NFL votes to move the St. Louis Rams to Los Angeles for the 2016 season

Status
Not open for further replies.
U2NUMB said:
I honestly really feel for the fans in St Louis... as a Vikings fan the threat to move to LA was used for over 10 years and it was always frustrating as there was never a lack of love for the team. To wake up to this news has to be a gut punch.
Click to expand...

The reason why the Vikings are getting a new stadium is because the roof collapsed on the Metrodome. That embarrassed the city enough to the point where they broke.

I can understand why Oakland needs a new Stadium, and the Chargers as well, but I've never really understood how the Rams have a poor Stadium other than what's underneath the field is terrible. It just sounds like the Rams owner was like 'fuck you, NFL, I'm moving the team, with or without you.'
 
Unknown Soldier said:
PSLs huh? I guess they want to make the same mistake the Raiders made. Good luck with that, I don't think sports fans in LA give enough of a shit about the Rams to fork out money to reserve seats which they can then buy tickets for to Rams games.
Click to expand...

No, PSLs aren't funded by fans, they're funded by Fortune 500 companies in the area. This is why you can built a privately funded stadium in LA or the Bay Area, but you can't do that anywhere else. It's the reason why the threat of "moving to LA" was a serious threat for so long.

Fitts said:
Lol... Oakland breathes a sigh of relief while SD gives no fucks about the Chargers.
Click to expand...

It's all political posturing. The Mayor of SD has done an INCREDIBLE job of doing nothing to actually build a stadium while somehow keeping up appearances that he did something so his job rating is super high despite the fact that we almost did and almost certainly will lose the Chargers. The concept of getting re-elected after dumping an NFL franchise is almost unthinkable.

What they're doing now is poorly timed gloating that the Carson project didn't go down because they think they can call the Chargers bluff because Stan Kroenke is fucking ruthless and has no incentive whatsoever to give the Chargers an even vaguely good deal, but its a deal none-the-less that I think they'll take, at least eventually. But if I had to hazard a guess, I think they'll try to see if they can push a vote through in SD and just risk being a year behind Stan's fan-push. The NFL does NOT want two teams in LA if they can help it, they just feel "bad" for Dean Spanos.

Meanwhile, Oakland isn't really doing or saying anything challenging because they have absolutely no intent to ever give the Raiders any kind of public subsidy, period. If the Chargers exercise their option to move, I would not be even vaguely surprised to see the Raiders try to move in on San Diego as a territory. Without LA available to build or occupy a stadium. there's basically nowhere for the Raiders to really go. This is all kind of ironic given that the Raiders are the only one of these three teams that have fans in LA.
 
KingBroly said:
The reason why the Vikings are getting a new stadium is because the roof collapsed on the Metrodome. That embarrassed the city enough to the point where they broke.

I can understand why Oakland needs a new Stadium, and the Chargers as well, but I've never really understood how the Rams have a poor Stadium other than what's underneath the field is terrible. It just sounds like the Rams owner was like 'fuck you, NFL, I'm moving the team, with or without you.'
Click to expand...
Also because Mike Lynn, ex-Vikings GM, negotiated a contract back in 1982 which gave him 10% of all suite revenue at the Metrodome for life, making the Vikings one of the lowest revenue generators as long as they were stuck in the dome. And they had a lease agreement dating from 1979 through 2011
 
U2NUMB said:
I honestly really feel for the fans in St Louis... as a Vikings fan the threat to move to LA was used for over 10 years and it was always frustrating as there was never a lack of love for the team. To wake up to this news has to be a gut punch.
Click to expand...

I figure it's an even bigger punch in the stomach for Minnesotans who are on the hook for half a billion dollars in public funding for their new stadium.

People of St. Louis dodged a bullet here: they still have another 5-6 years to go to pay off the Edward Jones Dome.

Fuck the NFL and any sports teams (and city/state administrations who are in on the fix) that blackmail taxpayers into keeping their teams put.
 
Angry Grimace said:
This is all kind of ironic given that the Raiders are the only one of these three teams that have fans in LA.
Click to expand...

I always thought that the Rams retained a sizable fanbase there as well, but then again I'm observing from afar on the opposite side of the country.
 
KingBroly said:
The reason why the Vikings are getting a new stadium is because the roof collapsed on the Metrodome. That embarrassed the city enough to the point where they broke.

I can understand why Oakland needs a new Stadium, and the Chargers as well, but I've never really understood how the Rams have a poor Stadium other than what's underneath the field is terrible. It just sounds like the Rams owner was like 'fuck you, NFL, I'm moving the team, with or without you.'
Click to expand...

I'm not a huge football fan but it seems like they never did anything to that stadium. Always kind of felt like a shithole vs the cardinals stadium.

As a non football fan though I think it's great, really didn't want my taxes paying for a new stadium.
 
Personally, I don't want to see the Chargers move. I'd rather have the L.A. Raiders back.

Besides, I don't think the fans in SD only want the Padres around to cheer for.
 
