Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How bad were SoCal Rams fans?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How bad were SoCal Rams fans?

    Ok. I am new to this bbs so this may have been covered before but I have read posts referring to "lackluster support" in the LA area for the Rams. I did not live in LA but remember seeing the LA Coliseum on TV jam packed with 70, 80, and 90 thousand Rams fans at times. After they moved to Anaheim I thought the angels stadium looked pretty full on the idiot box as well. In the 1979 Super bowl nfl films video there is a moronic reference to LA fans "putting on a show" or just there to be seen etc. while the Steelers fans presumably eat, breath and sleep Steelers football in between trips to the steel meal! Anyways, I never bought into this bidness about LA Rams fans not caring about the Rams....maybe some Los Angelinos on this bbs can expand on this . Thank you.

  • #2
    HP, I don't think it was so much attendance as passion. The Coliseum or Anaheim Stadium was never loud and just did not have that "aura" that put the fear of God in visiting teams. Some of that may have been the laid back California attitude though I acknowledge the Coliseum was so damned big that the crowd noise was minimized.

    But again, I've been a thirty four year Ram fan living here in Louisiana. It would be interesting to hear what the Angelenos have to say on this subject. :helmet:

    Comment


    • #3
      Well, hpbadger, I have been an LA Rams fan for most of my life (I'm 39 now) and I would probably characterize the LA fans as "laid-back". Certainly there were many passionate fans, but DEFINITELY NOT like the fans you see in Cleveland or Chicago. Also, it was hard to tell, because the Rams had so many Terrible years that it was hard to maintain excitement. I think also that the fan base is diluted because LA is composed of people that have relocated from all over the country. This is evidenced by the number of sports bars that "belong" to a different city's team.

      I, for one, don't want to see an NFL team in LA if that means we must subsidize the rich NFL owners (funding for a stadium). Our taxes are already too high!

      Comment


      • #4
        I was one of the few who were very sad when the RAMS left L.A. I enjoyed myself when I was able to attend the games both at the Coliseum and in Anaheim. Watch the video of the RAMS against the Steelers at the Coliseum for Super Bowl XIV. The place is packed and the fans were excited. It really came down to who were real RAMS fans and who jumped on board when they had a winning season. It would be next to impossible for a team like the Falcons to move to L.A. The fans need a new team one that they could call there own. The LA Express and recently the LA Extreme were nice innovations but without the NFL backing nowhere but down. I wen to the preseason game with the RAMS against the Chargers 90% of the people there had RAMS stuff on. There will always be a fan base in So Cal for our team.

        Remember they started out the franchise in Cleveland before moving. Its all part of the history and the mystique. Five years from now will we still be looking at a championship caliber team ??

        Always
        A
        RAMS
        Fan



        :ram:
        Always a Rams Fan............

        Rex Allen Markel

        Comment


        • #5
          The LARAMFAN

          We had season tickets from 1966 until they moved back east. Every year at least 2 games saw over 90,000 fans there. The ramfan laidback. Well, your not right there on the field at the coliseum and the way the Rams played football in the 70's (ground chuck no mistake wearing the defense down and counting on one of the greatest defenses to stop their offense cold) any city would be laid back. I have witnessed that coliseum rockin. I will finish this later got to take the family to the in-laws.

          Comment


          • #6
            At one time, Los Angeles was one of America's greatest football cities. Support dwindled towards the end, but that may have been as much to do with the team's poor performance than the city not being a good football city. Had they gotten together and put up decent facitilities they'd have an NFL team now.

            Comment


            • #7
              I don't think that The Coliseum or Anaheim Stadium were good venues for The Rams. I watched Ram games at both of them. The Coliseum was too "flat", spread out and airy and cheers seemed to just go straight up and out. Anaheim Stadium, i thought was better for seeing the games and acousticly better, as well, but there's somethin' about the shape that's not really right for the football experience. It was made for baseball-PERIOD! + poor Rams seasons.........But hell, Rams players and coaches complained about lack of crowd noise in the dome this year in St. Louis! Maybe Rams fans, in general, are more of a "finesse" group!!:angryram: Nah, that's not it.

              Comment

              Related Topics

              Collapse

              • NJ Ramsfan1
                Game Attendance
                by NJ Ramsfan1
                There have been a number of comments critical of what is perceived to be poor attendance at Rams games. I'll offer this as food for thought:

                First of all, the LA Colosieum is a cavernous facility of over 100,000 seats. You could put 80,000 people in that building and it would still look "empty".

                Secondly, the Rams must win consistently to draw fans. No news flash there. This is a team that has been lousy for 13 years, and was lousy for ten years prior to the GSOT days. There is too much to do in the LA area for fans to subject themselves to bad football week after week.There are only a few teams in the league who have the luxury of losing while still having their fans show up and sell out their stadium. The Rams aren't one of them - nor will they be anytime soon. The Rams will have to prove themselves to fans before that loyalty is returned.

                And finally, the Rams need to build a base in LA. Yes, there are a number of holdovers from the "old days" when the LA Rams were a staple, but that is ancient history. Thinking you're gonna' get 50-60 thousand old school fans to go to these games I feel is extremely wishful thinking. Remember that this is a city that has been without football for more than 20 years. They've gotten used to that, and old habits die hard. New fans have to be won- and again, it comes down to putting a product on the field people want to root for.

