Calamity Kris Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 I just read where the San Diego Chargers, Oakland Raiders and St Louis Rams have all petitioned to move to the Los Angeles area. We'll see how well that goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Mosby Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Didn't the Raiders already do that once, only to return to the bay area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Whiskers Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 2 of the 3 have been there. These poor billionaire owners just can't afford to build a new stadium to play in. They need the community to pay the bill of building one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 At least the dark cloud of Al Davis no longer exists... That man screwed up more stuff whenever he decided on a "move..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yul Lose Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Actually all three teams were in L A at one time. The Chargers started there and moved to S D. I wonder what makes the NFL think three teams or two teams or even one team can be successful there this time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cat Brules Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Send them all to LA and half the combined rosters, at any given time, will be in jail on Monday morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Well, bye! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noz Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Well, bye! Seems like what all of their current hometowns are saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yul Lose Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 I don't blame the Chargers ownership. They've been trying to get a new stadium built for almost 15 years and are no closer to getting one built now then they were 15 years ago, IMHO. The fan base isn't that important to a pro team because 85% of their revenue comes from the NFL television contracts according to an interview I listened to yesterday. I thought that there was a chance the new mayor would get something done but he's in the pocket of the hoteliers who are firmly against a stadium downtown and the plan that they came up with to build on the existing Qualcomm site was nixed by the NFL. The midnight hour is fast approaching for the Bolts to stay in town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nasty Newt # 7365 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Seems like what all of their current hometowns are saying.Not San Diego. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yul Lose Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Not San Diego. San Diego is saying it in a different sort of way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nasty Newt # 7365 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 The good news is, if they can get 2 or 3 more teams, L.A. can have its own division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 I don't blame the Chargers ownership. They've been trying to get a new stadium built for almost 15 years and are no closer to getting one built now then they were 15 years ago, IMHO. So why are taxpayers supposed to pony up the money? St. Louis built a stadium that cost taxpayers $750 million dollars to get the Rams there. The stadium still isn't paid for, the local economy is in the tank -- especially surrounding the stadium -- and the Rams are gone. Yet there are forces in St. Louis who are proposing yet another taxpayer financed stadium to attract an as yet unidentified NFL team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yul Lose Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 So why are taxpayers supposed to pony up the money? St. Louis built a stadium that cost taxpayers $750 million dollars to get the Rams there. The stadium still isn't paid for, the local economy is in the tank -- especially surrounding the stadium -- and the Rams are gone. Yet there are forces in St. Louis who are proposing yet another taxpayer financed stadium to attract an as yet unidentified NFL team. I never said the taxpayers were supposed to pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noz Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 So why are taxpayers supposed to pony up the money? St. Louis built a stadium that cost taxpayers $750 million dollars to get the Rams there. The stadium still isn't paid for, the local economy is in the tank -- especially surrounding the stadium -- and the Rams are gone. Yet there are forces in St. Louis who are proposing yet another taxpayer financed stadium to attract an as yet unidentified NFL team. The bad thing is it's not just the St. Louis taxpayers that are taking it in the lips. It's all of Missouri. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackwater 53393 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 One of these teams MAY be given permission to move to LA. The other two are likely to be looking for accommodations where they are now!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 LA is the biggest market without a pro team. Problem is if the raiders go there, they still won't have a pro team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rye Miles #13621 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Sports talk show yesterday said any team that moves to L.A., has to pony up 500 million bucks!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calamity Kris Posted January 6, 2016 Author Share Posted January 6, 2016 St. Louis built a stadium that cost taxpayers $750 million dollars to get the Rams there. The stadium still isn't paid for, the local economy is in the tank -- especially surrounding the stadium -- and the Rams are gone. Yet there are forces in St. Louis who are proposing yet another taxpayer financed stadium to attract an as yet unidentified NFL team. I've been to the EJ Dome. It's rather nice. I don't understand what the problem is with it, except for the neighborhood, which will be worse with the location of the proposed new stadium. One of these teams MAY be given permission to move to LA. The other two are likely to be looking for accommodations where they are now!! The talking heads here are saying Kroenke will move the team whether the NFL gives him permission or not. Speaking of relocation, I don't know which is worse, Inglewatts or Compton. Both of those are worse than St Louis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yul Lose Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 I've been to the EJ Dome. It's rather nice. I don't understand what the problem is with it, except for the neighborhood, which will be worse with the location of the proposed new stadium. The talking heads here are saying Kroenke will move the team whether the NFL gives him permission or not. Speaking of relocation, I don't know which is worse, Inglewatts or Compton. Both of those are worse than St Louis. The local talking heads said yesterday that Kroenke and the city of Inglewood are going to go ahead with the new stadium whether they get a football team or not. I guess they are counting on other activities to support it like soccer and who knows what else. The Charger owner, for some strange reason thinks they are the best team of the three to get the NFL's blessing on their move to L A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackwater 53393 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Sports talk show yesterday said any team that moves to L.A., has to pony up 500 million bucks!! LA would have to put up three times that to make me even THINK about relocating there!! That place is the rectal orifice of the world!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Here's what Kroenke had to say about St. Louis. It doesn't appear he feels any responsibility for delivering a product that fans want to pay for. Rams haven't had a winning season since '03. St. Louis and the state of Missouri don't have the taxpayer dollars to give him what he thinks is his birthright, but apparently California does. http://www.kansascity.com/latest-news/article53278470.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Well, my take is that if these owners would produce a viable team that gave the fans something to get excited about, perhaps the bottom line would not look so dismal. And the bottom line is what it is all about. That is the view from my saddle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calamity Kris Posted January 7, 2016 Author Share Posted January 7, 2016 Here's what Kroenke had to say about St. Louis. It doesn't appear he feels any responsibility for delivering a product that fans want to pay for. Rams haven't had a winning season since '03. St. Louis and the state of Missouri don't have the taxpayer dollars to give him what he thinks is his birthright, but apparently California does. http://www.kansascity.com/latest-news/article53278470.html Saw the same stuff on the local news sites. "The (new Inglewood) stadium serves as the epicenter for a NFL retail and entertainment district that includes a 6,000 seat theatre and up to 8.5 million square feet of office space, hotel retail and dining options," the application reads. This is out and out horse manure. The reason the Kings and Lakers moved from the Forum (which now sits on the land for the new stadium) to Staples Center and the horse race track was closed is the horrendous crime rates. Period. Inglewood, which is right next to Watts, is one of the most depressed areas in Los Angeles. Building a new stadium and entertainment complex isn't going to change that area. It will provide fertile ground for more crime. The team sold out every home game from its arrival until 2006, but attendance in recent years has been near the bottom of the league. The Rams haven't had a winning season since 2003 and fans endured one 15-65 stretch that was the worst five-year record in NFL history. Give the fans a winning team and they will come......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugs Bonney SASS # 10171 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 If you're not aware of it the Kroenke family owns Walmart and they are very used to getting their way no matter what it costs. What I can't understand is that the Rams left LA because they couldn't draw flies and came to Saint Louis where they continued to play like the stuff that does draw flies. Surprise, surprise nobody goes to the games. It has nothing to do with the stadium, the team stinks. Now they want to move back to LA where they won't be anymore successful unless they can win. After winning the Super Bowl they lost everyone but Kurt Warner. When he couldn't win another Super Bowl by himself they let him go and he promptly went to Arizona and won a Super Bowl. It appears Kroenke knows less about football than he does about quality retail products. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yul Lose Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Saw the same stuff on the local news sites. "The (new Inglewood) stadium serves as the epicenter for a NFL retail and entertainment district that includes a 6,000 seat theatre and up to 8.5 million square feet of office space, hotel retail and dining options," the application reads. This is out and out horse manure. The reason the Kings and Lakers moved from the Forum (which now sits on the land for the new stadium) to Staples Center and the horse race track was closed is the horrendous crime rates. Period. Inglewood, which is right next to Watts, is one of the most depressed areas in Los Angeles. Building a new stadium and entertainment complex isn't going to change that area. It will provide fertile ground for more crime. The team sold out every home game from its arrival until 2006, but attendance in recent years has been near the bottom of the league. The Rams haven't had a winning season since 2003 and fans endured one 15-65 stretch that was the worst five-year record in NFL history. Give the fans a winning team and they will come......... Yep it is a strange location for sure. What makes them think that large numbers of consumers are going to take the risk to travel to Inglewood at night or during the day for that matter. The proposed Carson stadium site is a landfill and I'm willing to bet the environmental issues will be tremendous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calamity Kris Posted January 7, 2016 Author Share Posted January 7, 2016 Yep it is a strange location for sure. What makes them think that large numbers of consumers are going to take the risk to travel to Inglewood at night or during the day for that matter. The proposed Carson stadium site is a landfill and I'm willing to bet the environmental issues will be tremendous. That stadium is actually on the Carson/Compton border. It sounds better to say "Carson" than "Compton". I used to work in that area. I wouldn't go there either..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gateway Kid SASS# 70038 Life Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 If you're not aware of it the Kroenke family owns Walmart and they are very used to getting their way no matter what it costs. What I can't understand is that the Rams left LA because they couldn't draw flies and came to Saint Louis where they continued to play like the stuff that does draw flies. Surprise, surprise nobody goes to the games. It has nothing to do with the stadium, the team stinks. Now they want to move back to LA where they won't be anymore successful unless they can win. After winning the Super Bowl they lost everyone but Kurt Warner. When he couldn't win another Super Bowl by himself they let him go and he promptly went to Arizona and won a Super Bowl. It appears Kroenke knows less about football than he does about quality retail products.If you are referring to SB 43 (2-1-09) Pittsburgh vs Arizona, Steelers won 27-23, not Arizona.In 2002 SB 36 (2-3-2002) NE beat St Louis 20-17 In 2000 SB 34 (1-30-2000) St Louis beat Tennessee 23-17 for Kurt Warner's only SB win. Regards Gateway Kid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedalia Dave Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 They are using the stadium and associated infrastructure/hotels/entertainment venues as an excuse to "revitalize" an area of urban blight. However it never works. It only makes crooked real estate developers rich at expense of the tax payers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 The big lie from pro sports is that they're good for the local economy and therefore worthy of taxpayer support. The truth is that they don't generate much revenue outside the stadium. Inside the stadium they generate bushels of cash for the owners. St. Louis is just one of many examples where a franchise and stadium were supposed to jumpstart the local economy and rehab the surrounding neighborhood. Time and again, that formula fails to deliver, yet the cronies of govt. cave every time. Locally, the Kansas City Chiefs got $350 million of taxpayer dollars over 20 years to renovate the stadium under threat of leaving town. In addition, the city of Kansas City gives the team $2 million of unrestricted funds annually. Independent analysis shows that the Chiefs' presence generates around $11 million annually for the local economy. Let's see, that's $390 million of taxpayer dollars vs a $220 million return on investment. A net loss of $170 million that isn't available for infrastructure and basic services. Sorry for the rant folks, but I'm fed up with govt. crying about not having enough money and hosing the taxpayers. Just so you know, in some areas locally, sales taxes are approaching 12% just to support "economic stimulus" while infrastructure crumbles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calamity Kris Posted January 7, 2016 Author Share Posted January 7, 2016 If you're not aware of it the Kroenke family owns Walmart and they are very used to getting their way no matter what it costs. I was not aware. He married well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudgeBagodonuts Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 It's been shown, time and time again, that the only "winners" in city/state grants to build sports stadiums are the owners of the franchises that get to use them. Here in Philadelphia, it was recently revealed that the city (which is always on the verge of a budget crisis) spent $170M for the new stadium for the Eagles, and the state kicked in even more than that. Yet, the Eagles charge Temple University (a state university) $1M every time they play in the stadium, resulting in little or no income to Temple. When Temple decided they wanted to build their own stadium, they went to the city for economic assistance. They were turned down. Even Philadelphia has finally figured out that they shouldn't be subsidizing sports stadiums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.