expect Rams to be back in LA next year.

[mdk]

I guess I see it differently then you do. If a fan base of the city will not support the team then they team has a right to move to greener pastures. Even if the product is bad and the team is playing terribly a real fan attends those games regardless. I just recently watch the Pirates make the playoffs for two years in a row after a 20 year drought. I still put my butt in the stadium year despite the fact they didn't produce a winning record since I was in grammar school.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I guess I see it differently then you do. If a fan base of the city will not support the team then they team has a right to move to greener pastures. Even if the product is bad and the team is playing terribly a real fan attends those games regardless. I just recently watch the Pirates make the playoffs for two years in a row after a 20 year drought. I still put my butt in the stadium year despite the fact they didn't produce a winning record since I was in grammar school.

I guess I see it differently then you do. If a fan base of the city will not support the team then they team has a right to move to greener pastures. Even if the product is bad and the team is playing terribly a real fan attends those games regardless. I just recently watch the Pirates make the playoffs for two years in a row after a 20 year drought. I still put my butt in the stadium year despite the fact they didn't produce a winning record since I was in grammar school.

I guess I see it differently then you do. If a fan base of the city will not support the team then they team has a right to move to greener pastures. Even if the product is bad and the team is playing terribly a real fan attends those games regardless. I just recently watch the Pirates make the playoffs for two years in a row after a 20 year drought. I still put my butt in the stadium year despite the fact they didn't produce a winning record since I was in grammar school.

well no I agree with you there.I have done the same thing with the royals the past 20 years till they had only their fsecond winning record thepast 20 years before making it to the playoffs for the first tiem in 29 years this past year. but thorough the worst times,i always put my butt in the seats as well. all Im saying is thats just plain wrong for arizona to keep the cardinals there and not give the name back to saint louis cause again they stole something that did not belong to them.they can have another team but not the cardinals,thats just plain wrong for them to keep the team name there since it belongs to the cardinals and they stole it from them.

 

[mdk]

I guess I see it differently then you do. If a fan base of the city will not support the team then they team has a right to move to greener pastures. Even if the product is bad and the team is playing terribly a real fan attends those games regardless. I just recently watch the Pirates make the playoffs for two years in a row after a 20 year drought. I still put my butt in the stadium year despite the fact they didn't produce a winning record since I was in grammar school.

I guess I see it differently then you do. If a fan base of the city will not support the team then they team has a right to move to greener pastures. Even if the product is bad and the team is playing terribly a real fan attends those games regardless. I just recently watch the Pirates make the playoffs for two years in a row after a 20 year drought. I still put my butt in the stadium year despite the fact they didn't produce a winning record since I was in grammar school.

I guess I see it differently then you do. If a fan base of the city will not support the team then they team has a right to move to greener pastures. Even if the product is bad and the team is playing terribly a real fan attends those games regardless. I just recently watch the Pirates make the playoffs for two years in a row after a 20 year drought. I still put my butt in the stadium year despite the fact they didn't produce a winning record since I was in grammar school.

well no I agree with you there.I have done the same thing with the royals the past 20 years till they had only their fsecond winning record thepast 20 years before making it to the playoffs for the first tiem in 29 years this past year. but thorough the worst times,i always put my butt in the seats as well. all Im saying is thats just plain wrong for arizona to keep the cardinals there and not give the name back to saint louis cause again they stole something that did not belong to them.they can have another team but not the cardinals,thats just plain wrong for them to keep the team name there since it belongs to the cardinals and they stole it from them.

Arizona didn't steal anything. The city of St Louis and it's citizens do not own the brand, the NFL and the owner of the team owns the brand. It sucks but they are in the business of making money. Besides, using your thought process, the Cards brand would be owned by Chicago. St. Louis stole the team name from the Windy City.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I guess I see it differently then you do. If a fan base of the city will not support the team then they team has a right to move to greener pastures. Even if the product is bad and the team is playing terribly a real fan attends those games regardless. I just recently watch the Pirates make the playoffs for two years in a row after a 20 year drought. I still put my butt in the stadium year despite the fact they didn't produce a winning record since I was in grammar school.

I guess I see it differently then you do. If a fan base of the city will not support the team then they team has a right to move to greener pastures. Even if the product is bad and the team is playing terribly a real fan attends those games regardless. I just recently watch the Pirates make the playoffs for two years in a row after a 20 year drought. I still put my butt in the stadium year despite the fact they didn't produce a winning record since I was in grammar school.

I guess I see it differently then you do. If a fan base of the city will not support the team then they team has a right to move to greener pastures. Even if the product is bad and the team is playing terribly a real fan attends those games regardless. I just recently watch the Pirates make the playoffs for two years in a row after a 20 year drought. I still put my butt in the stadium year despite the fact they didn't produce a winning record since I was in grammar school.

well no I agree with you there.I have done the same thing with the royals the past 20 years till they had only their fsecond winning record thepast 20 years before making it to the playoffs for the first tiem in 29 years this past year. but thorough the worst times,i always put my butt in the seats as well. all Im saying is thats just plain wrong for arizona to keep the cardinals there and not give the name back to saint louis cause again they stole something that did not belong to them.they can have another team but not the cardinals,thats just plain wrong for them to keep the team name there since it belongs to the cardinals and they stole it from them.