                LA has a team (two teams) because of Kroenke's billions and the promise of a new stadium in a few years which will dwarf anything currently out there. I'm sure this will draw huge crowds when complete, but for now, we need to realize that 50-60 thousand fans is probably going to be considered a good crowd at the Colosieum.
                -09-11-2017, 04:46 AM
              • queerz4sf
                Thank You Rams
                by queerz4sf
                It was amazing, the Rams returned to a place that rejected them and the fans took them back all 3 of them.

                The San Francisco ***** never had a home game on the road in St Louis due to the great and loyal fans of that city, however, the ***** first game in the Coliseum was amazing.

                Not only were the ***** the home team( Like the Raiders when the play in San Diego, at 50,000 to 60,000 Red and Gold fans were in the stadium. Our group" Gay America's Team" was at least 5,000 strong.

                I didn't see many Ram fans, the ones I did not know anything about the team and got free tickets and were paid to wear Rams gear, we were shocked, I love the fact the Rams are back in L.A. due to the extra home game for the ***** and to think we were not good, just imagine when we get good, we could probably fill the stadium with all 49er fans.

                I just hope the Rams stay, but they will never have a home field advantage like St Louis, even when they were in Anaheim we used own their venue.

                We shall see, but fans outside need to know, the Rams don't have that many fans inside L..A. and if they do somebody probably is paying them.

                I cant wait for the Giants and their fans due the same thing at Dodger stadium, we have the superior team this season as we always do. We did notice that the Golden State Warriors are now the most popular NBS team in L.A.

                We shall see the Rams next year and look forward to an extra home game.

                TY!

                San Francisco is supreme to anything L.A.

                Also:

                Half of the 49er fans lived in the L.A. area. I don't think the Rams have any local fans who aren't paid to go to a game?

                It 's the same as when the Chargers moved to L.A. and to hire fans for the press conference.

                We don't have any Dodger or Ram fans in the Gay Area, no one has ever seen them.

                See you next season and thanks for moving back.
                -02-10-2017, 01:01 PM
              • GroundDog39
                LA Rams fans in California.
                by GroundDog39
                Quick question to all you Rams fans in the L.A area. Now the Chargers are now an L.A franchise and have become the Rams local rivals. I'd like to assess the feeling from supporters in L.A on how this may affect the support the Rams already have in California. Keeping in mind how the Chargers are the better team right now and how this may give their franchise a leg up on the competition. I'm concerned because the Rams are struggling and I'm not sure if there re-established back in California. The Chargers, on the other hand, are consistently an exciting team to watch and have a QB in Philip Rivers who looks like he's on a mission right now. So I'd appreciate any feedback on the matter.
                -05-18-2017, 09:46 AM
              • RockinRam
                LA Times Bashes Rams with Headline; Results in Backlash
                by RockinRam
                As the hangover from the Superbowl loss started to seep in, the Los Angeles Times believed that a snarky, insulting front-page headline would be just the remedy for mourning Rams fans.

                And insult they did. Labeling the team the "Lambs", they essentially diminished the incredible year the team has had to reach the biggest game in football. The impact the Rams organization has had to the sports community in Los Angeles is tangible and measurable.



                However, the significance of their impact this year expanded far past the gridiron. From the incredibly tragic shooting at Borderline Bar & Grill in November to the havoc and destruction that the wildfires caused, the Rams were a pillar of support and stability in the community, with many players offering assistance and time to help the victims.

                With a year the Rams have had, both on and off the field, one would think that not only the fans would be behind them, but also the very news outlets that report them and beg for press passes.

                Unfortunately, it seems that either the LA Times are now ran by bitter Saints fans, or they are idiots and did not fully comprehend how much of an impact the Rams have had in Los Angeles.


                The results are telling. There is significant backlash on Twitter. People have been bashing the newspaper company, with many saying they have now canceled their subscription, some of which have lasted over 10-20 years. Several editors of the LA Times have come forward with very weak apologies, all of which have also been ridiculed.


                I think it's very telling that a team that has only been in the city for 2 years after a 20 year disappearance act can have enough support from its fans to make those fans turn off their loyalty to a newspaper that has been around since 1881.



                Los Angeles is now the Rams city. The LA Times better get with the times.


                ~Rockin...
                -02-07-2019, 08:26 AM
              • AvengerRam_old
                Which category do you fall in? (L.A./STL debate)
                by AvengerRam_old
                Just wanted to see how our members break down on the geographic debate.
                I live in California and hope the Rams return.
                17.31%
                18
                I live in California but think the Rams should stay in St. Louis.
                3.85%
                4
                I live in or near St. Louis and think the Rams should stay.
                10.58%
                11
                I live in or near St. Louis, but think the Rams should move to L.A.
                0.00%
                0
                I don't live near L.A. or St. Louis, and want the team to stay in St. Louis
                32.69%
                34
                I don't live near L.A. or St. Louis, and want the team to move back to L.A.
                13.46%
                14
                I don't care where the team plays, as long as they are the Rams.
                22.12%
                23
                -06-04-2009, 06:23 AM
              Working...
              X