beast
  • beast
  • Select Member Topic Starter
2 years ago
I feel like PFT is over exaggerating this, but I also have absolutely no clue how much trouble the NFL is, and how the heck they're gonna get out of it... but additional teams seems extreme, especially when Goodell was completely against it, as 32 was sorta the perfect scheduling number and because they don't have enough good talent to spread across 32 teams, teams are already sort very good linemen and QBs with 32, having more teams would spread it thinner even more.


Though I did find it surprising when it happened, how easily the NFL let the Rams out of St Louis when they usually seem to make it tougher for teams or make them prove there are issues over a longer period of time like there was with the Chargers and Raiders (whom were trying to work a deal together in Los Angeles).

But it seemed like the Rams owner (with the Cowboys owners blessing) said screw the rules, I'm doing my own thing, and the NFL followed Jerry Jones lead at the time.


The folks in St. Louis have a tiger by the tail. And they are pulling, hard.

The end result could be a new NFL team in St. Louis, eventually.

As the powers-that-be come to grips with the power they don’t have in a Missouri court that will conduct a trial of the litigation challenging the move of the Rams to L.A., the possibility of an expansion team as part of a potential settlement of the case has been floated in league circle with the stature and influence to float such concepts.

Although Rams owner Stan Kroenke has agreed to indemnify the rest of the league for whatever the verdict may be — and although the lawyers have told the other owners that the indemnity commitment is ironclad — there’s a concern that the eventual judgment in the case could be big enough to get Kroenke to try not to honor it. Thus, if and when other owners are looking at the possibility of paying for all or part of the compensatory damages (and possibly punitive damages) awarded to the St. Louis plaintiffs, a new team for St. Louis could be dangled as a way to wrap up the case.

That doesn’t mean it will be, but there’s an acknowledgment in league circles of the possibility that giving St. Louis a new team could help resolve the case.

The reality, as some in league circles now concede, is that the case should have been settled months if not years ago. Once the NFL exhausted all avenues for forcing the fight to arbitration, the lawyers representing the league should have alerted the league to the very real possibility for home cooking in Missouri state court by a judge who has shown no hesitation to speak truth to power.

The league at large woke up to the current predicament when the trial judge ruled in July that financial information from multiple owners must be disclosed in anticipation of a potential award of punitive damages. And there’s definitely some frustration regarding the failure of the lawyers who have been handling the case to not press the panic button sooner.

That’s one of the most important responsibilities of the outside lawyers from large firms who charge over $1,000 per hour and who relish the opportunity to represent what they call “cost-insensitive clients.” They need to be willing and able to realize when the case is going off the rails, and they need to say something sooner than later.

Currently, it’s too late to avoid a trial. It could soon be too late to avoid a massive verdict. And while the league seems to be content to willing to take its luck at the appellate level, that process only kicks in after a Seinfeld finale-style trial featuring multiple owners being placed under oath and asked aggressive questions that may potentially twist them in knots and expose them to widespread scrutiny, criticism, and embarrassment.

If the NFL would promise a new team within, for example, five or 10 or 15 years, the league would likely find another place to park a new team, bumping the league from 32 to 34 franchises. That would disrupt the simplicity and symmetry of the current configuration of teams, but the league lacked those things for decades before 2002.

The spread of gambling will create an urgency to increase inventory, and one way to do that is to increase the number of teams. If it helps the tiger keep its tail from being amputated, there’s all the more reason to consider it.

Profootballtalk  wrote:


UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
2 years ago
the NFL needs less teams, not more. I'd like the league to drop four teams. And also to make it easier, no State should have more than one team for a league. Spread the wealth homies.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
2 years ago
Kroenke saw the big city lights of LA and their 13 million people compared to the 3 million in St Lou and he ran. The NFL has been sick and tired of the 2nd largest city not having a team for the past 25 years and they didn't try to stop the move. The situation didn't matter to them. They will pay the fine out of petty cash.
UserPostedImage
Mucky Tundra
2 years ago

I feel like PFT is over exaggerating this, but I also have absolutely no clue how much trouble the NFL is, and how the heck they're gonna get out of it... but additional teams seems extreme, especially when Goodell was completely against it, as 32 was sorta the perfect scheduling number and because they don't have enough good talent to spread across 32 teams, teams are already sort very good linemen and QBs with 32, having more teams would spread it thinner even more.


