bluecoconuts
Legend
They have before.
Regardless of what happens it sets a precedent. What do you think the NFL would rather avoid? Backing owners into a corner and hurting their ability to negotiate, or pissing off local government?
New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL
- Thread starter STL-Rams
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
- Status
They have before.
Regardless of what happens it sets a precedent. What do you think the NFL would rather avoid? Backing owners into a corner and hurting their ability to negotiate, or pissing off local government?
bluecoconuts
Legend
Either way the Chargers likely come to LA. Which is dumb because they're going to be second/third fiddle no matter what. If the Rams or Raiders return you'll see dormant fans pop back up, but the Chargers aren't going to see mass changing of allegiances. Especially from those two fanbases.
I guess it's settled then, Chargers are staying in SD...
I just hope the owners ask Stan why he deserves LA when he's got the best offer on the table. I know he's got the best plan for LA at this point in time, but the home market just can't be an after-thought in this whole process.
The difference is the San Diego offer isn't realistic and everyone knows that. They are throwing something out there so they can say they tried, that public money wouldn't get voted through by the public anyways. Name one time where a city/state was offering real public money and a team left anyways to pay for it all themselves in another city.
Last edited:
I also hope they asked Spanos why he's willing to spend money in Carson yet not in San Diego. He has San Diego wanting to work with him but he seems to be too good to work with his home market. He also is making the home market an after thought.
I doubt we have a run on relocation either way. LA is getting filled by one team or another. Which means the next team has nowhere to go. That alone is what's going to kill the first tier nonsense eventually. Where's the next owners going to go and still make a profit? Nobody else with one of these is as rich as Stan, so who's going to build the stadium for them? Taking a team from St Louis that's destroyed its own net worth thru losing and moving them to LA isn't the same as taking the Bengals, who haven't been bad lately, and moving them to Toronto.
San Diego has had 10+ years to get a working deal on the table. St. Louis is working on the second stadium in 25 years, half public funded, and at break-neck speed (after arbitration).
I agree, if it's something that is being "reported". But opinion (which is how I read Whyche's comment) is another story altogether. I read it as two guys driving down the highway, looking at some sites and forming their own opinions on what they saw. (see bolded part)
As far as how TV works, I do not know as I've never worked in TV. Have you? But, I guess there is a difference in how things are broadcasted depending on whether it is being portrayed as fact or just an opinion. I guess broadcasters have quite a bit of leeway when it comes to opinions... it's only when they step over the line that their jobs may be in jeopardy (wasn't there a recent ESPN talking head that lost his job because of an opinion?
The Ripper
Starter
Now you're just taunting me. Get over it. The Rams have not been year to year on a lease for 10+ years.
St Louis followed the lease policy to the T and when the rams came back with an unrealistic demand they still turned around and put a new stadium offer out there in less than a year.
Re quoting from the page before this since you seemed to have missed it. The Browns leaving Cleveland has been mentioned many times as an example of what you say will never happen.
The Ripper
Starter
- Status