5fishlimit Posted January 13, 2016 Posted January 13, 2016 Bad decision. It failed once, and I believe it will fail again. It's sad that the owner couldn't work something out with St. Louis. Having lived through the Browns moving to Baltimore I feel for the city. What say you Bass Resource? Quote
Fentawn Posted January 13, 2016 Posted January 13, 2016 I don't get it. St. Louis has some of the best fans in the country. A lot of markets, including my own, are band wagon fans. I feel for St. Louis football fans 1 Quote
Hurricane Posted January 13, 2016 Posted January 13, 2016 Could of been my Bills... Thanks again for Pegula buying them.. 1 Quote
Super User BrianinMD Posted January 13, 2016 Super User Posted January 13, 2016 Keep seeing the information on all the teams that were there and left. Makes me wonder why any team would go back. Even this morning they were talking about how if they do not start winning in 2-3 years the fans will stop going to the games. Not exactly a good setup for business. 2 Quote
Super User HoosierHawgs Posted January 13, 2016 Super User Posted January 13, 2016 47 minutes ago, BrianinMD said: Keep seeing the information on all the teams that were there and left. Makes me wonder why any team would go back. Even this morning they were talking about how if they do not start winning in 2-3 years the fans will stop going to the games. Not exactly a good setup for business. Kinda like Jacksonville. Real surprised they didn't move. Jacksonville just can't support a football team, as sad as it is to say, because most of my family is from Jax. Quote
spartyon8 Posted January 13, 2016 Posted January 13, 2016 Wasn't there a big issue with the venue in St. Louis though? I thought they had a plethora of issues related to the turf and sidelines that was refused to fix. Plus, baseball is king there with hockey doing well also. Quote
Super User buzzed bait Posted January 13, 2016 Super User Posted January 13, 2016 given that LA is the 2nd biggest TV market, i can't believe it's taken this long for someone to get back there... It's all about the money.... 1 Quote
Super User roadwarrior Posted January 13, 2016 Super User Posted January 13, 2016 The NFL has used the L.A. vacancy to leverage every franchise and force NFL cities to build or dramatically improve every stadium in the league. 1 Quote
5fishlimit Posted January 13, 2016 Author Posted January 13, 2016 1 hour ago, spartyon8 said: Wasn't there a big issue with the venue in St. Louis though? I thought they had a plethora of issues related to the turf and sidelines that was refused to fix. Plus, baseball is king there with hockey doing well also. There is an issue with the stadium, but the city/state/county I believe had promised to put up something like $450 million dollars to help build a new one. Like somebody else already mentioned if they don't start winning in 2 to 3 years the people will stop going. There's so much else going on in the area that the people will not go just for the sake of going. 1 Quote
Super User BrianinMD Posted January 13, 2016 Super User Posted January 13, 2016 And the "issue" with the stadium was brought up by the owner in his papers to the NFL trying to justify moving the team. Does not exactly give it much credibility when the $450 million dollars was set aside by the city. Quote
boydn1 Posted January 13, 2016 Posted January 13, 2016 Full stadiums for a losing team, $450 mil from the city. Owner just wanted out of St Louis. 1 Quote
Super User Raul Posted January 13, 2016 Super User Posted January 13, 2016 So now St Louis has no NFL team. Quote
Super User F14A-B Posted January 13, 2016 Super User Posted January 13, 2016 Riots in Ferguson or Watts. Either way, the Rams suck..wherever they are. Quote
