Zooty Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Says the guy who knows there will never be the Sacramento or Akron Cowboys... does it matter though since he's a Cowboys fan from Jersey? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiehardSteeler Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 LA fans couldn't support 1 team enough to keep them, not sure why these morons now thing that the city needs 2 team. As a lifelong NFL fan, I say screw LA, they should give those 2 teams to someone that will actually support them. And yes, I know it is all about TV revenue, but that doesn't make me think any different. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trojanmojo Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) LA fans couldn't support 1 team enough to keep them, not sure why these morons now thing that the city needs 2 team. As a lifelong NFL fan, I say screw LA, they should give those 2 teams to someone that will actually support them. And yes, I know it is all about TV revenue, but that doesn't make me think any different. The Los Angeles Rams led the NFL in attendance 11 times in franchise history, spent a majority of their time in the top 5, and averaged well over the NFL average during their stay in LA. The television ratings were also significantly higher when the Rams were in Los Angeles as opposed to ratings of random teams (including the Raiders) on television in Southern California during the previous 16 seasons. As a lifelong NFL fan and an Angeleno, I say bite me. Edited January 13, 2016 by Trojanmojo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 The Los Angeles Rams led the NFL in attendance 11 times in franchise history, spent a majority of their time in the top 5, and averaged well over the NFL average during their stay in LA. The television ratings were also significantly higher when the Rams were in Los Angeles as opposed to ratings of random teams (including the Raiders) on television in Southern California during the previous 16 seasons. As a lifelong NFL fan, I say bite me. Seriously, people need to do a little homework before throwing out blanket statements. The facility is going to ROCK. People are going to go to it just to go to it... like JerryWorld. When has the NFL really cared about "the product", or for that matter.... "the fans"? It's all about money and if you don't realize that, well then I don't know what to say. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) I said this in another post. When Goodell took over in 2006, team revenue was $6.5B. 10yrs later, its $11.5B. He has almost doubled it. In 2027, the estimate will be $27.5B. If you think team revenue goes throughthe roof like that without a team in LA, you are delusional. Edited January 13, 2016 by tazinib1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Yes, this is about building an entertainment mecca. The owner knows and cares little about football. He is a businessman in a very lucrative business. He will make money on this and so will all the owners and they will all be very happy. The game is secondary, and will be from this point on. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Yep i agree. Dont get me wrong,i LOVE THE Rams coming back to LA. Guess whos pitch at the owners meeting swayed many votes??? Why the CEO of Disney. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdko Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 The LA Rams are going to do very well, to the naysayers hoping that things don't pan out and the team tanks, you're going to be waiting the rest of your embittered life doing so, haha. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Not from St Louis. And a Chiefs fan. I grew up in STL, still have friends and family there, and I renounced my Chiefs citizenship at 1-5. I basically turned the franchise around by getting off the bandwagon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trojanmojo Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Yep i agree. Dont get me wrong,i LOVE THE Rams coming back to LA. Guess whos pitch at the owners meeting swayed many votes??? Why the CEO of Disney. It was too Mickey Mouse 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rileyrott Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Thought this was funny (Per pft/nbcsports): “Stan’s proposal was like watching Star Wars,” the source said, adding that the Carson proposal “was like watching a home movie from the ’70s.” That’s a bit of a slap at Disney CEO Bob Iger, who made the presentation on behalf of the Chargers and Raiders (and whose company made the latest Star Wars movie). http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/13/owners-were-blown-away-by-differences-between-inglewood-and-carson/ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Yes, this is about building an entertainment mecca. The owner knows and cares little about football. He is a businessman in a very lucrative business. He will make money on this and so will all the owners and they will all be very happy. The game is secondary, and will be from this point on. Sadly I don't think the rest of the owners care much about football either. The relocation committee recommended the Carson project with SD/OAK teams. Neither projects had enough votes, but Carson was quickly tossed out. Then the strong arming and incentivizing started. And finally it was decided to take a secret ballot so nobody would know which owners changed their mind and voted for it. $$$$ over football, until one day the fans revolt and stop paying thousands to attend games and buy crap. Just reading that PFT article now, also the one linked in it about the scret ballot. The more I read the more I'm disliking the NFL. I need to step away from this or I won't want to watch the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Wasn't the vote 30-2? Secret ballot doesn't mean much in that case. Spanos and Davis are the only two guys who didn't f@ck themselves over and jump ship... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiehardSteeler Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 (edited) The Los Angeles Rams led the NFL in attendance 11 times in franchise history, spent a majority of their time in the top 5, and averaged well over the NFL average during their stay in LA. The television ratings were also significantly higher when the Rams were in Los Angeles as opposed to ratings of random teams (including the Raiders) on television in Southern California during the previous 16 seasons. As a lifelong NFL fan and an Angeleno, I say bite me. As a lifelong LA fan, you should know that it is a fact that in addition to not building the Rams a new stadium, a major reason for them leaving LA was poor declining attendance over the last 5 years in LA. The Rams were in LA for 50 years, citing attendance figures from long ago aren't relevant. I agree that LA once supported the Rams, but that support faded and was a contributing factor in the demise of the LA franchise. In my opinion the whole thing was a shame. For the Rams to leave LA after 50 years was a travesty. It is ironic that after having the LA Rams stab the loyal fans that they did have in the back, that the same fans would rejoice the same thing happening to St Louis. As for the current situation, of course the NFL wants a team in LA. I'd have much rather seen an expansion team in LA, and not create a new set of disenfranchised fans. Furthermore, I'd like to see the NFL to give ownership of a team name, logo, and history to each NFL city. Maybe it would give some teams more at stake to stay where they are. Baltimore should forever be the Colts, LA the Rams, etc... Edited January 14, 2016 by DiehardSteeler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiehardSteeler Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 (edited) Seriously, people need to do a little homework before throwing out blanket statements. see above post, not sure what the heck you are talking about. Edited January 14, 2016 by DiehardSteeler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rileyrott Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 As a lifelong LA fan, you should know that it is a fact that in addition to not building the Rams a new stadium, a major reason for them leaving LA was poor declining attendance over the last 5 years in LA. The Rams were in LA for 50 years, citing attendance figures from long ago aren't relevant. I agree that LA once supported the Rams, but that support faded and was a contributing factor in the demise of the LA franchise. ...and the reason for the "declining attendance over the last 5 years in LA" was orchestrated by Georgia Frontiere and John Shaw. They hired retread and over-the-hill coach Chuck Knox for the final 3 years (1992-1994) and put a piss-poor product on the field. There were minimum attendance clauses in the Anaheim Stadium contract that Georgia and Shaw made sure weren't met, thereby allowing the move to St Louis. In addition, the city of Anaheim would not allow anyone to enter the parking lot before 11:30AM (for a 1PM game) and there were NO toilets or outhouses in the parking lot (we had to use the Amtrak station's bathroom, until they stopped that too). Also, drinking alcoholic beverages was illegal in the parking lot and many received tickets for this. The cops cleared the parking lot within 1 hour after the game making tailgate parties impossible. It's easy for an outsider to say that the Rams left LA because of dwindling fan support, but there were many, many reasons why that happened. I'm ecstatic that the Rams are back where they belong....back in LA! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiehardSteeler Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 (edited) ...and the reason for the "declining attendance over the last 5 years in LA" was orchestrated by Georgia Frontiere and John Shaw. They hired retread and over-the-hill coach Chuck Knox for the final 3 years (1992-1994) and put a piss-poor product on the field. There were minimum attendance clauses in the Anaheim Stadium contract that Georgia and Shaw made sure weren't met, thereby allowing the move to St Louis. In addition, the city of Anaheim would not allow anyone to enter the parking lot before 11:30AM (for a 1PM game) and there were NO toilets or outhouses in the parking lot (we had to use the Amtrak station's bathroom, until they stopped that too). Also, drinking alcoholic beverages was illegal in the parking lot and many received tickets for this. The cops cleared the parking lot within 1 hour after the game making tailgate parties impossible. It's easy for an outsider to say that the Rams left LA because of dwindling fan support, but there were many, many reasons why that happened. I'm ecstatic that the Rams are back where they belong....back in LA! Interesting, thanks for sharing the story. This is what makes sharing opinions on forums worthwhile. While I was a grown man and an avid NFL fan at the time, I do remember the reported events surrounding the move but I don't recall anything about this. But of course I was only privy to what was being reported. I am man enough to say that maybe I am wrong about this and maybe the only reason for the fan support decline was orchistrated. I do believe that Georgia Frontiere was not a good person, or owner. I think that she was capable of pulling crap like this. I am sorry that y'all had to go through that. I will say that it seems right that the Rams are in LA, after so many years I never got used to the name St Louis Rams. I wish y'all nothing but success. I hope that the glory of years gone by can be recaptured. Edited January 14, 2016 by DiehardSteeler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiehardSteeler Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 (edited) While I am a lifelong Steelers fan, I live in Jacksonville now and I know that sometimes the national press reports completely mischaracterize things like fan support. They have done that exact same thing here in Jax where all they could talk about for years was the lack of fan support, and how the Jags were going to LA. They were completely wrong, the Jags have a very solid fan base that has always supported the team, and an owner that was and is committed to keeping them here. While we almost never failed to sell enough seats to avoid a blackout, cities like Tampa Bay, and Arizona (before they started winning) were given a free pass by the media. I challenge any NFL city to keep attendance and fan support as high as it has been for the last 10 years in Jacksonville, while the on field product was miserably bad. It was lazy journalism to pick on the small market team, while not knowing enough to accurately report the situation. The Jags are in Jax to stay, at least for the foreseeable future. Edited January 14, 2016 by DiehardSteeler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pun Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Forgive me for being too young to remember most of this history and (potentially, more than) a bit naive when it comes to the ins and outs of NFL management, but... As many in this thread have said, it's of course all about maximizing profit. So, I'd think it would make the most sense, from a profit-maximizing point of view, to move the Raiders to LA. Why have two teams in the bay area? (side note: I even think it's odd to have two teams in NYC, but that's clearly not up for debate) St. Louis isn't close to any other NFL city. Four hours from KC, Indianapolis, or Chicago. Whereas Oakland & SF are only 20 minutes apart. Sure, the bay area is a huge market, but it seems more profitable to me to have one team in that market and hold on to the St. Louis market, which isn't exactly small. It's probably larger than close to a dozen other NFL cities' markets. For the same reason, I'd think moving the Chargers to LA would also be a poor move. San Diego is a large market, and it's a good 2 hours from LA. Yet they're talking about moving the Chargers there in addition to the Rams? I don't see the reasoning behind abandoning two huge markets and shoving two teams into one market. What am I missing here? Do they think the remaining Rams fans in LA will make that big of an impact compared to if it were another team (Raiders or expansion) to offset the profits lost by leaving St. Louis? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 does it matter though since he's a Cowboys fan from Jersey? Exactly. My point is you root for the players on your teams and the players have nothing to do with these moves. You could move the Cowboys to the moon and I would still root for them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 While I am a lifelong Steelers fan, I live in Jacksonville now and I know that sometimes the national press reports completely mischaracterize things like fan support. They have done that exact same thing here in Jax where all they could talk about for years was the lack of fan support, and how the Jags were going to LA. They were completely wrong, the Jags have a very solid fan base that has always supported the team, and an owner that was and is committed to keeping them here. While we almost never failed to sell enough seats to avoid a blackout, cities like Tampa Bay, and Arizona (before they started winning) were given a free pass by the media. I challenge any NFL city to keep attendance and fan support as high as it has been for the last 10 years in Jacksonville, while the on field product was miserably bad. It was lazy journalism to pick on the small market team, while not knowing enough to accurately report the situation. The Jags are in Jax to stay, at least for the foreseeable future. Jacksonville's attendance consists on the road teams fans, a few paying customers , and ticket promotions used to fill the stadium. I think you can get free Jax tickets with a purchase of a burrito Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 The reason the Rams are moving is because this dude threw a pile of money at the league they couldn't refuse. Jerry Jones, who all the owners trust in matters of high finance, had the owners so riled up over the potential profits from Jerry-World West, they had to send out for 30 pairs of new pants by the time they cast their votes. The owners that are good owners (few left it seems) don't care that the owner of the new LA franchise is clueless in football operations. When you are made of solid gold, nobody cares if you smell like dung. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Exactly. My point is you root for the players on your teams and the players have nothing to do with these moves. You could move the Cowboys to the moon and I would still root for them But you are special. I doubt you would feel the same if you were a lifelong Rams fan that lived in St. Louis. You can say you would but those homer rules don't apply to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Im sure there are still lifelong Cardinal fans in St.Louis as well. And if Jerry moved the Boys to the moon, it would be to the dark side. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Unless you root and follow for a team that is in your hometown, you can't relate to what's happening in St. Louis. Saying they are entertainers and it doesn't matter where they play makes zero sense to me. Now Dallas will never move. However, if they moved to Mexico City, I submit a very large percentage of people that lived in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area would feel totally betrayed, and would not be buying MC Hombres jerseys. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.