Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Rams' request to upgrade Edward Jones Dome rejected
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL General
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
FourThreeMafia


Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 50433
Location: East of Sixburgh
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
NVRamsFan wrote:
iPwn wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
Yea, you're looking at this through entirely the wrong perspective. The Rams are more a threat to build a new stadium near St. Louis than they are to move to LA. The LA rumors are baseless.

So stick to your own team, thanks.
They "simply don't have the money" for a renovation, but they're going to find it for a entirely new stadium? Seems highly unlikely.


Kroenke is going to build his own stadium. He likes to own his teams stadiums and I'm pretty sure he does in each of the other sports he owns teams. He not only has the means to do it with minimal outside money but has the ties in many business areas to make it happen. They will also likely stay in St Louis as owning his own stadium in LA is less likely to happen given the area and market for real estate.


Ding ding ding...

green24 wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
Yea, you're looking at this through entirely the wrong perspective. The Rams are more a threat to build a new stadium near St. Louis than they are to move to LA. The LA rumors are baseless.

So stick to your own team, thanks.
I'll discuss what teams I want to discuss.

I said that I do not think the Rams will leave St. Louis. However, the prospect of them relocating should not be completely ignored.


I don't live in St. Louis. I have no connection to St. Louis. But having been on Rams message boards for the last few years, this is akin to poking the hornets' nest. Nothing stirs up Rams fans(both the remaining Cali fans and the STL fans) like the stupid LA rumors.

Unless you have something credible, there was no reason to add that in there other than to poke the bear.

And yea, I have had more than enough of the bickering that it inevitably causes.

So if you want to discuss every team, go for it...just don't talk out of your arse.


Holy hell, stop crying over spilt milk.

All he did was quote an article and say its a situation worth keeping an eye on. Youre acting like he blatantly bashed the Rams or said they were likely to move.

He did nothing wrong. Youre the one blowing it out of proportion.
_________________

Madden 25 Steelers Franchise
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 48660
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iPwn wrote:
Also, given that the Rams haven't finished above 29th in the league in attendance once since all teams started reporting attendance numbers, I can't see the NFL owners voting to allow the Rams to move somewhere outside of the city limits, and run the risk of attendance numbers dropping even lower, as they aren't in a city anymore. So going outside of St. Louis for somewhere that isn't giving the excuse that they "just don't have the money" but still near St. Louis doesn't seem that likely to me. I could be wrong, but that's going to be a really uphill battle.


Amazes me that you're going to come in here and talk about attendance as a Jaguar fan.

That subject annoys the living heck out of you when people do it and now you're guilty of the same thing.

The Rams sold out every single game from 1995 until the second to last game of 2006. The team went down the toilet as did the economy and the attendance is slowly starting to improve. Not surprising. In fact, in 2006, they were at 100% capacity for the season. In 2007, they were over 98% capacity.

And yes, you are definitely wrong. If Kroenke wants to build a stadium outside of St. Louis, he'll have no issues doing it. In fact, the Dome really isn't in all that good of an area. It would be better off if they had the stadium out more in the suburbs with a parking lot surrounding it for tailgating.

Which, imo, is probably the end game. In fact, a stadium in Fenton at the old Chrysler Plant has been discussed ad nauseum.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iPwn


Global Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 46819
Location: Warbortles Nation
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NVRamsFan wrote:
iPwn wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
Yea, you're looking at this through entirely the wrong perspective. The Rams are more a threat to build a new stadium near St. Louis than they are to move to LA. The LA rumors are baseless.

So stick to your own team, thanks.
They "simply don't have the money" for a renovation, but they're going to find it for a entirely new stadium? Seems highly unlikely.


Kroenke is going to build his own stadium. He likes to own his teams stadiums and I'm pretty sure he does in each of the other sports he owns teams. He not only has the means to do it with minimal outside money but has the ties in many business areas to make it happen. They will also likely stay in St Louis as owning his own stadium in LA is less likely to happen given the area and market for real estate.
Doesn't he only own the Pepsi Center, and only because he was contracted to build the stadium?
_________________

- Best since day one -
It may not be easy, but we ain't riding no tire fire merry-go-round.
- Gus Bradley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 48660
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FourThreeMafia wrote:


Holy hell, stop crying over spilt milk.