Global Moderator Mike L Posted January 13, 2016 Global Moderator Posted January 13, 2016 Do you guy's think for one second this would happen in...Chicago?, Washington?, Pittsburgh? Or even that team from Wisconsin? Not a chance. Those people would take a flame thrower to that stadium. Why did this happen? St.Louis couldn't or wouldn't guarantee the money the owner wanted. And with no guarantee he knows that with a fan base 4-5 times the size he will get what he deems he needs without one. He doesn't personally need the money, he's married to a Walton for crying out loud! So was it really about the money?? No, in my opinion it is all about exposure. .The NFL brass just couldn't take it anymore not having a franchise in the 2nd largest market. That's been an open sore for them since the Raiders left. So now they found the right combination of factors and now LA gets another one..Yeah I know the Rams started in LA, So what? There's no loyalty from the team to a fan base or to a city for that matter, no matter what they say. What about the guy who sells the popcorn? or takes the tickets? What about them? The Rams have had 4 winning seasons since 1990!! And those people sitill showed up and supported that team. Nobody cares..Nobody cares. And No I am not a St Louis fan, I'm a Bear fan..Born and bred Ok rant over Mike 1 Quote
Super User Sam Posted January 13, 2016 Super User Posted January 13, 2016 I never liked the St. Louis Rams. I always liked the Los Angles Rams. Wish the NFL would allow the cities to retain the team's nicknames. Baltimore Colts; Houston Oilers; any others?????? 1 Quote
Dypsis Posted January 13, 2016 Posted January 13, 2016 1 minute ago, Sam said: I never liked the St. Louis Rams. I always liked the Los Angles Rams. Wish the NFL would allow the cities to retain the team's nicknames. Baltimore Colts; Houston Oilers; any others?????? Houston Oliers was always a favorite team name of mine. 1 Quote
mrmacwvu1 Posted January 13, 2016 Posted January 13, 2016 well they only had 4 winning seasons in 21 years they have not made the playoffs in 11 years the only time they were relevant was when they found a QB bagging groceries and caught lightning in a bottle Quote
Jd_Phillips_Fishin Posted January 13, 2016 Posted January 13, 2016 I agree with Sam, St Louis Rams doesn't sound as good as L A Rams. And it always bothered me that a team that was to the East of 4 other teams not in there division was considered Western. Quote
5fishlimit Posted January 13, 2016 Author Posted January 13, 2016 3 hours ago, Mike L said: I'm a Bear fan..Born and bred And wasn't the original team from Chicago the Cardinals? The same one's that moved to Arizona? Quote
5fishlimit Posted January 13, 2016 Author Posted January 13, 2016 3 hours ago, Sam said: Wish the NFL would allow the cities to retain the team's nicknames. They did allows the colors and history to be retained by a city only once. The Cleveland Browns. A lot of good that did my city. LMFAO! Quote
5fishlimit Posted January 13, 2016 Author Posted January 13, 2016 1 hour ago, Carolina Bassin said: I agree with Sam, St Louis Rams doesn't sound as good as L A Rams. And it always bothered me that a team that was to the East of 4 other teams not in there division was considered Western. The divisions used to be all jacked up when there were 4 conferences. The Oilers where in the old AFC Central with the Steelers, Browns and Bengals. I remember when they had the Buccaneers in the NFC Central with the Bears, Lions, Vikings, and Packers! Quote
Global Moderator Mike L Posted January 13, 2016 Global Moderator Posted January 13, 2016 1 hour ago, 5fishlimit said: And wasn't the original team from Chicago the Cardinals? The same one's that moved to Arizona? Yes, they and the Bears are the only charter members of the NFL still in existence. They left Chicago in '59. I have uncles who are still pi**ed off about it! Quote
Global Moderator Mike L Posted January 13, 2016 Global Moderator Posted January 13, 2016 4 hours ago, Sam said: I never liked the St. Louis Rams. I always liked the Los Angles Rams. Wish the NFL would allow the cities to retain the team's nicknames. Baltimore Colts; Houston Oilers; any others?????? Chicago Cardinals, Ny Giants, Minneapolis Lakers, Dodgers...... Mike Quote
Super User deaknh03 Posted January 13, 2016 Super User Posted January 13, 2016 8 hours ago, roadwarrior said: The NFL has used the L.A. vacancy to leverage every franchise and force NFL cities to build or dramatically improve every stadium in the league. Not every but many.. Quote
Super User tomustang Posted January 14, 2016 Super User Posted January 14, 2016 Are they sure they didn't want the Eagles? It would be nice if Philly would start fresh 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.