Rush Limbaugh and the PC HQ of the NFL

When I got home from work last night, I was rather amazed by some of the things I saw on ESPN. Less so with the NFL network. Before playing a nice game of "He said, She said" let us establish the ground rules for the interpretation of PC statements.

First, let us forever dismiss in the Kindergarten of social inquiry the preposterous notion that PC is about being Liberal. That is simply not true. Second, we must dismiss the misguided theory that PC is about avoiding offending anyone. Third, let us also dismiss, with some consideration, the idea that PC is about establishing a fascist-enforced liberal orthodoxy of speech and thought. That was almost true for a time during the early 1990s.

No folks, PC is not about any of those things. Rather, it is about outright intellectual dishonesty. It is about not saying what you think. It is about not dropping a card which can be used against you at a later time; ostensibly when you are running for office, or when you need a favor. It is about making ambiguous statements that people can interpret as they please, without clarity. This allows you to become all things to all people. That is something most politicians want to do.

Did Roger Goodell say he would oppose Rush Limbaugh as an NFL owner? Nope. You read that into his statements. You had some help. Remember PC is about outright intellectual dishonesty, and making unclear statements that people can read as they will. Did Jim Irsay say that he was a liberal and would never allow a conservative to buy an NFL franchise? Nope. You may have interpreted it that way, but you would be wrong.

No folks, what these two gentlemen said was more like this: "We of the NFL market a product. We want to sell to everybody. We have a lot of Black customers. Right or wrong, Black folks tend to hate Rush. Ergo, we just can't allow him in the organization because he just might spoil one segment of the market. We don't want that."

When you strip the unclarity from Roger's statements, he basically said that the NFL cannot afford to have a highly political owner of any type. That's all he said. Any highly political dude is going to be controversial with some segment of the vast NFL market. Ergo any highly political owner would polarize the NFL market. This cannot be allowed. It would be bad for marketing.

Let's do three bits of truth telling while we are at this. I hate PC with all my heart and soul, so let me be brutally honest with you.

1. Reports of Rush Limbaugh's racism are vastly over-stated. Regrettably, the Black community--or at least certain bad leaders like Jessie Jackson--have had a tendency to pull the race card against any guy who might oppose social welfare policy or affirmative action. Any opposition to these two planks gets you blacklisted as a racist immediately. There is a massive logical fallacy in this reasoning, but this has always been the argument.
2. Reports of the NFL's anti-racism are fairly exaggerated. If you could really see inside the minds of some NFL owners, you would find a degree of racism there that would dwarf anything inside the mind of Rush Limbaugh.
3. Owners are going to be required to be a-political for marketing reasons, not for any egalitarian reasons. It's a financial thing. It has nothing to do with ideology.

So what about the famous Donovan McNab statements made by Limbaugh? Truth be told, he was absolutely and completely right. Those statements were made in the run up to the 2004 Super Bowl which featured the Eagles and the Patriots. Donovan's horrendous performance in the 4th quarter sure justified everything Rush said about Donovan. Donovan made Rush look great in that terrible 4th Quarter.

Do you remember the game? Did you watch the game? Did you actually really watch the game? I saw the Eagle defense absolutely hammering the Patriot offense by the 4th quarter. The Patriots were on the Ropes. The Eagle offense had ample opportunity to win that game in the 4th quarter. They did not. Terrible passing and horrendous clock management by McNabb lost the game for the Eagles. It was one of the most pitiful performances I have ever seen by a QB in the clutch moments of a game.

I am not the only one who knows this to be the fact of the matter. Why don't you consult Terrel Owens about this question. He sure felt that way, and with good reason. Donovan fucked it up. Instead of admitting that Donovan fucked up the Super Bowl, the NFL powers that be label Terrel a big trouble maker, they throw Rush off of ESPN, and they deride all the Philly fans who know that Donovan fucked the game up.

To this day, many Eagle fans know they cannot win the Super Bowl with McNabb at the helm. They know this because of that terrible Super Bowl performance. Both ESPN and the NFL Network continue to beat Philly fans for expressing themselves on this subject.

You know why? Because it messes up the marketing campaign, that's why.

A short discourse on the sale of the Rams

Yahoo's top ranked search Tuesday 10/13/2009

I visited Yahoo's front page this morning to consult their financial section regarding the state of current interest rates on real estate. My company provides those rates to Yahoo. I have full database admin rights. I could perfectly well look them up myself right here, but we have an agreement with Yahoo. Our guys are supposed to use their site.

