Both Eric Dickerson and Marcus Allen want the Rams in LA.

[Rex]

Warner, Faulk, and Bruce want the Rams in STL.

This is very bush league.

I want the Rams to move to LA for my selfish reasons, one less 10am start, less travel for the Hawks.

I do however feel bad for the average Rams fan in St Louis, I know the pain of losing a team (Sonics), so much so I hope the NBA dies a painful death.

Imagine losing two teams in less than 30 years.

Yeah that sucks, but Seattle has lost 2 in 39 years (Pilots MLB).
I went to a Pilots game, but don't remember it as I was 6 months old, but my dad who is a huge baseball fan was devastated, we finally got a team then they were ripped away by used car salesmen, Bud (lite) Selig a year later.

I remember the Pilots. Baseball card packs in St. Louis were heavy with Pilots cards.

 

[Rex]

I want the Rams in LA because it feels right to me. I also want the Raiders to stay in Oakland where they belong.

This.... And I want Seattle back in the AFC

Keep the Seahawks wherever St. louis gets to play against them the most. Payback boss! :th2thumbs:

 

[Maulbert]

I want the Rams in LA because it feels right to me. I also want the Raiders to stay in Oakland where they belong.

This.... And I want Seattle back in the AFC

Just throwing this out there, if Carson happens then there will be division realignment. Don't know which ones, though.

Only if both the Raiders and Chargers move, and the NFL has hinted that it will likely be the Cards or Rams that switch conferences in that scenario. I'm tired of being jerked around. Leave the Hawks where they are.

 

[Rex]

Warner, Faulk, and Bruce want the Rams in STL.

This is very bush league.

I just linked an article. You want St. Louis sunshine, lollipops, and rainbows? Go to a St. Louis board.

I want the Rams where I think they belong: LA. I think St. Louis is a terrible NFL city. It's a baseball town. Plus, I will never look favorably on a city that needs to steal a team.

That appears to be the narrative of the national media. However, back when the Rams had a legit product-over a decade ago- STL was regarded as one of the be toughest places to play. They had the whole crowd noise thing going for them and everything. SEA understands how cool that is now.

I did go to several games last year, though. I'd be lying if I said I was not disappointed with the crowd much of the time. It's just not fair to expect cities to show up like their team is a world beater when they already knew career back up QB's would be starting for 16 games with poor OL play. You're kidding yourself if you think LA would have handled it better.

You know how it goes though, friend. NFL is the "what have you done for me lately" league. Rams look to a considerably better team with the additions of Foles, Gurley, and an even better DL/defense. If STL doesn't show up this year then I'll be livid STL, beyond mad. I myself may throw them under the bus. There is no excuse. They know they gotta show up to change their recent image and have a much improved team to boot. No excuses this year for STL fans, zero.

But with that said I have confidence they will show up and a box will be checked in the league's eyes.

And for what's it's worth, I wasnt attacking you for posting that. I've seen former players taking sides for months now. I just don't really like that because what they say or think has no weight over the outcome and yet it breeds hard feeling within a team's fan base. But yeah, that doesn't matter here though because this is a SEA site. Point taken.

Tough sell when Kroenke takes the team to practice in LA and cuts back local fan outreach.

 

[Rex]

I want the Rams in LA because it feels right to me. I also want the Raiders to stay in Oakland where they belong.

This.... And I want Seattle back in the AFC

Just throwing this out there, if Carson happens then there will be division realignment. Don't know which ones, though.

Only if both the Raiders and Chargers move, and the NFL has hinted that it will likely be the Cards or Rams that switch conferences in that scenario. I'm tired of being jerked around. Leave the Hawks where they are.

Yes wherever the Rams can beat them the most! :thirishdrinkers:

 

[SuperMan28]

@Rex

Kroneke has committed to neither LA or STL. He's created options.

Ultimately it's up to the NFL owners what they believe is best. No they can't stop Stan from moving, but they can cut every perk they control (TV contracts etc.) and instill fines for every day he violates league policy. You only have to look as far as when the Saehawks tried to move to LA without league approval. (Total coincidence it was the Seahawks, no dig intended mods.)

What I'm trying to say is Stan will do what the league allows him to do. It's a tough sell to move a forth team to CA when 2 out three are having glaring issues within their home markets. The Carson stadium knocks out three birds with one stone (Chargers, Raiders, and LA football.) It makes the most sense as long as STL passes its legal hurdles and throws Stan some perks in the form surrounding land and the NFL clearing his cross ownership violation. LA doesn't solve that little delima for Stan, either.

