Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 32 of 33 FirstFirst ... 2230313233 LastLast
Results 466 to 480 of 488
  1. #466
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    nor-cal
    Posts
    4,893
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by CaliDevil71 View Post
    Need to get my #15 Ferragamo jersey ready!!!

    Hey St. Louis fans.. you know who that is???
    Hey Calidevil I'm one of the biggest LA Rams fan and would love it if they came back to LA but please let's not start talking smack to our STL bro's ...we are all ram fans

  2. #467
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    9,737
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by blue bleeder09 View Post
    Hey Calidevil I'm one of the biggest LA Rams fan and would love it if they came back to LA but please let's not start talking smack to our STL bro's ...we are all ram fans
    I agree...... If the Rams move back to LA, I certainly would not rub it in St. Louis faces, because I remember exactly how I felt when the Rams packed up and split..... I've been going to Rams games since 1969
    http://i557.photobucket.com/albums/ss17/duanevalle/1950Rams2.jpg

  3. #468
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    2,733
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by blue bleeder09 View Post
    Hey Calidevil I'm one of the biggest LA Rams fan and would love it if they came back to LA but please let's not start talking smack to our STL bro's ...we are all ram fans
    You guys are both probably are going to shoot me out of the water.. but I am Los Angeles Rams fan. LOL..... Plain and simple. I love my Los Angeles Rams. Die hard. Cried like a little sissy when they lost games as a child and really put on the water works when they last to the Steelers in the Super Bowl. When the Rams left, I was and still am bitter. I dispised the owner ship and I remember when Georgia died, the LA radio stations were singing thank God the Witch is dead. I've always believed that ownership should have left the Rams name and their history in LA. There isn't any history in St Louis but the history that they made. How many of their fans remember that Jack Youngblood played with a broken leg in the Superbowl? Jack himself said the Rams history was lost when they moved I get your point about not rubbing it St. Louis face and you and duane v are right. My bad I was wrong. But when they moved a lot of the history was lost. My memories of the team are lost.

    But I will always love my Los Angeles Rams and I hope people get active and time for them to right a wrong. The Rams should have never of left!

  4. #469
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    24,456
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Knuckles View Post
    http://m.stltoday.com/STL/db_140471/...tguid=T5o27MkP

    Good article. Rams win arbitration.
    I still think the Rams will stay in St. Louis. This is just part of the negotiations.

    As far as the Rams belonging in LA, I don't think they belong in LA any more than the Dodgers belong in Brooklyn. Both the Rams and Dodgers were allegedly stolen from their hometowns. In fact, the Rams actually started in Cleveland.

    Many southern California teams can from somewhere else, like the Dodgers, Athletics, Giants, Golden State Warriors, Clippers, Lakers, and Sacramento Kings. If either team/area is more guilty of "stealing" teams it is LA/Southern California, not St. Louis.

    Interesting viewpoint
    "When people used to ask me if I still rooted for the Dodgers after they moved to L.A.," he said, "my answer was, 'If my wife divorced me and left me for another man, would I root for her?' It's like they're thumbing their nose at the whole borough.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/23/sp...hass.html?_r=0

    I don't have anything against LA. I don't care if they have a team, but St. Louis Rams fans have grown very attached to their team. It would be unfair to send the Rams back now. LA should pick off some other team, like the Raiders. It wouldn't be fair to St. Louis fans to take the Rams away just as they are getting good, when many of these St. Louis fans did support the terrible Rams. I'm not convinced LA would have supported its team that well.

    It is strange that in the NFL 80-90% attendance is not good enough when half the MLB teams would be thrilled with that. Of course, there are 11 times as many MLB games. In the NFL The teams lower on the attendance standings (selling 85% of their tickets) are still doing pretty good, especially when that team (Like the Rams) has been so terrible. Oakland and San Diego had slightly worse attendance in 2012 than the St. Louis Rams did.

