Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1

    Rams owner ready to build an NFL stadium in L.A.



    The story is here:

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...tadium-in-l-a/

    The question is, will the NFL allow Kroenke to move the team to LA for the 2015 season, or will it stick to its guns in its previous statement that no teams will be moving in 2015 and force the Rams to play at least one lame duck season in St. Louis a la 1996 Houston Oilers? Or will the Rams move at all? And if the Rams do move, will either the Raiders or Chargers follow? And if one of those other team joins the Rams, where does the other team go, if it goes at all? And where the hell was I?





  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    25,086
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Rams owner ready to build an NFL stadium in L.A.

    The NFL can't stop any team from moving. Al Davis won that in court. They can make it expensive but ultimately if any owner wants to move there is nothing the league can do to stop it.

    Kronke also wouldn't be moving a team without a state of the art stadium. This is a very smart a rich man. He doesn't have to leave St. Louis. He'll go when his stadium is ready. That means no move in 2015 or 2016





  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Eastern Shore
    Posts
    2,477

    Re: Rams owner ready to build an NFL stadium in L.A.

    I see the NFL as a sort of musical chairs wi 32 teams and 31 cities; every time a city loses a team they steal somebody else's, who steal another, etc.
    Nothing against St. Louis but I can't imagine an owner staying there in preference to LA. He's not putting that kind of $ in a stadium for somebody else.
    interesting to see the St Louisans reaction next year. (Just as the Titans spent a year in Memphis as I recall, maybe they'll be in San Antonio for a year?)
    would certainly make geographic sense as the Rams are in the West. and Jeff Fisher already has his cali shades on.
    I do NOT see more than one team in LA. If the Chargers get desperate (and I hear their stadium sucks) St Louis might make them a sweetheart deal.
    "Nothing stops these Baltimore Ravens. Beat them, injure them, shove them to the bottom of the standings, drag them into a hostile environment and mount a big lead, and they just keep trudging forward like nothing fazes them." (Bleacher Report)





  4. #4

    Re: Rams owner ready to build an NFL stadium in L.A.

    Quote Originally Posted by sailorsam View Post
    I see the NFL as a sort of musical chairs wi 32 teams and 31 cities; every time a city loses a team they steal somebody else's, who steal another, etc.
    Nothing against St. Louis but I can't imagine an owner staying there in preference to LA. He's not putting that kind of $ in a stadium for somebody else.
    interesting to see the St Louisans reaction next year. (Just as the Titans spent a year in Memphis as I recall, maybe they'll be in San Antonio for a year?)
    would certainly make geographic sense as the Rams are in the West. and Jeff Fisher already has his cali shades on.
    I do NOT see more than one team in LA. If the Chargers get desperate (and I hear their stadium sucks) St Louis might make them a sweetheart deal.
    The thing is, both Oakland and San Diego's stadiums are woefully outdated relics built almost 50 years ago. Weird thing is, St. Louis' stadium is only 20 years old and not nearly as outdated as Oakland or San Diego's, but apparently still too dated for the Rams' taste.

    If the issue is stadiums (and when it comes to teams moving, the issue is always stadiums), and if the Rams do move out of St. Louis, a Chargers or Raiders move to St. Louis and the Edward Jones Dome or San Antonio and the Alamodome would still put them in a better stadium position than they currently are in, even if those stadiums remain as is in their mid 1990s amenities. However, I'd think a proposal to do a major renovation of the Edward Jones Dome/Alamodome or build a new stadium using those stadiums as temporary facilities would probably be a requirement if either of those teams abandon those cities.

    I'm the opposite of you regarding the number of teams to LA. I think the NFL would like to see two teams in LA, probably sharing the same stadium a la the Meadowlands. What I might see happening though is if it is the Chargers that move to LA as Team 2, they'd simply rebrand themselves as the "Southern California Chargers" and stay in San Diego until the new stadium is built. Under that scenario, only the Rams would use the Coliseum or Rose Bowl as temporary digs. If the team is marketed regionally (not saying it has to be....I know Baltimore doesn't like being lumped in with DC and I bet San Diego doesn't like being lumped in with LA) it might cut down on the "lame duck" perception in San Diego.





  5. #5

    Re: Rams owner ready to build an NFL stadium in L.A.

    I don't believe that Kroenke cares about loss of support from Rams fans in St. Louis for a 2015 lame duck season. TV revenue would be unaffected. He would chalk up the lost revenue from empty seats to the cost of moving.

    And I doubt that St. Louis would be getting a replacement team anytime soon. It would have to get in line behind London, San Antonio, and a 2nd LA team for an expansion team or the Raiders. We were 12 seasons without football, and LA will have encountered a 20 year absence.
    In a 2003 BBC poll that asked Brits to name the "Greatest American Ever", Mr. T came in fourth, behind ML King (3rd), Abe Lincoln (2nd) and Homer Simpson (1st).





  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Eastern Shore
    Posts
    2,477

    Re: Rams owner ready to build an NFL stadium in L.A.

    I don't think it's a question of the league choosing / wait time, I think the individual owner takes the best deal on the table. put enough $ on the table and Chargers / Raiders will come calling.
    maybe SDiego can host one or two games a year and 'share' the Chargers (iirc the Packers would play a game or two each year in Milwaukee, and the Bills used to play an occasional game in Toronto).
    "Nothing stops these Baltimore Ravens. Beat them, injure them, shove them to the bottom of the standings, drag them into a hostile environment and mount a big lead, and they just keep trudging forward like nothing fazes them." (Bleacher Report)





  7. #7

    Re: Rams owner ready to build an NFL stadium in L.A.

    So...St Louis just had a press conference where they submitted proposals for keeping the Rams in St Louis.

    Basically, the city acknowldged that the 19 year old Edward Jones Dome is outdated (smh...only 3 years older than M&T) and have proposed a new stadium to be built by 2020 at a cost of over $900 million. This right after Atlanta agreed to build a new stadium for the Falcons even though the Georgia Dome is only 22 years old.

    It's ridiculous how these teams are getting cities to build new stadiums so quickly now...they aren't even getting 25 years out of some of these stadiums.

    Anyway...there were no Rams representatives there so I think it's pretty obvious Kronke has zero intentions of staying in St Louis.

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...keep-the-rams/
    Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.





  8. #8

    Re: Rams owner ready to build an NFL stadium in L.A.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    So...St Louis just had a press conference where they submitted proposals for keeping the Rams in St Louis.

    Basically, the city acknowldged that the 19 year old Edward Jones Dome is outdated (smh...only 3 years older than M&T) and have proposed a new stadium to be built by 2020 at a cost of over $900 million. This right after Atlanta agreed to build a new stadium for the Falcons even though the Georgia Dome is only 22 years old.

    It's ridiculous how these teams are getting cities to build new stadiums so quickly now...they aren't even getting 25 years out of some of these stadiums.
    Considering the Georgia Dome, Edward Jones Dome, and Tropicana Field in baseball (built in 1990), I can only presuppose that having an old-school non-retractable dome on a stadium is considered by team owners for better or worse to be woefully out of fashion. They want either retractable roofs (which can double for conventions and Final Fours, but still allow the sun to shine on the field when desired) or no roof whatsoever.

    Funny, because I don't see anyone calling to replace M&T, which you point out is only 3 years older than the Edward Jones Dome, or considering it to be out of date. (I have heard people call to replace FedEx Field, but that's just because apparently the place is incredibly depressing from what I've heard.)

    The one I don't understand is in baseball, where they are planning to replace Turner Field for the Braves, built only in 1996. There's nothing wrong with that place at all.





Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland