NFL Owners Say No to Rams Move : Sports: Team plans legal action with St. Louis and mulls another season in Southland, not necessarily in Anaheim. Commissioner hints way could still be cleared.

National Football League owners on Wednesday overwhelmingly rejected the Rams’ proposed move to St. Louis, prompting the team to plot legal action and contemplate another year of football somewhere in Southern California, but not necessarily Anaheim.

League owners voted 21 to 3 against the Rams with six abstentions, including the Raiders. Only Tampa Bay and Cincinnati joined the Rams in approving the move, leaving officials in St. Louis fuming and those connected with the effort to keep the team here ecstatic.

“With all the calamitous news in California in recent months, what a beautiful day,” said Leigh Steinberg, a Newport Beach sports agent and a leader of the Save the Rams’ coalition.

John Shaw, Ram president, said the league never intended to approve the move, accusing NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue of inviting Fox TV objections to it and not informing owners of the team’s last-minute offer to pay more than $25 million in exchange for the league’s OK.

“The other owners will know about it--only when they read it in the paper,” said Georgia Frontiere, Ram owner.

A league spokesman said, “That’s not true. Ownership was fully informed of the Rams’ offer.”

Tagliabue, who was unavailable for comment on the accusations, said earlier the Rams’ terms failed to follow shared-revenue guidelines, negatively affected the lucrative Fox TV contract and did not address the league’s wish to renovate Anaheim Stadium or build a new football facility in the Los Angeles area.

The NFL wanted a Ram contribution to the Southern California stadium effort above the $25-million-plus payment, which represented 34% of the $74 million raised by FANS Inc. in St. Louis through the sale of personal seat licenses, onetime payments made for the right to buy season tickets.

“They arbitrarily decided we should develop a stadium trust fund for Orange County or Los Angeles,” Shaw said. “It’s an idea that’s just been floated in the last few days, and I still don’t know what it means. There’s no precedent for it, and I still don’t know what they’re talking about.”

Tagliabue, while hinting continuing negotiations might still lead to the Rams’ departure, said the league wants Los Angeles to remain a two-team market and that the fund to build a new stadium or renovate the one in Anaheim was essential.

A Ram official said the Cincinnati Bengals have expressed an interest in relocating in Southern California if the Rams move on. If the Bengals replaced the Rams in the Los Angeles area, it would force the NFL to realign divisions, something that has already been discussed among owners.

“I swear to you,” a Ram official said, “the Rams will eventually be playing in St. Louis.”

But the offer of more than $25 million is now off the table, Shaw said. The team has called a meeting for Friday with attorneys and St. Louis representatives to plan their next move, but club officials acknowledged that chances are now 100% a federal antitrust suit will be filed in Missouri.

In St. Louis, state and local government officials and civic leaders who worked to bring the team to their new, $260-million stadium reacted angrily and vowed that court would indeed be the next venue for the fight. Missouri Atty. Gen. Jay Nixon said earlier this week that he would file the antitrust suit, claiming unlawful restraint of trade, if the league blocked the move.

Said George (Buzz) Westfall, St. Louis County executive: “Litigation is usually a last resort, but we’re at that point now. If the NFL isn’t prepared to play in our stadium, perhaps they’d like to pay for it.

“Maybe we’ll have the last laugh if we win a lawsuit, but there’s going to be a lot of tears until then.”

A team official said the most likely course of action will be for the team to play in the Los Angeles area this season after joining with FANS Inc., the city of St. Louis and Nixon in a suit. By remaining in Southern California, the team enhances its claim for damages and eliminates risk if the legal action is unsuccessful.

“We want to find out the resolve of St. Louis,” Shaw said, while indicating he is “extremely” confident of the Rams’ chances of winning in court.

Ram legal advisers estimate the team might be entitled to $150 million in damages if it must fight what could be a two-year courtroom battle to win its way to St. Louis. But the team is also concerned with losing prospective minority partner Stan Kroenke in St. Louis, who has made an offer to purchase 30% of the team contingent upon its move.

Like Kroenke, the Rams have the option of walking away from their deal with St. Louis now that they have failed to win approval. Shaw said that option remained open, but the Rams could be in line for damages that could inflate to an estimated $1.5 billion if successful in court after losing the entire 30-year St. Louis deal.

The NFL is restricted from seeking a favorable venue with a suit of its own until after March 31 because of an earlier agreement with the Rams.

Frontiere, meanwhile, urged fans in St. Louis to “keep the faith,” after describing the league’s demands as “capricious, arbitrary and convoluted.”

Frontiere spoke to the owners before the vote, but she said she told them, “You’ve already made up your minds, so I guess this is a kangaroo court.”

Shaw, a close friend of Tagliabue’s, said the commissioner had a hand in putting together the rules overseeing team moves after the Raiders won their bitter suit against the league and moved to Los Angeles from Oakland in 1982.

“I don’t think there was any resolve on the part of ownership to resolve this,” Shaw said. “If they needed reasons to vote it down, they found some.

“The commissioner wrote a letter to Fox asking them if they thought they would lose money if we left Los Angeles. There’s nothing contractually that creates a Fox refund, but the league initiated a letter to Fox suggesting one.”

Was Shaw saying the commissioner orchestrated the owners’ vote against the Rams?

“He sent the letter to Fox,” Shaw said.

Both Frontiere and Shaw said the Rams will not defy the league and move without permission. Shaw said the team has the option of returning to Anaheim Stadium, although it would have to forfeit a $2-million deposit made when it gave notice of terminating its lease there.

