LA move is unlikely for Rams

[VenturaFwy]

Because through most of those years, they were very well supported. Before the era of national TV contracts, the Rams filled the Collesium. Then CR died and things changed in the 80's. Attendance fell off, and the rest is history.

For 39 of the 49 years, the fans did well. It was those last 10 or so seasons that lost the team.

So far, St. Louis attendance has yet to fall to those 80's-'94 numbers, but hopefully the decline turns around before it gets to that point. Otherwise, the Rams may have a 4th home.

Your original post said LA couldn't support them "to begin with" and now it's they didn't for the last ten years. Make up your mind. Which is it? The bottom line is they moved because of a new stadium and because they had an owner who drove the team into the ground. Sound familiar?

I know. I know. It was completely different when St. Louis lost the Cardinals.

[HUbison]

Your original post said LA couldn't support them "to begin with" and now it's they didn't for the last ten years. Make up your mind. Which is it? The bottom line is they moved because of a new stadium and because they had an owner who drove the team into the ground. Sound familiar?

I know. I know. It was completely different when St. Louis lost the Cardinals.

What original post are you talking about?

Pretty sure you've made a little mistaken identity here, Ventura. Apology accepted.

[gap]

First off, I want to say that I am sorry for those faithful fans in LA that still follow this team, or NFL football in general. You are good people, and I hope you get to have a local NFL team in your lifetime. I also hope it is a franchise, or another team move; not the RAMS. I also hope it isn't a relocation of the whiners, you deserve better than that.

Second... St Louis was filling Bush Stadium. Not to capacity, but enough to support the team. The owner just wanted a new stadium, with Club Boxes (or whatever those non-$ shared seats are called). The owner just locked up his stuff, and left in the night.

The problem with filling the current seats is that the PSL "lottery" was divided by ZIP codes. Meaning that those that had the highest income (and not necessarily the highest loyalty) got first dibs on PSLs. They also started pulling the PSL by the highest price first, and then worked their way down to the lowest priced seats. By the time they got to the people that had the low dollar seats as their first, or only, choice, there were no more PSLs left. Well, except may the PSLs that the remaining people couldn't afford. Now the people that would have been loyal fans cannot get PSLs, or don't want to reward the stab in the back by paying for PSLs.

gap

[theodus69]

Rams will always be in LA in my heart and yes I will always say they belong here and no where else. Don't think they won't be back.lease is up in 2014 and a couple more years without a team isn't that long. besides , that will give ED De Bartolo time to get his cash together to make the sale!

[VenturaFwy]

Bottom line, it would be pathetic for a team to return to a city that could not support them to begin with...And please spare me the financials because obviously LA could not or did not want the Rams so they ended up in St Louis...And imo that is where they should stay...Winning games is the only way to turn this topic around....There was never, ever talk of the Rams relocating when they were in the midst of their sellout streak....And i realize that i am "Captain Obvious" but no matter how bad of a product the Rams put on the field, the only way to keep them in Stl and silence this talk is to fill the dome each and every week! And all teams go through ups and downs, so once again spare me with the argument of "the rams don't put a quality team on the field, so i'm not going!"
Once again as obvious as it sounds, we should just fill up the dome every week and we would no longer be on this subject every off season....End Rant!

[LA Rammer]

Los Angeles Lakers 09 champs. Sorry had to.

[HUbison]

Your original post said LA couldn't support them "to begin with" and now it's they didn't for the last ten years. Make up your mind. Which is it? The bottom line is they moved because of a new stadium and because they had an owner who drove the team into the ground. Sound familiar?

I know. I know. It was completely different when St. Louis lost the Cardinals.

Bottom line, it would be pathetic for a team to return to a city that could not support them to begin with

Once again, Ventura, you're not quoting me. I never said that.

[VenturaFwy]

Once again, Ventura, you're not quoting me. I never said that.

I saw that it was someone else. Your response to my post initially led me to believe it was you.

[blood85]

I don't care what anyone says, I DO Want the RAMS to return to L.A. and will keep praying that they DO return HOME.

[HUbison]

I saw that it was someone else. Your response to my post initially led me to believe it was you.

No problem. Don't sweat it.

I DO Want the RAMS to return to L.A. and will keep praying that they DO return HOME.

Well, again.....they are already home. Such is the simple yet, for some, unfortunate truth of pro sport franchises. Wherever they play their home games is, in fact, their home. All that time they spent in LA, would it have been accurate to say they should come "home" to Cleveland? Of course not. Just as now, they ARE home. It ain't your home; but it is their home.

In the future, they may be the San Antonio Rams or the Portland Rams or (if the NFL changes policy) the Las Vegas Rams. And if so, I too will be incorrect (though ever vigilant) when I wish for them to come back "home" to St. Louis.

It may not be MY home, but it will be home.

[hawaiianpunch]

Really... I want them to move to L.A., so i don't have to pay about 800 to go watch the rams play, in St.Louis. But really it would be selfish of me to wish that, after the Rams won there first Superbowl in St.Louis.