    Brooklyn fans were heartbroken when they lost the Dodgers. St. Louis fans were heartbroken when they lost the football Cardinals. LA fans were heartbroken when they lost the Rams. LA is not special in its heartbreak. Many cities' fans have felt it. That doesn't make it fair to rebreak the hearts of St. Louis Rams fans. Two wrongs don't make a right.
    Last edited by redbird89; 02-05-2013 at 08:55 AM.
    Our forums:
    Blues Cardinals Rams

  5. #470
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    nor-cal
    Posts
    4,893
    vCash
    1500
    [QUOTE=redbird89;25310685]I still think the Rams will stay in St. Louis. This is just part of the negotiations.

    As far as the Rams belonging in LA, I don't think they belong in LA any more than the Dodgers belong in Brooklyn. Both the Rams and Dodgers were allegedly stolen from their hometowns. In fact, the Rams actually started in Cleveland.

    Many southern California teams can from somewhere else, like the Dodgers, Athletics, Giants, Golden State Warriors, Clippers, Lakers, and Sacramento Kings. If either team/area is more guilty of "stealing" teams it is LA/Southern California, not St. Louis.

    The majority of the teams you just named are from northern Cali

  6. #471
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    North Orange County
    Posts
    9,446
    vCash
    1500
    It's not "Just a part of the process". The CVC will not pay 700+ million for Dome renovations. The Rams can break the lease and leave after 2014.

    The ONLY hope for STL is a brand new stadium, which Stan would have to pay for himself. Why would he privately finance his own stadium in a market that is lukewarm at best for the Rams?

    The MLB Cardinals had to pay 90% for their stadium and the Cardinals are the biggest show in town. Politicians and citizens aren't making an exception for the Rams. Stan won't pay for 90% of a new stadium in the STL market (imo) and any public spending would be tax increases and would have to go to a vote. The people will not allow it.

    Republican leaders in the MO Senate are adamant that state funding will not be used to help build a new stadium for the STL Rams...

    http://www.news.stlpublicradio.org/p...w-rams-stadium

    STL Mayor Francis Slay: “We want the Rams to stay, but not at any cost."

    http://northcity.fox2now.com/news/ne...y-rams-leaving

    The Chargers owners have said a million times they want to stay in SD. The Rams have said nothing.

    STL as a city and fanbase is lukewarm at best for the Rams, leaving the only option a privately financed stadium by Stan in a market that has them 31st in attendance and 30th in franchise value.

    L.A has to look pretty attractive right now, and yes, they belong in Los Angeles. The Chargers belong in SD, the Cardinals belong in STL, Radiers belong in Oakland, and the Rams belong in LA.

    The Dodgers and Lakers moved in a different era and are ingrained in Los Angeles culture.
    Lakers, Dodgers, Kings
    Bring Back the Los Angeles Rams

  7. #472
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    24,456
    vCash
    1500
    Fine, you get the football Cardinals to move back to St. Louis and then we'll talk.

    I posted this article about Kroenke before, but I think it's a good insight into his possible mindset. It seems to have been mostly ignored.

    Yes, Silent Stan can be hard to read, but don’t the actions detailed above say more than any mere words could? When knowing his devoted history to St. Louis football, does it make more sense to give Kroenke the benefit of the doubt regarding the following 2010 statement to Bernie Miklasz of 101 ESPN and the Post-Dispatch, or to discredit it?

    "There's a track record," Kroenke said. "I've always stepped up for pro football in St. Louis. And I'm stepping up one more time. I'm born and raised in Missouri. I've been a Missourian for 60 years. People in our state know me. People know I can be trusted. People know I am an honorable guy."
    Is it just me, or does it boggle your mind to imagine Kroenke working so hard to move the Rams to his home state just to later work even harder to move them back out?

    Would the 65 year old Kroenke make the choice to live out as his days as a villain in his own land and a sellout to his home state? Would he choose to be despised in the state where various family members have been season ticket holders since the move and where he still resides and does more business than any other via both THF Realty and The Kroenke Group?

    If so, Kroenke would not only do irreparable damage to a legacy he values, but would jeopardize the considerable tax breaks, TIFF money and generally favorable standing he has amongst powerful politicians in the city and state while damage his day job, realty and development.
    In looking at Kroenke’s major sports’ holdings — the NBA’s Denver Nuggets, the Premiere League’s Arsenal, MLS’s Colorado Rapids and the NHL’s Colorado Avalanche — Kroenke has never sold any portion of his franchises.

