NFL rules state you can't own a team if you have ownership in teams in the other big 3 leagues that aren't located in the same city. Guessing he does what Kroenke did w the Avs/Nuggets and puts the team in his wife name or something along the lines of that.
Not quite. The rule was (possibly still is) that NFL owners can't own teams in other sports
in another NFL owner's market. The Seattle Seahawks owner Paul Allen (now his estate) owning the Portland Trailblazers is totally fine; but Kroenke owning the St. Louis Rams, and the Nuggets/Avs in Denver was not.
They had the rule because NFL/MLB teams shared multipurpose stadiums A LOT, so if -- For Example (I'm not looking up ACTUAL lease details here) -- the owner of the Cleveland Browns buying the Cincinnati Reds or Pittsburgh Pirates might let them set the price on the rent of the Cincinnati Bengals or Pittsburgh Steelers; Or even allow the Browns owner to evict another NFL team from the stadium. The rule was meant to prevent THAT kind of shenanigans.
That's why the NFL really didn't care about Kroenke's WIFE owning the Avs/Nuggets: There's no chance of meddling in lease stuff. They compete for fans, sure, but even though they're two different people, it's not like the Kroenkes can't easily work in cahoots when they're husband and wife. But there's really no damage to be done.
They technically still HAVE the rule, but it's "relaxed" because the number of teams sharing stadiums with MLB/NBA teams (the New Orleans Jazz is why the rule includes NBA/NHL) has dropped.
From 1960-2016, 23 NFL teams shared stadiums with MLB/NBA at one point. But by 2003, it was down to FOUR. And now it's at ZERO.