat writer Kevin Acee has this note for the loser:

Multiple sources continue to stress that the team left out of Los Angeles will be "taken care of." It is believed by many that team will be the Raiders, as league owners are not confident the organization can be entrusted with that jewel. Some have even begun to sense the Raiders believe that will be the case.

Those sources say the Raiders will likely be given extra money from the league for stadium construction and, should they move, have the relocation fee waived.

Among the possibilities for a Raiders landing spot is San Diego.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/jan/11/chargers-rams-jerry-jones-houston-proposal/

EDIT: here is a prominent national writer going a little further:

Jim Trotter ‏@JimTrotter_NFL 38s38 seconds ago
The NFL may want a Spanos-Kroenke marriage in LA, but Spanos isn't breaking his partnership w/ Davis unless deal satisfies him AND Davis.
 
Last edited:

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
@Gunfighter 09

I assume we have a clearer picture by Tuesday evening (early evening). I don't think the voting goes until Wednesday..

Also... Raiders to SD? thats kind of interesting
 
Dec 21, 2015
1,410
They don't believe the Raiders can "be entrusted with that jewel"?! What in god's name does that mean? Jim Irsay does everything but leave dead hookers on his front lawn, Jimmy Haslam comes within an ass hair's breadth of going to federal prison for a long, long time, Jerry Jones gropes anything that looks remotely like a boob, and let's not even get into Dan Snyder... but it's the Raiders who can't be trusted? What in god's name for?

I mean, sure, I hate their team and plenty of their fans are sore losers over 2001, but there's no question the franchise is one of the league's most popular.

"we don't like Mark Davis because he reminds us that his father existed" would be a fine rationale, if dickish... at least it would make sense. This doesn't make sense.
 
May 30, 2009
17,395
in my pants...
I don't think its about the character of the owner that they have problems with, but how the organisation is run. I don't know of anything about the Raiders operation that would justify that, but I doubt that it's about the character or behavior of Mark Davis.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
It is three things. The owners justifiably dislike the Davis family. We are only here because Al Davis threw a temper tantrum and left LA in 1995. The NFL wanted him to stay and helped broker the Hollywood park deal. (http://articles.philly.com/2001-04-10/sports/25329992_1_raiders-attorney-joseph-alioto-oakland-raiders-owner-inglewood-s-hollywood-park) Then Al left over being told he might have to share the stadium. He chose to share a re-modeled 50 year old stadium where he would be the #2 tennant in a small city over having his own building built from the ground up in the second largest market in the country. Al then sued the NFL in 2001 for $1B to declare the LA market was "his", and lost in court Now, 20 years later, his son is asking the NFL to let him back in to LA. Imagine if you are Bob Kraft or Jerry Jones and Marc Davis is begging you to let him go to LA.

Marc Davis doesn't have any money. The only source of real income for the Davis family is the Raiders. They don't have the Spanos' central valley real estate empire and Marc chose to stay single, rather than marry a Walton like Kroenke.

Marc is a weirdo by NFL owner standards. He eats 5-7 meals a week at PF Changs. He drives a 1997 Dodge Caravan. He doesn't own a jet, in fact he flies Southwest (there is a bit of corporate payback going on her, but he waits in line with civilians) he goes to hooters every Friday night with Marcel Reece and the Raiders radio guys. He hangs out is Raider bars with fans (see attached pic of Marc with me and my brothers). He only wears white or occasionally black and has that stupid haircut. He is not a football expert by any means. He just doesn't fit in well with that crowd. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13735322/are-mark-davis-raiders-leaving-oakland

To his credit, Marc seems to know how to lean heavily on guys like Ron Wolf and John Madden to fill in his gaps of knowledge. He cleaned out most of Al's people and has let Reggie McKenzie run the football side and Marc Badain run the business and administration side of things. I also think he understands and cares about fans more than most, if not all, NFL owners. The best recent example is the way he made the story about the Christmas Eve game in Oakland about Charles Woodson, and not the Raiders leaving Oakland. Further, his biggest desire for a stadium is to have a great parking lot for tailgating. I think that is the biggest reason he won't partner with the Niners in their terrible stadium in Santa Clara. I like the guy, and hope he keeps the team, but I worry that he is an anachronism that doesn't fit in the 21st century NFL. However, if he either undoes his father's greatest error and gets to LA, or pulls multiple hundreds of million dollars from the NFL just by making a few threats, he will have cemented his status as an owner who did something great for his team.

 
Last edited:

wibi

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,839
As has been noted before, if it's Chargers and Raiders, one of them will switch conferences with either the Cardinals or Seahawks.
Almost everyone I know is rooting for it to be STL and SD/OAK as the two teams because no one wants to see ARI or SEA leave the NFC West.
 

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)

T&A
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2010
5,302
Providence, RI
Marc Davis doesn't have any money. The only source of real income for the Davis family is the Raiders. They don't have the Spanos' central valley real estate empire and Marc chose to stay single, rather than marry a Walton like Kroenke.

Marc is a weirdo by NFL owner standards. He eats 5-7 meals a week at PF Changs. He drives a 1997 Dodge Caravan. He doesn't own a jet, in fact he flies Southwest (there is a bit of corporate payback going on her, but he waits in line with civilians) he goes to hooters every Friday night with Marcel Reece and the Raiders radio guys. He hangs out is Raider bars with fans (see attached pic of Marc with me and my brothers). He only wears white or occasionally black and has that stupid haircut. He is not a football expert by any means. He just doesn't fit in well with that crowd. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13735322/are-mark-davis-raiders-leaving-oakland
The bolded doesn't really match with the next paragraph :)
 
Last edited:
Dec 21, 2015
1,410
Great post GF. I understand he's not as wealthy, snobby or meddling as most other NFL owners... I'm still a bit confused as to why that would lead them to think that he and his organization would be a "risk" to the NFL's presence in LA, but maybe I'm under-weighting the spite angle.

Also, can I ask why you continue to spell his first name 'Marc' rather than Mark? I assume its some raider-fan inside joke or something, just curious.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
“@ProFootballTalk: Chargers could muster 9 votes to block a Rams partnership in Inglewood, delaying everything by at least a year https://t.co/Hpbs8sJFJ3

At a time when it appears that there’s plenty of momentum to finally resolve the L.A. situation, the possibility of another one-year delay has re-emerged.

Per a source with knowledge of the dynamics of the situation, the Chargers could resist a forced marriage with the Rams in Inglewood by employing nine votes to block the proposed Rams-Chargers partnership there. This would, as a practical matter, delay the L.A. relocation by at least another year, forcing the Chargers to stay in San Diego and, more importantly, forcing the Rams to stay in St. Louis.

With Rams owner Stan Kroenke recently burning his bridges there — and given that the NFL has declared the efforts of local politicians to subsidize a new stadium to be “unsatisfactory and inadequate” — a one-year stay in St. Louis would be impractical at this point for the Rams.

Which could give Chargers owner Dean Spanos the leverage necessary to, with the blessing of at least 23 other owners, swap the Raiders for the Rams in the proposal for a shared stadium in Carson. Which is possibly what Spanos and Raiders owner Mark Davis envisioned when they proposed their partnership a year ago, after Kroenke unveiled his plan to build a stadium in Inglewood. [\quote]
 

Quintanariffic

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2002
5,141
The City of Studios
Unclear what that means though. One thing is clear, some sort of decision is going to be made today - what else could lure Paul Allen out of his fortress of solitude?

Also from the SBJ:

The NFL Committee on L.A. Opportunities has recommended the Carson stadium project over Inglewood, sources said. The move is not unexpected, but it is unclear whether the six-owner committee's decision is a recommendation for the specific Chargers-Raiders shared stadium in Carson, or just that the NFL should move to Carson instead of Inglewood, the site proposed by Rams Owner Stan Kroenke. It also is unknown whether the committee's recommendation was unanimous. After owners speak their mind this morning in the meeting, the Rams will present followed by the Carson project. Disney Chair & CEO Bob Iger, who would run the stadium project, is set to make that presentation. “I feel good,” Iger said when questioned about the chances owners would give his site the nod. Still, much remains fluid, with a big push to put the Rams and Chargers together instead. Steelers Chair Dan Rooney said when asked what team was moving to L.A., “Your guess is as good as mine.” In a sign of just how much interest the meeting is generating, more than 200 media members are covering the gathering, and even Seahawks Owner Paul Allen is in attendance. The last meeting he attended was the July '11 gathering where owners approved the new CBA
 

Quintanariffic

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2002
5,141
The City of Studios
Great post GF. I understand he's not as wealthy, snobby or meddling as most other NFL owners... I'm still a bit confused as to why that would lead them to think that he and his organization would be a "risk" to the NFL's presence in LA, but maybe I'm under-weighting the spite angle.

Also, can I ask why you continue to spell his first name 'Marc' rather than Mark? I assume its some raider-fan inside joke or something, just curious.
I think it really comes down to perceptions of his business sense. Perhaps spite is a factor for some old guard owners who were around for "peak-Davis" in the 90s, but the NFL is nothing if not about business. The Raiders are not known as the most business-savvy organization out there, and if you're going to allow a team into the 2nd biggest market in the country, you want to be sure that they can milk the market for every red cent. Kroenke can certainly do that. Spanos probably can, and is anyway highly respected. Davis is neither.
 

wibi

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,839
“@ProFootballTalk: Chargers could muster 9 votes to block a Rams partnership in Inglewood, delaying everything by at least a year https://t.co/Hpbs8sJFJ3
I dont get how STL burning their bridges gives leverage for SD to swap them out for OAK. If anything I would think the NFL would want to get STL out of there as fast as possible so as to not burn any more bridges than they already have.
 