    That is important because — for AEG’s Los Angeles based Farmer’s Field project to work for any franchise as currently constituted — it would require a significant sale of ownership stakes (likely at a discounted rate). Kroenke operates in patterns. Kroenke is a buyer, not a seller.
    When considering both Kroenke’s affinity for owning his team’s venues and his appreciation for the way the Patriots do business, it is logical to deduce that he might envision creating a similar development in the St. Louis area with the potential help of land grants, tax breaks, other concessions, some public contributions and a large chuck of NFL G4 money — to go along with his own cash and resources.

    Another potential L.A. site (near the city of Industry) would see Ed Roski hand over the land he controls to any team relocating there. The team would then finance the stadium and sell him a share of the franchise. However, Kroenke is a buyer, not a seller.

    Land and business is very expensive in California. Thus, it is of no shock that Kroenke has exactly zero developments in that state but has plenty of developments in places like Iowa, Kansas, Arkansas and Alabama.

    A land donation or cheap sale to Kroenke could very well end up being part of a stadium solution here. Such a scenario could be a big win for all involved: it would allow Kroenke to develop and profit from a large area. That development would then create a large number of year round jobs. Finally, the state of the art stadium would aid the region in attracting Super Bowls, Bowl games, Olympic trials, NCAA championships, better conventions and more.

    Contrarily, there will not be any potential cheap land deals in the climate of Cali, where it is generally more expensive to own and operate a business.

    Stan likes the safer play, and the safe, cheaper bet is a private/public venue on his home turf. Kroenke has both the political allies and the keen knowledge of how things work here to make it happen.
    In March of 2010, Forbes reported that Stan and wife Ann Kroenke were worth a combined $6.1 billion. By September of 2012, the Kroenke’s were estimated to be worth $8.5 billion by the same publication.

    Simply put, the Kroenke’s wealth has continued to grow substantially by investing largely in smaller communities and states rather than the more populous ones.

    Kroenke doesn’t avoid all the highly populated areas, however. THF does have a property in New York… but in the 30,000 person town of Cicero, not NYC. He does have developments in states like Illinois, too… in towns like Belleville and Moline, not Chicago.

    When one’s wealth has reportedly jumped by over 25 percent in just over two years, betting on a massive game plan alteration is foolish.
    Another often misunderstood item relating to Kroenke is the L.A. Stadium Committee. This committee was comprised of a variety of NFL owners, something Kroenke was appointed to, not a volunteer for.

    The committee has since been abandoned, but many once mistook his participation on said committee as some sort of affinity for a possible move, all without basis.
    We can further gain insight into Kroenke by looking at where his money goes and what boards he chooses to be a part of.

    Kroenke is still a major contributor to the University of Missouri, his alma mater.

    The boards he sits upon in the Gateway City and Missouri include St. Louis’ Civic Progress, Community Investments Partnership of St. Louis, the St. Louis Art Museum and the Missouri Basketball Hall of Fame, among others.

    In 2009, Kroenke was enshrined into the Missouri Sports Hall of Fame.
    Again I ask a simple question: why would Kroenke make the effort to ensure maximum exposure to the St. Louis market if the plans were to leave the region within a few years? If the plan were to exit, the efforts to ensure that all games be televised in the metro would be pretty pointless.
    Something that has flown under the radar a bit is Kroenke’s current pursuit of full ownership and control of THF Realty and THF Management, headquartered in St. Louis. THF, although having holdings in dozens of states, still has more developments in Missouri than any other.

    The timing is very interesting, when considering the stage we are at in stadium negotiations.

    Furthermore, according to a Columbia Tribune report last October, Kroenke is also involved in some manner with CVC Chairman and Hospitality Management’s Bob O’ Loughin’s upcoming work to reinvent Union Station. Some have even suggested a soccer stadium could be a part of that deal, but time will tell the tale there.

    Kroenke continues to make moves in St. Louis, recently purchasing a major shopping center in Manchester Highlands via The Kroenke Group.

    It is very interesting to look at how the timing of lease negotiations coincides with Kroenke’s moves to gain control of THF Realty and his reported ties to Union Station. Although it all could be unrelated, it very easily could be a part of the puzzle, too.

