duma

NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

Yes, but that is a very misleading stat, since #2 and #11 are separated by just a few thousand fans per game.

 

 

71,000 fans per game is really nothing to sneer at.   Twenty-one teams woud trade places with them.

 

That and the Rams limit the capacity to around 75,000 (which after being there personally for that first preseason game with 90,000 in attendance, I wholeheartedly agree with that decision).

 

ESPN still thinks that the Coliseum seats 90,000+, which gives us that 75% capacity when in reality it’s actually near 95%. 

 

Make no mistake, Los Angeles has really re-embraced the Rams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, there’s construction limiting how many seats the Rams can sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet, I was just able to go to their site, and find plenty of $84 tickets available for this week's game vs Seattle, and plenty of $111 tickets for their SNF game against the reigning, defending, Super Bowl Champion Philadelphia Eagles - a game that, in the beginning of the year, many would have picked as a GOTY candidate, and a game for which thousands of Philadelphians have tickets for, meaning that the figure for tickets sold to Rams fans is actually lower.  Oh, and the Rams are an 8-0 team that looks on their way to the Super Bowl.

 

Say all you want about capacity, limits, etc., but the facts show that they're in the second largest market in the country, have no competition, and there is no demand for tickets.  If they're not selling 100K tix, and legit limiting it to 75K, then this is an embarrassment.  If they are limiting to 100K, that's still an embarrassment, because they should be able to draw more than 71K considering how good the team is, and the high-profile nature of their upcoming games.

 

This is simply fantasy that people have wanted to be true for so long now - that the Rams are the Lakers of football in LA (I believe that point has been made a few times).  They're doing OK - maybe even better than some (including me) anticipated - but it is simply not the case that they're killing it in the market.  It's not fair to cast full judgement until the stadium opens, but again, it's an 8-0 team that's fun to watch, and has a showdown with the champs coming up... and lots of people don't care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who said "Lakers of football"? I think the argument from pro-NFL-in-L.A. people like myself -- back when this was a hot-button discussion and some people were very insistent that the NFL wouldn't and indeed couldn't go back -- was that interest in one team would be good-not-great by Los Angeles standards but still represent a marked improvement over St. Louis or Jacksonville. I think that's what we ended up getting with the Rams, albeit in the post-any-desire-to-actually-attend-NFL-games era, and that's fine enough. Los Angeles as a football market presents a lot of challenges: 20 years that the league screwed with you, the prominence of USC during many of those years, transplants from all around the country who stay loyal to their teams, a lunatic fringe insisting that the Los Angeles Raiders were the only true NFL team the city ever had, and the fact that it's a big pleasant place with lots of fun stuff to do besides sit inside and yell at the TV like a bunch of snowed-in Buffalonians.

 

Still, the Rams can overcome all that just enough to justify dicking over St. Louis (though that'll never take much for me!). But "Lakers of football" is a problem because that's an unrealistic goal, and because there should not be a Clippers of football for anyone to be the Lakers to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, colortv said:

 

Two thoughts... the first being that their mayor at least recognizes that the Alamodome will never be a permanent home to a potential NFL team, and that a new facility would be required.

 

The second is that he isn't simply blowing sunshine out his *** on this.  Over the next decade there are a lot of NFL teams whose stadium deals either end or at least allow them an option to bail.  It wouldn't surprise me at all to see any one of a number of teams - at this point most likely among them, the Cincinnati Bengals - from making that move.  And no, I'm not knocking Cincinnati as a market at all; it's just that within the next decade the circumstances will be ripest for them to move (more than likely an ownership change, a stadium deal with an opt-out or expiration, etc.)

 

13 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

We really need to stop romanticizing over how much of a hit LA#1 (Rams) is in LA.  They're 11th in average home attendance, despite having arguably the best team, and having one of the largest stadiums (that they're filling to 75% capacity).  We can keep talking about a Lakers/Clippers situation, but it's more like a Clippers/Chargers deal.  At the end of the day, the masses really don't care about either team.

 

The Rams don't have to be romanticized.  Part of what the team's current draw is based on nostalgia.  But when they move into that new stadium?  The revenue streams from it are going to propel the Rams financially ahead of everyone else in the league, and do so for at least a quarter century.  From a revenue perspective anyway, it won't be a Lakers > Clippers environment.  It'll be a Rams > Lakers one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my perspective, the story has been much more that the Chargers are not wanted than the Rams are the second coming of Jesus. I expect the Rams to do well (starting PSLs at twice what the Vikings did seems about right), and I expect the Chargers to be “entertaining”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things nobody gets about the Coliseum:

 

*It’s in a God awful part of town

*There’s hardly any parking (people living a half mile away charge a hundred bucks to use their front lawns)

*There’s no shade whatsoever, which is great for a 90° 1:30 PM kickoff

*Concessions are so lacking that they’ve run out of water several times

*The stadium is a construction nightmare

*The light rail options, while there, require multiple transfers for most people and most rail lines snake through even worse parts of town (if I went I’d have to drive 5 miles to the Green Line then take that to the Blue Line to the Expo Line)

 

And you wonder why they’re not leading the league in attendance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, the admiral said:

there should not be a Clippers of football for anyone to be the Lakers to.