Arizona didn't steal anything. The city of St Louis and it's citizens do not own the brand, the NFL and the owner of the team owns the brand. It sucks but they are in the business of making money. Besides, using your thought process, the Cards brand would be owned by Chicago. St. Louis stole the team name from the Windy City.

APPLES AND ORANGES.


maybe Arizona didn't steal it but that asshole Bill Bidwell did.He stole the cardinals from that city and their fans and should be put behind bars for it.Its a fucked up world he is not.

I am so glad the Rams are going back to where they belong because when those two teams played,it was tough for me to root for either one of them to win cause i hated them both since they were both thieves.Now it will be easy as pie to always root against the cardinals though since the Rams are going back to their rightful home where they belong and LA is taking back something that was stolen from them.

it wasn't stealing when the cards moved to saint louis though because chicago did not care since they had the Bears and that was where they put all their support behind which is why they left because just like the chargers could not compete with the Rams for fan support out in LA their first year in existance,the cards could not compete with the Bears for fan support either.

The Rams had excellent support out there in LA though so saint louis had no right taking them. Same thing with the chiefs,they were originally the dallas texans but only stayed in dallas a couple years moving to kansas city and becoming the chiefs cause they could not compete for fan support with the cowboys.

Saint Louis did not have another NFL team to cheer on when they lost the cardinals like chicago did when the cards left or dallas did when the chiefs moved to KC.Thats why I will laugh my ass off at the suffering of saint louis because they of all people, should know how it feels to lose something you care about taking the rams away from LA and embracing them.they never deserved them in the first place either cause the first four years there when they had losing seasons,that place was half empty all the time with horrible fan support.

btw,you never answered my question on am i right or am i right that had your steelers left pittsburgh 20 years ago to play in arizona and you knew they were coming back to pittsburgh next year,would you STILL not be in support of the NFL's decision to bring the steelers back to pittsburgh next year and would you STILL say that arizona should not have to give up their team name? I dont think so.

 

[Papageorgio]

Arizona didn't steal anything. The city of St Louis and it's citizens do not own the brand, the NFL and the owner of the team owns the brand. It sucks but they are in the business of making money. Besides, using your thought process, the Cards brand would be owned by Chicago. St. Louis stole the team name from the Windy City.

What I find amusing, under his own logic, the Rams really belong in Cleveland. That's where they were first founded and their first city.

My opinion, it sucks to lose a team, however it's an owners right to move a team.

 

[mdk]

Arizona didn't steal anything. The city of St Louis and it's citizens do not own the brand, the NFL and the owner of the team owns the brand. It sucks but they are in the business of making money. Besides, using your thought process, the Cards brand would be owned by Chicago. St. Louis stole the team name from the Windy City.

What I find amusing, under his own logic, the Rams really belong in Cleveland. That's where they were first founded and their first city.

My opinion, it sucks to lose a team, however it's an owners right to move a team.

This pretty much sums up my view on the matter rather nicely.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Arizona didn't steal anything. The city of St Louis and it's citizens do not own the brand, the NFL and the owner of the team owns the brand. It sucks but they are in the business of making money. Besides, using your thought process, the Cards brand would be owned by Chicago. St. Louis stole the team name from the Windy City.

What I find amusing, under his own logic, the Rams really belong in Cleveland. That's where they were first founded and their first city.

My opinion, it sucks to lose a team, however it's an owners right to move a team.

This pretty much sums up my view on the matter rather nicely.

so I assume I am wrong and you would actually not want the steelers returned back to you where they rightfully belong from arizona? seriously? thats what i gathered foem your previous post and since you didnt answer the question.

 

[Papageorgio]

Arizona didn't steal anything. The city of St Louis and it's citizens do not own the brand, the NFL and the owner of the team owns the brand. It sucks but they are in the business of making money. Besides, using your thought process, the Cards brand would be owned by Chicago. St. Louis stole the team name from the Windy City.

What I find amusing, under his own logic, the Rams really belong in Cleveland. That's where they were first founded and their first city.

My opinion, it sucks to lose a team, however it's an owners right to move a team.

This pretty much sums up my view on the matter rather nicely.

so I assume I am wrong and you would actually not want the steelers returned back to you where they rightfully belong from arizona? seriously? thats what i gathered foem your previous post and since you didnt answer the question.

Steelers are originally from Pittsburgh, Art Rooney started them there in 1933.

 

[mdk]

Arizona didn't steal anything. The city of St Louis and it's citizens do not own the brand, the NFL and the owner of the team owns the brand. It sucks but they are in the business of making money. Besides, using your thought process, the Cards brand would be owned by Chicago. St. Louis stole the team name from the Windy City.