    The bottom line is this: Kroenke seems to be putting more focus on St. Louis, not less. And with that understood, would a move by the Rams with the above considered make any sense, being that it would completely contradict his increasing efforts in the region, disenfranchising politicians in the city and state and jeopardizing all the advantages he has with his real estate companies? I wouldn’t think so.

    In contrast, all indicators point to Kroenke having a bigger vision for the region, one that would obviously include the Rams.

    In St. Louis, will Silent Stan one day be known as King Kroenke? I wouldn’t bet against it.

    The future of the Rams is largely in the hands of the man who ensured the NFL’s return to the Gateway City. With his family still rooted in Missouri and all of the above considered, touting anything other than a long-term Rams stay appears meritless.
    http://101sports.com/category/misc-b...uis-Keep-Rams/

    One interesting tidbit there is that if Kroenke (or any owner) moves to LA they would have to give up a portion of ownership of the franchise. Kroenke seems unlikely to do that.

    As far as the Rams attendance, I am not convinced that most markets would have better attendance for a team that was so terrible for so many years.

    The Rams have already made it clear that they want to stay in St. Louis. Go back and listen to the interview team president Kevin Demoff did with me last month. He didn’t try to be cute. He didn’t tap dance. He said the Rams want to put together a deal that will keep them in St. Louis for the next 40 years.

    The Rams are not talking about Los Angeles now, and that has a lot to do with the simple fact that they still have two years left on their current lease, the stadium issue in LA is still unresolved and I doubt that Kroenke wants to give up a slice of his ownership to any potential ownership group in Southern California.

    Besides, the NFL does enjoy keeping Los Angeles in play as leverage for any frustrated owner who is trying to work out a new stadium deal, and right now there are at least six NFL owners including Kroenke who fit tha description (Atlanta, Buffalo, Jacksonville, Oakland and San Diego). But here in St. Louis, we know right now that for the time being, LA is a negotiating chip and nothing more threatening than that.

    But it’s wise to know that a negotiating chip can become a more serious threat if protracted negotiations – a St. Louis politcal staple – string things out so long and cause such rotten circumstances that Los Angeles could become a far more appealing alternative for relocation.
    http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colum...84912c00a.html
    Last edited by redbird89; 02-05-2013 at 08:45 PM.
    Our forums:
    Blues Cardinals Rams

  8. #473
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    North Orange County
    Posts
    9,446
    vCash
    1500
    Burwell is not only the laughing stock of the Bring Back the Los Angeles Rams group, but the laughing stock of people in STL...I mean, read the comments on his article.

    He's digging and digging but the reality is, the Ed Dome is done and politicians/tax payers aren't footing the bill for the dome, nor a new stadium. He proposes stadium sites, which is all fine and dandy, but fails to explain how the stadium would be funded. Public funding will not happen and he presents that as a key supplement. G-4 loan will hardly put a dent in it and although the NFL won't say it, I think they'd honestly prefer a lease buyout and a move to LA.

    All he can hang onto is, "Stan loves STL and will keep them there" basically. I can dig crap up too...Stan has a house in Malibu, attended the Lakers game with Patrick Soon-Shiong, who is a finalist in the AEG bidding, Stan tried aggressively to buy the Dodgers, etc, etc.

    Stan is gonna have to pay for at least 90% of a brand new stadium in the STL area. And he either will or won't. That's what it will come down to.

    The Farmers Field plan has changed. AEG's current owner, Phil Anchutz was never crazy about the NFL project and wanted a percentage of the team if they were to go forward. Now, AEG is being sold specifically to a group who will be 100% behind bringing the NFL to LA--so the terms of the AEG deal is ancient. Nobody knows what the terms will be. The stake in ownership was a term under an owner who is on his way out.

