Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
Duplicate of another approved link: 8123555


(LA Observed)   St. Louis Rams owner nonchalantly buys a stadium-sized real estate parcel in Los Angeles   (laobserved.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, St. Louis Rams, Stan Kroenke, Los Angeles, Inglewood, development plans  
•       •       •

357 clicks;  Favorite

26 Comments     (+0 »)
 
 
2014-01-31 12:01:06 PM  
So what did St Louis do to deserve football teams that come and go?
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-01-31 12:23:08 PM  
A 60 acre parking lot holds around 8,000 cars.
 
2014-01-31 12:34:34 PM  

ZAZ: A 60 acre parking lot holds around 8,000 cars.


And room for DOZENS of profitable buses.
 
2014-01-31 12:34:40 PM  
Really admins? So few greens today and you can't even look down a handful of links?
 
2014-01-31 12:36:17 PM  

Nadie_AZ: So what did St Louis do to deserve football teams that come and go?


Dred Scott.
 
2014-01-31 12:36:53 PM  
AGAIN? Is this so a few years after moving, they can move again?
 
2014-01-31 12:37:52 PM  
The Rams have been unable to work out a stadium deal in St. Louis, and, according to the terms of their lease, are able to move after the 2014 season....

Buh-bye. And thanks for all the loyalty.
 
2014-01-31 12:40:12 PM  

TheShavingofOccam123: The Rams have been unable to work out a stadium deal in St. Louis, and, according to the terms of their lease, are able to move after the 2014 season....

Buh-bye. And thanks for all the loyalty.


Stadium deal? It's sitting there, right downtown. How could anyone miss it?
 
2014-01-31 12:44:36 PM  
Don't worry, they've assured Goodell that it's not for a stadium. Being from Seattle, I know that these commissioners and owners are honorable folk and can be trusted in these situations.
 
2014-01-31 12:49:32 PM  

Shame Us: Don't worry, they've assured Goodell that it's not for a stadium. Being from Seattle, I know that these commissioners and owners are honorable folk and can be trusted in these situations.


If this was St. Louis to say, Oklahoma City then that might be true.

But to have a proven winner of an owner (Kroenke also owns the Colorado Avalanche) who wants to put a team (back) in L.A., with that TV revenue....I don't think there would be a lot of roadblocks put up there.
 
2014-01-31 12:52:34 PM  

LessO2: Shame Us: Don't worry, they've assured Goodell that it's not for a stadium. Being from Seattle, I know that these commissioners and owners are honorable folk and can be trusted in these situations.

If this was St. Louis to say, Oklahoma City then that might be true.

But to have a proven winner of an owner (Kroenke also owns the Colorado Avalanche) who wants to put a team (back) in L.A., with that TV revenue....I don't think there would be a lot of roadblocks put up there.


Yeah, I can't imagine there would be either. It is a little bit of a black eye on the NFL that they haven't found a way to get into the LA market since the Raiders left. Teams in Buffalo, Green Bay, Tampa, etc. but you can't make LA work?

On it's face though, I hate to see any fanbase lose it's team even if the move makes sense for the league.
 
2014-01-31 12:54:26 PM  
Its most likely for a land-swap elsewhere in the area. This is prime residential real estate... so say another company like the Irvine Company just does a land swap and boom, more acreage for a stadium.
 
2014-01-31 12:54:31 PM  

Klivian: Really admins? So few greens today and you can't even look down a handful of links?


This was the front page of the LA Times website most of last night, w/ the (bogus) headline "Rams on their way back?" Oh, how the mighty have fallen.
 
2014-01-31 12:54:55 PM  
I'm sorry but, USC constantly has bigger crowds than either the Raiders or the Rams did when they were both in Greater LA.

So, do go ahead Stan.  When you figure out being in LA isn't all it's cracked up to be you'll be playing the same game again with St. Louis...but no one there will care.
 
2014-01-31 12:56:14 PM  
Rams moving to Los Angeles? This is not a repeat from 1946.
 
2014-01-31 12:56:58 PM  

Shame Us: LessO2: Shame Us: Don't worry, they've assured Goodell that it's not for a stadium. Being from Seattle, I know that these commissioners and owners are honorable folk and can be trusted in these situations.

If this was St. Louis to say, Oklahoma City then that might be true.

But to have a proven winner of an owner (Kroenke also owns the Colorado Avalanche) who wants to put a team (back) in L.A., with that TV revenue....I don't think there would be a lot of roadblocks put up there.

Yeah, I can't imagine there would be either. It is a little bit of a black eye on the NFL that they haven't found a way to get into the LA market since the Raiders left. Teams in Buffalo, Green Bay, Tampa, etc. but you can't make LA work?

On it's face though, I hate to see any fanbase lose it's team even if the move makes sense for the league.


L.A. already has a professional football team.
 
2014-01-31 12:58:59 PM  
There will never be a team in LA.  Otherwise the other teams can't blackmail their home cities into paying for their stadiums.
 
2014-01-31 12:59:00 PM  

Shame Us: Don't worry, they've assured Goodell that it's not for a stadium. Being from Seattle, I know that these commissioners and owners are honorable folk and can be trusted in these situations.


Goodell's not cheering for that.
 
2014-01-31 01:00:23 PM  

Rwa2play: I'm sorry but, USC constantly has bigger crowds than either the Raiders or the Rams did when they were both in Greater LA.

So, do go ahead Stan.  When you figure out being in LA isn't all it's cracked up to be you'll be playing the same game again with St. Louis...but no one there will care.


Marketing is a whole lot different than it was when the Raiders were in LA.  If anything, the sold-out crowds at USC games would be added incentive for the NFL to return.
 
2014-01-31 01:05:52 PM  
This is the same damn story from below! :-(

i1182.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-31 01:06:37 PM  

LessO2: Rwa2play: I'm sorry but, USC constantly has bigger crowds than either the Raiders or the Rams did when they were both in Greater LA.

So, do go ahead Stan.  When you figure out being in LA isn't all it's cracked up to be you'll be playing the same game again with St. Louis...but no one there will care.

Marketing is a whole lot different than it was when the Raiders were in LA.  If anything, the sold-out crowds at USC games would be added incentive for the NFL to return.


Uh, the Raiders and Rams had winning teams during their runs there.  Hell, they had better teams than USC had during their runs there, still couldn't draw like USC did.
 
2014-01-31 01:14:28 PM  

Rwa2play: Uh, the Raiders and Rams had winning teams during their runs there. Hell, they had better teams than USC had during their runs there, still couldn't draw like USC did.


They don't need to.  They can make plenty of money off a fancy 70k stadium.  Jerry is the only one who can draw in 90k right now.
 
2014-01-31 01:18:48 PM  

Rwa2play: LessO2: Rwa2play: I'm sorry but, USC constantly has bigger crowds than either the Raiders or the Rams did when they were both in Greater LA.

So, do go ahead Stan.  When you figure out being in LA isn't all it's cracked up to be you'll be playing the same game again with St. Louis...but no one there will care.

Marketing is a whole lot different than it was when the Raiders were in LA.  If anything, the sold-out crowds at USC games would be added incentive for the NFL to return.

Uh, the Raiders and Rams had winning teams during their runs there.  Hell, they had better teams than USC had during their runs there, still couldn't draw like USC did.


You're missing the point.  A winning franchise is important, but it's not an essential thing nowadays.  There are so many revenue streams for professional (and college) sports.   Look at the Dallas Cowboys....they have won only won one playoff game in how many years?

Look at the LA Clippers...how did a team that was so pathetic survive for so long?
 
2014-01-31 01:22:31 PM  

Rwa2play: LessO2: Rwa2play: I'm sorry but, USC constantly has bigger crowds than either the Raiders or the Rams did when they were both in Greater LA.

So, do go ahead Stan.  When you figure out being in LA isn't all it's cracked up to be you'll be playing the same game again with St. Louis...but no one there will care.

Marketing is a whole lot different than it was when the Raiders were in LA.  If anything, the sold-out crowds at USC games would be added incentive for the NFL to return.

Uh, the Raiders and Rams had winning teams during their runs there.  Hell, they had better teams than USC had during their runs there, still couldn't draw like USC did.


Pretty much this.
I lived there from 1983 - 1990, the raiders couldn't sell out season tickets while winning super bowls.

The average angeleno was lukewarm about football.

A lot of folks in socal weren't born there, and tend to bring team loyalties with them.
They like the status quo because they get a larger range and variety of games to watch than they would with a hometown team.

The mausoleum sucks for generating revenue compared to a modern NFL stadium.
When al davis wanted a new one built, LA said sure pay for it yourself basically.
Soon thereafter the raiders were back in oakland.

Add in the fact that most young kids who are football fans there have never known a hometown team, and have other team loyalties, well, let's say I wish them the best of luck.

The reality is LA is a fantastic tv market and a lousy football market. The team owners in the NFL might not be great football people but they do know how to make money.

If they thought it was worth it there would be a team in LA.
Without massive public financial support, again , good luck with that.
 
2014-01-31 02:17:57 PM  

LessO2: Look at the LA Clippers...how did a team that was so pathetic survive for so long?


Because Donald Sterling was a cheap bastard.
 
2014-01-31 02:20:31 PM  

Muzzleloader: Pretty much this.
I lived there from 1983 - 1990, the raiders couldn't sell out season tickets while winning super bowls.

The average angeleno was lukewarm about football.

A lot of folks in socal weren't born there, and tend to bring team loyalties with them.
They like the status quo because they get a larger range and variety of games to watch than they would with a hometown team.

The mausoleum sucks for generating revenue compared to a modern NFL stadium.
When al davis wanted a new one built, LA said sure pay for it yourself basically.
Soon thereafter the raiders were back in oakland.

Add in the fact that most young kids who are football fans there have never known a hometown team, and have other team loyalties, well, let's say I wish them the best of luck.

The reality is LA is a fantastic tv market and a lousy football market. The team owners in the NFL might not be great football people but they do know how to make money.

If they thought it was worth it there would be a team in LA.
Without massive public financial support, again , good luck with that.


That's why I find Kroenke's move funny.  He's not gonna get any public money from building a stadium there; he'll have to pay for it himself.

So, he could wave that in St. Louis' face but the officials there know that if LA won't finance it, Kroenke's going to the need the NFL's help to fund it.
 
Displayed 26 of 26 comments


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report