OFFICIAL (and only) "Rams to L.A." Thread

[sjacksonrules]

They are already home...in St. Louis, right where they belong.

Yep its been home for 16 years now and will be home for many years to come.

Believe me because if the Rams did try and move I would flatten the moving trucks tires......

[MoonJoe]

Big rally for the Rams in whitter, ca 9/19/2011. Show your support fot the rams and lets bring them home

Any more details on this rally?

[Rambunctious]

Any more details on this rally?

I hear the few fans that showed up arrived late and then left early. ; )

[RamFan_Til_I_Die]

I honestly don't know why youguys care so much. I'm willing to guess 95% of the members of this site do not attend more than one home game in person per year anyway, but watch the games on tv or on the web. Since that is the case, what difference does it make where they play? What we all should want is what's best for the team, whether that is in L.A. or St Louis.

[ZiaRam]

I honestly don't know why youguys care so much. I'm willing to guess 95% of the members of this site do not attend more than one home game in person per year anyway, but watch the games on tv or on the web. Since that is the case, what difference does it make where they play? What we all should want is what's best for the team, whether that is in L.A. or St Louis.

I agree to this fully, but I am in that 5% that does watch them every year at least once! Although if I did live in SoCal I would want them to come back since I could go to alot more games so I see where the SoCal fans are coming from.

[sjacksonrules]

I honestly don't know why youguys care so much. I'm willing to guess 95% of the members of this site do not attend more than one home game in person per year anyway, but watch the games on tv or on the web. Since that is the case, what difference does it make where they play? What we all should want is what's best for the team, whether that is in L.A. or St Louis.

Count me in that 5% I goto practices even though they are over 2 hours away.

[supachump]

Even when I lived in Los Angeles, I wanted them to stay in StL. It has little to do with whether I'd make more games or not. But to me, they are the StL Rams now. Keep it that way.

I honestly don't know why youguys care so much. I'm willing to guess 95% of the members of this site do not attend more than one home game in person per year anyway, but watch the games on tv or on the web. Since that is the case, what difference does it make where they play? What we all should want is what's best for the team, whether that is in L.A. or St Louis.

[RAMFANRAIDERHATER]

I honestly don't know why youguys care so much. I'm willing to guess 95% of the members of this site do not attend more than one home game in person per year anyway, but watch the games on tv or on the web. Since that is the case, what difference does it make where they play? What we all should want is what's best for the team, whether that is in L.A. or St Louis.

...and this is exactly what Stan will ultimately do. If he gets a new stadium in St. louis, he'll stay there, as he should. If the LA deal is the better deal, he'll pack the moving vans up and move. It's never been about the selection between which fans are better, or more loyal. NEVER. The Rams were not moved to St. Louis because they were going to be better fans, it was about the money. ...and it's still going to be about the money.

[MoonJoe]

I honestly don't know why youguys care so much. I'm willing to guess 95% of the members of this site do not attend more than one home game in person per year anyway, but watch the games on tv or on the web. Since that is the case, what difference does it make where they play? What we all should want is what's best for the team, whether that is in L.A. or St Louis.

I couldn't afford to go when I was a kid. Just about the time I was able to afford to buy season tickets they split on me. I fly to a different city each year now to watch them play. To me there is no substitute for watching the game live. The sounds of the crowd, the hitting, looking into the QB's eyes as gets ready to call the snap, the smell of the grass (if there is grass) and of course the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat. With all of those combined, yeah I care where they play...

[MoonJoe]

I hear the few fans that showed up arrived late and then left early. ; )

This one made me laugh Rambunctios, good one!

[sjacksonrules]

I couldn't afford to go when I was a kid. Just about the time I was able to afford to buy season tickets they split on me. I fly to a different city each year now to watch them play. To me there is no substitute for watching the game live. The sounds of the crowd, the hitting, looking into the QB's eyes as gets ready to call the snap, the smell of the grass (if there is grass) and of course the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat. With all of those combined, yeah I care where they play...

Well sounds like you need to move to St Louis were you and the Rams can be at home.

[RamsFanSam]

One thing in Missouri's favor: Governor Jay Nixon's a "supporter" of the Rams in St. Louis. Anyone who saw Marshall talking to Governor Nixon last Thursday should have caught this.

[RAMFANRAIDERHATER]

One thing in Missouri's favor: Governor Jay Nixon's a "supporter" of the Rams in St. Louis. Anyone who saw Marshall talking to Governor Nixon last Thursday should have caught this.

Missouri had better hope it has more going for it than the Governor.... Like tax-payer money to build a new stadium. Unless the Governor himself pays for it. They need to come up something, and real quickly.

[macrammer]

I went to Candlestick last year to watch Rams. Wow has that place just fallen apart. That and the so called whiner fans! I loved seeing Rams at home in LA and I did go often. Now, it is Phoenix, SF, Oakland, Seattle. Need to get to the archway to see home game with many other Ram fans.

I really did care when they left LA. To me, LA Rams had and for me, still has a better ring to it then St Louis Rams. But, over the the years, with advent of internet, satellite Tv etc I can pretty much see them play each week. St Louis Rams are still the Rams, the team I have followed since I was 10.

[RamsFanSam]

I guess some of you really wanted to hear this:

The Rams are moving back to Los Angeles.

At least, that's the dream of some misguided fans who believe that the people of Los Angeles deserve the Rams back in L.A. What they don't realize is that they don't deserve them at all. Here's why:

Way back in the 1850's, there was a city out east that was home to several baseball clubs. This city played a HUGE role in the establishment of baseball as an American sport. Charles Byrne, Joseph Doyle, and Ferdinand Abell got together to form a team known as the "Grays" in 1883. Their very first home game, played May 12, 1883, drew 6000 fans. In the days before radio and television, when only newspapers and handbills were spreading news, a team just starting out drew more than 20% of what the Rams were able to do the last time they played in Los Angeles - a far larger city.
In 1891, the "Grays" (never an official name) became known as the "Trolley Dodgers" due to the proximity of the trolley tracks on two sides of the field. Soon, that was shortened to just the "Dodgers".
On September 24, 1957, the Brooklyn Dodgers played their final game at Ebbets Field, winning 2-0 over the Pittsburgh Pirates.

Why did the Dodgers move to Los Angeles? It wasn't due to lack of fans, or even falling ticket sales (although Ebbets field wasn't routinely selling out). It was because of greed. A man named Walter O'Malley wanted to purchase land in downtown Brooklyn, but Robert Moses, the New York City Construction Coordinator, refused to condemn the land so O'Malley could purchase the land for far less than market value. O'Malley wanted full control over the stadium and revenue, and didnt want to pay full price for anything. When contacted by Los Angeles officials in 1957, O'Malley was told exactly what he wanted to hear: Los Angeles would condemn the land of his choice, sell it to him at below market value, and allow him full control over the stadium and its revenue stream.

So, dear Los Angeles fans - what does this have to do with the Rams?

The stories are not too different. An owner wanted to move a team from one city to another. Where the difference comes in is in fan support. You see, the Dodgers were still filling seats more often than the Rams did. The Dodgers had a better win percentage before they moved. No one ever said anything about the "Same old sorry-assed Dodgers" and had it repeated by so-called fans.

So, why are the Dodgers still in Los Angeles? Don't you think that there are STILL fans in Brooklyn? They may be older fans now, but I would be willing to bet that they would love to have their team back. Oh, yes, Los Angeles, the Dodgers ARE Brooklyn's team - they began there in 1883. For 74 years, they were in the hearts of the people of Brooklyn. You have only had them since they were stolen away 53 years ago. Remember - the Dodgers were BORN there. The fans never wanted them to leave.

Los Angeles NEVER owned the Rams. They were born in Cleveland, Ohio, back in 1936. In 1937, they became part of the NFL. After winning the NFL Championship in December 1945, the Cleveland Rams moved to Los Angeles to refrain from having to compete with the Cleveland Browns. (We all know which team Cleveland would rather have now...) The Rams were the SECOND team to have ties to Los Angeles; In 1926, there was a professional football team called the Bucaneers that called Los Angeles home.

From 1946, when 95,000 fans filled the stadium, to 1994, when no one wanted to see them play, the Rams had a mostly good run in Los Angeles. But that run ended in 1994 - after the city refused to allow development by the team near the stadium. (Georgia wasn't the only reason for the move, after all.)

St. Louis, traditionally a baseball town, actually had ties to the Rams LONG before Los Angeles. You see, when the Rams joined the NFL, they actually took the spot previously occupied by the St. Louis Gunners in the Western Division. Funny - you never hear a Los Angeles fan mention that the Rams actually have ties to St. Louis a decade before they moved to L.A....

The Rams were welcomed instantly to St. Louis. They had found a new home, and are still the hottest ticket in town! Don't feed me that "I can see empty seats" stuff - I saw many empty seats in Los Angeles, too. What you guys out west seem to forget is that even after the Rams left Los Angeles, you still had a football team - and you let that one slip away, too. Sorry guys - two teams moving away in two years? Sounds like the fans didn't like football very much.

Will the Rams go back to Los Angeles? Sure. But first, they have to send Brooklyn the Dodgers, apologize to the fans there...and find a way to delete the history of the Cleveland Rams' ties to the city of Saint Louis. Since we know neither of those will happen anytime in this century, perhaps praying for the Raiders to move back to Los Angeles would be a better bet.