expect Rams to be back in LA next year.

The NFL is looking to build an NFL stadium in Los Angeles, move the Pro-Bowl to Los Angeles, hold the NFL draft in Los Angeles and host a few Super Bowls in Los Angeles. So there is a lot of potential to have a first class stadium and celeb and star power to make it all viable. The Rams and the Raiders are the two lowest valued franchises in the NFL, either or both would double their value by moving to Los Angeles, also LA could support two teams the surrounding area is large enough,. The Raiders have said they will not play another year in the Coliseum, so that is no longer an option, they could share Levi Stadium with the 49ers. Jerry Jones has taken Mark Davis under his wing and as the most influential owner in the NFL, he is pushing for an LA team as he feels it would further streghten the NFL.

So I think the possibility of two teams in LA by next year is a real possibility.
 
If LA has enough fans to have a team, what is stopping them? Does St. Louis have to lose their team for LA to get one? LA clearly is a city that should have a team. Maybe if a new team comes in, one has to go?

Is there another city in America that could/should have a team? That way MO doesn't have to suffer.
 
I know why...or at least I have a theory why attendance is down in St Louis.

Their #1 QB is out for the season and it is obvious they will suck because of that.

Maybe they would have more fans show up if they didn't have such bad luck with injuries.

The same thing could be applied to last season because Bradford was injured..and they did suck.. well not entirely...but they did lose Bradford and as a result lost more games than they would have if he had remained healthy.
 
I know why...or at least I have a theory why attendance is down in St Louis.

Their #1 QB is out for the season and it is obvious they will suck because of that.

Maybe they would have more fans show up if they didn't have such bad luck with injuries.

The same thing could be applied to last season because Bradford was injured..and they did suck.. well not entirely...but they did lose Bradford and as a result lost more games than they would have if he had remained healthy.

As a Lion fan, we only give up when there is no hope. Remember the year we lost every game? Yea, we gave up that year.

In fact, I gave up on the Lions (Schwartz) with 3 games left in the regular season. All they had to do was win 1 and they would have made the playoffs. If you forgot, the Bears and GB did everything they could to give the Lions a spot in the playoffs, and the Lions could not take it. I knew they would blow it.

But the stadium was packed. I still watched and there was still hope. I just wanted us to lose to get rid of Schwartz. He was clearly a loser. So who cares if we make the playoffs and lose first round and he keeps his job? No way. We're much better off now.

If I were you, I'd hope that the 2nd string QB proves to be a good QB. This is his chance. Maybe you should get Tebo. That'll get attendance up.
 
"If I were you, I'd hope that the 2nd string QB proves to be a good QB. This is his chance. Maybe you should get Tebo. That'll get attendance up."

HUH?

But you are not me and Russell Wilson plays smart ...slides and stuff...gets out of bounds.

Tebow couldn't play in Seattle...he would be laughed off the field with/for all his religious antics.

We ain't exactly the buckle of the bible belt up here.
 
"If I were you, I'd hope that the 2nd string QB proves to be a good QB. This is his chance. Maybe you should get Tebo. That'll get attendance up."

HUH?

But you are not me and Russell Wilson plays smart ...slides and stuff...gets out of bounds.

Tebow couldn't play in Seattle...he would be laughed off the field with/for all his religious antics.

We ain't exactly the buckle of the bible belt up here.

I'm talking about him going to the Rams. Seattle isn't religious? That's encouraging.
 
"If I were you, I'd hope that the 2nd string QB proves to be a good QB. This is his chance. Maybe you should get Tebo. That'll get attendance up."

HUH?

But you are not me and Russell Wilson plays smart ...slides and stuff...gets out of bounds.

Tebow couldn't play in Seattle...he would be laughed off the field with/for all his religious antics.

We ain't exactly the buckle of the bible belt up here.

I'm talking about him going to the Rams. Seattle isn't religious? That's encouraging.

Oh...we have OUR religious but they are not the bible thumpers like in many other parts of the country.

Russell Wilson "thanks his lord" a lot but it's not all up in our faces like Tebow. When he refers to "his father" he is actually talking about his biological dad.

Here we respect the right to believe or to NOT believe in somebody's personal choices.
 
The NFL is looking to build an NFL stadium in Los Angeles, move the Pro-Bowl to Los Angeles, hold the NFL draft in Los Angeles and host a few Super Bowls in Los Angeles. So there is a lot of potential to have a first class stadium and celeb and star power to make it all viable. The Rams and the Raiders are the two lowest valued franchises in the NFL, either or both would double their value by moving to Los Angeles, also LA could support two teams the surrounding area is large enough,. The Raiders have said they will not play another year in the Coliseum, so that is no longer an option, they could share Levi Stadium with the 49ers. Jerry Jones has taken Mark Davis under his wing and as the most influential owner in the NFL, he is pushing for an LA team as he feels it would further streghten the NFL.

So I think the possibility of two teams in LA by next year is a real possibility.

Im glad to see you have a grasp of this situation and understand whats happening.You are far more aware of the facts here than most the posters that have been naysayers that have come on here refusing to look at the other side of the coin have been.:thup: you HAVE taken the time to look at the other side of the coin,thanks for doing that.

the Raiders will play another year or two in their current stadium if they get a deal and plan laid out for a new stadium which they are very close to getting .I posted a link of that on the previous page and on another thread i made as well.

as far as levi stadium goes,Davis has already said he wont share the stadium with them so unless he changes his mind,thats not happening. The raiders wont be moving back to LA.he wont share a stadium with the 49ers so forget it that he will share a stadium with stan kronke.

The raiders are out of the picture for LA because the majority of the owners dont want them there and you have to get approval from them for the move.plus the city doesnt want them there as well so thats not happening.thats why he recently visited san antonio to talk to the city officials about possibly moving there.He was using that as leverage and it looks like it got the attention of oakland in the fact they are very close to a deal for a new stadium.

He had to use san antonio as leverage to get oakland to take him seriously because he knows they know he cant move back to LA.

the rumor in NFL circles is that they want two teams there.another from the AFC but it looks like it will be just the rams though with the new sale of the bills and the chargers are also apparently are in the works in getting a new deal for a new stadium as well.I thought they might be joing the rams there but that doesnt look like its going to hapepn for them.the chargers and the raiders have all kinds of hurdles they have to clear to relocate that the rams dont so thats what is unique about the rams situation.
 
After the riots in St Louis, companies, residents & the team are now far more likely to leave.
NOW your catching on.:biggrin: yeah they are going to leave and follow the Rams to LA.:biggrin:

seriously,expect that to happen.My buddies out in LA tell me there are saint louis people out there in droves lately more so than usual since last summer,inquiring about purchasing homes out there.the football fans in saint louis are getting very worried out there.IF there was nothing to it,they wouldnt be so worried out there like they are.:lol:
 
I can understand the skeptisem of people here because of LA's past fauiles.but again that was the past,this is the present.This below is why this time is different.anybody ever hear of the book THAT WAS THEN,THIS IS NOW. it holds so true right now.

The stadium proposals are just talk, they will fail just like all the others.
There is a lot of skepticism out there concerning the return of the NFL to Los Angeles, and rightly so; there have been many failed proposals in the last 15 years concerning a new football stadium. There have been proposals in Anaheim, Carson, Irwindale, Inglewood, the Coliseum site, and downtown. What makes these two proposals different? The players involved. Both Majestic Realty and AEG have a track record of making things happen in Southern California and to doubt either of them would be a large mistake. In the end, however, only one of the two stadium proposals will end up being built, but thanks to the players involved, the best plan will be the eventual winner and Southern California (and the Rams) will be better off because of it.
 
as everyone can see below,the raiders were never embraced in LA.the Rams were.so contrary to what demise LA RAIDER fans want to believe,The Raiders would not be welcomed back by many folks in LA.

Los Angeles is a Raiders town, they would be a better fit in L.A.
This could not be a bigger lie. During their short stint in Los Angeles, the Raiders were the distant second team to the Rams. Even after winning the Super Bowl in the City of Angels, the Raiders could not draw well because no one was going to abandon their Rams and join up with the infamous "Raider Nation." The Raiders would often average crowds in the low 40,000s only reaching the 80,000/90,000 mark when visiting teams like the 49ers, Chargers, and Rams and their fans came to the Coliseum. During those games, at least half of the fans were cheering for the "visiting" team. The NFL tried to stop the Raiders from moving, but it was impossible to stop Al Davis. The silver and black never belonged in Los Angeles and the fans here do not want that team to bring its owner and all of its problems to Southern California. Also, the Raiders DO NOT still own the Los Angeles market no matter what the Raiders organization tries to say.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: Kat
The Rams never had a decent following in Los Angeles/Anaheim. (Top)
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 the City of Angels. 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. The Rams were at one point the pride and joy of Los Angeles and they had a very large following both when they played at the Coliseum

that is ALSO backed up by al michaels which i already posted this before below.



in commenting further on this video of michaels,he was recently on ESPN being interviewed and asked the question about a team being in LA in the next couple years and guess what? he ONLY mentioned the Rams,nobody else.as i said before,this is common knowledge around the country its going to happen.

just as it was common knowledge around the country in 95 in the prior months before the raiders moved back to oakland that it was going to happen.same thing happening all over again.

so much for the myth that LA never supported the Rams.again i got friends out there,i know better,cant fool me.

in fact without bragging,I have contacts in both LA and in saint louis,so you guys arent ready for the big leagues with me.you cant stand toe to toe in this discussion.you have no answes for any of the facts on how gloomy the situation in saint louis is.
 
Last edited:
  • Thanks
Reactions: Kat
If LA has enough fans to have a team, what is stopping them? Does St. Louis have to lose their team for LA to get one? LA clearly is a city that should have a team. Maybe if a new team comes in, one has to go?

