Jump to content

NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay


duma
 Share

Recommended Posts

Throw out the business aspect/logic aspect, do any of you honestly want to see a team move to Los Angeles?

Personally, I would be pissed. Not only has LA screwed several opportunities of having their own NFL team, I still don't think that there is a true thirst for NFL football there. Why should Minnesota or St.Louis lose their team to that? Small-medium market teams is what makes the NFL interesting. 1/7th of the NFL shouldn't be in California.

The only exception I have to this is moving San Diego. Poor fanbase for the most part, and it's not that far of a move. But I feel the only change from the San Diego fanbase and the Los Angeles fanbase is just a larger amount of shi*ty "casual" fans.

I would love to have a team here again. By the time I took a real interest in football the Rams were gone and most of my family were Cowboys fans. Needless to say I adapted but it would be nice to have a chance to actually go to a home game as I'm not close to Arlington. That, and I need someone to root for when the Cowboys piss me off(except for when they play Dallas).

It sucks that another city would lose their team, but they were taken from LA too. It's just the reality of sports sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Throw out the business aspect/logic aspect, do any of you honestly want to see a team move to Los Angeles?

Personally, I would be pissed. Not only has LA screwed several opportunities of having their own NFL team, I still don't think that there is a true thirst for NFL football there. Why should Minnesota or St.Louis lose their team to that? Small-medium market teams is what makes the NFL interesting. 1/7th of the NFL shouldn't be in California.

The only exception I have to this is moving San Diego. Poor fanbase for the most part, and it's not that far of a move. But I feel the only change from the San Diego fanbase and the Los Angeles fanbase is just a larger amount of shi*ty "casual" fans.

Why can't 1/7th of the NFL be in California? Roughly 1/8 of the entire US population is in California.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really. It's such an arbitrary thing. Imagine if MA, NY, and PA and DC were the same state. I'm not going to look it up, but the geographical size would probably be smaller, especially if you only kept the big cities and their metro areas. You'd lose most of NY and PA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Throw out the business aspect/logic aspect, do any of you honestly want to see a team move to Los Angeles?

Personally, I would be pissed. Not only has LA screwed several opportunities of having their own NFL team, I still don't think that there is a true thirst for NFL football there. Why should Minnesota or St.Louis lose their team to that? Small-medium market teams is what makes the NFL interesting. 1/7th of the NFL shouldn't be in California.

The only exception I have to this is moving San Diego. Poor fanbase for the most part, and it's not that far of a move. But I feel the only change from the San Diego fanbase and the Los Angeles fanbase is just a larger amount of shi*ty "casual" fans.

The NFL is extremely popular here. And we have tons of people craving NFL football in their city, me included. True, the Lakers are number one, but if the Rams were to move back and have a good amount of success, and with a new generation of fans (in my generation, we've all had to adopt other teams) they'd be right up there with the Lakers and Dodgers in terms of popularity.

And St. Louis wouldn't be losing "their" team, we'd be getting our team back.

I can't wait until you're pissed off about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cardinals didn't get public funding for their new park; not sure why the Rams should.

They did, but it was a relatively very small amount, so the point is still worth bringing up.

The answer is pretty much leverage and desire.

1. True or false, people weren't buying the claim that Busch Stadium II had to be replaced. It probably did, but the Cardinals had made the inside appear so nice in the previous decade, they struggled to sell the public that the rest of it was in bad shape.

2. The Cardinals couldn't even attempt a threat to leave the region. Everyone would have laughed that off. It wouldn't have made any sense. The league would never have allowed it. And ownership didn't even pretend to desire it. They obviously were staying.

3. Their threat to leave the city had some traction, but still suffered from a lot of the above. Nobody really believed they'd want to do it. It was worth just enough to hammer out the details, but not draw any significant funding.

The Cardinals did receive a lot of tax breaks including a lot of things to do with Ballpark Village (which they've largely bumbled and not met their requirements on, and have not and likely will not be held accountable for).

Meanwhile, the Rams have a lot of things on which to draw leverage.

1. Everyone pretty much agrees the Dome is little better (if at all) than serviceable. There's debate over whether building a new stadium is worth it, but nobody really wants to keep the Dome.

2. The Rams potential threat (and I say potential because they've still never even hinted at it until this land buy) to leave the region is real. Or could be. There's a need for a new stadium, a lapse in the lease, and a major market open. And because the Rams have only been in town for 19 seasons, and only good for about 4 of them, they're not the institution the Cardinals are.

