NJ2MDTerp
1st String
Posts: 1,344
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Maryland
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
Personally I'd like to see Brooklyn get an NFL team before LA. Call it the Bulldogs or the Dodgers.
|
|
02-06-2014 11:37 PM |
|
arkstfan
Sorry folks
Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-06-2014 06:41 PM)TomThumb Wrote: (02-06-2014 05:52 PM)arkstfan Wrote: Put out a product there will be fans, the LA issue is a viable NFL quality stadium which is something the city has not effectively addressed.
...
The right type of facility in LA privately built with an NFL owner/tenant would be worth billions.
I don't understand why the city needs to effectively address it if building a private stadium in LA is a money maker. It's not like LA is refusing to let people build privately funded stadiums. The city is just refusing to fork over funds for it. What does the NFL need/want from LA(besides money and subsidies)?
City as in community not city as in government but if memory serves the city government took the wind out of one private effort by claiming they would build a public stadium at a competing site and another private venture fizzled because the city government signaled that they would provide no infrastructure upgrades for a proposed site because they wanted it built elsewhere. Seems that another area was reclassified based on new seismic data which would have greatly increased the construction cost.
I've not followed closely but the general impression I've received is the city doesn't want to build a stadium which frankly is a smart attitude given the value of the market but there are very few places they seem willing to have a stadium located in.
|
|
02-07-2014 09:30 AM |
|
Wedge
Moderator
Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-07-2014 09:30 AM)arkstfan Wrote: (02-06-2014 06:41 PM)TomThumb Wrote: (02-06-2014 05:52 PM)arkstfan Wrote: Put out a product there will be fans, the LA issue is a viable NFL quality stadium which is something the city has not effectively addressed.
...
The right type of facility in LA privately built with an NFL owner/tenant would be worth billions.
I don't understand why the city needs to effectively address it if building a private stadium in LA is a money maker. It's not like LA is refusing to let people build privately funded stadiums. The city is just refusing to fork over funds for it. What does the NFL need/want from LA(besides money and subsidies)?
City as in community not city as in government but if memory serves the city government took the wind out of one private effort by claiming they would build a public stadium at a competing site and another private venture fizzled because the city government signaled that they would provide no infrastructure upgrades for a proposed site because they wanted it built elsewhere. Seems that another area was reclassified based on new seismic data which would have greatly increased the construction cost.
I've not followed closely but the general impression I've received is the city doesn't want to build a stadium which frankly is a smart attitude given the value of the market but there are very few places they seem willing to have a stadium located in.
Though they haven't said so explicitly, it looks like the city of LA is lukewarm, at best, on the downtown LA site that Anschutz wanted to use because they think the road/freeway infrastructure near there can't hand NFL game day crowds getting in and out of there, plus they'd rather see scarce downtown real estate utilized for something that is used more often than a football stadium.
The best site in LA overall might be next to Dodger Stadium (there is more than enough room in Chavez Ravine), but even if the Dodgers owners allowed an NFL stadium to be built there, the NFL owner would have to pay a very big chunk of money to the Dodgers, and the Dodgers would get all of the parking revenue from NFL games. Maybe the NFL team would have to sell a minority share to the Dodgers owners to get an NFL stadium built in Chavez Ravine.
|
|
02-07-2014 12:12 PM |
|
TomThumb
Special Teams
Posts: 687
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 18
I Root For: stuff
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
Traffic in downtown LA wouldn't be so bad on Sundays. But I don't even want to imagine what the traffic would look like for a weeknight game. Have the people drawing up plans for a downtown stadium ever looked at sigalert.com during weeknight rush hour?
|
|
02-07-2014 12:41 PM |
|
bluesox
Heisman
Posts: 5,295
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 84
I Root For:
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
How about Sacramento make a play for the Raiders. They could drop the plan to build an arena for Kings and go for the NFL. Thus, kings can move to seattle and become the Sonics.
|
|
02-07-2014 12:59 PM |
|
Wedge
Moderator
Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-07-2014 12:41 PM)TomThumb Wrote: Traffic in downtown LA wouldn't be so bad on Sundays. But I don't even want to imagine what the traffic would look like for a weeknight game. Have the people drawing up plans for a downtown stadium ever looked at sigalert.com during weeknight rush hour?
