Looks like LA is a go...

[Rambunctious]

I think what we have now is a high stakes game of poker amongst billionaires to see who is going to blink first.

I agree the Chargers have been trying to build a fan base throughout Southern California with the help of the networks for decades with not much success. If they move to Los Angeles they will still be viewed by LA Fans as the San Diego Chargers...it just will not work. The Raiders have been in LA and won a Super Bowl there but they still moved back home because of too many empty seats at the coliseum. The Rams make the most sense to me to be the team that will be the best fit for LA.

 

[ksudodger]

The Rams make the most sense to me to be the team that will be the best fit for LA.

You mean the team that could not fill Anaheim Stadium for years?? If you use that argument on the Raiders, it HAS to apply to the Rams as well. You are trying to make a square peg fit in a round hole because of your love of your city. However, your city has not loved your team. From 1985-1994, they were in the bottom 25% of attendance in the NFL. That is before Caroll died and before Georgia squawked about moving.

 

[Rambunctious]

You mean the team that could not fill Anaheim Stadium for years?? If you use that argument on the Raiders, it HAS to apply to the Rams as well. You are trying to make a square peg fit in a round hole because of your love of your city. However, your city has not loved your team. From 1985-1994, they were in the bottom 25% of attendance in the NFL. That is before Caroll died and before Georgia squawked about moving.

I'm not sure where you get your stats but the Rams filled the LA coliseum during the Robinson/Jim Everett era just fine. They did lose fans to the LA Raiders when they moved to Anaheim and the Raiders won a SB their first season in LA. Of course as the Rams struggled to win they lost support just like any other team. I lived in LA at the time and I remember no one wanted to attend a football game at a ball park. Anaheim stadium sucked back then and remember; the rumors of a move to St Louis started years before the Rams left. That didn't win them any new fans, especially when the Raiders still played in LA. A team needs to win to win the support of any city but if the NFL thinks LA will be satisfied with a hand me down team they are mistaken.

 

[shopson67]

The Rams make the most sense to me to be the team that will be the best fit for LA.

You mean the team that could not fill Anaheim Stadium for years?? If you use that argument on the Raiders, it HAS to apply to the Rams as well. You are trying to make a square peg fit in a round hole because of your love of your city. However, your city has not loved your team. From 1985-1994, they were in the bottom 25% of attendance in the NFL. That is before Caroll died and before Georgia squawked about moving.

There is a big difference though. The Rams had a long history with LA, whereas the Raiders were just flirting with LA to get what they wanted out of Oakland.

 

[Rambunctious]

For what it's worth, one way or the other, Here is the latest: New NFL stadium in St. Louis, Los Angeles for Rams, Raiders, Chargers? | The MMQB with Peter King

Quote..."Potential end game: Rams move to Los Angeles. Chargers can’t get a deal done in San Diego and join them in Inglewood. And by 2019, Derek Carr will be the quarterback of your St. Louis Raiders."

 

[ksudodger]

They did lose fans to the LA Raiders when they moved to Anaheim and the Raiders won a SB their first season in LA. Of course as the Rams struggled to win they lost support just like any other team. I lived in LA at the time and I remember no one wanted to attend a football game at a ball park. Anaheim stadium sucked back then and remember; the rumors of a move to St Louis started years before the Rams left.

I lived there too.. I was in fact a season ticket holder (well my parents were). I went to MANY games during my elementary school years (78-81) where the stadium was half full. And it got worse in Anaheim, like you said. Granted, alot of what happened in Anaheim was on Georgia, but still. I can guarantee you will see the Dome at 85 to 86% like it was last year for EVERY game this season, lame duck or not.

 

[ksudodger]

Also. Georgia tried to get a new stadium in Los Angeles in 1991 and the city shot her down. Is that her fault?

 

[Retroram52]

Well stated arguments gentleman. I am not quite sure why this progression has gotten so muddled all of a sudden. If Kroneke is going to sell the Rams, perhaps he should do it and get that item settled. He can then pursue the Broncos and the ownership in St Louis can keep the team there. If Kroneke retains ownership, make it known that he is moving. Dragging this thing out is only going to kill the momentum for the team going into the 2015 season but I suppose this is what owners do and so doing display their real intentions to the fans and the players.

 

[shopson67]

They did lose fans to the LA Raiders when they moved to Anaheim and the Raiders won a SB their first season in LA. Of course as the Rams struggled to win they lost support just like any other team. I lived in LA at the time and I remember no one wanted to attend a football game at a ball park. Anaheim stadium sucked back then and remember; the rumors of a move to St Louis started years before the Rams left.