Quintanariffic

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2002
5,141
The City of Studios
I dont get how STL burning their bridges gives leverage for SD to swap them out for OAK. If anything I would think the NFL would want to get STL out of there as fast as possible so as to not burn any more bridges than they already have.
That's not what the PFT post is saying though. It just says that Spanos has the votes to block Kroenke/Inglewood until he get what he wants, or more likely to get what he's willing to accept (e.g. at least keep his putative partner Mark Davis whole by extracting an extra $100-200MM payment to help fund a new stadium in Oakland or elsewhere.
 

wibi

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,839
That's not what the PFT post is saying though. It just says that Spanos has the votes to block Kroenke/Inglewood until he get what he wants, or more likely to get what he's willing to accept (e.g. at least keep his putative partner Mark Davis whole by extracting an extra $100-200MM payment to help fund a new stadium in Oakland or elsewhere.
Is the implication that then the NFL would have three teams in LA? Because, to me, the article reads like swapping STL and OAK would leave STL in their current location and not moving to LA.
 

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)

T&A
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2010
5,302
Providence, RI
I think it really comes down to perceptions of his business sense. Perhaps spite is a factor for some old guard owners who were around for "peak-Davis" in the 90s, but the NFL is nothing if not about business. The Raiders are not known as the most business-savvy organization out there, and if you're going to allow a team into the 2nd biggest market in the country, you want to be sure that they can milk the market for every red cent. Kroenke can certainly do that. Spanos probably can, and is anyway highly respected. Davis is neither.
But isn't this exactly why Bob Iger is attached to the Raiders bid, the stadium and rumored to be in a position to buy a sizeable chunk of the team? That gambit might not work, but I think Mark Davis gets sold short by a lot of people. He is a weirdo for sure, but he also seems to have a firm grasp on his limitations and is lining up competent people to protect his greatest asset. That or someone duped him by picking up his PF Changs tab.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,212
I hadn't previously looked at the composition of the NFL's LA six man committee:

Rooney (chair)
Kraft
Hunt
McNair
Richardson
Mara

That is quite possibly the six most important and influential owners isn't it? I know some put Jones there.
 

Quintanariffic

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2002
5,141
The City of Studios
But isn't this exactly why Bob Iger is attached to the Raiders bid, the stadium and rumored to be in a position to buy a sizeable chunk of the team? That gambit might not work, but I think Mark Davis gets sold short by a lot of people. He is a weirdo for sure, but he also seems to have a firm grasp on his limitations and is lining up competent people to protect his greatest asset. That or someone duped him by picking up his PF Changs tab.
Correct - that's exactly why Iger was brought in. But as of now, he's just leading the stadium effort. Until and unless there is an agreement in place (vs. just rumors) for Iger and/or other to purchase a controlling stake in the Raiders, nothing much changes.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
“@JasonColeBR: #NFL LA comm recommends Carson site 5-1. Lone exception: #Chiefs owner Clark Hunt, who said should 1 team or none #Rams #Chargers #Raiders”


I can think of one reason why the Chiefs voted against the Carson plan. And it's completely obvious
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,382
That's not what the PFT post is saying though. It just says that Spanos has the votes to block Kroenke/Inglewood until he get what he wants, or more likely to get what he's willing to accept (e.g. at least keep his putative partner Mark Davis whole by extracting an extra $100-200MM payment to help fund a new stadium in Oakland or elsewhere.

I guess one of the big unknowns here is if deep down Davis would prefer a financially-viable Oakland-area stadium solution over moving to LA.
 

Quintanariffic

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2002
5,141
The City of Studios
Is the implication that then the NFL would have three teams in LA? Because, to me, the article reads like swapping STL and OAK would leave STL in their current location and not moving to LA.
No - definitely won't be 3 teams in LA. The implication is that Spanos can inflict pain on Kroenke and the NFL by delaying the decision for a year - he has the votes to block Inglewood even if he can't muster the votes for Carson. Kroenke would lose buckets of money and the visuals of empty stands in StL and overall uncertainty of the LA situation would make the NFL look like idiots (more so than they already do). Not sure what Kroenke's Plan B is, b/c his scorched-Earth approach in StL means that's not a viable market for him.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
Chiefs want the Rams out so they can get the money that would come from one less team
 