All he did was quote an article and say its a situation worth keeping an eye on. Youre acting like he blatantly bashed the Rams or said they were likely to move.

He did nothing wrong. Youre the one blowing it out of proportion.


Without any credible rumors, he brought up a subject that happens to be a problem one for this fan-base. Yep, that is going to get on my nerves.

It would be like someone posting Roethlisberger news and then putting in their comments that they hope he doesn't rape anyone this off-season.

I think you'd probably have an issue with that.

So stop your "whining" about my "whining" and butt out.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 48299
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RuskieTitan wrote:
First thing I thought of when I saw the thread was "LA".

They have a history there, the city would embrace them and they would get a fancy new stadium.

Could use that threat as leverage, but I find them more likely than Minny (would seem wrong) and Jacksonville (no ties, its the Jaguars).


Minnesota is getting a new stadium. The ties to LA can officially stop.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iPwn


Global Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 46819
Location: Warbortles Nation
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
Amazes me that you're going to come in here and talk about attendance as a Jaguar fan.
What amazes you? Every single year, except one (the year that all of Florida was upside down due to the housing market collapse), that attendance numbers have been reported, the Jaguars have outsold the Rams, and by a very significant margin. Aside from that one year, the Jaguars have sold 6,000-11,000 more tickets than the Rams. So I'm really struggling to see how the Jaguars attendance numbers play any role in this discussion whatsoever. The Jaguars have been trashed for one year of bad ticket sales. It's been 6 straight years scraping the bottom of the barrel (bottom 5) for the Rams. This is wholly different than the Jaguars situation insofar as attendance numbers are concerned. The Jaguars are currently at #20, the Rams at #30. If you don't see a 6 year issue as cause for concern, I don't know what to tell you.

Quote:
That subject annoys the living heck out of you when people do it and now you're guilty of the same thing.
Guilty of doing what, exactly? I didn't say they were moving, didn't even suggest it. I just said that I believe it to be an uphill battle for them to secure the deal outside of the city. Given that I wrote an article for SBN that talked (partially) about a similar type of hurdle that Jacksonville would have to overcome, I'm not sure how I'm being hypocritical when I recognize a similar issue for the Jaguars.

Quote:
The Rams sold out every single game from 1995 until the second to last game of 2006. The team went down the toilet as did the economy and the attendance is slowly starting to improve. Not surprising. In fact, in 2006, they were at 100% capacity for the season. In 2007, they were over 98% capacity.
Do you have data for this? I can't find it anywhere, and I'm actually interested. While they were at those numbers in 2006 and 2007, it was 23rd and 24th of 28 reported teams. There's no data from before 2006 for the Rams, so if you have it, I'd really appreciate it.

Quote:
And yes, you are definitely wrong. If Kroenke wants to build a stadium outside of St. Louis, he'll have no issues doing it. In fact, the Dome really isn't in all that good of an area. It would be better off if they had the stadium out more in the suburbs with a parking lot surrounding it for tailgating.
You don't think that the other owners will look at the attendance numbers and not at least discuss the possibility that attendance numbers could continue to drop if the team is moves outside of the city limits? It could be troublesome convincing the other owners (who have to agree to the stadium) that the move wont cause more issues. Not even saying that it won't happen, or that a move is inevitable, but it's far from the slam dunk, non-issue you're trying to paint it as.
_________________

- Best since day one -
It may not be easy, but we ain't riding no tire fire merry-go-round.
- Gus Bradley


Last edited by iPwn on Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:04 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Supersuavesky


Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Posts: 29434
Location: Anywhere But Here
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your not helping Jrr. Just let it go man.


