wv wrote:

Relocation might be an issue
for some free agents, i suppose.
w
v
=================================
Laram

We were doing some promos for the combine and I had an opportunity to speak with this player.

It’s an issue, at least for him.

Makes complete sense.

Less likely to matter to someone without kids.

There goes the last credible news anchor in America.

I guess I will have to rely on Jon Oliver for worthwhile coverage of the news, now.

rfl wrote:

Zooey wrote:
I have always been at odds with the home town fans, and I guess I like it that way. Being the contrarian. You know.

Yeah, that’s how I feel.

But Zooey, you grew up in So Cal, didn’t you?

No. I was born in Los Angeles, but moved to NoCal when I was 6-months old.

I became a Dodgers fan because one of my idiot brothers told me that they had a player who hit a lot of triples, and had “3-dog” written on his shoes (Willie Davis). That was enough for a 6-year old to become a Dodgers fan.

I became a Rams fan because I became sensitive to my mom saying that I liked or disliked certain things just because my idiot brothers did, and two of my idiot brothers are Cowboys fans. So I chose the Rams because they had the coolest helmets, and they were from the same place as the Dodgers, and I was born there, and it all seemed to add up in a nice, tidy package.

Later, I learned the benefits of contrariness.

Dak wrote:

Yeah. I can’t get too upset with the local effort right now. There’s movement on the stadium construction front. It looks doable in STL.

I wonder, if at the end of this, we don’t have the St. Louis Chargers or Raiders. I really think it could be either team that could decide they want a sure-thing new stadium for a few hundred million dollars, rather than continue to dick around in those cities.

I guess the Rams could stay here, and the Chargers or Raiders could move to Kroenke’s stadium. I just don’t see that happening, though. I am inclined to believe that SK wants to move HIS team to HIS stadium, and help build that entire Inglewood development. And, I just don’t see an owner swap, where SK owns the L.A. Chargers or Raiders. I guess it’s possible, since SK would control the lease on the stadium. It’s conceivable that it would be cheaper to build a new stadium than lease SK’s new stadium. And, the NFL likely would not want an owner of one NFL team leasing to another NFL team. Although, at the same time I write that, I remember that they’re sure ignoring the cross-ownership rule in place right now in order for SK to continue to own the Rams, so maybe those little details aren’t that important to NFL ownership.

It’s an interesting situation, for sure. And, it seems to evolve weekly.

I don’t see it (the Rams staying), either. If Kroenke is going to present the league with a crowning jewel, he’s going to want to wear the crown himself. I’m not 100% sure of the Rams moving to LA, but I am 100% sure of Kroenke moving to LA. Well, 99.9%, with a 0.1% chance of trading franchises with the Bowlen family.

I don’t think it would be a big issue for a team to lease a stadium from another owner. Most teams have a lease. So what does it matter? Any relocation and stadium lease gets passed by the Committee for Overseeing Opportunities to Make Fortunes in Los Angeles, or whatever it is. I can’t think of anything that would be an inherent conflict of interest in that kind of arrangement.

My intuition tells me that the Rams, and eventually the Raiders, end up back in LA, with St. Louis getting either the Chargers or the Jaguars.

It’s a strange world. I mean, if you look at the St. Louis stadium…that’s a nice looking stadium. Right on the River. It’s nice. It’s certainly better than what the Rams have right now, better than what the Chargers or Raiders have. That stadium is an upgrade for any of those teams.

It’s just that the LA project trumps it. It just does.

wv wrote:

Well, they are not letting him go. They may not trust him
but they are not letting him walk.

Seems to me, Bradford has all the cards. I keep
hearing he has to take a pay cut to stay,
but i dont see what leverage the Rams have.

w
v

He could take a pay cut as part of an extension. I mean…he’s not giving up the money, but he might defer it into the future. His incentive to do that is that an unproductive year this year leads to a greatly reduced offer for his second contract. He could be better off signing an extension now. Both sides may want to see how it goes during the season, though, and it may depend upon how badly the Rams feel they need to free up cap space.

zn wrote:

Remember, it was just an example. I said, just one example. And personally I don’t think they caught Seattle napping…I think coverage units respect him that much. Plus of course he was 3rd in punt return yards in spite of playing just 8 games.

There are other examples from the season of him being used as a decoy on offense to set up a big play by someone else.

There’s the fact that when they had Bradford, he actually was a deep threat. And, with a qb who can throw those, will be again.

There are the runs that nearly broke so many times that you have to figure one will … and in the meanwhile he was averaging 6.2 a rush.

To me, all they need is to add in some other routes as a receiver when he becomes more proficient at that.

In fact his combined yards rushing, receiving, and returning in 2014 amounted to 857 in 8 games. Across 16 of course that’s 1714.

The 6.2 per rush is nice. I felt like he was becoming more proficient at that this season. I think a lot of people want a Big Play every time TA touches the ball, but I was satisfied with his carries this last season. I didn’t realize it was as high as 6.2, but I thought those play calls were getting an undeserved bad rap. I will take 5 or 6 per carry. I also did not know he was averaging over 100 per game combined yardage. I would have guessed a figure a lot lower than that.

