U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-27-2015, 04:17 PM
 
Location: California
2,015 posts, read 2,016,234 times
Reputation: 1776

Advertisements

I have been reading so much about who will be moving and who will stay put between the Rams, Raiders and Chargers. Right now it is all speculation on who will move. But one thing is obvious, the only owner who truly wants to move to LA is Stan Kroenke and his Rams.

We do know Stan Kroenke wants to build this lavish stadium in Inglewood, which I would think the NFL would salivate at the thought of having Los Angeles with this lavish stadium to host a Super Bowl or should I say be in the rotation to host Super Bowls

The Raiders and Chargers on the other hand would prefer to stay where they're at. IMO the Rams would have the upper hand since Kroenke will finance his stadium himself (with his partners). I think the NFL will help one of the other two teams to finance a stadium deal for them to stay put and maybe the other team might move into the stadium in Inglewood.

But who knows???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-27-2015, 06:00 PM
 
Location: AriZona
5,230 posts, read 3,133,277 times
Reputation: 5395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just One of the Guys View Post
I have been reading so much about who will be moving and who will stay put between the Rams, Raiders and Chargers. Right now it is all speculation on who will move. But one thing is obvious, the only owner who truly wants to move to LA is Stan Kroenke and his Rams.

We do know Stan Kroenke wants to build this lavish stadium in Inglewood, which I would think the NFL would salivate at the thought of having Los Angeles with this lavish stadium to host a Super Bowl or should I say be in the rotation to host Super Bowls

The Raiders and Chargers on the other hand would prefer to stay where they're at. IMO the Rams would have the upper hand since Kroenke will finance his stadium himself (with his partners). I think the NFL will help one of the other two teams to finance a stadium deal for them to stay put and maybe the other team might move into the stadium in Inglewood.

But who knows???
All told, the Rams belong in LA, and they would be wholeheartedly supported by the greater Los Angeles area. Stan Kroenke has the right idea, and it wouldn't be in the NFL's best interests if they failed to get behind this move.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2015, 10:26 PM
 
Location: North Texas
1,743 posts, read 960,883 times
Reputation: 1568
I don't want ANYBODY in Los Angeles in 2016. This may be a worn-out, lazy argument, but I don't care: California has enough teams! If you're going to move a team to LA, let it be the Raiders so they can tear down that eyesore of a stadium.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2015, 10:29 PM
 
Location: Aurora, CO
6,569 posts, read 10,293,233 times
Reputation: 9834
Short answer? Nobody. Too quick of a turnaround. I don't see the Trojans or Bruins wanting to share their facilities either (even though the Raiders played in the coliseum back in the day). Wouldn't be surprised to see the Rams back in L.A. by 2017 or 2018.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2015, 07:05 AM
 
Location: A great city, by a Great Lake!
15,908 posts, read 10,088,811 times
Reputation: 7456
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew Duck View Post
I don't want ANYBODY in Los Angeles in 2016. This may be a worn-out, lazy argument, but I don't care: California has enough teams! If you're going to move a team to LA, let it be the Raiders so they can tear down that eyesore of a stadium.

As someone who has seen his favorite team pick up and leave, I would not wish that on anyone. The Rams should not have left LA the first time, but they are in St. Louis, and should stay there! Same with the Jags! What is sad is that it comes down to a bunch of bureaucratic BS! Greedy owners demanding that the taxpayers fund their lavish facilities and reap most of the benefits and profits! In the end, it's the fans who get screwed!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2015, 08:27 AM
 
Location: California
2,015 posts, read 2,016,234 times
Reputation: 1776
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1brownsfan View Post
As someone who has seen his favorite team pick up and leave, I would not wish that on anyone. The Rams should not have left LA the first time, but they are in St. Louis, and should stay there! Same with the Jags! What is sad is that it comes down to a bunch of bureaucratic BS! Greedy owners demanding that the taxpayers fund their lavish facilities and reap most of the benefits and profits! In the end, it's the fans who get screwed!
Stan Kroenke is turning on St. Louis when they are trying to get funding for a new riverfront open air stadium, to build his own lavish stadium in LA with zero tax payer money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2015, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Two Rivers, Wisconsin
11,724 posts, read 11,559,537 times
Reputation: 12484
Mark Murphy talked about it with reporters today at the Packers meeting. He said, it has been a priority for the NFL for years and this NFL August meeting is solely for the purpose of discussing Los Angeles. Mark Murphy is on one of the many committees within the NFL, as are other owners, I'm sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2015, 11:55 AM
 
3,723 posts, read 3,885,493 times
Reputation: 2782
This whole LA situation continues to be a mess.

In my opinion, move Jacksonville there and be done with it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2015, 01:10 PM
 
Location: California
2,015 posts, read 2,016,234 times
Reputation: 1776
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluescreen73 View Post
Short answer? Nobody. Too quick of a turnaround. I don't see the Trojans or Bruins wanting to share their facilities either (even though the Raiders played in the coliseum back in the day). Wouldn't be surprised to see the Rams back in L.A. by 2017 or 2018.
Well we know that the Rose Bowl will not be a temporary home to any team, they have already come out to say they wouldn't. The Coliseum in actually operated by USC and Pat Haden the USC athletic director and former Los Angeles Ram has stated he would welcome being a temporary NFL home as long as upgrades are made to the Coliseum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2015, 10:58 PM
 
Location: Trumbull/Danbury
6,551 posts, read 4,502,743 times
Reputation: 2488
My guess: by 2016 no one!

By 2026: 1 of Rams or Raiders (not both).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top