NFL UK Forums

NFL UK Forums (
-   Los Angeles Rams (
-   -   A False Economy: A British Fan’s View of the Rams’ Move to L.A. (

bluelionman 24.01.2016 08:50 AM

A False Economy: A British Fan’s View of the Rams’ Move to L.A.
Thought this was an interesting read (written by a Brit) so thought I'd share it about:

European Bob 25.01.2016 12:54 AM


Originally Posted by bluelionman (Post 2254988)
Thought this was an interesting read (written by a Brit) so thought I'd share it about:

As I've said before, St Louis cannot play the victim here - it was more than happy to take both the Rams and the Cardinals from two other cities so it is rich to go crying when someone else does the same. The Rams were in LA for 50 years and that is where most of their history is. Yes this is about money but it's also about taking the Rams back to what most would consider their true home (note I did not say city of birth). Think of it as a 20-year loan agreement.

I feel far more sorry for the Browns fans in 1995, or the Oilers fans in 1997. Those were their own teams, founded in those cities, not teams they had taken from Los Angeles 20 years prior after a stadium dispute. Both those towns then made their own teams after their losses (Browns were a new team that kept their old history; the people of Houston didn't even get that). Maybe St Louis should lobby to make its own team too, although doing that in a league of 32 may not be easy at all.

Tiger1971 25.01.2016 05:17 PM

A good read, thanks for sharing.

Burgerboy558 28.01.2016 11:09 PM

It is an interesting view point, but I have to say I don't agree with some of it.

I think some of my views are made out in other thread, but in summary:-

1. Stan actually gave the CVC and City the opportunity to tie us in to the city until 2025 with the plans for the dome. Even after arbitration they refused to negotiate.

2. LA was always a football city. We used to sell out the Coliseum until the move to Anaheim, even when we were poor in the 60's. We had great success throughout the 70's and 80's (OK, during the 80's were were usually chasing the 49'ers). We were the first professional sport team in LA.

3. Georgia made it clear from the late 80's that she had no interest in staying in SoCal. She and Shaw systematically tore the team apart brick by brick. Somehow John Robinson kept them competitive until 89 (when I still say we were the best team in the NFL!). For example, Dickerson was possibly the best running back ever (at that time). He was awesome and carried the team. Only right he be paid his worth but they refused! Then, when we got Greg Bell to 1000 yard seasons they let him walk in free agency!

4. STL said nothing at all about any plans to persuade Stan to stay until he announced his plans - why?

5. People forget the economic situation in the late 80's when they started to demand a new stadium. And on that subject, how many other cities built? I can't recall one. I do recall Houston, Cleveland and San Diego all refusing. Also, LA had just gone through the Rodney King riots - spending money on a stadium wasn't exactly a priority.

Whatever you're views on the NFL, capitalism or the rights and wrongs of it, there were fans in LA gutted in 94/95 and there are fans in STL gutted now. Many, many Rams stayed loyal in LA and many will still support us in STL. Lets just look forward now.

All times are GMT +0. The time now is 01:57 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.