Quote:
Originally Posted by HUbison
Well, RAMarkable, we all know the big dinero can do about anything; so nothing is impossible. However, I've yet to see an LA moneyman step up to buy the Rams and spend their way out of town. And I don't know that the Sonics deal is what LA Rams fans would want anyway. Bennett had to pay $75 million ($45M now, $30M conditional later), and (here's the kicker) had to leave the team name, logo, and colors in Seattle.
What LA fan would want the team back, but with a different name, colors, and logo; while St. Louis hung on until the league determined when the St. Louis Rams, with their blue/gold horned helmets, return to the league?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by HUbison
Moonie, I can speak only for myself; but it's never been said that LA can't support an NFL team. They can......but that doesn't mean they are entitled to. Which makes those attendance stats so much more astounding. St. Louis pulls in 19% of its population base, and SoCal pulled in less than 1%. Yes, I think everyone here in flyover country gets your point. You (and Randy Newman) love LA. Wonderful.....enjoy it. To each their own. As for me, I'll take Missouri over California anyday. Actually, I believe it Chicago was the other locale to lose the Cardinals, so no, we don't have that in common. Yet we don't live under the false assumption that St. Louis is entitled to their return.
Guys, spin the numbers anyway you like to feel better. But in the end they don't change. The St. Louis Rams have brought in 11,000 more per game than the LA Rams did in their final years over that same time period even though the Rams product in St. Louis was far inferior to the product the Rams gave to the LA fans in that same span.
Let's cut to the chase. I agree with your basic premise. Bottomline on this: LA should have an NFL team. An area that large should be able to support a team, and most likely would. I would vote (not that the league is listening, but) for a team in LA. It makes sense. However, LA is not entitled to the Rams; and do not have some superior claim to this team. St. Louis has treated this team very well; in fact better than the previous years in another location.
|
Hey Hubby,
I am guessing it is the multi quote button that allows the boxes, but my doesn't seem to work so I'll go through your post and address it the best I can.
I never said LA was entitled (or had a superior claim?). What I said is most people seem to think LA can't support a pro-football team because two have been here and left. My response to that is most chose not to support an inferior organization. As as you eloquently stated, who didn't put in those extra 10k fans with 10 times the population. That was exactly my point. Marketing and quality product are some of the basic ingredients to a successful business plan. But the St. Louis fans are now only learning how the ownership of the Rams runs a team. And based on the declining attendance and blackouts, it is reflected in their support level.
I am glad you love St. Louis. It was a fine town while I visited there and I am sure it has many benefits and yes Randy Newman and I both love LA. I presume l just like you and Ol' Glen Miller love St Louie. I don't have a problem with the town or the fans, considering some of the other cities my Rams could have gone to, it wasn't the worst choice. And yes, St Louis had the Cardinals and they left there too. You guys really should understand bad ownership...
I am not spinning any numbers. The only one I threw out there was the record at the coliseum. You provided the numbers, and I asked to see the total numbers since CR died. That was it. I still bet there is a steady decline based on the take over in ownership.
Again I'll repeat, I would never wish for any city to lose their team. For instance, if you remember , Art Modell was one of the few owners who voted against the Rams moving and the he quickly moved his team to Baltimore (snake!). And his Browns were selling out!? Oh, and that vacancy in Baltimore. Created by the Colts weasel move out of town in the middle of the night. Both fine examples of how the fans are treated by some teams.
You are correct in that we have no cliam to the Rams. Only luck and the forgetfulness of bitter memories (usually brought on by the piling on of ginornous amounts of money) would make that happen. And yes, it would have been nice if we had made some deal to keep the name like the Browns did, but I am not sure how all of that transpired, so good luck to you on that if the Rams decide to move. I honestly believe the team wouldn't accept a deal like.
I am also glad we have your vote for a team. Can you do me a favor and click on this link below and tell them you would like to buy tickets for our new stadium? It might hep us out a lot.
Home on Los Angeles Stadium
I'll end it here. I would like to see the Rams return, although I find it unlikely. If that doesn't happen I would take an expansion team, although I don't see that happening too soon either. I do not want another team from another city, unless of course it was the Rams, because they are my team. Why would I want to be a part something like that unless it was for the Rams. As a football fan I found the whole experience ugly and distasteful. Oh and one last thing. Be careful what you wish for when you say "LA Moneyman". The present owner actually lives here and I hear is a bit short on money....
Respectfully,
Joe