It'll be interesting to watch it all unfold.

 

[Rex]

@Rex

Kroneke has committed to neither LA or STL. He's created options.

Ultimately it's up to the NFL owners what they believe is best. No they can't stop Stan from moving, but they can cut every perk they control (TV contracts etc.) and instill fines for every day he violates league policy. You only have to look as far as when the Saehawks tried to move to LA without league approval. (Total coincidence it was the Seahawks, no dig intended mods.)

What I'm trying to say is Stan will do what the league allows him to do. It's a tough sell to move a forth team to CA when 2 out three are having glaring issues within their home markets. The Carson stadium knocks out three birds with one stone (Chargers, Raiders, and LA football.) It makes the most sense as long as STL passes its legal hurdles and throws Stan some perks in the form surrounding land and the NFL clearing his cross ownership violation. LA doesn't solve that little delima for Stan, either.

It'll be interesting to watch it all unfold.

Technically you are correct. Kroenke is watching his options play out. However when you bring fan support as a must it is a difficult sell when Kroenke himself is trying to disenfranchise (literally!) the St. Louis fans. He is doing so to try to bolster his case to move the team. I other words if Kroenke had ever muttered a word about wanting to stay in St. Louis it would have been by forked tongue. I hope he has to sell the Rams and they stay in St. Louis while he buys another NFL team.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

@Rex

Kroneke has committed to neither LA or STL. He's created options.

Ultimately it's up to the NFL owners what they believe is best. No they can't stop Stan from moving, but they can cut every perk they control (TV contracts etc.) and instill fines for every day he violates league policy. You only have to look as far as when the Saehawks tried to move to LA without league approval. (Total coincidence it was the Seahawks, no dig intended mods.)

What I'm trying to say is Stan will do what the league allows him to do. It's a tough sell to move a forth team to CA when 2 out three are having glaring issues within their home markets. The Carson stadium knocks out three birds with one stone (Chargers, Raiders, and LA football.) It makes the most sense as long as STL passes its legal hurdles and throws Stan some perks in the form surrounding land and the NFL clearing his cross ownership violation. LA doesn't solve that little delima for Stan, either.

It'll be interesting to watch it all unfold.

Technically you are correct. Kroenke is watching his options play out. However when you bring fan support as a must it is a difficult sell when Kroenke himself is trying to disenfranchise (literally!) the St. Louis fans. He is doing so to try to bolster his case to move the team. I other words if Kroenke had ever muttered a word about wanting to stay in St. Louis it would have been by forked tongue. I hope he has to sell the Rams and they stay in St. Louis while he buys another NFL team.

He should go halvsies with Russell Wilson. :242735: :242733: :smilie=angry016.gif:

 

[Scottemojo]

I want the Rams in LA because 10 AM starts suck. How the hell does an NFC West team have an early start? A move to LA would fix that.

This is actually the only reason I care about this issue. If Roger announced tomorrow that STL would only have late starts, I would not give a crap if they stayed in STL.

 

[hawknation2015]

I kind of like that L.A. doesn't have a team. I saw a lot of Seahawks jerseys when I was there last year. It seems a lot of Southern Cal fans, or former SC fans when Carroll was there, have now become Seahawk fans. That has expanded the reach of the brand.

 

[chris98251]

Seahawks won't move unless the NFL greases the skids so to speak, when we came back to the NFC and yes I said back, I remember a caveat being said about we have moved twice, it was damaging to the fans and teams with developing rivalries and history being cut off.

So to get it done without a bunch of animosity the NFL basically said the Seahawks don't have to move again. Now things change granted, but you don't move a three time Super Bowl appearing team and as recent as three years removed being in two of them out of a conference.

There will be back lash from the other teams in the AFC West due to us being good and setting them back, the Conference does not want a good team coming in that can knock some of them out of contention.

Seeing how this all plays out, Arizona is on the rise, the Rams are not bad just not real good and cause teams problems, nobody is talking about the 49ers who I think will suck but their history of Super Bowls may keep them in place.

The only way I see Seattle changing is if the NFL gives us a few Super Bowls in Seattle. Then and maybe then Paul would agree to go to the AFC and make the Broncos, Chiefs, Raiders and Chargers pissed. I know one would move, but it would really screw up what a few of the owners are thinking as far as how they build and think the can dominate in the current situation.