Is there another city in America that could/should have a team? That way MO doesn't have to suffer.
Remember oakland a much smaller market was without a team for 13 years as well. LA has been looking for the right situation,they dont want just any team.The rams unlike the raiders or even chargers,are the right fit for the situation. the NFL has said in the last couple years the new team they want,they dont want an expansion team,so that leaves the raiders,chargers,and rams in the mix.

again both the raiders and chargers are in negotions with their city for a new stadium,they have all kinds of hurdles they ahve to clear being they can even consider the move.the rams do not.saint louis clearly has no passion for football,that was why the cardinals left in the first place.they come back to LA.all that changes as I just proved in my presvious posts.

and they have to wait till AFTER this season is over before they can leave.they already got one foot out the door in saint louis.


matter of fact the ONLY time i would say a team was justified in leaving was when the cardinals left saint louis.that was why the cardinals left in the first place is because the city doesnt support football out there.its a baseball and hockey town but they have NO PASSION for football whatsoever.I think its a shame they had to lose the cardinals.

i always liked it that they had two sports teams named the same name,but the football fans brought it on themselves being the fair weather fans they are.

thats WHY they are about to lose THE RAMS as well.saint louis doesnt want them.LA "does." they have such passion for their team out there they dont care if they go 0-16 like your Lions did which I would not put it past this rams team being the first Rams team to accomplish that feat the fact they are down to their third string quarterback now.
 
Last edited:
this is why the raiders need to stay in oakland,their fans have passion for that team,yo move them to another city,you wont see this same kind of passion.there was none in LA. would be same anywhere else as al davis found out.

LA has the SAME passion for their RAMS that there is NONE in saint louis.they come back to LA and the place will packed as well like it always was.

saint louis doe not care about that team one bit at all.

Raiders sell out home opener vs Texans televised locally - Silver And Black Pride
 
:rofl:Look at all that excellent fan support they have in saint louis and no,this isnt a pre season game.thats what ALL their games look like.:rofl:

Bring Back the Los Angeles Rams - Los Angeles CA - Sports Team Facebook

they stopped zooming in on the upper decks and started sealing it off making the stadium really dark not too long after that so the NFL could avoid that embarrassement of showing all those empty seats in the upper level. :rofl: anybody who watched their home opener against the vikings noticed that the dome was so dark there were nobody in the upper levels.

heck even the LOWER level seats are half empty as seen in this photo.:rofl:
I guarantee the rams have a deal cut with the NFL to inflate their attendance numbers.the announced attendance in the papers said 55,000 but i can tell you from watching the game last week thats bullshit.anybody who saw that game said the same thing i did that their was no more than 30,000 fans in that place and the majority were viking fans.

heck if not for the viking fans showing up,that pklace would average no more than 10,000 fans there.
 
Last edited:
Raiders Reportedly Close to New Stadium Deal in Oakland
Brendan Marks posted on September 03, 2014 10:17
350_EdJones_Cash.jpg
The NFL has made known its desire to eventually have a team in Los Angeles, the country's second largest market.

And along with the St. Louis Rams, a couple teams always seem to be mentioned when talking what franchises would or could relocate to the City of Angels.

One of them is the Oakland Raiders. But according to the San Francisco Chronicle, the Raiders have reached a tentative agreement on the contruction of a new stadium.

The report says Raiders owner Mark Davis has the power to give the thumbs up or thumbs down to proceed with the plan.

Related: Thomas Says 'Needle has moved' regarding Rams in St. Louis

The news won't be taken as a positive for Rams fans.
The Rams’ lease with the Edward Jones Dome ends after the upcoming season, and the topic of the team’s future in St. Louis will soon be back at the forefront.

The general consensus is the team will go one of two ways: stay in St. Louis and play in a newly-built stadium or relocate to Los Angeles.

And with the Raiders seemingly off the market, the chances of the Rams relocating has by all appearances gone up.
 
There is absolutely zero chance of a new stadium in St Louis but it goes beyond that. The Rams are ranked 32 out of 32 teams in franchise value in the league. Do you really believe Kroenke is happy with that and isn't ready to move to LA right now?
 
this is WHY the raiders will never be allowed back into LA again.

The Los Angeles Raiders 8211 ENOUGH ALREADY

ANYBODY BUT THE RAIDERS… – Mention the Raiders to Angelenos, and the reactions are usually ones of rapidly shaking heads, sour grimaces, and eye rolling. “Not the Raiders!” “Anyone but the Raiders!” Speaking to LAPD cops recently at USC’s spring game, a veteran of the force said emphatically, “I’ll retire before I ever patrol another Raider game!”
Instead of the outlaw brand that they had inherited from their days in Oakland, by the late 1980’s, the classic Silver and Black was now the preferred apparel worn prominently by gang members in Southern California. Raider games at the Coliseum were often the site of brawls within the crowd. This infamously carried over to Anaheim Stadium in a 1994 game when the Rams and Raiders faced off in their final ‘Battle of Los Angeles.’
must see video.
 

Forum List

Back
Top