And this article doesn't really mean anything at this point. The Rams have been bad for a while so of course people don't want to pay for a new stadium. Everything will work out fine, they aren't going to LA.
_________________
PSN: Suavesky

RIP Robin Williams
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Vikefan79


Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 29761
Location: Atlanta
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wish the Rams would move back to LA. My uncle was a huge LA Rams fan until they move to St Louis. Since he was living in Wisconsin he adopted the Packers and has rooted from them even since. If the Rams moved back to LA that would be one less Packer fan in my family tree and I can stop hating my uncle during football season and the holidays.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 48660
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iPwn wrote:
Do you have data for this? I can't find it anywhere, and I'm actually interested. While they were at those numbers in 2006 and 2007, it was 23rd and 24th of 28 reported teams. There's no data from before 2006 for the Rams, so if you have it, I'd really appreciate it.


Because their stadium is small.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2705298

Quote:
You don't think that the other owners will look at the attendance numbers and not at least discuss the possibility that attendance numbers could continue to drop if the team is moves outside of the city limits? It could be troublesome convincing the other owners (who have to agree to the stadium) that the move wont cause more issues. Not even saying that it won't happen, or that a move is inevitable, but it's far from the slam dunk, non-issue you're trying to paint it as.


No, I don't think the other owners are going to hold up Kroenke from building a new stadium for the Rams...especially a better stadium in a better location.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 48660
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Supersuavesky wrote:
Your not helping Jrr. Just let it go man.


And this article doesn't really mean anything at this point. The Rams have been bad for a while so of course people don't want to pay for a new stadium. Everything will work out fine, they aren't going to LA.


You're right. I will.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iPwn


Global Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 46819
Location: Warbortles Nation
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2705298
Strangely enough, a sellout ≠ 100% attendance. The Rams last recorded non-sellout was in 2009, yet their attendance in 2010 was 81% in 2011, 86.3% and 2012, 86.8%. So just because they were meeting the threshold for a sellout doesn't mean they were pulling 100% or weren't in a somewhat troubling spot.

Quote:
No, I don't think the other owners are going to hold up Kroenke from building a new stadium for the Rams...especially a better stadium in a better location.
A better location for the league's finances, or a better location as in just a nicer neighborhood type thing? Because other owners aren't going to sign off on losing shared revenue.
_________________

- Best since day one -
It may not be easy, but we ain't riding no tire fire merry-go-round.
- Gus Bradley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NS922


Joined: 01 Aug 2011
Posts: 8326
Location: New Orleans
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:

So stick to your own team, thanks.


umad bro? Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jaguarfan


Joined: 27 Nov 2011
Posts: 22443
Location: Daboyle on the sig/ JMG on the avy
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You listen to me, Green24, if that is your real name.
If you so much as mention the Rams ever again, I will end you.
END YOU
_________________

I hate the Jaguars
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 48660
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iPwn wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2705298
Strangely enough, a sellout ≠ 100% attendance. The Rams last recorded non-sellout was in 2009, yet their attendance in 2010 was 81% in 2011, 86.3% and 2012, 86.8%. So just because they were meeting the threshold for a sellout doesn't mean they were pulling 100% or weren't in a somewhat troubling spot.


I understand the blackout rules but to my knowledge they were real sellouts.

However, here is a site with attendance archived and it appears they weren't in the early years(95, 96, etc.):
http://www.footballdb.com/teams/nfl/st-louis-rams/results/2005

That said, if you look at every game from 99(the 3rd game on) to 2006...I only saw 1 game prior to the Redskins one mentioned above where the Rams attendance fell below 65,000+ which is around 100% capacity.

Attendance hasn't been an issue until the team went into the toilet.

Quote:
A better location for the league's finances, or a better location as in just a nicer neighborhood type thing? Because other owners aren't going to sign off on losing shared revenue.


A better location for the Rams to make more money and a bigger stadium.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 48660
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jaguarfan wrote:
You listen to me, Green24, if that is your real name.
If you so much as mention the Rams ever again, I will end you.
END YOU


This guy gets it. You tell Green Beans who is boss. Cool
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL General All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group