What I find amusing, under his own logic, the Rams really belong in Cleveland. That's where they were first founded and their first city.

My opinion, it sucks to lose a team, however it's an owners right to move a team.

This pretty much sums up my view on the matter rather nicely.

so I assume I am wrong and you would actually not want the steelers returned back to you where they rightfully belong from arizona? seriously? thats what i gathered foem your previous post and since you didnt answer the question.

My fan base has supported the team and filled the stadiums even when the team stunk up the place. I am not too worried about the Steelers every leaving my city so the questions is silly. The surest way to keep a team is to not be fair weather fans because the NFL/owners own the brand and not the city and its people.

 

[Papageorgio]

Arizona didn't steal anything. The city of St Louis and it's citizens do not own the brand, the NFL and the owner of the team owns the brand. It sucks but they are in the business of making money. Besides, using your thought process, the Cards brand would be owned by Chicago. St. Louis stole the team name from the Windy City.

What I find amusing, under his own logic, the Rams really belong in Cleveland. That's where they were first founded and their first city.

My opinion, it sucks to lose a team, however it's an owners right to move a team.

This pretty much sums up my view on the matter rather nicely.

so I assume I am wrong and you would actually not want the steelers returned back to you where they rightfully belong from arizona? seriously? thats what i gathered foem your previous post and since you didnt answer the question.

My fan base has supported the team and filled the stadiums even when the team stunk up the place. I am not too worried about the Steelers every leaving my city so the questions is silly. The surest way to keep a team is to not be fair weather fans because the NFL/owners own the brand and not the city and its people.

Thanks that makes sense now, thanks.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Arizona didn't steal anything. The city of St Louis and it's citizens do not own the brand, the NFL and the owner of the team owns the brand. It sucks but they are in the business of making money. Besides, using your thought process, the Cards brand would be owned by Chicago. St. Louis stole the team name from the Windy City.

What I find amusing, under his own logic, the Rams really belong in Cleveland. That's where they were first founded and their first city.

My opinion, it sucks to lose a team, however it's an owners right to move a team.

This pretty much sums up my view on the matter rather nicely.

so I assume I am wrong and you would actually not want the steelers returned back to you where they rightfully belong from arizona? seriously? thats what i gathered foem your previous post and since you didnt answer the question.

My fan base has supported the team and filled the stadiums even when the team stunk up the place. I am not too worried about the Steelers every leaving my city so the questions is silly. The surest way to keep a team is to not be fair weather fans because the NFL/owners own the brand and not the city and its people.

No its not silly at all in the fact that the Raiders,Colts, Rams,Browns and Oilers were all packing their stadiums selling out all their games as well before those A hole owners gave the fans the middle finger and left for another city so its a VERY relevent question that Im going to ask one more time which is-

-If Art Rooney wasnt the class guy that he is and was a jerk like those A hole owners all were and moved them to arizona 20 years ago despite the great turnouts from the crowds they were having because he wasnt able to get a new stadium like he wanted and was about to move them back next year to pittsburgh,would you STILL be saying that arizona shouldnt have to give up their name?

simple yes or no question.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

some people in saint louis are starting to see the light.

St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke buys 60 acres of land in Los Angeles - ESPN Los Angeles

 

[LA RAM FAN]

St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke buys 60 acres of land in Los Angeles - ESPN Los Angeles

Kroenke has not publicly discussed the stadium situation.

Gee I wonder why? lol.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

some people in saint louis are starting to see the light.

Burwell Kroenke ups the stadium ante Sports

 

[LA RAM FAN]

berine thinks saint louis aint got a thing to worry about.

Bernie video Rams owner buys land in LA Sports

 

[LA RAM FAN]

they said :silent stan" would build his own stadium in STL.it seems they were half right.he might build his own in LA.

Rams owner 8220 Silent Stan 8221 Kroenke finally raises his voice On Any Given Sports Day

 

[LA RAM FAN]

wow,very interesting,the patriots were going to bolt to saint Louis which is why all those seats in the dome are read instead of blue.

St. Louis Admit it. You 8217 re worried about the 8220 L.A. 8221 Rams. On Any Given Sports Day

 

[LA RAM FAN]

when asked about stan kroneke's land purchase STL mayor francis slay replied-"It got our attention,dont know what it means and I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens."

NFL commissioner Mayor Slay weigh in on future of Rams KMOV.com St. Louis

 

[LA RAM FAN]

EPSN sports nation poll today "which city would be a better home for the Rams?" the people have spoken.

ESPN Sports Nation Poll today... Which... - Bring Back the Los Angeles Rams Facebook

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Rams fans "In saint Louis " wont want to hear it,but they are the most likely franchise to relocate to southern California. Kroenke may be explosring the notion.And if he is,its a good thing for the NFL.The league is the most popular sport in the country and tapping into the Los Angeles market will generate instant exposure and revenue.

Goodell responds to L.A. Rams rumors Q