It's basically logic above feelings here. If one team "deserves" public money, it'd be the Cardinals and not the Rams. And yet, logically the Cardinals had no ability to demand public money while the Rams do. It's weird. It feels backwards. But that's the way it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NFL is extremely popular here. And we have tons of people craving NFL football in their city, me included. True, the Lakers are number one, but if the Rams were to move back and have a good amount of success, and with a new generation of fans (in my generation, we've all had to adopt other teams) they'd be right up there with the Lakers and Dodgers in terms of popularity.

And St. Louis wouldn't be losing "their" team, we'd be getting our team back.

I can't wait until you're pissed off about it.

While it's easy fodder to say LA lost three teams already, they won't support another, it's probably BS. I have little doubt an LA team would be successful.

That said, it would be St. Louis losing our team. But yes, before that it was LA losing their team. And before that it was Cleveland losing theirs. As Lee Noire said, it's just the business of sports sometimes. Ugly and crappy for someone, joyous for another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Dean Spanos wants to stay in San Diego.

I wouldn't say that just yet. The Chargers aren't any closer to securing a stadium deal in San Diego.

I think it's entirely fair to say that. I did not say Dean Spanos will not move the Chargers (just as I haven't said Kroenke won't move the Rams). I said Spanos wants to stay in San Diego. The fact that he hasn't moved yet and has pretty much said he wants to stay in San Diego makes that a pretty solid statement, I believe. I'm dubious whether or not something will ultimately be worked out in San Diego, but it's clearly Spanos' desire.

It's like nobody believes someone might actually enjoy owning a team in St. Louis...

It's like you refuse to believe that someone would enjoy owning a team in Los Angeles.

That seems unfair. I don't dismiss the appeal of owning a team in LA, even for Kroenke. All I'm saying is that we see time after time businessmen still be influence by personal preferences. And Kroenke's personal preferences very well may be (but it's all speculation) to remain in St. Louis with a very good deal rather than seeking every last penny in LA. To some this seems unfathomable.

Meanwhile, I think I've actually been pretty clear I believe there are people who would love to own a team in LA. That's why it's my believe that at least one of the teams in LA will be a $1 billion expansion franchise. Don't think someone would pay that if they didn't want to own a team there.

(despite the fact Kroenke is pretty much the #1 reason the Rams went to St. Louis in the first place.)

Oh come now. We all know that's a lie.

I think it's fair to call me on this, although I think "lie" is a bit strong. It's more of an exaggeration, probably. Kroenke was a HUGE part of the team moving to St. Louis, and it's very probable the team doesn't move to St. Louis if he doesn't step up. That may not make him the #1 reason, though, so I'll admit to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I generally despise Los Angeles fans, but to say the primary reason why the Rams left southern California was the fickle/rude fans with a sense of entitlement is buying into the Frontiere spin machine. It's hard to pin such consistent ineptitude and finger-pointing all on the LA fans, as just about any market this side of Cleveland would abandon their team in that situation.

*Can't say I entirely disagree. :P

Of all the things Georgia did do, she had no part in the fans treating the team like crap. Here's just one shining example:

December 1980: Rams up by 24 against the Cowboys. Rams receiver drops a pass and the fans boo him.

And that kind of stuff happened all the time. It was well known at that time how fickle and rude the LA fans were. I remember reading about it and seeing it play out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I generally despise Los Angeles fans, but to say the primary reason why the Rams left southern California was the fickle/rude fans with a sense of entitlement is buying into the Frontiere spin machine. It's hard to pin such consistent ineptitude and finger-pointing all on the LA fans, as just about any market this side of Cleveland would abandon their team in that situation.

*Can't say I entirely disagree. :P

Of all the things Georgia did do, she had no part in the fans treating the team like crap. Here's just one shining example:

December 1980: Rams up by 24 against the Cowboys. Rams receiver drops a pass and the fans boo him.

And that kind of stuff happened all the time. It was well known at that time how fickle and rude the LA fans were. I remember reading about it and seeing it play out.

Hooray. One incident devoid of context. Got others?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I generally despise Los Angeles fans, but to say the primary reason why the Rams left southern California was the fickle/rude fans with a sense of entitlement is buying into the Frontiere spin machine. It's hard to pin such consistent ineptitude and finger-pointing all on the LA fans, as just about any market this side of Cleveland would abandon their team in that situation.