GoldenEye 007 said:
Eh.... LA isn't the only major city with NFL teams that have sucked over the years. Yet they're about the only ones to have multiple franchises leave the city. And the largest one without a franchise for an extended period.

I mean Miami has basically sucked since the tail end of the Marino era yet they have been able to maintain the franchise. And Miami isn't exactly small town USA. It's possible there just isn't genuine interest in LA. It's incredibly easy to support a winner but the reality is that it's relatively rare for a franchise to have constant success and consistently be competing for championships outside of a few exceptions. Heck, the team they are getting is terrible and others here have indicated the owner has been questionable in his commitment in producing a viable product.

Maybe there is genuine interest. But that will take support of the franchise beyond the honeymoon period and during both good and bad stretches. We'll see moving forward.
Click to expand...

We also won't pay for stadiums, which is the sole reasons for ffranchises leaving.
 
Flo_Evans said:
I'm not a huge football fan but it seems like they never did anything to that stadium. Always kind of felt like a shithole vs the cardinals stadium.

As a non football fan though I think it's great, really didn't want my taxes paying for a new stadium.
Click to expand...

Rams stadium was a dump the day it opened. The clause that mandated it be in the top 25% of all stadiums was a noose from day 1. That's not even remotely feasible for any franchise and everyone knows it. You can't just be dumping hundreds of millions into stadiums and/or replacing them every 15-20 years. Not sure if you saw the Rams proposal to upgrade the dome, but they wanted to convert it into a convertible roof stadium.. Think about that.

Nothing of value was lost. It's just a losing franchise and it will continue to be. I was tempted to go a couple times in recent years when teams I like came to town, but the bottom line is that it just wasn't a good experience, IMO.. And I'm a huge football fan. I wish I wasn't.
 
GaimeGuy said:
Also because Mike Lynn, ex-Vikings GM, negotiated a contract back in 1982 which gave him 10% of all suite revenue at the Metrodome for life, making the Vikings one of the lowest revenue generators as long as they were stuck in the dome. And they had a lease agreement dating from 1979 through 2011
Click to expand...

Holy shit. That is A-grade corruption right there. Well done.
 
Fitts said:
Lol... Oakland breathes a sigh of relief while SD gives no fucks about the Chargers.
Click to expand...

San Diego has been jerked around and insulted by Spanos and Fabiani for a long time. The last negotiation the Chargers representatives basically walked out. More over, Spanos has treated the fans (and the team) poorly.

Beyond that, I don't see it the same way. Oakland has a weak hand is happy just to be able to have another shot at negotiating. San Diego has a strong hand and feels good about the circumstances.

I agree that it came off overly aggressive, but the city was attempting to put forward a real plan for a stadium. Now they're willing to go back to it if Spanos is serious.
 
nocturnalis said:
We also won't pay for stadiums, which is the sole reasons for ffranchises leaving.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Probably something all jurisdictions should band together for. Or at least limit the amount of public contributions to like 5-10 percent or something.

The touted benefits to the community frequently are less than overwhelming.
 
CYlNDhvUkAA8h_9.jpg:large
 
GoldenEye 007 said:
Fair enough. Probably something all jurisdictions should band together for. Or at least limit the amount of public contributions to like 5-10 percent or something.

The toted benefits to the community frequently are less than overwhelming.
Click to expand...

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2015/mar/03/economic-impact-chargers-leaving-san-diego-would-b/

That seems to be the prevalent opinion among economists. None of those billions of dollars are going back into the community. Their stated example is that if Chicago lost all 5 of its professional sports teams, the economic impact would be a fraction of 1 percent of the local economy, about as significant as the closure of a major department store. Rather, that money goes directly into the owner's wallet. Meanwhile, the public bears a disproportionate or even majority burden of building these billion dollar stadiums.
 
Kastrioti said:
Which is bullshit and having a official team in L.A. will help filter out the West L.A. bandwagoning Seahawks fans. This season they're Seahawks fans, next season they're Lions fans.
Click to expand...

If they are bandwagoning fans, why would they be Lions fans? Last I checked being a fan of pure trash wasn't in your interest as a bandwagoner.
 
winjet81 said:
I figure it's an even bigger punch in the stomach for Minnesotans who are on the hook for half a billion dollars in public funding for their new stadium.

People of St. Louis dodged a bullet here: they still have another 5-6 years to go to pay off the Edward Jones Dome.

Fuck the NFL and any sports teams (and city/state administrations who are in on the fix) that blackmail taxpayers into keeping their teams put.
Click to expand...

I agree with you at a base level and do not support paying for these things but honestly.. the economy here is so damn good we wont notice. We have a surplus in the billions.. so we are used to being taxed out the ass.

Does not make it right at all.. but the general public wont really notice it here. And they did replace the roof on the metrodome.. they paid for it and played another year there.
 
hipsterpants said:
I only went to a couple games but honestly it was a pretty awful stadium to be in. It was like a dungeon. More importantly it didn't meet the "top tier" requirements that existed in the contract with the Rams, whatever that means.

Really though it doesn't matter, I'm sure even if the Dome was in better condition Kroenke would have gotten the Rams out anyway.
Click to expand...

Yea the stadium was built as part of our convention center which is connected to it. They actually built the stadium hoping we would get an expansion team but that fell through last minute. So basically we built the thing as cheap as possible. $280 million in 1995 which would be $434 million in 2015.
 
Do the majority of people in LA even care about the NFL returning?

The loudest and strongest opinions of the "LA NEEDS AN NFL TEAM" movement come from outside of Los Angeles.

I was an LA Rams fan as a kid, but it seemed like the true football loyalties in LA were always to the college teams - USC, mainly, and UCLA.
I feel like the Rams will be like the Clippers - they'll provide some occasional fun and noise to distract while the Lakers are sucking.
 
Erico said:
Do the majority of people in LA even care about the NFL returning?

The loudest and strongest opinions of the "LA NEEDS AN NFL TEAM" movement come from outside of Los Angeles.

I was an LA Rams fan as a kid, but it seemed like the true football loyalties in LA were always to the college teams - USC, mainly, and UCLA.
I feel like the Rams will be like the Clippers - they'll provide some occasional fun and noise to distract while the Lakers are sucking.
Click to expand...
It raises the value of a franchise to have it in LA. The Rams will be worth quite a bit more than they ever were in St Louis.

The real question is if LA needs to have two teams again because why
 
nemss said:
Somber day downtown in St. Louis today.
Click to expand...

Sorry but it doesn't get better, it almost gets worse as StL will now be used as leverage to get deals done in other cities. "What, don't like this deal? Fine we'll go to St Louis."

Replace St Louis with Seattle and that's how us former Seattle SuperSonics fans feel. :(
 
Gangs need to throw down in head butting battles once the Rams move in.
How are head butting battles not a thing?

Anyway. When is former president RBH throwing up an Inglewood Stadium thread?
 
beanman25 said:
hope so. I'm a much bigger futbol fan anyhow. NFL isn't even the NFL anymore. With all the flags and whatnot. Same boring teams in playoffs, etc.
Click to expand...

The Cardinals, the Chiefs, the Texans, the Panthers. Not really the same boring teams. There is a decent chance the Superbowl will have 2 teams that haven't won it in a long time if ever.
 
The Lamonster said:
I had no idea people still cared about the Rams this much. I live in STL and my Facebook feed is full of people upset about this.
Click to expand...
As poorly as the franchise has been run, with a non existent owner, it's easy to have that viewpoint. It is true that the franchise was hurting here, but it wasn't from a lack of fan support. PSL'still sold, the games held enough capacity to not be blacked out.

It's evident that Kroenke, and I'd even say Goodell have had this lined up for a while.
 
oh god I just saw a dolphins fan complain about Tannehills deep ball and how he couldn't get Parker the ball..... :/ our fan base is the
second
worst.
 
aceface said:
Forgive me if it was stated elsewhere in this thread, but do we know what teams voted against the move?
Click to expand...

Oakland and Cincinnati

I wish the Rams would have stayed in St. Louis. I think the fans there would care more than LA. And there are already 3 California teams.
 
If a team was going to go to LA, it should have been the Cleveland Browns,

someone, anyone take em', the odds are they'll win a ring
 
DeathoftheEndless said:
Oakland and Cincinnati

I wish the Rams would have stayed in St. Louis. I think the fans there would care more than LA. And there are already 3 California teams.
Click to expand...

Case in point: I've lived in St. Louis for about 5 years. The Rams have never to my recollection been blacked out or even in threat of a blackout. Both the Raiders and Chargers have flirted with and played under local media blackouts.

It's no coincidence that the NFL lifted blackout restrictions for 2015 while contemplating this. They would have a harder sell if the team getting to move had a fanbase that sold out on Sundays while the two with "options" have been in blackout hell for years now.

Personally I didn't see any real future for the NFL here though, no matter how much money a team might make. The NFL doesn't like being second fiddle and in St. Louis no one tops the Cardinals. That chip on their shoulder was never going away.
 
The NFL is really horrible on how they handle stuff like this. St Louis not super huge like LA in terms of a media market, but it's still fairly big for the Midwest.
 
entremet said:
The NFL is really horrible on how they handle stuff like this. St Louis not super huge like LA in terms of a media market, but it's still fairly big for the Midwest.
Click to expand...

You kinda brought up exactly why they're allowing it. LA is a fucking massive market, even more so than anything St Louis could ever hope to do. Hell, they're allowing and wanting 2 teams in LA. Sucks for fans in St Louis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

King of the Hill returns 8/4 for a new season
2
69
1K
YCoCg replied
It's time to move away from Firefox (UP: Mozilla clarified the language in the ToS)
2
59
4K
mitch1971 replied
(The Boys) Gen V Season 2 Trailer
35
909
YCoCg replied
  • Poll
2024 MLB World Series: New York Yankees vs Los Angeles Dodgers
2 3 4
157
7K
diffusionx replied
The Rehearsal season 2 - April 20th.
34
1K
AJUMP23 replied
Top Bottom