NFL in Los Angeles? - Page 2

*dgr828* · #16 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rambos

Thats 15 min from my house,come home Rams!

I'm not sure, but I believe the Rams will be playing a preseason game in Qualcomm (San Diego) this year. If so, Will you be going?

*ramsanddodgers* · #17 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgr828

I'm not sure, but I believe the Rams will be playing a preseason game in Qualcomm (San Diego) this year. If so, Will you be going?

I could be wrong (not terribly unusual) but I believe the Bolts travel to the Ed this year?

*ramsanddodgers* · #18 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

After the preseason opener, the Rams return home for a pair of game in consecutive weeks. The first home game has the San Diego Chargers paying a visit to the Edward Jones Dome the week of Aug. 14-18 tilt. The teams met in last season’s preseason.

Quote:

The official site of the St. Louis Rams - Article

Hope that helps!

*dgr828* · #19 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by ramsanddodgers

I could be wrong (not terribly unusual) but I believe the Bolts travel to the Ed this year?

The Rams played the Bolts Last year at the ED, I figured this years game would take plce in San Diego. ON NFL.com they only show the Rams last two preseason games (Balt, Aug. 23 & KC, Aug 28). I have no idea who their first two Preseason opponents are officially.

**HUbison** · #20 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgr828

Football will never come to Los Angeles until our beloved Rams return from being "on loan" to the city of St Louis. In Fact, It's still the Los Angeles Rams, were just using St Louis for the Dome Stadium. Much in the way that the New York Jets and Giants use New Jersey for their stadium. Makes much more sense for the Rams to move back west and keep the NFL alignment intact. Hate to say it, but St Louis fan seems to be a frontrunner. In 1999 he jumped on the Rams bandwagon until it hit a bump in the road, ditching it and settling for the St Louis Blues.

NFL in LA? It'll never happen until the Rams return to run the Empire they built for nearly 50 years. The Rams put LA on the map, and when they left no one has been able bring football back to that region of the world. Rams will always forever be Los Ageles!

Oh, that's just precious. And truly inspirational. You hang on to your dreams, little camper; hang on for all your worth, little buddy.

*ramsanddodgers* · #21 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgr828

The Rams played the Bolts Last year at the ED, I figured this years game would take plce in San Diego. ON NFL.com they only show the Rams last two preseason games (Balt, Aug. 23 & KC, Aug 28). I have no idea who their first two Preseason opponents are officially.

Well, that is why I quoted the article and then included the link?

Yes, I also thought that since the Rams hosted the Bolts last year they would be in San Diego this time. It's what we get for trying to make sense of the No Fun League.

*moklerman* · #22 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

As unlikely as it seemed that the Rams would ever leave L.A. is how it seems for them in St. Louis right now. I don't guess that they'll leave any time soon or ever, but with Chip still maintaining control...well, it is within the realm of possibility that he moves them or sells out to the guy putting up $800 million for a new L.A. stadium.

Personally, I'd like to see a new franchise in L.A. A ground floor start for all the fans would be a much better fit in my opinion. L.A.'s really never had it's own NFL franchise and I think the overall support would benefit in the short term and the long term. It isn't even unprecedented for the league to go with an odd number of teams. Although there were other plans in place, 31 teams played for a couple of years. I really don't see a problem with it.

There are already 17 weeks in the season because of that 31 team period of time so in terms of the scheduling, it shouldn't be an issue. The division would be the only issue. My gut tells me NFC West would be the spot for an L.A. team but what would it mean to have one division in football with five teams? Realistically? Nothing. But there would certainly be some opposition.

I don't really want to see any of the aforementioned teams move, much less move to L.A. Buffalo, Minnesota, San Diego and New Orleans all need teams in my opinion. I could see the Jaguars moving because they still seem new to me but I don't think it's fair to pull the plug on that area just when the team is developing a winning attitude. Their first run into the playoffs was a bit of a fluke but in recent years, they've really established themselves as a perennial winner.

L.A. Stars? Jerry Jones would never let it happen but I like the name. L.A. Knights is a good name and double meaning(knights/nights). The cougar is indigenous to California but it might be in bad taste with all the people who've been attacked/killed. IF they get an expansion team, I sure hope they come up with a good name. Actually, with the Panthers and Jaguars already, I would really be against cougars.

*nonefan* · #23 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

ESPN said the Rams was going back to L.A.

**txramsfan** · #24 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

I hope the LA area gets a team. Went to watch the Rams in Anaheim and had a blast. Saw a UCLA-USC game in the Rose Bowl when UCLA throttled the Trojans in 86.

*starfoxx* · #25 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

I don't see how another franchise can survive in Los Angeles. That city will always be Laker Town.

*moklerman* · #26 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

I don't see how another franchise can survive in Los Angeles. That city will always be Laker Town.

You might want to ask USC, UCLA, Dodgers, Angels, etc. before settling on that conclusion. There are a great many people who take great pleasure in proclaiming L.A. can't support an NFL franchise but it's an uninformed opinion. The last two NFL teams that were here had owners who were primarily interested in holding the city hostage for millions of dollars, NOT in winning football games or putting a good product on the field for the fans.

The Raiders' stay in L.A. had a foundation built in sand. I'm not sure they ever unpacked their bags. After the ***** took over, the Rams were constantly pinching pennies as a precursor to eventually gutting the team to get out of their lease(a timespan of less than 10 years). The fans aren't stupid but the stain of the early '90's version of the NFL in L.A. has somehow become the reality of the fans in this area.

Put a franchise committed to football in L.A. and the fans will be there. Put a winner in L.A. and the celebrities will show up too.

**HUbison** · #27 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Put a franchise committed to football in L.A. and the fans will be there.

Put a franchise committed to football in _________ and the fans will be there.

*moklerman* · #28 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Put a franchise committed to football in _________ and the fans will be there.

I agree. L.A. is no exception.

*Rambos* · #29 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Qualcomm (San Diego) this year. If so, Will you be going?

Last time they did come, I went. I'm looking to go to AZ this year, but its harder now to get a good seat.

*RamFan_Til_I_Die* · #30 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

We're gonna be waiting awhile guys.

An excerpt from an interview with Goodell:

Quote:

He welcomes the plan by developer Edward P. Roski Jr. to build a 75,000-seat stadium in Los Angeles to help lure back the NFL, which hasn't had a team there since 1994. He noted, however, the league has no plans to expand and no current franchise seems in enough trouble to seek relocation.

Goodell says he will approach Walsh material with open mind - NFL - SI.com