I lived there too.. I was in fact a season ticket holder (well my parents were). I went to MANY games during my elementary school years (78-81) where the stadium was half full. And it got worse in Anaheim, like you said. Granted, alot of what happened in Anaheim was on Georgia, but still. I can guarantee you will see the Dome at 85 to 86% like it was last year for EVERY game this season, lame duck or not.

That 86% was last in the league, not exactly impressive. They were 8th in road attendance however (but the majority of that had to do with the fanbases of their opponents, of course). Their home % was so poor that it still had them at the bottom of the league in overall attendance.

The LA Rams bottomed out for attendance in 91-94, after Georgia started working for a new stadium. In the 78-81 years you noted, the Rams were 14th, 17th, 8th, and 11th out of 28 teams in attendance.

 

[Rambunctious]

Also. Georgia tried to get a new stadium in Los Angeles in 1991 and the city shot her down. Is that her fault?

No it wasn't her fault...the city leaders back then never imagined the Rams actually leaving thus they shot the team down every step of the way. The city was as usual running a deficit with no desire on behalf of the citizens for a tax hike. I know there were some bleak years for ticket sales but not when they were winning. I remember the season the Rams went to the NFC championship against the Vikings; the year was 76 or 77 my dad took me to a mid season game that year and the place was packed full. It's all about winning. Win and they will come. What Stan knows is that just the re appearance of the Rams back in LA with a state of the art stadium would bring them mega ticket sales regardless of wins and losses. For a few seasons anyway...

 

[Vitamike]

That 86% was last in the league, not exactly impressive. They were 8th in road attendance however (but the majority of that had to do with the fanbases of their opponents, of course). Their home % was so poor that it still had them at the bottom of the league in overall attendance.

The LA Rams bottomed out for attendance in 91-94, after Georgia started working for a new stadium. In the 78-81 years you noted, the Rams were 14th, 17th, 8th, and 11th out of 28 teams in attendance.

I'd say...

St Louis Rams Attendance... EJD Capacity 66,000

• 2014 31/32 86.4%
• 2013 31/32 87.2%
• 2012 30/32 86.8%
• 2011 31/32 86.3%
• 2010 30/31 81.0%
• 2009 29/32 84.6%

 

[Vitamike]

Of the 49 years in Los Angeles, the Rams were in the bottom half of the league only 11 times.

 

[ksudodger]

That 86% was last in the league, not exactly impressive.

Actually 29th out of 32, but I get your point. They have not drawn well for a while

 

[shopson67]

That 86% was last in the league, not exactly impressive.

Actually 29th out of 32, but I get your point. They have not drawn well for a while

2014 NFL Football Attendance - National Football League - ESPN

Listed as 30th, but only because they screwed up the Vikings and 49ers numbers. 49ers definitely sold a greater percentage of their seats, not sure about the Vikes.

 

[UVA_Guy81]

Well stated arguments gentleman. I am not quite sure why this progression has gotten so muddled all of a sudden. If Kroneke is going to sell the Rams, perhaps he should do it and get that item settled. He can then pursue the Broncos and the ownership in St Louis can keep the team there. If Kroneke retains ownership, make it known that he is moving. Dragging this thing out is only going to kill the momentum for the team going into the 2015 season but I suppose this is what owners do and so doing display their real intentions to the fans and the players.

Theoretically, if he does make a bid and does buy the Broncos, who all would be on the short list to purchase the Rams? I'd say Rush Limbaugh but I remember how much a lot of the players and fans disliked that so I wouldn't expect that to happen.

 

[Vitamike]

Theoretically, if he does make a bid and does buy the Broncos, who all would be on the short list to purchase the Rams? I'd say Rush Limbaugh but I remember how much a lot of the players and fans disliked that so I wouldn't expect that to happen.

I'd like to see the Guggenheim Partners take a stab at it!!

 

[Rambunctious]

I know some here hate Limbaugh's politics, that goes without saying but I bet the Rams would look completely different today if he had purchased the team. All of this LA talk would not be going on because Rush is from Cape Girardeau. He's a home town boy....

 

[mutigers1fan]

I you look at wins in the last 10 years I bet the Rams are #32 though. Winning would help attendance.

I wonder how much the tax exempt status of the NFL affects this. CA taxes are certainly greater than MO taxes.

 

[shopson67]

I you look at wins in the last 10 years I bet the Rams are #32 though. Winning would help attendance.

I wonder how much the tax exempt status of the NFL affects this. CA taxes are certainly greater than MO taxes.

To the 225th richest man?

 

[mutigers1fan]

To the 225th richest man?

Kroenke is a cheap guy.