expect Rams to be back in LA next year.

[LA RAM FAN]

L.A. doesn t love Chargers Fabiani UTSanDiego.com

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The more I hear about how the Chargers are doing this, the shadier it seems.

For all the insistence of St. Louis fans that the good faith clause in the guidelines should force the Rams to stay, it really seems San Diego has a better argument there. Their FIRST proposal was better than St. Louis', and San Diego has never broken a core promise made to the team.



Ten Questions Mark Fabiani Doesn t Want To Answer - Bolts From The Blue

 

[Papageorgio]

^^^^ hand job wanking off again^^^^

 

[LA RAM FAN]

someone farted in here.^

 

[Papageorgio]

someone farted in here.^

More wanking by hand job troll. The poor idiot.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

someone farted in here.

 

[Papageorgio]

Lol! See, I told you he has nothing to back up his shit, hand job is a total troll.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

someone farted in here.^

Yesterday the Coliseum City investor Floyd Kephart Speaks to Fred Roggin (980 the Beast in LA.) About Recently Submitted Financial Plan for Coliseum City Project (New Raiders Stadium)

 

[Papageorgio]

someone farted in here.^

Yesterday the Coliseum City investor Floyd Kephart Speaks to Fred Roggin (980 the Beast in LA.) About Recently Submitted Financial Plan for Coliseum City Project (New Raiders Stadium)

I didn't say the Raiders would be in LA in 2016 if ever. Why do you make shit up hand job.

I said two teams would land up in LA, either the Chargers, Raiders or Rams. I don't care if they all relocate or none relocate. I'll follow the Raiders wherever they go.

I know two things, last fall you said the Rams would be playing in LA in 2015, which you are WRONG!

The second thing is, a couple months ago you claim the Rams would move without the leagues approval and would announce it at the last NFL owners meeting, which again you are WRONG!

 

[LA RAM FAN]

someone farted in here.^

Gray 5 Topics on Rams Future in St. Louis insideSTL.com - St. Louis Sports Music Entertainment and Nightlife STL Rams

this one poster nailed it when he talked about shanes article above.great article shane,thanks for the laugh.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

@RayHartmann: "Here's the precedent I don't think the NFL wants to set: (St. Louis) walked away from upgrading the Edward Jones Dome, now it's going to help us two years later? (St. Louis) had a deal, we had a contract walked away from it. We walked away... People should've known this is coming."

St. Louis Magazine s Ray Hartmann In-Studio for Discussion on Stadium Rams Future insideSTL.com - St. Louis Sports Music Entertainment and Nightlife STL Rams

st louis sportswriter Harmann on the other hand,is the only one from the area with any grasp of logic and common sense.

This article is Spot on! I know Ray Hartman is a Debbie Downer, but he is completely on point with this article. Stl Had their chance to comply with the lease. They chose to roll the dice and they got Burned

best info I have read about the Rams since all this started. Kroenke has more money than everyone in Missouri, except his walmart relatives. Let him build it himself.

exactly.well said.

 

[Papageorgio]

^^^^whiney little bitch alert^^^^

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Finally, He hits right on the Head ! St Louis had their chances and walked away from It. Clearly, Mr Kronenke has done his homework and knows, Just like the NFL, That its about Selling Suites , not about the Attendance , and the Money making machine is in LA, Not St Louis ..


They don't listen to Hartmann because they're too deep in denial, but this is what I've been saying all along. St. Louis is trying to break their promise (which they strangely insist has just gone away) and force the Rams to take lesser terms by playing the relocation guidelines so they can't leave.

In what sane world would any NFL owner vote for that? That's a precedent that could bite ANY of them if cities could break their promises and teams could do nothing about it.

yep.the smartest guy in st louis.


Chargers gone Keep calm carry on UTSanDiego.com Mobile

 

[Papageorgio]

^^^^whiney little bitch Alert!^^^^

Lol!

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Anyone know when the market assessments will be released to the public? I would love to read them. I think they are the biggest piece in this whole thing. There is no way the NFL would try to force one of their franchises to stay in a dead corporate market ( public money or not). I just don't see how there could be much corporate money left for the Rams after the Cardinals and Blues get theirs. Come on home boys !

very good point.

Big day for Raiders future in Oakland but big questions remain The NFL in L.A. with Vincent Bonsignore

 

[Papageorgio]

^^^^whiney little bitch Alert!^^^^

Lol!

