Skip to content

Rams Moving To Los Angeles

The Browns Board
54 23 1.6k
  • L LondonBrown wrote on last edited by
    #1

    lookd like San Diego has lost its football team to Los Angeles. Rams joining them in a joint venture in Inglewood.

    Raiders stay in Oakland surely they need a new stadium soon though?

  • WalterWhiteW WalterWhite wrote on last edited by
    #2

    So fucking stupid. Los Angeles has never been able to support one NFL franchise let alone 2.

    Most people out here are transplants anyways

  • lookd like San Diego has lost its football team to Los Angeles. Rams joining them in a joint venture in Inglewood.

    Raiders stay in Oakland surely they need a new stadium soon though?

    Mark OM Mark O wrote on last edited by
    #3

    @londonbrown said:

    lookd like San Diego has lost its football team to Los Angeles. Rams joining them in a joint venture in Inglewood.

    Raiders stay in Oakland surely they need a new stadium soon though?

    The Raiders will get compensated by the league to stay in Oakland and get a new stadium built in Oakland. The Chargers have been leaving SD for 14 years and the Rams owner has wanted out of St. Louis since the day he bought the team.

  • @londonbrown said:

    lookd like San Diego has lost its football team to Los Angeles. Rams joining them in a joint venture in Inglewood.

    Raiders stay in Oakland surely they need a new stadium soon though?

    The Raiders will get compensated by the league to stay in Oakland and get a new stadium built in Oakland. The Chargers have been leaving SD for 14 years and the Rams owner has wanted out of St. Louis since the day he bought the team.

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on last edited by
    #4

    @mark-o said:

    The Raiders will get compensated by the league to stay in Oakland and get a new stadium built in Oakland. The Chargers have been leaving SD for 14 years and the Rams owner has wanted out of St. Louis since the day he bought the team.

    & if they move the Rams- I feel for the city- have friends there. Their owner is a complete jackass. The city and state offered to build a new stadium, and apparently that's not good enough. FWIW, I went to the Browns Rams game this past year, and really, there's nothing wrong with the current place. St Louis is more of a baseball town, just like Cincinnati.

    If Oakland won't build a new stadium for the Raiders- move 'em to St Louis.

  • L LondonBrown wrote on last edited by
    #5

    LA has never been able to support one team has it let alone two?

  • @londonbrown said:

    lookd like San Diego has lost its football team to Los Angeles. Rams joining them in a joint venture in Inglewood.

    Raiders stay in Oakland surely they need a new stadium soon though?

    The Raiders will get compensated by the league to stay in Oakland and get a new stadium built in Oakland. The Chargers have been leaving SD for 14 years and the Rams owner has wanted out of St. Louis since the day he bought the team.

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on last edited by
    #6

    @mark-o said:

    The Raiders will get compensated by the league to stay in Oakland and get a new stadium built in Oakland. The Chargers have been leaving SD for 14 years and the Rams owner has wanted out of St. Louis since the day he bought the team.

    With the cost of a new decent stadium running around $1 billion, you sure the other owners are going to be willing to take a $32 million per hit to keep Davis in Oakland? Unless they hit the Chargers & Rams with hundreds of millions in relocation penalties.

  • LA has never been able to support one team has it let alone two?

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on last edited by hoorta
    #7

    @londonbrown said:

    LA has never been able to support one team has it let alone two?

    The logic is you can't have the #2 market in the country minus a team. We'll see how it works out this time. Rams and Raiders sort of proved LA could care less if they have a team or not.

    If they had really wanted a franchise, it would have gotten done long before now. Like around 15 years ago.

  • @mark-o said:

    The Raiders will get compensated by the league to stay in Oakland and get a new stadium built in Oakland. The Chargers have been leaving SD for 14 years and the Rams owner has wanted out of St. Louis since the day he bought the team.

    With the cost of a new decent stadium running around $1 billion, you sure the other owners are going to be willing to take a $32 million per hit to keep Davis in Oakland? Unless they hit the Chargers & Rams with hundreds of millions in relocation penalties.

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by
    #8

    @hoorta said:

    With the cost of a new decent stadium running around $1 billion, you sure the other owners are going to be willing to take a $32 million per hit to keep Davis in Oakland? Unless they hit the Chargers & Rams with hundreds of millions in relocation penalties.

    Owners are each pitching a mill into a PowerBall pool...

  • L LondonBrown wrote on last edited by
    #9

    Rams moving immediately. Chargers have a year to negotiate to follow them. All very confusing if you ask me!

  • bbedwardB bbedward wrote on last edited by
    #10

    30-2 owners vote, wonder who the 2 were that were opposed?

    Reports said Dee was there, not Jimmy.

  • miktoxicM miktoxic wrote on last edited by
    #11

    wow. what a complete fucking idiot this owner is. there's always someone to blame but yourself.

    these owners treat fans if they are just annoyances and nothing more. i hope they all go down in flames on their lear jets while goodell pilots the plane.

    rich get richer and the little guy continue to take it in the ass.

  • Browns149B Browns149 wrote on last edited by Browns149
    #12

    Wasn't the fee to move around $550 million?

    Times 2 split between 30 other owners.

    That's $18.3333333. Million per team

    Of course they will never say no

  • Rams moving immediately. Chargers have a year to negotiate to follow them. All very confusing if you ask me!

    Mark OM Mark O wrote on last edited by
    #13

    @londonbrown said:

    Rams moving immediately. Chargers have a year to negotiate to follow them. All very confusing if you ask me!

    Not really...if the Chargers say no thanks to following the Rams...they get 100 million to help finance a new stadium in SD. The Chargers are moving to LA with the Rams and it won't take that long.

  • @londonbrown said:

    Rams moving immediately. Chargers have a year to negotiate to follow them. All very confusing if you ask me!

    Not really...if the Chargers say no thanks to following the Rams...they get 100 million to help finance a new stadium in SD. The Chargers are moving to LA with the Rams and it won't take that long.

    Browns149B Browns149 wrote on last edited by
    #14

    @mark-o said:

    Not really...if the Chargers say no thanks to following the Rams...they get 100 million to help finance a new stadium in SD. The Chargers are moving to LA with the Rams and it won't take that long.

    100 million might buy them a parking lot

  • Bob806B Bob806 wrote on last edited by
    #15

    If you needed another reason to not shop at Wal Mart, here ya go. Stan Kroenke just screwed over a great sports city in St. Louis.

    We know the pain of losing a team. I hope to God Haslam was one of the "no" votes.

  • ErnieCamacho84E ErnieCamacho84 wrote on last edited by
    #16

    My sympathy to the St. Louis fans. We all went through the same thing 20 years ago.

    But they still have their Cardinals and that's their true love. They'll be OK.

    C'est la vie.

  • If you needed another reason to not shop at Wal Mart, here ya go. Stan Kroenke just screwed over a great sports city in St. Louis.

    We know the pain of losing a team. I hope to God Haslam was one of the "no" votes.

    Browns149B Browns149 wrote on last edited by
    #17

    @bob806 said:

    If you needed another reason to not shop at Wal Mart, here ya go.Stan Kroenke just screwed over a great sports city in St. Louis.

    We know the pain of losing a team. I hope to God Haslam was one of the "no" votes.

    Not another reason needed.

  • My sympathy to the St. Louis fans. We all went through the same thing 20 years ago.

    But they still have their Cardinals and that's their true love. They'll be OK.

    C'est la vie.

    Bob806B Bob806 wrote on last edited by
    #18

    @erniecamacho84 said:

    My sympathy to the St. Louis fans. We all went through the same thing 20 years ago.

    But they still have their Cardinals and that's their true love. They'll be OK.

    C'est la vie.

    I don't know about that. They've lost 2 teams now, and it sounds like this Kroenke shmuck never really wanted to be in St. Louis after he bought the team.

    It's certainly a great baseball town, but they love their football too. Screwed over by 2 owners NFL-wise, yikes.

  • L LondonBrown wrote on last edited by
    #19

    VesnaKociper said:

    London,

    you are basing your comment on an economical model that is way outdated. Over the past 25 years the NFL has expanded it's fan base exponentially, and the marketing, with social media is tremendously more potent than was the case back in those days. In case you haven't noticed, the NFL no longer fails financially at anything. They don't even lose in court when they are dead wrong.

    LA football in the 21st century will be unlike anything the NFL has seen. It is an unbelievably large, attractive market that will capture the attention of fans everywhere.

    LA football, this time around will be HUGE.

    If they are smart................... they will not use the RAMS,/CHARGERS name.

    That's my two cents.

    I don't know enough about it but what you say certainly makes sense, even if it was slightly patronising...

  • @erniecamacho84 said:

    My sympathy to the St. Louis fans. We all went through the same thing 20 years ago.

    But they still have their Cardinals and that's their true love. They'll be OK.

    C'est la vie.

    I don't know about that. They've lost 2 teams now, and it sounds like this Kroenke shmuck never really wanted to be in St. Louis after he bought the team.

    It's certainly a great baseball town, but they love their football too. Screwed over by 2 owners NFL-wise, yikes.

    Browns149B Browns149 wrote on last edited by
    #20

    @bob806 said:

    I don't know about that. They've lost 2 teams now, and it sounds like this Kroenke shmuck never really wanted to be in St. Louis after he bought the team.

    It's certainly a great baseball town, but they love their football too. Screwed over by 2 owners NFL-wise, yikes.

    Listening to Jimmy, does he REALLY sound like he wants to be in Cleveland?