Page 41 of 43 FirstFirst ... 31323334353637383940414243 LastLast
Results 601 to 615 of 637
Like Tree154Likes

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

  1. #601
    macrammer's Avatar
    macrammer is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Livermore, Ca/ Arnold,Ca
    Age
    55
    Posts
    2,110
    Rep Power
    29

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

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    I have no issue with the people of St. Louis, who I found to be super friendly in my two visits there. I also have tremendous respect for their baseball fandom, among the best in all of MLB. What they are NOT doing is supporting the Rams in the kind of numbers necessary to put aside all the talk about them potentially leaving town at some point. The easy thing to do is to point to the losing to justify the lack of support. But I see an owner who has spent money, a respected veteran coach running the show and a young team which has improved and should continue to do so. Having the Dome filled with Bears or Packers fans is disgusting any way you slice it.
    No axe to grind with the City. I am certain there are quite a few real dedicated fans.....Season ticket holders year in and year out. But the overall lack of support is telling and COULD be an impetus for moving (along with the stadium renovation stipulation). The NFL is BIG business and if you have two elements that are linchpins in that business model failing (fan support and stadium issues) do not be surprised if the owner decides to take it elsewhere.

    I was a season ticket holder when they were in Anaheim. Drove down for 4 games a year from the Bay Area. My buddy took the other 4 games and did the same. I get it if you are season ticket holder. And you do not sell your tickets to opposing teams fans. The dedication is there. Wish there were more of you.


  2. #602
    RamsFanSam's Avatar
    RamsFanSam is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Springfield, Missouri, United States
    Age
    51
    Posts
    2,664
    Rep Power
    72

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

    Quote Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike View Post
    What were the other 1.2% doing? Really? And as Mikey noted, the Lakers are 19 games out of a playoff spot with 7 games to go. You do the math.



    Amazing what fan support can do.
    Mike, I'm glad you mentioned this...

    St. Louis has 318,000 people (roughly).

    LA (the city ONLY) has 9.96 MILLION.

    People from LA are using the "empty" dome for justification to move the Rams - yet, if you do the percentages (it's 5 AM, I am NOT going to try), a higher percentage of the St. Louis population goes to Rams games than the percentage of LA fans...in fact, a higher percentage of STL people go to sports events than do LA people. 65,000/318,000 > 100,000/9,960,000.

    So...which is more important? 20.4% of the population of St. Lous supporting the team, or the ONE percent of the population of LA supporting the team?

    When you look at the PERCENTAGES, LA doesn't look like much of a "sports city"...

  3. #603
    gap's Avatar
    gap
    gap is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,279
    Rep Power
    25

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

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    I have no issue with the people of St. Louis, who I found to be super friendly in my two visits there. I also have tremendous respect for their baseball fandom, among the best in all of MLB. What they are NOT doing is supporting the Rams in the kind of numbers necessary to put aside all the talk about them potentially leaving town at some point. The easy thing to do is to point to the losing to justify the lack of support. But I see an owner who has spent money, a respected veteran coach running the show and a young team which has improved and should continue to do so. Having the Dome filled with Bears or Packers fans is disgusting any way you slice it.
    At the expense of bumping this again... I agree with everything you said here.

    One caveat to the above is important to mention.

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    But I see an owner who has spent money, a respected veteran coach running the show and a young team which has improved and should continue to do so.
    This did not happen until there was a lack of commit from the RAMS to the City of St. Louis.

    Sure the city should show more support to the team, but until the team commits to staying in St. Louis, the team should not require a PSL to be purchased to buy season tickets. Nor should they require you to buy a season ticket package to by more than 4 game's worth of tickets. I believe doing these ticket related issues will moderately increase ticket sales. Committing to stay in St. Louis will more than likely GREATLY increase ticket sales. Until the RAMS do either, they have to lie in the bed they made over the previous seven plus years of squandering the team and disrespecting the fans.


    gap

  4. #604
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,539
    Rep Power
    128

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RamsFanSam View Post
    When you look at the PERCENTAGES, LA doesn't look like much of a "sports city"...
    Trust me Sam, LA is a great sports city, and the percentages that matter are butts in the seats. In that regard, LA is at the top of the heap, in every sport.

    The facts show LA supports all it's sports team, so in any decision on a possible Rams move to LA, that is a given and at this point, a non-issue. The biggest issue for LA, is a stadium. Same for St. Louis.

  5. #605
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,612
    Rep Power
    145

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

    I ask this in all honesty and sincerity. And I ask because I truly don't know the answer, and would like to:




    Why has no NFL team moved to Los Angeles in 20 years?
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  6. #606
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,539
    Rep Power
    128

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

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    I ask this in all honesty and sincerity. And I ask because I truly don't know the answer, and would like to:




    Why has no NFL team moved to Los Angeles in 20 years?
    Who knows, but it's certainly not because of inadequate fan support for the cities teams, or the erroneous, uninformed notion that "LA is just not that into sports."

  7. #607
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,612
    Rep Power
    145

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

    Quote Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike View Post
    Who knows, but it's certainly not because of inadequate fan support for the cities teams, or the erroneous, uninformed notion that "LA is just not that into sports."
    Not saying it is, Mike. I have just always wondered why we're wrapping up 2 decades with no NFL in LA. I'm sure it's not the fans. I'm sure it's not the lack of economic opportunities.

    But why?
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  8. #608
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,539
    Rep Power
    128

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

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    Not saying it is, Mike. I have just always wondered why we're wrapping up 2 decades with no NFL in LA. I'm sure it's not the fans. I'm sure it's not the lack of economic opportunities.

    But why?
    Again, who knows. Logistics, stadium issues, political bickering, timing, competing proposal factions, NFL demands? It could be any number of factors, but as you alluded to, LA is a very viable location for an NFL team. The situation is definitely a head scratcher.

  9. #609
    Mikey's Avatar
    Mikey is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    895
    Rep Power
    10

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

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    Not saying it is, Mike. I have just always wondered why we're wrapping up 2 decades with no NFL in LA. I'm sure it's not the fans. I'm sure it's not the lack of economic opportunities.

    But why?
    Two things will contribute to this. One is lack of a state of the art stadium. We see the Rams wanting to update the EJD and it's what 18 years old? The only stadiums they could move to LA and Play in are the Rose bowl, a 90 year old stadium that was renovated 3 years ago. And The Coliseum again a 90+ year old stadium that has recent renovations. Either of these would serve as a temporary home but nothing more as they're owned and operated by the City of Pasedena and USC. So there is only temporary homes, not a major road block but an minor problem for a team relocating.

    The major problem is tied in to the first problem though. California's economy is a disaster right now. Any team wanting to move down there is very unlikely to get public assistance in putting together a new stadium. Just about every team is going to get what they can from the local city/county/state to support them building a new stadium. We see that right now in the negotiations with Kroenke and the EJD and City.

    All in all it's not nearly as easy as we fans think it is to move a team. I'm not surprised there hasn't been any movement. I think the NFL doesn't really want anybody to move just yet. It's a great bargaining chip for their teams to get new/updated stadiums. Eventually they'll have to fill that market with a team. I'd say the likely candidates are Jacksonville or San Diego.

    Just my two cents.

  10. #610
    RamsFanSam's Avatar
    RamsFanSam is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Springfield, Missouri, United States
    Age
    51
    Posts
    2,664
    Rep Power
    72

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

    Quote Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike View Post

    The facts show LA supports all it's sports team, so in any decision on a possible Rams move to LA, that is a given and at this point, a non-issue. The biggest issue for LA, is a stadium. Same for St. Louis.
    Actually, Mike, the stadium is a non-issue. Since both cities need a new stadium, it is "equal" in my eyes.

    The ONLY issue is what Stan wants for his team.

  11. #611
    Truth's Avatar
    Truth is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Age
    54
    Posts
    1,401
    Rep Power
    37

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

    Politics, and money. Politically, there has been ZERO support for a publically funded stadium. The politicians have always felt that they didn't want to be burdened with the responsibility to manage and maintain another stadium (ala the Coliseum). Not to mention that they felt any team could make plenty of money to cover the costs in a market like LA (any well run team). The Rams were so poorly managed when they left LA to go to Anaheim, there's no way they could've afforded to build for themselves. Also, at that time, it just wasn't done. Since that time, the economy tanked, and getting taxpayers to agree to give money to an NFL team has become extremely difficult (and politicians want to keep their jobs).