 

[Rex]

@Rex

Kroneke has committed to neither LA or STL. He's created options.

Ultimately it's up to the NFL owners what they believe is best. No they can't stop Stan from moving, but they can cut every perk they control (TV contracts etc.) and instill fines for every day he violates league policy. You only have to look as far as when the Saehawks tried to move to LA without league approval. (Total coincidence it was the Seahawks, no dig intended mods.)

What I'm trying to say is Stan will do what the league allows him to do. It's a tough sell to move a forth team to CA when 2 out three are having glaring issues within their home markets. The Carson stadium knocks out three birds with one stone (Chargers, Raiders, and LA football.) It makes the most sense as long as STL passes its legal hurdles and throws Stan some perks in the form surrounding land and the NFL clearing his cross ownership violation. LA doesn't solve that little delima for Stan, either.

It'll be interesting to watch it all unfold.

Technically you are correct. Kroenke is watching his options play out. However when you bring fan support as a must it is a difficult sell when Kroenke himself is trying to disenfranchise (literally!) the St. Louis fans. He is doing so to try to bolster his case to move the team. I other words if Kroenke had ever muttered a word about wanting to stay in St. Louis it would have been by forked tongue. I hope he has to sell the Rams and they stay in St. Louis while he buys another NFL team.

He should go halvsies with Russell Wilson. :242735: :242733: :smilie=angry016.gif:

:0190l:

 

[Rex]

I want the Rams in LA because 10 AM starts suck. How the hell does an NFC West team have an early start? A move to LA would fix that.

This is actually the only reason I care about this issue. If Roger announced tomorrow that STL would only have late starts, I would not give a crap if they stayed in STL.

I prefer the late starts too. :th2thumbs:

 

[Rex]

Seahawks won't move unless the NFL greases the skids so to speak, when we came back to the NFC and yes I said back, I remember a caveat being said about we have moved twice, it was damaging to the fans and teams with developing rivalries and history being cut off.

So to get it done without a bunch of animosity the NFL basically said the Seahawks don't have to move again. Now things change granted, but you don't move a three time Super Bowl appearing team and as recent as three years removed being in two of them out of a conference.

There will be back lash from the other teams in the AFC West due to us being good and setting them back, the Conference does not want a good team coming in that can knock some of them out of contention.

Seeing how this all plays out, Arizona is on the rise, the Rams are not bad just not real good and cause teams problems, nobody is talking about the 49ers who I think will suck but their history of Super Bowls may keep them in place.

The only way I see Seattle changing is if the NFL gives us a few Super Bowls in Seattle. Then and maybe then Paul would agree to go to the AFC and make the Broncos, Chiefs, Raiders and Chargers pissed. I know one would move, but it would really screw up what a few of the owners are thinking as far as how they build and think the can dominate in the current situation.

Super Bowls in Seattle? How is the weather there in late January? Super Bowl XXXIV was in Atlanta and in a dome (thankfully) but it was miserable outside.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Seahawks won't move unless the NFL greases the skids so to speak, when we came back to the NFC and yes I said back, I remember a caveat being said about we have moved twice, it was damaging to the fans and teams with developing rivalries and history being cut off.

So to get it done without a bunch of animosity the NFL basically said the Seahawks don't have to move again. Now things change granted, but you don't move a three time Super Bowl appearing team and as recent as three years removed being in two of them out of a conference.

There will be back lash from the other teams in the AFC West due to us being good and setting them back, the Conference does not want a good team coming in that can knock some of them out of contention.

Seeing how this all plays out, Arizona is on the rise, the Rams are not bad just not real good and cause teams problems, nobody is talking about the 49ers who I think will suck but their history of Super Bowls may keep them in place.

The only way I see Seattle changing is if the NFL gives us a few Super Bowls in Seattle. Then and maybe then Paul would agree to go to the AFC and make the Broncos, Chiefs, Raiders and Chargers pissed. I know one would move, but it would really screw up what a few of the owners are thinking as far as how they build and think the can dominate in the current situation.

Super Bowls in Seattle? How is the weather there in late January? Super Bowl XXXIV was in Atlanta and in a dome (thankfully) but it was miserable outside.

Not as bad as you'd think, Better than New York.
37 to 51 degrees with it averaging 16 out of the 28 days of rain.
I don't think it would be the tempature as much as the over 50% chance of rain that would deter us from getting a Super Bowl.

Frankly, I don't want one here. Traffic here already sucks, and call me fickle but I don't want another team hoisting a Lombardi in our stadium.

 

[SuperMan28]

@Rex

Kroneke has committed to neither LA or STL. He's created options.

Ultimately it's up to the NFL owners what they believe is best. No they can't stop Stan from moving, but they can cut every perk they control (TV contracts etc.) and instill fines for every day he violates league policy. You only have to look as far as when the Saehawks tried to move to LA without league approval. (Total coincidence it was the Seahawks, no dig intended mods.)

What I'm trying to say is Stan will do what the league allows him to do. It's a tough sell to move a forth team to CA when 2 out three are having glaring issues within their home markets. The Carson stadium knocks out three birds with one stone (Chargers, Raiders, and LA football.) It makes the most sense as long as STL passes its legal hurdles and throws Stan some perks in the form surrounding land and the NFL clearing his cross ownership violation. LA doesn't solve that little delima for Stan, either.

It'll be interesting to watch it all unfold.

Technically you are correct. Kroenke is watching his options play out. However when you bring fan support as a must it is a difficult sell when Kroenke himself is trying to disenfranchise (literally!) the St. Louis fans. He is doing so to try to bolster his case to move the team. I other words if Kroenke had ever muttered a word about wanting to stay in St. Louis it would have been by forked tongue. I hope he has to sell the Rams and they stay in St. Louis while he buys another NFL team.

I hope you are wrong about Stan intentionally disenfranchiseing the STL fan base. My hopes are the STL fans are an unfortunate, unintentional, victim to Stan's negotiating tactics. But there are few good ways to go about it, really.

Spanos and Davis stated they'd like to stay home but their actions are not living up to their words. In my opinion that's worse than saying nothing. At least Stan isn't telling lies. I commend him for that. All that matters is Stan, or a trusted representative like Kevin Demoff, stays engaged with STL's stadium task force. That does appear to be the case because it was reported the Rams made more changes to the Riverfront design back when the NFL VP was in town. That comes straight from Stan, ultimately.

We do both agree nothing is final, however. All of Stan's options are still on the table at this point.

 

[Rex]

@Rex

Kroneke has committed to neither LA or STL. He's created options.

Ultimately it's up to the NFL owners what they believe is best. No they can't stop Stan from moving, but they can cut every perk they control (TV contracts etc.) and instill fines for every day he violates league policy. You only have to look as far as when the Saehawks tried to move to LA without league approval. (Total coincidence it was the Seahawks, no dig intended mods.)

What I'm trying to say is Stan will do what the league allows him to do. It's a tough sell to move a forth team to CA when 2 out three are having glaring issues within their home markets. The Carson stadium knocks out three birds with one stone (Chargers, Raiders, and LA football.) It makes the most sense as long as STL passes its legal hurdles and throws Stan some perks in the form surrounding land and the NFL clearing his cross ownership violation. LA doesn't solve that little delima for Stan, either.

It'll be interesting to watch it all unfold.

Technically you are correct. Kroenke is watching his options play out. However when you bring fan support as a must it is a difficult sell when Kroenke himself is trying to disenfranchise (literally!) the St. Louis fans. He is doing so to try to bolster his case to move the team. I other words if Kroenke had ever muttered a word about wanting to stay in St. Louis it would have been by forked tongue. I hope he has to sell the Rams and they stay in St. Louis while he buys another NFL team.

I hope you are wrong about Stan intentionally disenfranchiseing the STL fan base. My hopes are the STL fans are an unfortunate, unintentional, victim to Stan's negotiating tactics. But there are few good ways to go about it, really.

Spanos and Davis stated they'd like to stay home but their actions are not living up to their words. In my opinion that's worse than saying nothing. At least Stan isn't telling lies. I commend him for that. All that matters is Stan, or a trusted representative like Kevin Demoff, stays engaged with STL's stadium task force. That does appear to be the case because it was reported the Rams made more changes to the Riverfront design back when the NFL VP was in town. That comes straight from Stan, ultimately.

We do both agree nothing is final, however. All of Stan's options are still on the table at this point.

The only issue I have with what you wrote is your putting the onus on the fans given Kroenke's actions such as moving practices to LA and drastically scaling back outreach to St. Louis fans. That is asking a lot of people who have already PAID THEIR DUES by the PSL process and building a new stadium a mere 20 years ago.