Only the old Ram die hard's will support that team. At the beginning they'll sell out, it'll be fun and different. Then they'll go 8-8 or 7-9 and then the novelty will wear out and they'll be back to drawing 50k at some 75k stadium. The Rams will then bolt to Barstow and UCLA will have a nicer stadium to play in. We didn't miss it and I really couldn't care less now..
Well it's official. More dominoes to fall San Diego may join in on the fun. And then the Raiders will decide what's next. These owner are nothing more than modern day carpetbaggers.
at least the NBA seems to relish in having franchises in some small-market cities-Sacramento, Milwaukee, Oklahoma City, at least that's what ex-NBA COMMISH David Stern stated when justifying not moving the Kings to Seattle to replace the departed Super Sonics.
What confuses me most with, not only one, but two, teams relocating to LA, is the fact that this city used to have 2 teams, and both of them bolted. Lo and behold, the NFL still thrived, even without a presence in the City of Angels. Did LA even notice that the NFL left? From an outsider looking in, the city did not seem to care too much. What has changed? Why will it work this time around? What, other than a significant amount of dollars, prompted this migration back to LA?
You can criticize the NFL for a lot of things (their treatment of former players, their handling of player discipline, their inability to find/train refs to get calls right are a few of the hot topics); but making money is NOT one of them. While LA doesn't care about football, the NFL really cares about LA and has salivated over getting back into that market for decades. Not only will the Rams make significantly more money being in the LA market (like Kroenke needs any more money, but I digress here) all the owners will benefit from their move. Hey, these guys have to feed their families!
The interesting thing is what happens to the Raiders (I think the Chargers will ultimately end up in LA...too much of an opportunity for them to turn down). It looks like the Raider's top two options are San Antonio or Oakland. They will have to play one against the other to get what they want. I have no idea where they end up, so that will be an interesting storyline to follow.
-- Modified on 1/13/2016 10:02:02 AM
-- Modified on 1/13/2016 10:09:23 AM
-- Modified on 1/13/2016 10:11:02 AM
It's about the stadiums. The 3 teams looking to move have the 3 worst stadiums in the league. Oakland is the last NFL team to have to share a stadium with a baseball team. Qualcomm is a dinosaur, and Edward Jones Dome is over 20 years old...a relic in this day and age. Let's not forget, the NFL is charging each franchise $500MM to move. A new stadium is like a recruiting tool..would you rather go play for the Chargers in Qualcomm or the Niners in Levi Stadium
new stadiums=many more luxury suites & other amenities=more money for the owners, especially if they can con the new city's taxpayers to pick up the tab.
Only the old Ram die hard's will support that team. At the beginning they'll sell out, it'll be fun and different. Then they'll go 8-8 or 7-9 and then the novelty will wear out and they'll be back to drawing 50k at some 75k stadium. The Rams will then bolt to Barstow and UCLA will have a nicer stadium to play in. We didn't miss it and I really couldn't care less now..
How could they, when they had the LA Xtreme in the XFL?
(What a terrible idea that was by the way. Football fans didn't want WWE football, WWE fans didn't want WWE football, and then they spent the vast majority of their marketing efforts trying to denigrate the NFL whose loving fans they were trying to snag. Could have been and probably should have been so much more than it was. The XFL is an amazing story of failure, if you ever care to do some research.)