Though I did find it surprising when it happened, how easily the NFL let the Rams out of St Louis when they usually seem to make it tougher for teams or make them prove there are issues over a longer period of time like there was with the Chargers and Raiders (whom were trying to work a deal together in Los Angeles).

But it seemed like the Rams owner (with the Cowboys owners blessing) said screw the rules, I'm doing my own thing, and the NFL followed Jerry Jones lead at the time.

Originally Posted by: beast 



Either the NFL lawyers really underestimated the case against them or as wpr pointed out, there was too much money in LA to be ignored the NFL damned the torpedoes. And you're right, the talent pool just isn't there to support more teams.

the NFL needs less teams, not more. I'd like the league to drop four teams. And also to make it easier, no State should have more than one team for a league. Spread the wealth homies.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I think relocation would be more likely with St. Louis with a prospective ownership group being given the rights of first refusal (or whatever the term is) and either being sold a team or taking a payout of some kind.

Two teams I think that could move to St Louis:
1. Los Angeles Chargers: clearly doesn't have any fanbase in LA and moving from San Diego might have fatally compromised the fan base there. Also, the Rams really don't want to share a stadium with them.
2. Jacksonville Jaguars: Jacksonville is probably the worst city in the US for an NFL franchise. Team seems to just drift along. Outdated stadium and in a crowded market (Tampa and Miami to the South, Atlanta to the North). Current owner seems hellbent on making something out of them though.

Kroenke saw the big city lights of LA and their 13 million people compared to the 3 million in St Lou and he ran. The NFL has been sick and tired of the 2nd largest city not having a team for the past 25 years and they didn't try to stop the move. The situation didn't matter to them. They will pay the fine out of petty cash.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



This is the correct take. Can you imagine explaining to someone from outside the US why LA doesn't have a team while a city like Green Bay does?

All this talk about a team leaving St. Louis reminds me of the Spirits of the ABA. The owners, Ozzie and Daniel Silna, took a buyout when the ABA merged with the NBA. Where as some owners took a money payout upfront, the Silna Brothers struck a deal for a cut of the TV Revenue!

The NBA Paid $800 Million to Make Spirits Disappear 

The 1980s Dire Straits song “Money for Nothing” was about a couple of working stiffs commenting on the music industry. But it might as well have been the walk-up music for trips to the bank by Ozzie and Daniel Silna. The Silna brothers made $800 million from the NBA by agreeing to make the Spirits of St. Louis of the ABA disappear.

The Silna brothers pocketed $300 million over a span of nearly four decades and then cashed out for an additional half a billion when exasperated NBA owners finally gave up.



Talk about easy money
“Nah. I like having the island. It’s pretty cool...not too many visitors”
UserPostedImage
"I’ve got it." -Aaron Rodgers
beast
  • beast
  • Select Member Topic Starter
2 years ago


Two teams I think that could move to St Louis:
1. Los Angeles Chargers: clearly doesn't have any fanbase in LA and moving from San Diego might have fatally compromised the fan base there. Also, the Rams really don't want to share a stadium with them.
2. Jacksonville Jaguars: Jacksonville is probably the worst city in the US for an NFL franchise. Team seems to just drift along. Outdated stadium and in a crowded market (Tampa and Miami to the South, Atlanta to the North). Current owner seems hellbent on making something out of them though.

Originally Posted by: Mucky Tundra 



Rams built the stadium with a second team in mind, so I think their owner loves someone paying rent to him. Though I do agree with Jon Gruden, who's ever heard of lightning delay for indoor stadiums? (Note, I guess the architecture design left some creative holes in the roof on purpose, which is why lightning causes delays even though it's an indoor stadium).

Also I think the Chargers owner wants to stay in Southern California.

As far the Jaguars, I can not prove this, but I'm thinking they would have moved to London if the Owners Stadium deal went through... and they had an agreement in place, but England citizens rejected the deal based on the idea a foreigner owning their national stadium and where their national soccer team plays.

UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
2 years ago
Who the fuck cares about Los Angeles? They had two teams and LOST both! They shouldn't have been rewarded with two teams decades after. Los Angeles teams left for a reason. Rams and Chargers will also relocate away from Los Angeles. Then people can whine about about a large city being without a team while ignoring the thousands of cities that haven't ever had one.

Fuck LA!
UserPostedImage
Mucky Tundra
2 years ago

Rams built the stadium with a second team in mind, so I think their owner loves someone paying rent to him. Though I do agree with Jon Gruden, who's ever heard of lightning delay for indoor stadiums? (Note, I guess the architecture design left some creative holes in the roof on purpose, which is why lightning causes delays even though it's an indoor stadium).

Also I think the Chargers owner wants to stay in Southern California.

As far the Jaguars, I can not prove this, but I'm thinking they would have moved to London if the Owners Stadium deal went through... and they had an agreement in place, but England citizens rejected the deal based on the idea a foreigner owning their national stadium and where their national soccer team plays.

Originally Posted by: beast 



beast, the Rams owner does indeed enjoy having someone pay rent but the Chargers have been less than ideal tenants. The two teams have a bit of a fractious relationship.

Inside the Rams-Chargers marriage as the NFL fights for Los Angeles 

Of course, if Justin Herbert keeps lighting it up, that might solve the Chargers fan base and attendance problem.

Who the fuck cares about Los Angeles? They had two teams and LOST both! They shouldn't have been rewarded with two teams decades after. Los Angeles teams left for a reason. Rams and Chargers will also relocate away from Los Angeles. Then people can whine about about a large city being without a team while ignoring the thousands of cities that haven't ever had one.

Fuck LA!

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



The Rams' 2018 TV ratings in L.A. were higher than the Giants and Jets in New York, the only comparable market and situation. And a prime-time game against the Seattle Seahawks this year outdrew a Dodgers playoff game head-to-head on TV. The Rams ranked 11th in total home paid attendance in 2018, despite playing in the league's oldest stadium.



That's probably why. And no way will the NFL let both teams leave LA again, not with a fancy new domed stadium that can host Super Bowls in a big media market. And if the NFL gets hit with a hefty financial penalty, I imagine they'll double down on LA under the sunk cost fallacy.
“Nah. I like having the island. It’s pretty cool...not too many visitors”
UserPostedImage
"I’ve got it." -Aaron Rodgers
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
2 years ago

Either the NFL lawyers really underestimated the case against them or as wpr pointed out, there was too much money in LA to be ignored the NFL damned the torpedoes. And you're right, the talent pool just isn't there to support more teams.



I think relocation would be more likely with St. Louis with a prospective ownership group being given the rights of first refusal (or whatever the term is) and either being sold a team or taking a payout of some kind.

Two teams I think that could move to St Louis:
1. Los Angeles Chargers: clearly doesn't have any fanbase in LA and moving from San Diego might have fatally compromised the fan base there. Also, the Rams really don't want to share a stadium with them.
2. Jacksonville Jaguars: Jacksonville is probably the worst city in the US for an NFL franchise. Team seems to just drift along. Outdated stadium and in a crowded market (Tampa and Miami to the South, Atlanta to the North). Current owner seems hellbent on making something out of them though.



This is the correct take. Can you imagine explaining to someone from outside the US why LA doesn't have a team while a city like Green Bay does?

All this talk about a team leaving St. Louis reminds me of the Spirits of the ABA. The owners, Ozzie and Daniel Silna, took a buyout when the ABA merged with the NBA. Where as some owners took a money payout upfront, the Silna Brothers struck a deal for a cut of the TV Revenue!

The NBA Paid $800 Million to Make Spirits Disappear 



Talk about easy money

Originally Posted by: Mucky Tundra 



I loved the savvy move the Silnas made. It's not often when a couple of guys can get the best of an entire league.

UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
2 years ago

That's probably why. And no way will the NFL let both teams leave LA again, not with a fancy new domed stadium that can host Super Bowls in a big media market. And if the NFL gets hit with a hefty financial penalty, I imagine they'll double down on LA under the sunk cost fallacy.

Originally Posted by: Mucky Tundra 



It doesn't matter. It's doing nothing for the sport or anyone other than making rich a bit more rich. It will come to it's head and people will be like Ahh wow how did this happen?

The NFL needs less teams, not more. And FUCK LA!


Edit, no, I do not know how LA hurt me. 😁
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
dfosterf (7h) : Maybe
Mucky Tundra (8h) : Yes
Zero2Cool (9h) : No.
Mucky Tundra (11h) : End of a Degu-era
dhazer (12h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (14h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (15h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (28-Mar) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
3h / Around The NFL / beast

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.