*Can't say I entirely disagree. :P

Of all the things Georgia did do, she had no part in the fans treating the team like crap. Here's just one shining example:

December 1980: Rams up by 24 against the Cowboys. Rams receiver drops a pass and the fans boo him.

And that kind of stuff happened all the time. It was well known at that time how fickle and rude the LA fans were. I remember reading about it and seeing it play out.

Fans booed a mistake on the field? Where did they think they were? A football game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I generally despise Los Angeles fans, but to say the primary reason why the Rams left southern California was the fickle/rude fans with a sense of entitlement is buying into the Frontiere spin machine. It's hard to pin such consistent ineptitude and finger-pointing all on the LA fans, as just about any market this side of Cleveland would abandon their team in that situation.

*Can't say I entirely disagree. :P

Of all the things Georgia did do, she had no part in the fans treating the team like crap. Here's just one shining example:

December 1980: Rams up by 24 against the Cowboys. Rams receiver drops a pass and the fans boo him.

And that kind of stuff happened all the time. It was well known at that time how fickle and rude the LA fans were. I remember reading about it and seeing it play out.

And by that time, Georgia had already burned about 80% of the Rams fanbase by playing in Anaheim. Heck, for all the things the Rams did to get to and play in Super Bowl XIV in January of 1980, there were still rumors circulating about the team moving to play somewhere else within that game. The only other distracting storyline affecting a Los Angeles team during a critical time was the McCourt divorce rumors circulating during the 2009 NLCS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I generally despise Los Angeles fans, but to say the primary reason why the Rams left southern California was the fickle/rude fans with a sense of entitlement is buying into the Frontiere spin machine. It's hard to pin such consistent ineptitude and finger-pointing all on the LA fans, as just about any market this side of Cleveland would abandon their team in that situation.

*Can't say I entirely disagree. :P

Of all the things Georgia did do, she had no part in the fans treating the team like crap. Here's just one shining example:

December 1980: Rams up by 24 against the Cowboys. Rams receiver drops a pass and the fans boo him.

And that kind of stuff happened all the time. It was well known at that time how fickle and rude the LA fans were. I remember reading about it and seeing it play out.

Fans booed a mistake on the field? Where did they think they were? A football game?

I've never ever been to a football game in which the fans of the team winning by 24 points booed their receiver for dropping a pass. Have you? Do you consider that in good taste? I consider it rude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You consider it rude? Ok. It's sports. Not a night at the opera. Drunken fans who were probably a bit giddy that the team was up by so much probably got a bit to into the action. The fact that they were there, in the stadium, supporting the team, tells me LA wouldn't be the worst place for the Rams to end up. They certainly haven't been selling out the Dome in St. Louis (or lightning up the ratings charts).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You consider it rude? Ok. It's sports. Not a night at the opera. Drunken fans who were probably a bit giddy that the team was up by so much probably got a bit to into the action. The fact that they were there, in the stadium, supporting the team, tells me LA wouldn't be the worst place for the Rams to end up. They certainly haven't been selling out the Dome in St. Louis (or lightning up the ratings charts).

It wasn't a "few drunk fans". It was a to of fans. That kind of thing was the norm in LA.

I mean, I generally despise Los Angeles fans, but to say the primary reason why the Rams left southern California was the fickle/rude fans with a sense of entitlement is buying into the Frontiere spin machine. It's hard to pin such consistent ineptitude and finger-pointing all on the LA fans, as just about any market this side of Cleveland would abandon their team in that situation.

*Can't say I entirely disagree. :P

Of all the things Georgia did do, she had no part in the fans treating the team like crap. Here's just one shining example:

December 1980: Rams up by 24 against the Cowboys. Rams receiver drops a pass and the fans boo him.

And that kind of stuff happened all the time. It was well known at that time how fickle and rude the LA fans were. I remember reading about it and seeing it play out.

Hooray. One incident devoid of context. Got others?

Devoid of context? I gave you the entire story. Up by 24 points. What other context do you need?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this talk of two teams in LA seems premature given how difficult it's been trying to secure even one.

I've said the same many times here, but the majority seems to think two teams will come after two decades of zero. I understand why, but I'm not convinced it makes the most sense after all these years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.