The issue isn't the volume of traffic on Sundays. It's the limited number of freeway exits and the fact that it's all older road construction that isn't designed to handle 70,000 people getting in and out of a football stadium around the same time. I don't go to LA that often, but I have been to Staples Center, which is near the Anschutz site, once for a Lakers game and once for a Kings game, and the parking garages near there and the in-out seem to work well enough, but obviously those crowds are about one-fourth the number of people you'd have for an NFL game.
|
|
02-07-2014 01:58 PM |
|
Wedge
Moderator
Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-07-2014 12:59 PM)bluesox Wrote: How about Sacramento make a play for the Raiders. They could drop the plan to build an arena for Kings and go for the NFL. Thus, kings can move to seattle and become the Sonics.
I think the Kings should move into the Oakland arena after the Warriors move to S.F., but I'm pretty sure Sacramento fans won't agree with me on that.
|
|
02-07-2014 02:02 PM |
|
USAFMEDIC
Heisman
Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
If Stan the Man wanted to build a billion dollar NFL stadium in LA he could just build an even nicer stadium in St Louis for a lot less money.
|
|
02-07-2014 02:24 PM |
|
dbackjon
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12,007
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 655
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-02-2014 11:10 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: (01-31-2014 07:12 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: (01-31-2014 04:21 PM)PirateMarv Wrote: (01-31-2014 01:43 PM)esayem Wrote: Haha man the LA Rams with Jerome Bettis and Isaac Bruce!
Haha back; the St. Louis Rams with Erick Dickerson and Chuck Knox.
The Rams should have never left L.A., because if St. Louis couldn't even keep the horrible Cardinals then St. Louis doesn't need a team.
The Cardinals being horrible is a big reason why they ended up leaving St. Louis. Those folks are used to following a winning Cardinals team. They don't like losers. When the Rams were hot, they were beloved in that town. It is a very fickle town when it comes to following their teams. It just isn't large enough I guess to have a stable enough rotation of fans.
The Arizona Cardinals on the other hand have a stable following and are competing in the money making aspect of the business. They were arguably the third best team in the NFC this year. Folks seem to forget that.
St Louis is more than big enough.... they just refuse to be threatened. For three years Bidwell threatened to move the Cards out of St Louis. He nor his family ever took part in, or supported city functions and programs. Fans have no interest in supporting a team that is eyeing an escape route. That goes for any US city. Bidwell did ponder moving back around 1995 or so because Arizona hadn't built the stadium they promised. The Arizona Cardinals were a pitiful franchise with pitiful fan support back in the Sun devil stadium days. I am glad they are doing well, which I knew would be the case once the crazy old owner died... As for Kroenke, he owns the venues for all of his other franchises, and I imagine he will build his own football venue as well. As a business man he is hedging his bets with this land. He can buy the same swath of land in St Louis County anytime he wants...
Bidwill is still alive, and the Cards are doing just fine, thank you.
Bidwill never threatened once to move back, and has been active in the Phoenix community - it is just that he doesn't seek publicity, and many of his charitable endeavors were done low-key, without the typical chest-beating press releases.
|
|
02-07-2014 05:03 PM |
|
dbackjon
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12,007
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 655
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-04-2014 11:27 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote: (02-04-2014 11:39 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote: (02-04-2014 08:04 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: L.A. will be without a team for as long as the NFL gets value out of franchises threatening to move there. The moment that cities stop caving in, and stop giving NFL owners massive subsidies, that's when you'll see a team move to L.A.
It might be St. Louis, but I think their politicians will cave. If I had to put money on it, it will be the Bengals in 15 years. Mike Brown lives in L.A. and enough of Cincinnati hates him so much that the Brown family will never get another taxpayer funded stadium in Cincy.
I say, good riddance. An NFL team just sucks money out of a city and makes it a worse place to live.
Mike Brown possibly could take the Bungles out of Cincy anytime.
They don't even pay rent on the stadium anymore. My guess is that there is no penalty for vacating the stadium if they choose to do so. Are you sure about that? I thought he lives in Indian Hill and has forever.
Bengals aren't moving, however my cousins would love it. 4 of my cousins, all from here in Fresno are life long Bengal fans. When we were kids in the 80s my cousin chose the Bengals as his team b/c of their cool helmet, his siblings and dad followed.
Princeton?
|
|
02-07-2014 05:05 PM |
|
Rube Dali
1st String
Posts: 1,018
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 46
I Root For: UST, BSU, Minn
Location: Maplewood, MN
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
The Rams are not moving to the Los Angeles area...yet. Turns out that Kroenke's deal for land in Inglewood will be for a new stadium...for a Third MLS franchise in L.A. The proposed name is the "Gunners" and it would be a sister team to his BPL club, Arsenal. Which is somewhat odd, given the fact that his other MLS team(Colorado Rapids) are already a sister club to the North London squad. Also, it will not be a buyout of CD Chivas USA from their parent club in Guadalajara.
Another thing that may prevent the team from coming to fruition, the name. Given the fact that some parts of L.A. still have gun violence as a way of life, the name of Gunners is simply asking for trouble.
|
|
02-07-2014 06:44 PM |
|
PirateTreasureNC
G's up, Ho's Down ; )
Posts: 36,249
Joined: May 2004
Reputation: 617
I Root For: ECU Pirates,
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
LA didn't want the Rams or the relocated Raiders and hasn't gotten its stuff in order in well over what.... 20+ years now to take a team back in?
Cleveland, Houston,and Baltimore did the same thing in less time and in less glitzy cities than LA.
If they had wanted it and the NFL had wanted it, it would have happened a long time ago.
|
|
02-08-2014 12:05 AM |
|
NJ2MDTerp
1st String
Posts: 1,344
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Maryland
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-07-2014 06:44 PM)Rube Dali Wrote: The Rams are not moving to the Los Angeles area...yet. Turns out that Kroenke's deal for land in Inglewood will be for a new stadium...for a Third MLS franchise in L.A. The proposed name is the "Gunners" and it would be a sister team to his BPL club, Arsenal. Which is somewhat odd, given the fact that his other MLS team(Colorado Rapids) are already a sister club to the North London squad. Also, it will not be a buyout of CD Chivas USA from their parent club in Guadalajara.
Another thing that may prevent the team from coming to fruition, the name. Given the fact that some parts of L.A. still have gun violence as a way of life, the name of Gunners is simply asking for trouble.
Also, there's an Los Angeles-based heavy metal band called L.A. Guns. They've been around a long time.
|
|
02-08-2014 12:40 AM |
|
DexterDevil
DCTID
Posts: 5,008
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 218
I Root For: EMU, DCFC
Location: Jackson, Mi
|
Re: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
L.A. Doesn't need a third team, not at least until they get Chivas USA good and sell tickets... Galaxy dominates the market
Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App
|
|
02-08-2014 02:35 AM |
|
PirateTreasureNC
G's up, Ho's Down ; )
Posts: 36,249
Joined: May 2004
Reputation: 617
I Root For: ECU Pirates,
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-08-2014 12:40 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote: Also, there's an Los Angeles-based heavy metal band called L.A. Guns. They've been around a long time.
Are THEY still around though?
|
|
02-08-2014 10:52 PM |
|
Rube Dali
1st String
Posts: 1,018
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 46
I Root For: UST, BSU, Minn
Location: Maplewood, MN
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-08-2014 02:35 AM)DexterDevil Wrote: L.A. Doesn't need a third team, not at least until they get Chivas USA good and sell tickets... Galaxy dominates the market
Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App
The really big mistake the management that CD Chivas made was becoming the second team in the L.A. market. Now, don't ask me how and why the folks in Guadalajara were thinking, but it would've been better to place Chivas USA in market like San Diego, but, doesn't Tijuana have a team in the Mexican Primera Division? If they do, then San Diego would be problematic for Chivas USA. Phoenix, perhaps?
|
|
02-08-2014 11:29 PM |
|
Fresno St. Alum
Heisman
Posts: 6,408
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation: 306
I Root For: Fresno St.
Location: CA
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-07-2014 05:05 PM)dbackjon Wrote: (02-04-2014 11:27 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote: (02-04-2014 11:39 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote: (02-04-2014 08:04 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: L.A. will be without a team for as long as the NFL gets value out of franchises threatening to move there. The moment that cities stop caving in, and stop giving NFL owners massive subsidies, that's when you'll see a team move to L.A.
It might be St. Louis, but I think their politicians will cave. If I had to put money on it, it will be the Bengals in 15 years. Mike Brown lives in L.A. and enough of Cincinnati hates him so much that the Brown family will never get another taxpayer funded stadium in Cincy.
I say, good riddance. An NFL team just sucks money out of a city and makes it a worse place to live.
Mike Brown possibly could take the Bungles out of Cincy anytime.
They don't even pay rent on the stadium anymore. My guess is that there is no penalty for vacating the stadium if they choose to do so. Are you sure about that? I thought he lives in Indian Hill and has forever.
Bengals aren't moving, however my cousins would love it. 4 of my cousins, all from here in Fresno are life long Bengal fans. When we were kids in the 80s my cousin chose the Bengals as his team b/c of their cool helmet, his siblings and dad followed.
Princeton?
No, he likes the Bears, his dad is a Packers fan like me. The 3 Awbrey boys and their dad are the Bengal fans.
|
|
02-09-2014 12:28 AM |
|
NJ2MDTerp
1st String
Posts: 1,344
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Maryland
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-08-2014 10:52 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote: (02-08-2014 12:40 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote: Also, there's an Los Angeles-based heavy metal band called L.A. Guns. They've been around a long time.
Are THEY still around though?
They're touring, albeit part-time:
http://www.laguns.net/tour.html
|
|
02-09-2014 12:35 AM |
|
dbackjon
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12,007
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 655
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-08-2014 11:29 PM)Rube Dali Wrote: (02-08-2014 02:35 AM)DexterDevil Wrote: L.A. Doesn't need a third team, not at least until they get Chivas USA good and sell tickets... Galaxy dominates the market
Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App
The really big mistake the management that CD Chivas made was becoming the second team in the L.A. market. Now, don't ask me how and why the folks in Guadalajara were thinking, but it would've been better to place Chivas USA in market like San Diego, but, doesn't Tijuana have a team in the Mexican Primera Division? If they do, then San Diego would be problematic for Chivas USA. Phoenix, perhaps?
Phoenix would be a great place for Chivas USA
|
|
02-12-2014 12:45 PM |
|
dbackjon
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12,007
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 655
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
|
RE: Rams owner may be laying ground work to move back to L.A.
(02-09-2014 12:28 AM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote: (02-07-2014 05:05 PM)dbackjon Wrote: (02-04-2014 11:27 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote: (02-04-2014 11:39 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote: (02-04-2014 08:04 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: L.A. will be without a team for as long as the NFL gets value out of franchises threatening to move there. The moment that cities stop caving in, and stop giving NFL owners massive subsidies, that's when you'll see a team move to L.A.
It might be St. Louis, but I think their politicians will cave. If I had to put money on it, it will be the Bengals in 15 years. Mike Brown lives in L.A. and enough of Cincinnati hates him so much that the Brown family will never get another taxpayer funded stadium in Cincy.
I say, good riddance. An NFL team just sucks money out of a city and makes it a worse place to live.
Mike Brown possibly could take the Bungles out of Cincy anytime.
They don't even pay rent on the stadium anymore. My guess is that there is no penalty for vacating the stadium if they choose to do so. Are you sure about that? I thought he lives in Indian Hill and has forever.
Bengals aren't moving, however my cousins would love it. 4 of my cousins, all from here in Fresno are life long Bengal fans. When we were kids in the 80s my cousin chose the Bengals as his team b/c of their cool helmet, his siblings and dad followed.
Princeton?
No, he likes the Bears, his dad is a Packers fan like me. The 3 Awbrey boys and their dad are the Bengal fans.
good to know he likes Bears
|
|
02-12-2014 12:45 PM |
|