Quintanariffic

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2002
5,141
The City of Studios
I guess one of the big unknowns here is if deep down Davis would prefer a financially-viable Oakland-area stadium solution over moving to LA.
My guess is "yes". So if Spanos can extract his pound of flesh from Kroenke in terms of rev/profit sharing from Inglewood while ensuring that Davis gets enough extra cash from the NFL to make the numbers pencil out in Oakland, then that's what will happen. I guess it depends on whether the extra value of the Inglewood plan over Carson is greater than the cost of providing that extra subsidy to Mark Davis.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
“@ramonashelburne: At this point just an interesting detail, but hearing from 2 sources Mayor of Inglewood has tentatively scheduled a press conference Friday”
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
“@JasonColeBR: last night, #NFL staff tried to nego better landlord-tenant deal between #Rams & #Chargers in Inglewood with LA Comm. Comm didn’t like idea”
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
I hadn't previously looked at the composition of the NFL's LA six man committee:

Rooney (chair)
Kraft
Hunt
McNair
Richardson
Mara

That is quite possibly the six most important and influential owners isn't it? I know some put Jones there.
Spanos is "old" school owner isn't he? Richardson is one of his biggest friends from the scuttlebut you read in the papers. Some would argue the LA committee was heavily tilted by member selection as a recommendation for Spanos was pretty much a done deal.

As an aside some of the guys that used to be consider new school guys have been around long enough they are now old school (Jones and Kraft as examples if you go back to articles in the 90's).
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
Oh god
“@HBalzer721: Hearing Stan Kroenke told owners this morning not to cross him; believes there would be collusion if chose Carson with Chargers-Raiders.”
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
Correct - that's exactly why Iger was brought in. But as of now, he's just leading the stadium effort. Until and unless there is an agreement in place (vs. just rumors) for Iger and/or other to purchase a controlling stake in the Raiders, nothing much changes.
Iger has an option to buy 20% of either the Raiders or Chargers. That option is already agreed to, thus not part of the NFL's requirement to pay 20% of profit to the league after the teams moved to LA. It is assumed he will take that 20% of the Raiders, Since Mark Davis owns 52%, and selling 20% would allow him to retain control. What is unknown is if Ellison has a similar buy in deal that could avoid that tax.

Oh god
“@HBalzer721: Hearing Stan Kroenke told owners this morning not to cross him; believes there would be collusion if chose Carson with Chargers-Raiders.”
He threatened Kraft and Rooney like that? Has there every been a single issue that the Rooneys (who come with the Maras) have supported with significant backing that didn't go their way? Is there any chance Kraft loses anything with the NFL right now after what they did to him last year? I all of a sudden feel very confident that the Raiders might get to LA after all.

The Kroenke / Inglewood team has been almost too vocal with media types over the last week or so. Maybe Iger and Co really can take down the deep pocketed bully. The NFL might still more of a club than a business consortium.

Great post GF.
Also, can I ask why you continue to spell his first name 'Marc' rather than Mark? I assume its some raider-fan inside joke or something, just curious.
It is a joke, I'll stop. Apparently Al spelled it both ways in correspondence. There are many stories that indicate Al loved DBs with a sub 4.4 40 more than his own son.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
“@DailyNewsVinny: #Rams alone to Inglewood has been pulled from the ballot”
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
“@DailyNewsVinny: So it’s down to #Chargers/#Rams Inglewood vs. #Chargers/Raiders Carson bids”
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
Iger has an option to buy 20% of either the Raiders or Chargers. That option is already agreed to, thus not part of the NFL's requirement to pay 20% of profit to the league after the teams moved to LA. It is assumed he will take that 20% of the Raiders, Since Mark Davis owns 52%, and selling 20% would allow him to retain control. What is unknown is if Ellison has a similar buy in deal that could avoid that tax.



He threatened Kraft and Rooney like that? Has there every been a single issue that the Rooneys (who come with the Maras) have supported with significant backing that didn't go their way? Is there any chance Kraft loses anything with the NFL right now after what they did to him last year? I all of a sudden feel very confident that the Raiders might get to LA after all.

The Kroenke / Inglewood team has been almost too vocal with media types over the last week or so. Maybe Iger and Co really can take down the deep pocketed bully. The NFL might still more of a club than a business consortium.



It is a joke, I'll stop. Apparently Al spelled it both ways in correspondence. There are many stories that indicate Al loved DBs with a sub 4.4 40 more than his own son.
yup

Martin Kilcoyne ‏@martinkilcoyne2 15m15 minutes ago
Update. voting has begun. No secret ballot. Stan did mention legal action if Carson chosen. First reported by @HBalzer721. #rams #fox2
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
6,668
My fingers are crossed for a shitstorm of lawsuits and anger that exposes the league for the corrupt pile of shit it is.