    So, if AEG can lure a team in that is willing to sell part ownership, they could actually start building. However, no one has taken that bait. I think the Raiders are strapped for cash. It's possible that they might be willing to deal with AEG. I don't think the Bills are going to leave Buffalo. I definately don't thiink Mr. Kroenke has any interest in taking on a partner.

    Now, If I'm in Mr Kroenke's position, my 1st choice is to have the CVC honor their contract, and remodel the EJD. Why should I spend my money on something that was contractually promised to me? IF I'm going to layout $1 billion to build a stadium, I need to make suret that I can sell the corporate seats. That's where the money is. So, if I build, with my cash, It probably wouldn't be in STL. I don't believe I could fill the corporate seats. Nor do I think I could sell enough PSL's. If I'm put in the position where I have to pay for my own building, my only real choice would be LA. It comes down to MONEY, not which town has the best fans. As for percentages, if I'm looking at putting people in seats, I think I have a better chance when my pool of possible attendees is 10 million, rather than 320K.
    That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!!

  12. #612
    Truth's Avatar
    Truth is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Age
    54
    Posts
    1,401
    Rep Power
    37

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

    Just an aside. It always makes me laugh when i write a long post, and the button I have to hit says "Post Quick Reply". Just makes me chuckle.
    That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!!

  13. #613
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,612
    Rep Power
    145

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth View Post

    Now, If I'm in Mr Kroenke's position, my 1st choice is to have the CVC honor their contract, and remodel the EJD. Why should I spend my money on something that was contractually promised to me? IF I'm going to layout $1 billion to build a stadium, I need to make suret that I can sell the corporate seats. That's where the money is. So, if I build, with my cash, It probably wouldn't be in STL. I don't believe I could fill the corporate seats. Nor do I think I could sell enough PSL's. If I'm put in the position where I have to pay for my own building, my only real choice would be LA.
    which brings us back to the question at hand: why hasn't somebody moved a team there in the past 20 years? Surely, Kroenke isn't the first rich guy with a team that sees the money to be made in LA?
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  14. #614
    Truth's Avatar
    Truth is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Age
    54
    Posts
    1,401
    Rep Power
    37

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

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    which brings us back to the question at hand: why hasn't somebody moved a team there in the past 20 years? Surely, Kroenke isn't the first rich guy with a team that sees the money to be made in LA?
    No he's not. But perhaps he's the 1at with a team that could move, and has the finances to build his own stadium. Then go back to the politics in LA. It's insanely difficult to get a site approved. Everybody wants a team, no one wants the expense and traffic. That's why Dodger Stadium was always such a desirable site. The Inglewood site would also meet with much approval. The Hollywood Park people have already said they would lose the housing plan if a stadium were to be built.

    I don't think anything is decided yet in STL. I just think Mr Kronke won't accept less than what he's asked for in the EJD . I also think that if he's put in a position to build his own stadium, it will be in LA.

    If he wanted to sweeten the deal for a move for the NFL (to Commish), he'd offer to have the Rams play in London while the LA stadium is being built. It would give the NFL a real opportunity to test the market, and logistics.
    That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!!

  15. #615
    zgare's Avatar
    zgare is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Des Peres, MO
    Posts
    69
    Rep Power
    0

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

    Quote Originally Posted by MoonJoe View Post
    They matched that in LA, 7 years from 1959 to 1965, and came close with 5 years in 1990 to 1995....
    To match the current Rams, you would need to have some team lose for 10 straight years. And LA has never had that. So to say LA's support would never drop off some if they lost 10 straight years in LA, as it has a little in St. Louis, is just nonsense. Rams support in LA dropped off when they were actually winning. That never happened in St. Louis. Better find a new reason if you want the Rams to move. Lack of support from St. Louisans is a non-starter.
    ZGare

Similar Threads

  1. *Official Rams @ Saints Prediction Thread
    By LA Rammer in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: -12-12-2010, 05:47 PM
  2. Replies: 218
    Last Post: -10-11-2009, 04:50 PM
  3. Replies: 305
    Last Post: -10-04-2009, 08:26 PM
  4. The Official Gibril Wilson For Next Rams SS Thread
    By THOLTFAN81 in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: -02-26-2009, 12:33 PM
  5. *Official Rams vs. Jags Gametime Thread
    By LA Rammer in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -10-30-2005, 05:19 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •