LA RAM FAN
Diamond Member
- Mar 1, 2008
- 50,055
- 17,418
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #1,601
theres a bunch of them that have penetrated this site,rightwinger happens to be one of them.ask him. although he would only lie to you and not tell you the truth and never give you an honest answer.He has no interest in facts or truth so it would be a miracle if any of these government paid shills like him ever actually spilled the beans and told you the truth about it.lol.
btw,sticking to the topic here,loyal bush dupe antiquity,if i didnt know any better,i would think that HE actually lives in saint louis and is a rams fan the way he posts because his behaviour I would expect out of a fan in saint louis in denial that they are going to lose their team.I run into THEM all the time at this LA RAM site i post at.
they have NO IDEA WHATSOEVER WHY the Rams left LA in the first place.the majority of them.When you point out to them the facts that attendance at the dome in saint louis is ranked almost dead last in attendance there ranking 31st out of the 32 teams they evade those facts either accusing you of being a liar or when they acknowledge it,they quickly change the subject saying the rams moving back to LA would be a bad idea saying they moved out of LA in the first place because of poor attendance.
Huggy even YOU as a seahawk fan,know thats not true,that attendance had nothing to do with it.that attendance was not an issue there.i know that for a fact,i have many aquintances that live in LA who were season ticket holders there all the way up till their final season there till they left.
those games were ALWAYS packed there. You know as well as I do that the ONLY reason they left LA was that evil bitch owner was a showgirl from saint louis who did not respect her husbands wishes to keep them in LA. you point out those facts to that troll seahawk fan and instead of admitting he is wrong and cluless,he'll go and say some stupid shit like-LA has been trying to get a team forever,its not going to happen,stop being negative.
you shouldl be embarrassed to have him as a fellow seahawk fan.I know i would. not only that,he is ALSO clueless about WHY the raiders and chargers left LA in the first place as well.
the chargers were there for one year and left for san diego because they could not compete with the rams to have quality attendance numbers that one year they were there so they BOLTED,no pun intended.
the faiders when they left,it was no surprise to LA folks because everybody knew al davis was just going to be there briefly till he got the stadium deal he wanted in oakland so when he moved them back,it was no surprise to LA folks at all.the older ones anyways.
where when the Rams left it was a major shocker to everybody.Nobody believed that was going to happen because they had been there forever with a long history of over 50 years.everybody figured the NFL would never allow that for them to leave the second biggest market in the NFL for some second rate has been city.the NFL owners initially voted against the move but then caved in and approved it only AFTER the bitch threatened to move them.
I bring up to him cold hard FACTS that the rams in LA have a HUGE following there which guarantees it will be packed so its a win /win situation for stan if he moves them back where its nothing but a lose/ lose situation if he stays in the least valued stadium in america.i even spelled it out to him dummies style the NFL has been trying to get a team back in LA for at LEAST 10 YEARS NOW.
Logic and common sense doesnt seem to register with him though even though i mentioned as well that the rams will be free agents free to leave saint louis after this season if they so desire.
Lets see,stan makes the purchase of that land near the lakers stadium,the rams can leave saint louis after this year,they are ranked 31st out of 32 teams in attendance which changes instantly if they move back to LA,the value of an NFL franchise is four times what its worth in LA than in saint louis,the owners have been trying to get a team back in LA for at least 10 years now,yet he actually believes Stan Kronke will stay in saint louis and lose out on billions of dollars he could make from the move to LA next year deciding NOT to move there next year to stay in that dump in saint louis.comedy gold.you got to love it.what a troll who cant think for himself.
Can understand your passion regarding the possibility of the Rams returning to Los Angeles. The NFL owners were not paying any attention in the past, and let owners dictate how the league was organized, where the teams played, and to move at will, whenever they thought they had greener pastures.
The great tradition of the Baltimore Colts ended forever when Irsay packed the team up at midnight, and disappeared without permission and resurfaced in, of all cities, Indianapolis. Irsay has held up that city a couple of times since for new stadiums also if I remember correctly.
Al Davis went to court and beat the NFL to move out of Oakland to Los Angeles, than, after winning a Super Bowl, moved that team out of LA back to Oakland. The feared silver & black haven't been competitive since.
Art Modell in Cleveland, one of the cheapest owners ever, for years tried to hold up the city for a new football stadium. Not saying that the old "mistake on the lake" Cleveland Municipal wasn't a dump, but the place had seating for 84,000 and the Browns used to sell it out routinely, whoever was in town. Modell mortgaged the money year after year, and when the city father's were not buying it anymore, he up and moved them to Baltimore, ending the run of one of the NFL's greatest franchises. And in Baltimore? All they did was win a Super Bowl quickly - one that should have been Cleveland's.
Not sure about Ram attendance, used to live in Los Angeles, only saw one Ram game there. Always was a stadium issue, as the Coliseum isn't up to NFL standard's. How well they drew in Anaheim, when they moved into essentially a baseball stadium, don't remember.
Than there were the Houston Oilers, 5th largest city in the country, playing in the 52,000 seat Astrodome, with the great moniker of "The House Of Pain" abandoning Texas for, of all places, tiny Nasvhille, Tennessee. That club also got to a Super Bowl, 1999 I believe, and lost by a yard on the final play to - the St.Louis Rams with Kurt Warner. The New England Patriots began their great run of Super Bowl appearances by beating the Rams on a final play FG the next season.
In the cases of Cleveland and Houston, they got back expansion teams - not the same as the originals. Baltimore got Cleveland's team, and continues to be a force. St.Louis got Los Angeles' Rams, and due to inadequate stadium facilities, the owner moved them, right after her husband's death. No expansion team has ever been considered for Los Angeles.
At some point, the NFL owner's wised up. No way does Los Angeles, Baltimore, Cleveland and Houston lost NFL franchises, long established and profitable to the likes of St.Louis, Indianapolis and Nashville. I watched the videos, seems the headlines and rhetoric don't match. The Rams owner bought 60-acres in Inglewood, a tough neighborhood, but not as tough as where the Coliseum is located, and Inglewood's politicians have promised to build a stadium there. You don't build a quality NFL stadium in 1-2 years, anywhere. Even the Army Corps of Engineers or Halliburton couldn't pull that off. To me, appears to be wishful thinking on Ram fans part.
What also is required, and this is something nobody seems to post about, is no team may relocate in the current NFL, and no expansion franchises are going to be issued, for at least 8-10 years, unless the vacant Los Angeles territory is filled first. Rumors of small market teams that might be considering it over the past 8-10 years were Jacksonville, where attendance is as bad as in St.Louis; New Orleans, losing half of their population to Hurricane Katrina, and playing in a dump called the Superdome, where the lights went out during the Super Bowl; Buffalo, where the late owner Ralph Wilson passed away at 96, but the Bills got local ownership, deep pockets, that owner also owns the Buffalo Sabres NHL club, and yes, St.Louis, a baseball town, which has lost three professional teams in its history - baseball - St.Louis Browns; NFL football - St.Louis Cardinals; NBA basketball - St.Louis Hawks. Plus their hockey franchise, the St.Louis Blues came close to being contracted about 20-years ago when they were owned by the dawg food company.
I understand fans desire to have the Rams return to Los Angeles, but what about Ram fans in St.Louis, working to get a new stadium? Is the league going to let them move when a new stadium is in the works or being negotiated? Rams owner isn't even speaking to the government officials there who are trying to build a new stadium. If they let him leave, with a poor team to boot, it will be three years before the team arrives on the West Coast. Unless they are stupid enough, and no team has considered it, to play in the LA Coliseum. Right now the owners and the league commish are satisfied with the current status of the league. All that has been done is the St.Louis Rams owner, a real estate mogel, has purchased a 60-acre parking lot in Inglewood. The odds of that remaining a parking lot, or becoming a Super Wal Mart or mega-shopping mall, very good. Odds of a mega expense NFL stadium going up there? Questionable. St.Louis is a lot like Portland, Oregon or Salt Lake City. A one sport town when it comes to professional sports.
As to a Super Bowl being played in Los Angeles in 2018 as the wishful thinking reporter in one of the video's reported, highly unlikely. Miami, which has hosted 11 of them, has their stadium (Sun-Life) undergoing a multi-billion dollar renovation, simply because Goodell took them off of the Super Bowl host list, the same way he did San Diego, for stadium reasons. Two best party cities in the country - he gives the game to - - - Tampa - - - odds are they won't even wake up over there long enough to remember the game is being played in their tiny (66,000 seat) stadium, Raymond James. BTW, appears the Tampa Rays AL East franchise stands a very good chance of moving to Montreal at the end of their lease in St.Petersburg. Again, attendance and stadium issues.........luck to LA, but I don't really think all the excitement being displayed is going to come to pass. Odds are the NFL eventually dumps an expansion team in there. Football has been out of the City of Angels too long.............
Okay you make some good points here but some of your information is incorrect however.
For example,you mentioned that the Raiders have not been competitive since they moved back to Oakland out of LA.That is false.the first five years they were back in Oakland yes,they were not competitive at all however your forgetting that when traiter Al got smart and wisely hired John Gruden, things turned around for them instantly with Gruden being brilliant to despose Jeff George after one year there understanding and seeing that George was not the answer and aquired Rich Gannon who took them back to the superbowl for the first time since 1984.other than that though you are correct because they have sucked ever since they lost Gannon to retirement. you could see the impact gannon was having on the team his first year there and how they were going to be good with him
The future however seems to be more promising for them though with the hiring of their new coach Jack Del Rio and Derrick Carr seems to have what it takes to be a success in the NFL at quarterback which has been a major problem over the years since losing Gannon.Gannon thinks he will do well as well.Plus they had an excellent draft this past off season as they did last year. the last few games of the year last year they started to jell and finally figure out how to win coming on strong at the tail end of the season. Under Jack Del Rio,i think he will change the culture and negative atmosphere around the raiders this season and they might even finish at 500,we shall see.
you are correct that it was always a stadium issue there in LA,it never had anything to with attendance in them leaving.the attendance even in that small dump in anahiem was very impressive actually.wasnt till the last couple years they were there the attendance was bad and that was because they got disgusted with the owner cause she purposely traded away eric dickerson and other player greats so the team would get bad so she could say to the NFL the attendance was bad to justify the move to LA. as you can see from this video here of a game in the early 90's against the eagles,they were supported very well,as you can see,that stadium is packed to the max even in the upper deck.
whats funny is history is repeating itself here because as you said,they left anaheim because of an inadequete stadium which is what they are playing in now,you look at that poorly lit stadium and dump they play in now,and its depressing,it looks like gothem city,its so poorly lit.
thats why they are so bad there,nobody wants to sign and play with them in that depressing dump. soon as they move back to LA in tinseltown,that all changes,every free agent in the world will want to come and play there in sunny LA with all the beachs and entertainment there.all the best free agents in the world will want to come and play there like they do with seattle right now.you are incorrect on the part you mentioned that you dont build a quality stadium anywhere in the country in 1 to 2 years though.The Seattle Seahawks the year they demolished the Kingdome to play outdoors in their new stadium century clink they play in now,they played their next two years in seattles university and used Husky stadium those two years and the Minnesota Vikings are in the process of completing to finish their new stadium to be ready for the 2016 season,they just started construction of their new stadium last year.the Rams will be doing the exact same thing they are doing.The vikings will be playing their second year at the university of minnesota while waiting for their new stadium to open next season.as i mentioned in the past post,the vikings used the threat of moving to san antonio for over ten years for leverage for a new stadium deal.once the Rams move back to LA next year,the NFL will just continue to use them as a threat for other teams to get new stadiums just like the Raiders have.
and like i said,its just wishful thinking on fans in st louis's part that the Rams will stay in st louis after this year,its a pipe dream they will get a new stadium anytime in the near future because the LAMESTREAM media in their pathetic reporting of it,never bothers to mention the fact they are MILLIONS in debt still trying to pay off the current stadium the edward james dome they are playing in now.they cant even pay that stadium off and will be continuing to for YEARS so they sure as hell wont be able to fund a new stadium.
Oh and there has been a drastic dropoff in season ticket renewals this year,not because of the poor play of the Rams on the field,but because nobody in st louis is convinced they are going to stay after this season.whats even more comical about it though,is the majority of football fans there dont even care if they leave.
where the chargers,they had an increase of 4,000 new season ticket sales and the raiders,they did not have an increase,but they did not have a dropoff either so thats good that they lost no season ticket renewals.they have been just as horrible on the field as the rams are the last ten years plus but unlike the rams,they sold out every game last year because they are loyal and passionate about their team there in Oakland.
as i mentioned.stan kroneke isnt speaking to the officials in st louis because he is not required to do so.He lived up his end of the agreement in the lease the rams signed under previous ownership 20 years ago when they moved there,the city of st louis did not and now they are back peddling trying to make it look like kronke is the bay guy for THEIR incompetence.
thats why i am hopeful that the the NFL will tell the chargers they cannot move because they would be violating NFL relocation rules if they tried to do so because they have not negotiated in good faith with the city as required which is why the major of SD is going to the NFL to present their play because idiot spanos isnt even trying to work with them.
the chargers are locked into a lease agreement with their city where the Rams they have no lease agreement with the city so they are free to leave if they wish and it is well known kronke wants to move them there.
Spanos and Davis have both said they would like to stay in their cities but Kroneke has not said that and his actions indicate the reports are true,that he does not want to stay the fact he has put all his money into Inglewood purchasing something like an additional
120 acres or something like that since the 60 acre purchase they were talking about in those videos yet he has made NO COMMITMENT to putting any money into the new stadium in st louis to fund a new stadium.Logic and common sense dictates and screams he has no intention of wanting to stay.
Oh and the NFL actually has it planned for the superbowl to be played in 2020 season,not 2018.thats why you cant believe anything the media reports. and remember,the reason the last time there was a superbowl played in LA was in 1993 is because it is required for a city to have an NFL team to have an NFL stadium.Thats why Inglewood will be the choice for the new stadium there in LA over carson because Inglewood is miles and light years ahead of carson in their planning and will have the stadium ready by the 2018 season.
carson on the other hand? they are so far behind in their planning with permits and everythign else under the sky they wont have their stadium ready it has been reported,till the 2020 season that its why this carson project is a complete joke and pipe dream same as it is for the rams to have a new stadium in st louis anytime in the near future or to stay there after this season.
Lastly,thanks for taking the time to watch the videos on the first page there.for some unknown crazy reason,many posters here are afraid to watch them.
the first few or so doesnt really give any indication about it but the LAST one in post # 3,common sense and logic with the information they talk about it in it,pretty much proves its a done deal.you should listen to that particular one again. They were the only ones out of that bunch in watching those videos to report the facts how st louis does not have the money to fund a new stadium there in st louis.
as i said before,LA major James Butts who has met with Knoneke many times over the past year has said he had a welcome speech ready to go for them this year,that it was suppose to be this year but again,word around town is kronke put off the move for next year so spanos can still use LA as leverage for a new stadium so kroneke is giving him time to do so.
Last edited:
