- This topic has 180 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Did I miss anything?
vinegar chicken – try it sometime. It’s pretty decent, cheap and easy to make. http://www.cookingchanneltv.com/recipes/laura-calder/chicken-in-vinegar.html
Maybe the Rams will move to France? Les Mouflons, no? Crazy shit this moving, not moving – I can relate kind of.
I feel bad for fans that teams come and go but like about everybody don’t want my team to be one of them. I was a Ram fan as a kid in LA, then I moved to SD and so they’ve been close enough for me to drive there in a day – it’s a shitty long drive but I can do it. If they moved to Paris, I’d still root for those froggy fucks.
The chicken sounds good, sdram.
AgamemnonI’m confuzed — this article sez the LA Stadium wont be finished until 2018. So does that mean if the rams move, they will
play somewhere else for a coupla years?This is one bloody complex issue.
Remember Kroenke still has to fix the cross-ownership in Denver AND he wants to buy the Broncos and sell the Rams IF he buys the Broncos.
What we have here is a socio-pathic Spock playing 3-dimensional chess while we gaze on confused.
I think one of the conditions of taking the job for Fisher was reassurance they wouldn’t move.
Apparently SK only really hears his inner entrepeneurial longings and everything else is just grist for that mill.
The Rose Bowl is an NFL approved venue. If the Rams moved to LA, they could play in the Rose Bowl for a few years…
How long have you been a Ram fan, Mack? I forget.
Do you prefer them in LA or St.Louis?
w
v
1999
On March 16, 1999, the NFL owners, by a 29–2 vote, approved a resolution to award Los Angeles the expansion 32nd franchise. However, the award was contingent on the city’s putting together an acceptable ownership team and stadium deal by September 15; if the parties could not reach an agreement or be close to doing so, the committee would then turn its recommendation to Houston.Yes, you are right about the trouble getting the stadium done. I just wonder if St. Louis would be in the situation it is now if LA had gotten that expansion team instead of Houston. I dunno.
stltoday.com
Should Chargers be next in line in LA?
4 hours ago • By Jim ThomasAccording to some league sources, the NFL would rather have a “California solution” to the Los Angeles situation rather than having the Rams move to the nation’s second-largest market.
Namely, either the San Diego Chargers or Oakland Raiders. And the sentiment there seems to lean towards San Diego, which has unsuccessfully tried to get a new stadium built for years.
In an interview earlier this week with the Post-Dispatch, longtime Raiders executive Amy Trask pointed out how having the Chargers in Los Angeles would make the most sense.
“The Chargers in particular having been working for a decade and a half — almost 15 years,” Trask said. “I think the Chargers have been at it longer than any other team in terms of trying to develop a successful (stadium) alternative in the San Diego market.”
Trask, who was with the Raiders for nearly three decades before resigning in 2013, adds: “If you look at this from a league perspective, it really does in many regards make the most sense — certainly a tremendous amount of sense — to relocate the Chargers rather than another team.”
She cites the New England Patriots as a prime example of a team with a truly regional scope.
“They’re not the ‘Boston’ Patriots. They’re the ‘New England’ Patriots,” Trask said. “And that team, rather than being identified with one municipality — Boston — identifies with the whole region.”
San Diego could fill that role in southern California by relocating north to the Los Angeles area.
“San Diego’s about 100 miles from where I’m sitting right now,” said Trask, who lives in Los Angeles. “Southern California is a big, big area. The Chargers could move someplace within that region that would give all their fans in San Diego easy access. And give those in the Los Angeles market easy access.
“And I’m not suggesting the Chargers would have to move right smack in the middle of downtown (L.A.), but they could pick a location within the region in which they could serve all of southern California very easily.”
Given Los Angeles’ rather lukewarm history of support for pro football, Trask also feels it makes more sense to relocate just one team into the market rather than two.
“Particularly at the outset,” said Trask, who now works for the CBS Sports Network, appearing on “That Other Pregame Show” and “Can We Talk?”
“Why not let one team come, sink its roots into the ground, really capture the market, and then make a determination down the road if you believe the market will handle a second team well.
“Why do both at the same time? I think that’s a dicey proposition.”
Trask never thought the Los Angeles market would go 20 seasons, soon to be 21, without an NFL team.
“If you had told me back in 1995 when Georgia Frontiere moved the Rams to St. Louis and Al Davis moved the Raiders to Oakland that we would be having this conversation 20 years later discussing the empty Los Angeles market, I would’ve looked at you like you were nutty,” she said.
For years the top-ranking Raiders executive behind only late owner Al Davis, Trask has sensed in the past year or so that a return of the NFL to L.A. was gaining momentum. And not just because the Rams, Raiders and Chargers can now get out of their stadium leases in their current market.
“That’s part of it,” she said. “I think also a lot of challenges that the league had been facing have been surmounted.”
Among them, the new collective bargaining agreement as well as a new long-term television contract.
“It simply strikes me that the time is really ripe for focus on this market,” she said.
She suggests that having a state of the art stadium in Los Angeles would be a true test of market support.
“The one thing to remember in that regard is Los Angeles has never had a magnificent stadium,” Trask said. “Look, at the time the Coliseum was built, which was right about the time the Roman Coliseum was built — and I jest — it was a beautiful facility.
“But in terms of a modern day, state of the art, all the bells and whistles facility, Los Angeles doesn’t have a football stadium like that. So I think before the market support for the team can be judged, one has to know that there’s going to be that kind of stadium available.”
Stan Kroenke’s proposed Inglewood stadium could provide that venue. Trask believes Inglewood is a good site, but says there are two or three other sites in the area that also would work.
http://www.stltoday.com/sports/football/professional/article_49137ae3-24ce-58cb-bca2-defc3d4032a9.html#.VK7NYg-NMJA.twitter Agamemnon
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