Yeah, the Jets are already that?

Or are they closer to being the football Mets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LMU said:

Things nobody gets about the Coliseum:

 

*It’s in a God awful part of town

*There’s hardly any parking (people living a half mile away charge a hundred bucks to use their front lawns)

*There’s no shade whatsoever, which is great for a 90° 1:30 PM kickoff

*Concessions are so lacking that they’ve run out of water several times

*The stadium is a construction nightmare

*The light rail options, while there, require multiple transfers for most people and most rail lines snake through even worse parts of town (if I went I’d have to drive 5 miles to the Green Line then take that to the Blue Line to the Expo Line)

 

And you wonder why they’re not leading the league in attendance?

 

So... they're the Tampa Bay Rays of football. 

 

That's obviously hyperbole, but an 8-0 exciting team in a market that hasn't had a great (or, well, any) NFL team for >20 seasons should be able to sell 75K tickets despite any logistical hurdles.  It's one out of every 14 days.

 

What will the excuse be in the new stadium?

 

My point isn't that they're failing (they're not), or that it was a mistake to move back (it wasn't), just that some on here act like LA had been pining for this for decades, and they're beloved and have rock solid roots now, when that's just not the reality.

 

Also - I never said "the Lakers of the NFL", though I understand the confusion due to the poor wording.  I said the Lakers of "football in LA", meaning their relationship to the Chargers.  While I get that the Chargers are insignificant and unwanted, I disagree with the comparison because the Rams don't seem to have anywhere near the loyal and devotion from their fanbase as the Lakers.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching the Saints right now and I am reminded of the fact that they came very close to moving after Hurricane Katrina.  I read where a lot of people credit Drew Brees for saving the Saints and it would have been one of those crazy "what-if" scenarios: What would have happened had Drew Brees never signed? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, GDAWG said:

Watching the Saints right now and I am reminded of the fact that they came very close to moving after Hurricane Katrina.  I read where a lot of people credit Drew Brees for saving the Saints and it would have been one of those crazy "what-if" scenarios: What would have happened had Drew Brees never signed?  

 

San Antonio would have an NFL team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

So... they're the Tampa Bay Rays of football.

?

 

2 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

That's obviously hyperbole,

Nah, ya think? They’re drawing 71,000 to a stadium that seats 75,000 and they’re ahead of 21 teams in the attendance standings. And you want to compare them to the Rays? 

 

There’s hyperbole and then there’s nuking your own point with insane statements. 

 

I have no idea why “I don’t think anyone in LA likes the Rams” is your hill to die on. Is this one of those “east coast/west coast” things I’ve heard so much about? 

 

2 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Also - I never said "the Lakers of the NFL", though I understand the confusion due to the poor wording.  I said the Lakers of "football in LA", meaning their relationship to the Chargers.  While I get that the Chargers are insignificant and unwanted, I disagree with the comparison because the Rams don't seem to have anywhere near the loyal and devotion from their fanbase as the Lakers.  

The Lakers/Clippers comparison has always been made in comparison between the Rams and the Chargers, and only in that context. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

So... they're the Tampa Bay Rays of football. 

 

That's obviously hyperbole, but an 8-0 exciting team in a market that hasn't had a great (or, well, any) NFL team for >20 seasons should be able to sell 75K tickets despite any logistical hurdles.  It's one out of every 14 days.

 

What will the excuse be in the new stadium?

 

My point isn't that they're failing (they're not), or that it was a mistake to move back (it wasn't), just that some on here act like LA had been pining for this for decades, and they're beloved and have rock solid roots now, when that's just not the reality.

 

Also - I never said "the Lakers of the NFL", though I understand the confusion due to the poor wording.  I said the Lakers of "football in LA", meaning their relationship to the Chargers.  While I get that the Chargers are insignificant and unwanted, I disagree with the comparison because the Rams don't seem to have anywhere near the loyal and devotion from their fanbase as the Lakers.  

I wouldn't sat that, but the Coliseum is still big and worth 72k.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

They’re drawing 71,000 to a stadium that seats 75,000

 

Yeah... that's good?  In a market of what - over 13M people?  I get that it's not proportional, and a market of 13M isn't expected to draw 4x the number of a market of 3M, but I'm not sure how many other NFL cities would have face value tix available for a 8-0 (now 8-1) team, especially going into marquee matchups.  75K is not hard to fill in the NFL.  And as stated, a sizeable (but hard to quantify) number of those 71K are visiting fans.  Even given the "well, the location isn't ideal, the traffic is bad, etc" argument, you're telling me there's not 75,000 people out of 13 million that want to see a fantastic team?

 

 

32 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Is this one of those “east coast/west coast” things I’ve heard so much about? 

 

I"m not sure what that is.  BIG and 2Pac both still DEAD.

 

EDIT: and this isn't the hill I'm going to die on.  I announced what that was a few weeks ago... ...and now I can't remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Yeah... that's good?

Considering this?

 

20 hours ago, Gothamite said:

Yes, but that is a very misleading stat, since #2 and #11 are separated by just a few thousand fans per game.

 

Yes. 

 

4 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

EDIT: and this isn't the hill I'm going to die on. 

Then maybe stop comparing a NFL team that leads 21 other NFL teams in terms of attendance to the G-ddamn Rays. It’s ridiculous, and I’m unsure why trying to argue that no one likes the Rams is so important to you. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ice_Cap said:

Yes. 

 

Not when there's unsold seats there.  

 

Six of the 10 ahead of them are at 100% capacity.  Two are putrid teams (NYY/NYJ) that would almost certainly be at 100% if 8-0.  Either way, I don't blame people for not coming out for bad teams.

 

Dallas's stadium is too big, and for all everyone says, isn't as great as it's made out to be when it comes to team support (half their games sound like road games - yes, I know, sell tix to make $$$, but that just doesn't happen in lots of other places.)

 

I don't know what's going on in GB.  According to ESPN they're at 96%.  I thought they were sold out before the seasons ever started.  

 

So, there's literally ONE - maybe two (I'm not sure if ATL is at capacity or not, since numbers aren't always the same everywhere) that are in similar boats as the Rams - except that the Rams are 8-0, and the market just got NFL football back!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

Not when there's unsold seats there.  

 

Six of the 10 ahead of them are at 100% capacity.  Two are putrid teams (NYY/NYJ) that would almost certainly be at 100% if 8-0.  Either way, I don't blame people for not coming out for bad teams.

 

Dallas's stadium is too big, and for all everyone says, isn't as great as it's made out to be when it comes to team support (half their games sound like road games - yes, I know, sell tix to make $$$, but that just doesn't happen in lots of other places.)

 

I don't know what's going on in GB.  According to ESPN they're at 96%.  I thought they were sold out before the seasons ever started.  

 

So, there's literally ONE - maybe two (I'm not sure if ATL is at capacity or not, since numbers aren't always the same everywhere) that are in similar boats as the Rams - except that the Rams are 8-0, and the market just got NFL football back!

Green Bay’s only at 96%? Get those unloved bums out town before it’s too late! 

 

Look dude, again. I’m not sure why you’ve decided to make this your obsession, but I think the LA Rams will do just fine considering they’re only a few thousand short of the #2 slot. 

 

Wait. Is this just you warming up for the inevitable “gotta hate on the new reigning, defending Super Bowl Champions” schtick? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

I’m unsure why trying to argue that no one likes the Rams is so important to you. 

 

My argument isn't that no one likes the Rams - just that they aren't this beloved franchise that was welcomed back with open arms and are killing it in the market.  TBH, I can't even recall at this point what post (or collection of posts) got me started on that.  ?  I'm tired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BringBackTheVet said:

 

My argument isn't that no one likes the Rams - just that they aren't this beloved franchise that was welcomed back with open arms and are killing it in the market.  TBH, I can't even recall at this point what post (or collection of posts) got me started on that.  ?  I'm tired.

If it’s just you being pedantic that this *can’t* be a Lakers/Clippers thing because the Rams don’t have the passionate following the Lakers have? 

Well again, the Lakers/Clippers comparison has only ever been made in context of the Rams’ and Chargers’ respective relationships with the market. 

 

And yeah. In that context? Compared to the Chargers? The Rams are the Lakers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

 Wait. Is this just you warming up for the inevitable “gotta hate on the new reigning, defending Super Bowl Champions” schtick? 

 

I don't understand this.  Just come out and say whatever it is.  I'm not sure anyone is hating on the SBCPE. 

 

Now that you mention it, it's obvious to anyone with a brain that they're not selling out because their fans know that they can't defeat the SBCPE, so they're not even going to try.  So, if the NFC is a four-team race between the LAR, CAR, SPCPE (albeit the underdog at the moment), and NO, then you take LAR's 25% and give it to the SBCPE, giving them 50% against 25% each for CAR and NO.  Then, factor in that Carson Wentz is like superman and has Jesus on his shoulders, that gives them another 33%, so it's 83% against 25% and 25%.  The SBCPE do well in domes, so take off 3% from NO, and Cam Newton is a dope, so subtract 10 from CAR.  Now, you get the SPCPE with a 98% chance to win the NFC, and the other teams combined have only 37%.  The numbers don't lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now