 

[LA RAM FAN]

someone farted in here.^

 

[Papageorgio]

^^^^whiney little bitch Alert!^^^^

Lol!

 

[LA RAM FAN]

man when they left they should have changed their name to st least SAINT LOUIS "LAMBS" that at LEAST has a ring to it.saint luis rams is the most retarded name for a football team.arizona cardinals is right up there with them the facts they dont even migrate there.

I will be constanty updating this thread with new information,this has been known since 2012 it was going to happen so for now,I'll just post a few videos form the past to get everyone started with for the weekend,football can FINALLY be fun for me again.I lost interest in the NFL when my team,the TREU rams,the LA RAMS,moved away.

I think you'll find all these videos interesting.

The position of the NFL is that the league owns the rights to the Los Angeles territory. To move a club requires a 2/3 vote of the owners, and until the LA market vacancy is replaced with a club, any team desiring to move to another city, must go to Los Angeles. That is why Oakland can't play the San Antonio card off against city leaders, neither can St.Louis, threatening to leave for new stadium or concessions. I don't know what St.Louis' attendance figures are, but low attendance isn't exactly a reason for a team to move.

All the clubs share the league television revenues with the big market teams in New York, Washington, Dallas, Philadelphia, Chicago, Houston carrying the small market teams. If that wasn't so, the legendary Green Bay Packers would have left decades ago for greener (no pun intended) pastures. One of the lowest teams attendance wise is located in Jacksonville where they tarp off Alltel Stadium down to 62,000 seats (it can hold 80,000 for the Gator Bowl and the annual Florida - Georgia game there). Jags don't even come close to hitting the 62,000 - ever, but they have no intention of moving.

The key to the LA market must be a stadium, if they had one, that was up to NFL standards, some owner would have moved there ages ago. But, the heart of the matter was that someone would move there because of the huge population (ignoring the fact the city turned its back on the NFL, twice), and play a couple of years in the antiquated LA Coliseum, in a dangerous neighborhood. No owner would buy that deal, and LA only recently voted on a referendum to possibly build a football stadium in Inglewood. End of Raiders moving there. I will believe the new stadium when construction starts there.

Whatever the St.Louis owner is up to regarding the Rams, their movement back to Los Angeles isn't a given. The Chargers (the team the league would love to have move up to LA), are negotiating for a new stadium. Rams ownership isn't even speaking to St.Louis officials. My guess is a football stadium in Inglewood just might be a pipe dream, and the Rams will remain in St.Louis and not be back in LA in 2016 or 2017. "If you build it they will come" - but Los Angeles hasn't managed to build it since the Rams left originally, and wouldn't want to be a Ram fan forced to go to the Coliseum to see them play. Matter of fact, if that was the case, doubt St.Louis ownership could get the necessary votes to move.

You guessed wrong.,think again. just the opposite. a new stadium happening in st louis is a pipe dream..

You are correct that the Chargers are the team they would like to have but they would be in violation of NFL relocation rules if they tried to move.I see you understand that the NFL will never allow the Raiders back,your one of the very few here that understand that.

That is what makes the Rams situation so unique over the Raiders and Charger is the Raiders and Chargers have all kinds of obstacles and hurdles they would have to clear if they tried to move that the Rams have none of.

you mentioned you will believe the new stadium when construction starts there.will guess what? the stadium that Kroneke is paying for out of his own pocket to build an NFL stadium,they are set for construction in december this year.The city of Inglewood already has the date circled at the end of december to start the construction of the stadium they are planning to have ready built by 2018.so it will only be a few months before you start believing.

they did not demo the hollywood park to build a shopping mall there recently.


Racetrack demolished in California to make way for Rams owner s new stadium FOX2now.com

If you are correct that Oakland cannot play the san antonio card that is great news for the fans of Oakland to keep the Raiders because LA is not an option for them contrary to what the media reports which means they are staying..The owners are sore at the davis family for suing them to move and the city does not want them there so they will get no corporate sponsorship there so Raiders to LA is not even a discussion.

That is why Kroneke will get the 2/3 votes to move them there because the owners did not want them to leave in the first place,they initially voted against it back then and only changed their votes once the bitch owner threatened to sue the NFL to move them.

Inglewood mayor James Butts has met with Kroneke many times last year and has said Kroneke has told him he is intent on moving them there.the NFL badly wants a team there and the Rams have honored their lease agreement with the city in their contract under previous ownership signed 20 years ago.

the city of st louis however did not honor their agreement to keep it in the top third tier of stadiums so he can legally move them in a court of law without the owners votes but it wont come down to that when they vote on it later this year. attendance has nothing to do with the Rams being able to move,you are correct about that.