To what did my wandering eye did appear? The St. Louis Rams are actually the top-ranked search on Yahoo's search rankings. This hasn't happened since Kurt Warner blew up in 1999. We out-shot Hedi Klum for the title. Shocking. So how does an 0-5-0 team in the cellar of the NFC West get to the top of the Yahoo search pages?

Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson are pissed that Rush Limbaugh wants to buy the team, that's how. Ah shit... What else can go wrong this year? Fuck... Now we have three (count 'em three) of the world's biggest assholes slapping each other over my team. Please, fuck off and die; all three of you shitheads... especially Jessie Jackson. Jessie is a crap-hound and a manwhore. If Rush pays him $50k, he'll go away, just as he did with NASCar. I think they are all demagoguing this as a publicity stunt.

So without further ado, let us look dispassionately at the facts and assess the situation. I am not thrilled by the prospect of Rush owning the Rams. At the same time I am not concerned about this because I do not regard it as a serious probability. Let me tell you why.

Rush vs. Kroenke: bullet for bullet.

Rush is a poor boy folks. They talk about his vast fortune from broadcasting, and they have no idea what real money looks like. Let me tell you about real money and real pole position.

Enos Stanley Kroenke owns 40% of the Rams. Kroenke has the right of first refusal on any sale of Ram stock. This means he can match any bid, and he gets the stock. Kroenke is estimated to be worth $3.5 billion dollars. This puts him higher than #163 on the Forbes 400 for sure. His wife, Anne Walton, is a Walmart heir. She is thought to be worth more money than he is. It is rumored that Kroenke also holds a poison pill. If he does not like the new majority owner, he has the contractual right to force this new owner to buy his 40% of the stock.

Rush owns exactly 0% of the Rams. He is not worth $3.5 billion. Most people believe his total collective assets are worth far less than $1 billion. By the world's standards, he is not all that rich. Rush is not married. Last time he was married, it was to an Aerobics instructor he met on CompuServ. Do you remember CompuServ?

Kroenke needs to come up with approximately $550 Million liquid cash to close the deal. Rush just might need to come up with $929 million to do the deal. Kroenke just might drop the poison pill, remember?

Now in a financial shoot-out between Rush and Kroenke who do you think is going to win the day? All of you Las Vegas handicappers are laughing your fucking asses off right about now. You might as well put the Indianapolis Colts up against the JV team at East Podunk High School. This is a mega-blow out. Kroenke wins, hands down. It ain't even going to be a close call. It will be worse than Super Bowl XX.

Kroenke holds all the cards. The end of story. Rush better hope that Kroenke loves him, or there is no play on the Rams for Rush.

The Fly in the Ointment

Kroenke owns a lot of sports franchises. He owns the Denver Nuggets of the NBA. He owns the Colorado Avalanche of the NHL. He owns a sizable chunk of the Arsenal FC in England. He also owned the Colorado Crush when there was such a thing as Arena League Football. He was partnered with John Elway and Pat Bowlen in this affair.

The NFL has bylaws which forbid ownership of professional franchises in other leagues... at least if they are in NFL cities. That was the latest ruling when they decided they wanted Paul Allen in the club. Kroenke would run afoul of this rule. Most of his toys are in Denver. This is Pat Bowlen's turf.

However, Bowlen is a buddy, and presumably a political advocate. They have been partners. If Bowlen advocates Kroenke, I think Kroenke is in the owner's booth. Unattributed and unconfirmed rumors say that NFL HQ will waive the cross-ownership restriction for Kroenke. He would seem to be the sort of guy they want in the owner's booth.

So you see, my friends, this PR flap is much ado about nothing. It is an opportunity for political manwhores to jiggle their junk in front of the camera for all to see. The Rams belong to Kroenke if he wants them. I think he does. Rumor has it that he bought 40% to secure his position in line to buy the team. He expected Georgia to sell or die sooner or later. His angle has been well played. He is now about to reap his harvest.

Ed Roski Jr. has been given the greenlight

Ad meanwhile, Mr. Edward P. Roski Jr, ranked #163 on the Forbes 400 with about $2.5 Billion in networth, has been given the green light to go forward with his new $750m to $800m stadium in Industry California. Make no mistake folks, this is L.A. County.

A settlement has been reached in Walnut's lawsuit against Industry. The story is fascinating. When the City of Walnut raised lawsuits against Industry over the environmental impact of a new stadium construction, the State of California Legislature immediately threatened to pass an exemption for Roski, so that he could go forward with the plan. Shortly afterward, crushed opponents agreed (under duress) to terms of surrender. If they hadn't negotiated a surrender, the State would have castrated them legally anyway. It was a no-win situation.

What does this tell you about the situation? Powerful forces in California want this deal to happen. They want an NFL stadium in L.A. county. Presumably, this means they want an NFL team in Los Angeles, and they would like Super Bowl 50 here also. They want it done with private money. They want the stimulus that this construction will bring. Believe me, the politicians are 4-square behind this.

Now you explain to me why Mr. #163 on the Forbes 400 list risks a sizable share of his megar $2.5 billion to build an NFL Stadium when there is no NFL team in the Los Angeles area? I'll tell you why.

There just happens to be a team for sale right now.

The band that would not die

A certain director named Barry Levinson has made a film about the Colts moving to Indianapolis and the Browns becoming the Ravens in Baltimore. It is called "The Band that Would not Die". It is set to air tomorrow on ESPN. The theme is about how devoted fans cope with the loss of their teams when they move.

I know a little something something about that. I lived through 1995, you know. My Rams left town for St. Louis. Now it looks like they might do precisely what the Raiders did before them. They might return home. It is funny how many gaffs I have heard lately on the NFL Network, Fox broadcasts and ESPN where seasoned sports casters (like Rich Eisen) call my boys the Los Angeles Rams. Now why in the hell do you think they are doing that?

This is on everybody's mind folks. I'm telling you, this is on everyone's mind.

Will Rush Limbaugh be the next owner of the Rams?

In short, I seriously doubt it.

So why are we even considering this? Because news.google.com is reporting 11 stories on the news wire alleging that Rush is trying to purchase the Rams. Some of these reports are just standard preseason news bits about the Rams, with footnotes referencing the main story.

So how the hell did this rumor even get started? Evidently it all began with a quote from Limbaugh in the St. Louis Business Journal. The quote is as follows: "The Rams would be a great team to have. I have a lot of friends in ownership of the NFL, and my desire to get involved has not been a secret."

The SLBJ writer covering this story speculates that Limbaugh is consorting with Dave Checkett of the Blues to make this deal happen. There is no confirmation, corroboration, or proof this speculation. We do not know that Limbaugh is working Checkett at all... not that such an alliance would matter much anyhow.

My reaction was simple: "Great, so their are now two figures--without money--supposedly teaming up to buy a controlling position they cannot afford to purchase. Why should I believe or be impressed by this speculation?"

Most of the other 'news' reports are just blog editorials full of emotional (pro or con) reaction to the 'news' that Rush Limbaugh wants to own the Rams. There are no new facts reported in these entries at all. They did not say anything like:

• Sources close to Limbaugh indicate that Rush can raise over $132 in immediate capital from his substantial personal wealth.
• Rush Limbaugh has acquired another $430 in financial backing from famed Republican Entrepreneur Daddy Warbucks John Johnson.
• Limbaugh has retained the services of Walter Vexa's famous real estate law firm to pass a formal purchase offer to Dale Rosenbloom via Goldman Sachs.
• Limbaugh is scheduled to meet with his future business partner Stan Kroenke later this week to establish good relations.
• Limbaugh is scheduled to meet with NFL commissioner Roger Goodel next week to schmooze and grease the wheels of progress so that he may enter the sacred club of NFL owners.

If any of these bullshit laden pieces said anything of this variety, I would be more inclined to take the Limbaugh story seriously. In the absence of any significant facts, I have no reason to take these 'reports' seriously.

So why has anyone written on this subject at all? Because it makes sensational copy. Because this is a slow news cycle. Because we are in the deep off-season for NFL Football. There is not much to say about the NFL right now. This worthless tidbit is as good an NFL story as we have in June of 2009. Rush is a divisive figure. Liberals & Democrats utterly hate him. You can stick a grain of sand in the Clam's mouth pretty quickly with this story.

The fact is Limbaugh doesn't have a lot of money. He is not a poor man or a middle-class citizen by any stretch. Yet he is a very far-cry from the billionaire status you must enjoy to buy and run an NFL franchise these days. Checkett is in the same category. I would love to own the Rams. The fact is that I cannot. I do not have the money. I wish I did. I would buy my team in a second.

There is no factual basis for the claim that Limbaugh is trying to buy the Rams. These reports are without legal or journalistic merit. These are trumped up reports of little or no significance.