- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,841
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
expect Rams to be back in LA next year.
- Thread starter LA RAM FAN
- Start date
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,842
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,844
The Rams didn't move due to the fans. That was Georgia's excuse and the false narrative perpetrated by St. Louis for the past 21 years. If you want the truth, you need look no further than the owners themselves, who rejected the Rams moving to St. Louis and believed, "Frontiere had all of the elements in place to succeed in the Los Angeles area and that the Rams were simply mismanaged."
Georgia stated everyone would be surprised at how well the Rams would do in the Mid-West. Well, time has shown that she was very, very wrong. She was woefully unqualified to run a franchise, borderline incompetent. Moving the Rams to St. Louis was yet another bad business decision and the results prove that. Kroenke took ownership with the Rams a mere shadow of their former self and with a three year record of 3-13, 2-14, 1-15, and bottom of the league attendance and revenue. Georgia was an utter disaster as an owner.
The Rams did not leave Los Angeles because of the fans. They left Los Angeles because the owner was an idiot.
Al Davis backed out of the deal at the last minute because he didn't want to share Hollywood Park with an eventual NFC team. He stole 10 million from the Hollywood Park deal and scored 30million in incentives to move back to Oakland with guaranteed PSL sellouts. Al Davis admitted he made a mistake later in an interview but he made the right choice going home.
Georgia stated everyone would be surprised at how well the Rams would do in the Mid-West. Well, time has shown that she was very, very wrong. She was woefully unqualified to run a franchise, borderline incompetent. Moving the Rams to St. Louis was yet another bad business decision and the results prove that. Kroenke took ownership with the Rams a mere shadow of their former self and with a three year record of 3-13, 2-14, 1-15, and bottom of the league attendance and revenue. Georgia was an utter disaster as an owner.
The Rams did not leave Los Angeles because of the fans. They left Los Angeles because the owner was an idiot.
Al Davis backed out of the deal at the last minute because he didn't want to share Hollywood Park with an eventual NFC team. He stole 10 million from the Hollywood Park deal and scored 30million in incentives to move back to Oakland with guaranteed PSL sellouts. Al Davis admitted he made a mistake later in an interview but he made the right choice going home.
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,847
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,848
Why the Raiders will not end up in San Diego:
For the last two weeks Vinny and Fred have been noting that if the Chargers do move to LA, the Raiders will "pounce" on San Diego because "they will kill" the market there (using Vinny's words) although I have tremendous respect to Fred and Vinny, I keep having a logistical and logical itch in that premies. In Houston the owners approved relocation of the Chargers and the conditional relocation of the Raiders with a $550 millionfee. According to Jason Cole, the Houston meetings were specific to LA and it doesn't provide an open range to the Raiders to move anywhere. In other words, the Raiders need to reapply for relocation with a new application/process. Let's look at the following:
1- we know how arduous NFL2LA was, do you think the owners have the stomach for a NFL2SD sequel?
2- it was noted that many owners were not in favor of the Raiders moving to LA, why would that be any different for SD?
3- it was also note that many owners are friendly to Spanos and relate to his stadium struggles. Why would they undermine his business practice especially with a division rival that will "kill" his old market there?
4- other owners (like Clark Hunt of KC) had reservations about two teams in LA right away shocking the LA market, why would such owners jeopardize their seeds in LA and favor three teams 125mi apart?
5- Mark Davis expectations for a stadium are much lower than that of Spano's, so is his pocket book value! so $100 million offered by the NFL to stay goes a long way for Davis in Oakland not to mention the $550million needed to move.
6- Qualcomm will not be refurbished (in case the Raiders are interested in that) because the city of San Diego has done studies showing it's a bad investment. So, considering that public funding for a new stadium for the Chargers with 55 year history there is getting 2/3 disapproval in the polls, what do you think a stadium for a division rival Raiders will get?
Although Raiders to San Diego makes a good Hollywood story of your ex buying your old house Spanos. Prior history and attitude by the NFL indicates otherwise.