HOWEVER, what IS the deciding factor in why they get to leave is the Rams honored their agreement with the city in their lease,they city did not honoer their agreement.It would be the same as if you rented an apartment and in your agreement in the lease,the landlord was required to keep your apartment furnished in top condition as long as you stayed there for the years you agreed to. you honor the agreement upholding your end of the bargain,but your landlord did not.you can legally give your landlord the finger and leave.

Thats why I dont think the chargers will be able to leave because they have not negotiated in good faith with their city as required by NFL rules,the Rams HAVE.

people will mention that he is not returning phone calls so he is not negotiating in good faith with them.all nonsense.he did everything the city required the rams to do in the original terms of the agreement,the city did not honor their end of the deal and they are now backpeddling trying to make it look like kroneke is the bad guy here for THEIR incompetence so he is not required to return their phone calls.


The key to the LA market must be a stadium, if they had one, that was up to NFL standards, some owner would have moved there ages ago. But, the heart of the matter was that someone would move there because of the huge population (ignoring the fact the city turned its back on the NFL, twice), and play a couple of years in the antiquated LA Coliseum, in a dangerous neighborhood. No owner would buy that deal, and LA only recently voted on a referendum to possibly build a football stadium in Inglewood. End of Raiders moving there. I will believe the new stadium when construction starts there.

Yes end of RAIDERS moving to LA but not Rams.Kroneke is the one building the stadium.The LA coliseum and rose bowl have both said either the chargers or rams can play there for the next couple years starting next year while the construction of the stadium begins this year.they have said the raiders are not welcomed there and wont be allowed.they dont want them so end of story that the Raiders will ever be allowed to come to LA again. chargers on the other hand? I am not so sure about because they are pushing for two teams.will see what happens on that front.

Rams will get the neccessary votes to move,no problem there as far as that is concerned.the NFL badly wants a team in LA.they want an owner with deep pockets to be that team.kroneke is the man.. they would like the chargers as their preferable choice as you said,but they have no legal grounds to move there like the Rams do.

the Rams upheld their end of the deal in the lease agreement,the chargers however,have not negotiated in good faith to stay in their city as required by NFL rules.Rams have so I think that will prevent the chargers from leaving is my hunch.

you mentioned that its a pipe dream for the Rams to be in LA in a couple years.On the contrary-
Its just the opposite here,your wayyyyyyyy off target that LA is a pipe dream.its a pipe dream for st louis to have a new stadium,they are so bankrupt there MILLIONS in debt trying to pay off the current stadium they play in,they dont have the funds to even build a new one that they want kronke to build.you cant put a gun to an owners head and force him to use his own money to stay in a city he does not want to stay in.

the LAMESTREAM media convienetely leaves out that little fact because they know its a done deal and they want to try and cover it up to keep a lid on it.hee hee

matter of fact to prove you are way off target that LA is a pipe dream and its actually a pipe dream that the rams will stay in st louis after this year is spanos point man, PR man mark fabiani even came on fred roggins sports show in LA back in february came on his show and said that the carson project with the chargers and raiders was just a pipe dream,a fantasy.that spanos only made the move because he is 100% convinced Kronke plans to move the Rams to LA.

LA major James Butts was expecting kroneke to move them this year,he had a welcome speech all written out and prepared for the Rams this season but word around town is Kroneke is putting it off one more year to give spanos time to get a new stadium in SD..Once Kronke moves,the threat of LA is not there for spanos anymore.

Oh and when the Rams move to LA,the NFL will just use another city as their new threat for a new stadium.they'll continue to use san antonio as a threat.the vikings used that city for over 10 years as a threat to move for leverage for a new stadium until they got the deal done to have one ready for them next year.

they'll continue to use cities like san antonio for leverage and maybe even London as well.who knows.never can tell with the NFL.

lastly,the chargers,the ones the NFL wants,since they have not negotiated in good faith with the city as required by the NFL and not tried to get anything done with them,the major of SD has done the smart thing and gone to the NFL to present their case to them since the chargers are not working with them.Hopefully the NFL will agree that they have not acted in good faith with the city and they wont allow the move is what I am guessing.we'll have to wait and see.

 

[Papageorgio]

^^^^whiney little bitch alert^^^^