The team would be entitled to a refund on that deposit if it leaves Anaheim Stadium, so Shaw said he will explore lease opportunities for the 1995 season with the Los Angeles Coliseum and the Rose Bowl in Pasadena. The Rams would still have to continue an annual payment of $2.5 million on Anaheim Stadium renovations.

In an unprecedented move, the Rams earlier scheduled all four of their exhibition games for this season on the road (Seattle, Jacksonville, Fla., San Diego and the Los Angeles Coliseum against the Raiders). Tagliabue said he has no idea where the Raiders will play their games in 1995, but the Rams believe they might make a bid to play in Anaheim Stadium.

Raider owner Al Davis refused comment.

The Rams’ return to the Los Angeles area with no guarantee they will remain should present a number of problems for the team and the league.

“That was one of the difficult aspects of this situation,” Tagliabue said. “Once bridges have been burned and people get turned off on a sports franchise and feel like their years of loyalty have been maybe not been respected, it’s difficult to get it back.

“But, by the same token, there are millions of fans in that area who supported the Rams over the years and through the ‘80s in an extraordinary way.”

Said Steinberg: “We’re thrilled and excited that the NFL has stood by the fans of Southern California and honored the 50-year tradition of the Rams. Whether the Rams choose to re-establish their relationship with the community and run the franchise with new vigor, or they choose to sell, it’s just wonderful.”

Frontiere, who said once again she will “never” sell the team, sounded like a team owner still on her way out of town after being decisively voted down.

“The last chapter has yet to be written,” she said. “I look forward to a happy ending. . . . We’ll just have to wait for what the court decides.”

Anaheim Mayor Tom Daly, who met with NFL officials in Phoenix, applauded Wednesday’s vote but conceded the Rams’ future in Orange County is still uncertain.

“This whole situation is far from over,” said Daly, who is also with the Save the Rams committee. “But for the time being the Rams are still a Southern California football team. However, that could change any day.”

In Phoenix, Daly said he showcased Anaheim as an ideal location for a pro football team.

“The mission was to promote the Anaheim area,” he said. “Whatever happened with the Rams’ situation, I wanted to convey Anaheim’s interest in being a home for a professional football team.”

Wednesday’s vote caught other Anaheim city officials off guard. Accustomed to disappointment, they welcomed the chance to keep the team in Orange County.

“This is a complete shock to me,” Councilman Lou Lopez said. “This is good for the city and it’s going to be interesting to see what happens.”

Anaheim City Manager James D. Ruth said officials there would eagerly resume negotiations with the Rams if allowed.

“The city is committed to working with the Save the Rams committee, the National Football League and the Rams to develop a very competitive package that will assure a high-quality facility as well as an economically competitive opportunity to continue the tradition of NFL competition within the county,” he said in a prepared statement.

But city officials also realized the news could lead to another in a series of frustrations if the Rams try to overturn the vote in court.

“Once again, we find ourselves in a holding pattern,” said Councilman Frank Feldhaus, who also served on the Save the Rams committee. “I think the Rams are going to have to rethink their future. . . . If they fight this with a lawsuit, it’s going to cost them a lot of money.”

Roy Englebrecht, an Orange County sports promoter and entrepreneur and another Save the Rams member, agreed that the victory might be temporary.

“I guess for the time being the Rams are saved,” he said. “I’m concerned about litigation. Have we won the battle for now, but could we lose the war? I hope this isn’t a short-lived victory.”

For some Southern California Ram fans, who have expressed bitter frustration over what they perceive to be shabby treatment by the team in the past few years, the feeling Wednesday was mixed.

“That’s great,” was the first reaction to the vote by 20-year-season ticket-holder Don Comstock of Tustin. But he quickly added that following a team owned by Frontiere and run by Shaw would continue to be troublesome.

“My feeling is that if (Frontiere) doesn’t sell the team she’s going to go bankrupt if she stays here,” he said. “I’ve colored them gone. That was our Sunday afternoons. We swore if they moved we’d be fans of whoever came into the stadium. We hate the owner. We hate Shaw. He’s a bean-counter.

“I feel she (Frontiere) wanted to move a long time ago. She wanted poor attendance.”

Comstock said a change of ownership was the one thing that would brighten his outlook.

“I’d love to see (Disney Co. Chairman) Michael Eisner own this team. He’s a marketing wizard. Look what he did for the Ducks,” Anaheim’s pro hockey franchise.

Added Jim Reish, a lifelong Orange County resident who spends his season-ticket money on the Mighty Ducks rather than the Rams: “I’d like them to stay. I don’t think they gave the county a chance.

“I’d like to see new ownership. I’d like to see somebody who’s committed. I think they could be successful if they had stronger ties to the community like the Ducks do. They still call themselves the Los Angeles Rams. They seem arrogant. They have an elitist attitude. They should be more open to the fan base and the community. . . .

“With the Rams, it seems like their attitude is, ‘You’re lucky you have a football team here. Now, support us.’ ”

Times staff writers Martin Miller and Elliott Teaford contributed to this story.

More Coverage: Vote on Rams’ Move

* TIME TO ANTE UP--Pay the money and get out, that’s what the owners want Georgia Frontiere to do. Commentary. C1

* MIKE PENNER--Ram fans can smirk because now it’s time for Georgia Frontiere and John Shaw to squirm a little. C1

* FANS IN MISERY--Vote against the Rams’ move leaves people in St. Louis angry, bitter and determined to fight on. C1

* COVERAGE: C1, C6