Amy Trask said on the radio yesterday that even tho the raider brand is big that she thinks the raiders to SD is not a good idea . I'm so glad our relocation drama is over. Now we are just waiting to see what happens with the chargers
If you think back to how long Vinny was the MAIN guy to leverage Carson...and realize that now he's leveraging SD in just as obvious a way. That tells me that those two teams aren't finished squeezing their respective cities. Does Vinny have a hotline to Fabs, or what??
For the last two weeks Vinny and Fred have been noting that if the Chargers do move to LA, the Raiders will "pounce" on San Diego because "they will kill" the market there (using Vinny's words) although I have tremendous respect to Fred and Vinny, I keep having a logistical and logical itch in that premies. In Houston the owners approved relocation of the Chargers and the conditional relocation of the Raiders with a $550 millionfee. According to Jason Cole, the Houston meetings were specific to LA and it doesn't provide an open range to the Raiders to move anywhere. In other words, the Raiders need to reapply for relocation with a new application/process. Let's look at the following:
1- we know how arduous NFL2LA was, do you think the owners have the stomach for a NFL2SD sequel?
2- it was noted that many owners were not in favor of the Raiders moving to LA, why would that be any different for SD?
3- it was also note that many owners are friendly to Spanos and relate to his stadium struggles. Why would they undermine his business practice especially with a division rival that will "kill" his old market there?
4- other owners (like Clark Hunt of KC) had reservations about two teams in LA right away shocking the LA market, why would such owners jeopardize their seeds in LA and favor three teams 125mi apart?
5- Mark Davis expectations for a stadium are much lower than that of Spano's, so is his pocket book value! so $100 million offered by the NFL to stay goes a long way for Davis in Oakland not to mention the $550million needed to move.
6- Qualcomm will not be refurbished (in case the Raiders are interested in that) because the city of San Diego has done studies showing it's a bad investment. So, considering that public funding for a new stadium for the Chargers with 55 year history there is getting 2/3 disapproval in the polls, what do you think a stadium for a division rival Raiders will get?
Although Raiders to San Diego makes a good Hollywood story of your ex buying your old house Spanos. Prior history and attitude by the NFL indicates otherwise.
Amy Trask said on the radio yesterday that even tho the raider brand is big that she thinks the raiders to SD is not a good idea . I'm so glad our relocation drama is over. Now we are just waiting to see what happens with the chargers
If you think back to how long Vinny was the MAIN guy to leverage Carson...and realize that now he's leveraging SD in just as obvious a way. That tells me that those two teams aren't finished squeezing their respective cities. Does Vinny have a hotline to Fabs, or what??
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,850
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,851
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,852
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,853
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,855
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,856
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,857
comedy gold.lol
A man who can't move on... an epic butt hurt bonanza. Look at the bright side Shane, now you have all the time in the world to bench press 500lbs....
Gray: Dear Stan Kroenke (Part 2) > insideSTL.com - St. Louis Sports, Music, Entertainment and Nightlife > Rams
Chargers Staying in San Diego for 2016? From: Steve Hartman @cannonhartman High ranking Rams official says talks have stalled for a Chargers move to LA in 2016...most likely the Chargers staying in SD in 2016
A man who can't move on... an epic butt hurt bonanza. Look at the bright side Shane, now you have all the time in the world to bench press 500lbs....
Gray: Dear Stan Kroenke (Part 2) > insideSTL.com - St. Louis Sports, Music, Entertainment and Nightlife > Rams
Chargers Staying in San Diego for 2016? From: Steve Hartman @cannonhartman High ranking Rams official says talks have stalled for a Chargers move to LA in 2016...most likely the Chargers staying in SD in 2016
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,858
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,859
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,948
- 17,326
- 2,250
- Thread starter
- #2,860
Similar threads
- Replies
- 4
- Views
- 223
- Replies
- 14
- Views
- 1K
- Locked
- Replies
- 16
- Views
- 1K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 100
- Views
- 613
- Replies
- 69
- Views
- 421
- Replies
- 24
- Views
- 156
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8083
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 471
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-