    I am not against por-STL articles, but Bernie is an idiot. Plain and simple.
    Last edited by THINKBLUE15; 02-06-2013 at 04:22 AM.
    Lakers, Dodgers, Kings
    Bring Back the Los Angeles Rams

  9. #474
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    North Orange County
    Posts
    9,446
    vCash
    1500
    Anyways, there is always a greater chance a team stays--as they are already there. There's a good chance they stay. But there is a good chance they leave as well.
    Lakers, Dodgers, Kings
    Bring Back the Los Angeles Rams

  10. #475
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    nor-cal
    Posts
    4,893
    vCash
    1500
    The St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority has hired Goldman Sachs, the multi-national investment banking firm, to keep the Rams in the Dome, or, if that’s not possible, to maintain a National League Football team in St. Louis, David Hunn of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.

    The contract pays Goldman $20,000 a month, plus no more than $25,000 in expenses, Dome officials said.

    Goldman will prepare a plan "on existing and alternative methods for maintaining or renovating current facilities, and/or constructing new facilities sufficient to retain a National Football League franchise in the St. Louis Metropolitan Area," according to the resolution unanimously approved by the Authority board Monday afternoon.

    An arbitration ruling earlier this month, which required an estimated $700 million in renovations to the Dome, is “unworkable,” authority board Chairman Jim Shrewsbury told his fellow commissioners. “As a practical matter, the arbitrator’s decision is untenable,” he said.

    Goldman Sachs has basically financed or advised on the financing of every NFL stadium recently built, added authority attorney Robert Blitz. Blitz called Goldman executive Greg Carey “the guru of sports stadiums in the United States.”

  11. #476
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    9,737
    vCash
    1500
    It's more and more interesting.....

    I think we will have a good idea where the Rams will be in 6-8 months..... However if AEG doesn't get its act together soon, they could miss a big opportunity to make their pitch to Kronke

    Financially it make sense for the Rams to move back to LA, however LA has trouble making sense of anything when it comes to the NFL, which is why we haven't had an NFL team in 20 years and counting
    http://i557.photobucket.com/albums/ss17/duanevalle/1950Rams2.jpg

  12. #477
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    vCash
    1500
    What do you mean by that?

  13. #478
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    St. Ann, MO
    Posts
    278
    vCash
    1500
    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...y-dead-to-nfl/

    Sorry LA fans looks like if the Rams are going to move it won't be to LA..LOL

  14. #479
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,554
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ramfan63074 View Post
    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...y-dead-to-nfl/

    Sorry LA fans looks like if the Rams are going to move it won't be to LA..LOL
    if you did more research you'd know that people say it's basically dead because AEG is selling their Co. right now so they're not fully committed on selling the plan at this moment.

    Plus they're only talking about the stadium in downtown, there are other possible locations to build the stadium as well as the indication of it being built at Chavez ravine instead. They already approached Guggenheim about the possibility of building it there, not to mention that Guggenheim is one of the top candidates of buying AEG. To boast about it being done over what seems like a "my opinion" article is a little premature ramfan.

    Refardless, I'm tired of everyone bashing on each other and rubbing speculation articles in each others faces because they want the same team in their respective cities. It doesn't matter where the rams end up, we all go for the same team

  15. #480
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    St. Ann, MO
    Posts
    278
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by cg_la00 View Post
    if you did more research you'd know that people say it's basically dead because AEG is selling their Co. right now so they're not fully committed on selling the plan at this moment.

    Plus they're only talking about the stadium in downtown, there are other possible locations to build the stadium as well as the indication of it being built at Chavez ravine instead. They already approached Guggenheim about the possibility of building it there, not to mention that Guggenheim is one of the top candidates of buying AEG. To boast about it being done over what seems like a "my opinion" article is a little premature ramfan.

    Refardless, I'm tired of everyone bashing on each other and rubbing speculation articles in each others faces because they want the same team in their respective cities. It doesn't matter where the rams end up, we all go for the same team
    Sorry I shouldn't have been so harsh on that one. You're right they are the Rams and all of us like our team. We will all enjoy this that is only missing a couple of pieces to the puzzle. No more moving post unless they are facts instead of the rumors.

  16. 03-06-2013, 10:09 PM
    Reason
    off-topic

  17. 03-06-2013, 11:02 PM
    Reason
    off-topic

  18. 03-07-2013, 02:13 AM
    Reason
    off-topic

Page 32 of 33 FirstFirst ... 2230313233 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •