kidhawk
Well-known member
[urltargetblank]http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/90817/what-to-know-about-rams-stadium-ruling[/urltargetblank]
Just saw this in Sando's blog. Apparently, the two sides (Rams and Stadium Authority) each put forward a proposal to an arbiter and it was decided that the Rams proposal would be the one moving forward. The Stadium authority has 30 days to accept or reject that proposal. Sando seems to think they reject it, at which point, in 2015, the lease reverts to an annual lease, meaning that they could opt to do whatever they wish at that point.
Man this offseason is REALLY slow when I start wondering what the different scenarios are for our division because of stadium issues in St Louis
Just saw this in Sando's blog. Apparently, the two sides (Rams and Stadium Authority) each put forward a proposal to an arbiter and it was decided that the Rams proposal would be the one moving forward. The Stadium authority has 30 days to accept or reject that proposal. Sando seems to think they reject it, at which point, in 2015, the lease reverts to an annual lease, meaning that they could opt to do whatever they wish at that point.
Man this offseason is REALLY slow when I start wondering what the different scenarios are for our division because of stadium issues in St Louis