I’d still like to see more out of him to justify the draft position. I’d like him to develop as a receiver, mostly. I would like him to be part of a mix on offense that makes the defense pick their poison. It will take growth from Bailey, Quick, and Austin to make that happen. And a QB would be nice.

If the Rams evaporate, I would be done. I would probably still watch the Super Bowl. But I wouldn’t have a team to follow. I wouldn’t start over with another team.

There is something about my team loyalty – an essence of my innocent childhood years – that remains an important part of sports for me. I think that is why the blue and whites are important to me.

Baseball kind of “jumped the shark” for me. I was a baseball fanatic growing up. It’s just that tradition in baseball is so rich, and the tradition eroded severely in a lot of ways, and I no longer felt like my favorite team had the same…je ne sais quois. I still root for the Dodgers, but I’m a fair weather fan now.

There are a few scenarios here that could push me beyond my…loyalty, for lack of a better word. If I get sickened by what happens in the next 2-3 years, I could lose it.

zn wrote:

I once got into a discussion about similar stuff with a St. Louis fan who wanted to change the team name and logo so they would be more St. Louis. I disagreed, and said their longterm identity meant more to me than any St. Louis identification. He said that was superficial, since it meant I was just loyal to laundry. I said that the name, logo, and uniform are more than just merely external things–they’re the signs and symbols of a history and tradition, and that history and tradition is part of what the team means to people. I knew he was a baseball Cards fan, so I said, what if the Cards changed their colors and their name and became (say) The Aces. Would that be an absolutely meaningless change in merely superficial, external things? I think he saw the point when it struck home–no, the Aces wearing black and red would not be the same as the Cards wearing red.

Well, we are headed into something that matters a great deal to a lot of us, and to our posting friends that we have bonded with over the past two decades. Some of us are fans of the _________ Rams. Some of us are fans of the St. Louis _________. I think some of us may be fans of the Los Angeles ________, a currently vacant spot that people have filled with the Rams. I think, though, that if the Chargers had moved to LA five years ago, we would have seen some Los Angeles fans vanish.

We are headed for changes, and we are all going to lose some friends one way or another. It’s too bad.

But at least we have the consolation that Kroenke will be worth more on paper no matter what.

Interesting assessment of the 6 football stadium proposals in Los Angeles.

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2015/01/the_six_possible_plans_for_a_los_angeles_nfl_stadium.php#more

rfl wrote:

wv wrote:
So I assume their thinking will be — Build a Brick WALL of an OLine.
Throw every resource at that one Unit. Do whatever you have to do
but make SURE that one Unit is topnotch.

Your conviction that they MUST be prioritizing the OL is interesting. It sounds plausible, but I am not convinced.

Anyway, I’d just question your metaphor. I don’t think the key is an OL WALL. I think what they really want is a pile driving OL to get the running game going.

The frequent assumption about Fisher’s Rams is that they are a power running team. The truth is that their running game was extremely erratic last year. Their offense was driven by passing, not running.

That’s not what Fisher wants. He wants to supercharge the running game and build passing on it.

Just a quibble …

I think what they want is battering rams.

And I think I should trademark that and market it as the nickname of the line.

This is what a team of quitters looks like:

zn wrote:

Zooey wrote:
I sincerely hope the man never goes far without a tiny little cigar.

What happened to his hand.

He extinguished his previous cigar on it. Duh.

Cignetti – Tougher Than You.

wv wrote:

Zooey wrote:
But…if the Davis family ends up owning the Rams, it will take me a long time to climb out of my depression.

Hole-Lee-Shit. Dont even say that.
Dont think it, and dont type it.

Geezus-h-christ.

Let a thousand flowers bloom,
except for that one.

w
v

Yeah. It would be the ultimate kick-to-the-groin for a Rams fan. Like we haven’t been kicked around enough.

PA Ram wrote:

I will always believe it was a dumb call at that moment.

They were down in the first half–momentum was an issue. I would have criticized him for kicking the field goal.

This play was THE game. They had to have the T.D.

For some reason they decided to call a play with a lot of moving parts. There was an off snap in the first half that Wilson gathered in–could have happened. Could have been called for a penalty on a pick play. Could have and was intercepted. Wilson may have pulled the ball down for a split second of hesitation and been sacked.

If they run it in Lynch either gets it and it’s game over or he doesn’t and a time out is taken. You live to play again.

I love the chances with Lynch–stacked box or not.

Was execution perfect? Nope.

But the coaches should not have put the team in that position. They did not have to do it.

I’ve read all the excuses, all the explanations and all the rationalizing.

In the end–that call is going to haunt that team and its fans forever.

I agree with that.

I also think everybody around here would be pretty happy with that if it had been ANY other team than the Patriots. It would have been something to gloat over a division rival about, and ridicule them. Instead, it appears a lot of Rams fans are unhappy.

Weird, huh?