Rams to re-locate to L.A. in 7 years...?

[YodaRam]

The numbers are skewed. Comparing Los Angeles and St. Louis attendance is not a fair barometer of fan interest. I get plenty of people from St. Louis complaining about the empty seats at the Dome. Selling tickets does not put asses in the seats. SORRY!
Corporate America snags up most of the great tickets. And when they or their entourage don't want to attend, they spend no effort in giving their tickets to the less fortunate "true fans" who can't afford those seats.
This problem is age old but growing in the moderate to weaker markets. The current economy is making this worse. Or more lop-sided. More empty seats for those that can afford. Less attendance when the team sucks. Those that purchase tickets for the cheap seats are dis-heartened looking at all of the empty seats below them. Yes, they are sold. BUT NOBODY IS THERE! It's like the biggest bummer that i can imagine. Sports-wise.
WE ARE LOSING THE FAN and gaining the money-man. And the money-man doesn't care about sports.


RAM ON!

[HUbison]

Originally Posted by Moon

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.

Joe, what you do is 1) highlight the material you want to quote, 2) copy and paste to your response, 3) with the text highlighted in your response, hit the quote button (the picture of what looks like a square thought bubble). That should allow you to quote just the sections you want.

What I said is most people seem to think LA can't support a pro-football team because two have been here and left.

Well, like I said, I think it would be silly to say SoCal can't support a team. I would be curious to here the argument from someone who actually espouses that idea.

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.

If the Rams leave the heartland after 2015, then I don't suppose it would happen either. However, to break the lease, the city could make it part of the agreement. Then it just depends on how bad the new owner wants to leave town.

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

But that's the point, Joe. The Sonics got their deal done, because a wealthy owner wanted to move to his hometown and was willing to throw around big money to get the lease broken. As of now, I haven't seen a counterpart to that looking to A) buy the Rams, and for the specific reason of B) moving them to LA. If one arises, then yea, it could happen.

If that doesn't happen I would take an expansion team, although I don't see that happening too soon either.

With the even conferences, maybe it doesn't happen anytime soon, but you've hit upon an interesting question. While I have no doubt that a return of the Rams (or even the Raiders for that matter) would spark interest from LA, how do you feel an expansion team would do?

[HUbison]

The numbers are skewed. Comparing Los Angeles and St. Louis attendance is not a fair barometer of fan interest. I get plenty of people from St. Louis complaining about the empty seats at the Dome. Selling tickets does not put asses in the seats. SORRY!

Hold to that if you like, but a sold ticket is revenue regardless of what is or is not in a seat. The numbers don't lie, Yoda.

But this isn't new. Some LA folks have been looking down their nose at St. Louis since the possibility of a move was mentioned. Take Roman Gabriel for instance....

Originally Posted by NY Times article, 1994

"The people of St. Louis will be all excited to get this team," said the Rams' former longtime quarterback, Roman Gabriel. "And then they'll realize Georgia Frontiere is still the owner."

Yet here we are: 13 seasons, only 4 of which offered winning seasons, and the St. Louis attendance is still the best the Rams have enjoyed since the 70's. The decline in LA attendance didn't go unnoticed by the players either....

"You want to join the witness protection program?" said Howie Long, a former Raider and current Fox television football analyst. "Play football in Los Angeles."

The answer, of course, being the fans won't show up for an inferior product. Though the Rams have enjoyed superior attendance with a mostly inferior product, I agree......why should fans be motivated by an inferior product? However, that's not exactly a message to motivate the NFL to offer a new team, is it? Come to LA; we'll show up if you're good.

I understand the premise, but does the NFL?

[RAMarkable]

Originally Posted by HUbison

But this isn't new. Some LA folks have been looking down their nose at St. Louis since the possibility of a move was mentioned. Take Roman Gabriel for instance....

Hub, I believe this was a shot at Georgia far more than at the fans of St. Louis. Many retired Rams players had had their fill of her (as well as most of Cali) and this quote accurately reflects what they thought of her "management' (and I use that word loosely) style. Bottom line is that it was her malfeasant running of the Rams that drove the fans away in droves and led to the acrimonious split. But none of this reflects (splatters?) on the noble St. Louis sports fan. Messy divorces are just that: Messy.

WHAT SAY YE?

[HUbison]

Originally Posted by RAMarkable

Hub, I believe this was a shot at Georgia far more than at the fans of St. Louis. Many retired Rams players had had their fill of her (as well as most of Cali) and this quote accurately reflects what they thought of her "management' (and I use that word loosely) style. Bottom line is that it was her malfeasant running of the Rams that drove the fans away in droves and led to the acrimonious split. But none of this reflects (splatters?) on the noble St. Louis sports fan. Messy divorces are just that: Messy.

WHAT SAY YE?

Regardless of Gabriel's intention (and I do agree it was a direct shot at Frontierre), the implication is that after a honeymoon period, the St. Louis fans will dislike Frontierre enough to lose interest in the team.

Yet, thirteen years later, the St. Louis fans are still buying tickets and merchandise IN SPITE of Frontierre and her legacy.

Directly? No. However, Gabriel sold the St. Louis fans short and indirectly insulted them with the comment. But St. Louis fans rose above his expectations.

[YodaRam]

bison, I think you're missing my point. To your credit you are great with the numbers. But The fact is that "seats sold" is not equal to fan base or fan support.
Your explanation about this subject sounds like "Corporate America". Do you think that empty paid for seats gives a "warm and fuzzy" feeling to the performers on the field? Do you think that it may have an affect on the % of effort put forth by the players on the field? Do you think that it has an influence on the actual fans that attend games on whether they want to return again?

The disparity between the "haves" and "have nots" grows every year. Ticket prices don't come down but gas prices, and other essentials, continue to rise.
This is not a knock .....yes it is, on St. Louis and most sports markets in our country.
I'm beating a dead horse.




RAM ON!

[moklerman]

Something else to consider in the attendance conversation is the capacity of each stadium. Anaheim stadium was a 43,000 seat stadium converted to 65,000. The Ed is 70,000. It is also designed to accommodate and enjoy football games. Anaheim stadium was a mish-mosh of seating that afforded more than it's fair share of bad seats. Weather might also be a slight consideration. It's never too bad in L.A. but I would assume there is much less fluctuation in a dome.

[YodaRam]

Originally Posted by moklerman

Something else to consider in the attendance conversation is the capacity of each stadium. Anaheim stadium was a 43,000 seat stadium converted to 65,000. The Ed is 70,000. It is also designed to accommodate and enjoy football games. Anaheim stadium was a mish-mosh of seating that afforded more than it's fair share of bad seats. Weather might also be a slight consideration. It's never too bad in L.A. but I would assume there is much less fluctuation in a dome.

No offense, but i watched the Rams at Anaheim Stadium. IT SUCKED! That is not a viable N.F.L. venue. Period. Lose the Angels and do some serious reconfiguration? Maybe. Or wait, did the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim actually move to L.A.? Naa. Just one more reason that L.A. is not suitable for another pro franchise. They're not even sure of where they are located.



RAM ON!

[HUbison]

Originally Posted by Yoda

Your explanation about this subject sounds like "Corporate America".

The decision makers are Corporate America. A "seat sold" is a "seat sold" regardless of what occupies that seat. What effect does it have on the field? What effect does it have on the butts that DO occupy the seats?

The answer is........who (among the decision makers) cares (as long as the seat is sold on that Sunday). Football is a business and like any business it is run by money, aka revenue, aka "seats sold". And regardless of what anybody in a Che Gueverra t-shirt may say, that's not a bad thing. It goes beyond what we fans have as our priorities, but then again we don't have an ownership investment in the organization.

Originally Posted by Yoda

Just one more reason that L.A. is not suitable for another pro franchise.

Hold the phone! Yoda, are you now saying LA should NOT get a team. Am I going to have to argue FOR SoCal now to keep this discussion going?

[onslaught11]

I don't think it has anything to do with attendance now. It has everything to do with PSLs. The average fan would not be able to afford the PSL.
It all comes down to the all mighty buck. If Rosenbloom want the team to stay in St. Louis he could easily rip up the current contract on the stadium and say forget the high 10% stadium clause, we will draw up another 20 yr contract without that clause. I think the city of St. Louis would be willing to do that.
But he is not even suggesting it.
He is a businessman. He is trying to extort more money.

If the new Los Angeles stadium offer the greater number of PSLs, you damn skippy Rosenbloom would jump at that or say the new owner (DeBartolo anyone?) will move the team to the city with the greater number of PSLs.

Money is everything in this game. Unfortunately St. Louis don't have the money or is not even willing to get their act together to raise that money.

[HUbison]

I guess we'll see.......in 7 years.

[YodaRam]

Originally Posted by HUbison

The decision makers are Corporate America. A "seat sold" is a "seat sold" regardless of what occupies that seat. What effect does it have on the field? What effect does it have on the butts that DO occupy the seats?

The answer is........who (among the decision makers) cares (as long as the seat is sold on that Sunday). Football is a business and like any business it is run by money, aka revenue, aka "seats sold". And regardless of what anybody in a Che Gueverra t-shirt may say, that's not a bad thing. It goes beyond what we fans have as our priorities, but then again we don't have an ownership investment in the organization. Hold the phone! Yoda, are you now saying LA should NOT get a team. Am I going to have to argue FOR SoCal now to keep this discussion going?

Well, bison, first off, I'm not going to argue with you about sold seats and fan base or "true fans" anymore. You don't get what i'm saying and as i stated before,"I'm beating a dead horse." Believe it or not numbers "can" lie.

And as far as a team for L.A. When did i say that Los Angeles deserved another pro franchise? If i did, point it out for me. Thanks




RAM ON!

[HUbison]

Believe it or not numbers "can" lie.

Numbers don't lie...........but people do.

[blood85]

Cabo San Lucas Rams??? Maybe....??

[RAMarkable]

Originally Posted by blood85

Cabo San Lucas Rams??? Maybe....??

Well gee then...maybe they can get Van Halen to play the National Anthem for them.

WHAT SAY YE?