I don't know how I would feel about it. It would definitely be...odd. They've always been one of those teams that I've rooted to do well, plus they oppose the Chiefs and that gets big points from me.

tkihshbt wrote:

It might be happening...

Any basis for this other than McKernan and his crew making it up during their radio show?

tkihshbt wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

tkihshbt wrote:

It might be happening...

Any basis for this other than McKernan and his crew making it up during their radio show?

No, just trying to connect theoretical dots. People have started picking up on Nixon saying it's important to keep St. Louis an "NFL city" rather than a "St. Louis Rams city" during his announcement of Peacock and Blitz, and given that Kroenke isn't returning the calls of anyone associated with this project, there are two possibilities: 1) they are going forward with the stadium to try and convince the NFL and owners that Kroenke has no reason to move or 2) they are prepping for the team that loses out on LA.

Jacksonville. Khan wanted to be here from the beginning, and I think Lamping was brought on board to make it happen.

I'm glad you mentioned his haircut because that is ridiculous.

Another twist: Phil Anschutz might try to block whatever Kroenke does in Los Angeles. There's also a rumor that Kroenke could sell the Rams, buy the Raiders and move them in. I'm getting exhausted keeping up with everything.

artie_fufkin wrote:

tkihshbt wrote:

Another twist: Phil Anschutz might try to block whatever Kroenke does in Los Angeles. There's also a rumor that Kroenke could sell the Rams, buy the Raiders and move them in. I'm getting exhausted keeping up with everything.

Again, going by everything I've read, the Raiders aren't for sale. I'll say one thing in Davis' favor, he understands his limitations. He knows he's not a football guy, and he's doing his best to get football guys around him. Whether he's talking to the right football guys is another matter. His loyalty to Reggie MacKenzie has become perplexing. John Madden was a phenomenal coach in the '70s, but I'm not sure he's relevant today. Same with Mike Shanahan. But by bringing in Shaggy at least for a conversation, he's showed he's not going to be tied to his father's old grudges.

 

I know Al Davis has been dead for a while, but depending on when things wrapped up with his estate, there may be a really large incentive to his son selling the team.  According to what I've heard, one of the reasons Georgia Frontiere's kids sold the Rams was that the inheritance tax was really high.  If he hasn't already paid the tax, Mark Davis may be enticed to sell the team in an effort to avoid the tax (if that's possible).

I confess I don't know Davis' wealth. I'm pretty sure Al wasn't rich, by NFL owners' standards. He had no source of revenue other than the Raiders, and several years ago he had to sell shares of the team to pay for free agents (most of whom, particularly Javon Walker, were ill-advised signings).
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I don't think Los Angeles necessarily wants or deserves an NFL team. I can't think of another city other than Atlanta that has lost two teams in the same sport. Look at the Raiders' attendance figures in the '90s. They were drawing 40,000 to the Coliseum even when they were making the playoffs. I'm aware it's an embarrassment to the NFL that it doesn't have a stake in the second-biggest city in the country, but it seems to me the league has been doing just fine financially without a team in L.A.
 

tkihshbt wrote:

St.Louis can support a football team

 

Something doesnt click with st louis and the rams.  Idk what it is.  Im a viking fan because dad is.  Id gladly switch teams if there was a reason.  Ive almost ignored the nfl regular season for several years.  Im not rooting for the bears.  I just cant do it.  The vikings were good the last time the rams had a watchable football team.  Idk if that why the "greatest show on turf" shit was annoying as hell to me.  Or if it was because pretty boy, grocery bagger, Kurt Warner was the issue.  Still idk what the turn off is.  The fact the team suck?  The fact there isnt a "ram" within 1,000 of miles of St. Louis?  The idea a midwest football team plays in a pussy ass dome?  Id be a colt fan if they were not in the AFC.  Idk why but the AFC is like the AL to me.  I sort of ignore it.  Id get into st. Louis football if there was a reason.  Idk id the raiders coming there would do it or not.  Honestly i want a NFC type feel to the team. It is just hard for me to put a finger on what turns me off about the rams.

artie_fufkin wrote:

"Something doesnt click with st louis and the rams.  Idk what it is."

From an outsider's perspective, St. Louis has always been labeled as a "baseball town." Wasn't it Neil Lomax who once said Fredbird gets more commercial endorsements than he does?

Neil Lomax had a face that looked like it had been run over by a cheese grater.  Not surprising Fredbird had more opportunities.

forsberg_us wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

"Something doesnt click with st louis and the rams.  Idk what it is."

From an outsider's perspective, St. Louis has always been labeled as a "baseball town." Wasn't it Neil Lomax who once said Fredbird gets more commercial endorsements than he does?

Neil Lomax had a face that looked like it had been run over by a cheese grater.  Not surprising Fredbird had more opportunities.

Fredbird has spots for that "cheap, cheap, fun, fun" store, doesn't he? I'm sure there weren't a lot of athletes climbing over each other for that one.

I still comtend the rams are a west coast team playing in the midwest.  Thats the feel.  Most the peolpe i know who went to a rams game went there to watch the other team.  I think mostly the team is supported by the city.  The cardinals on the other hand draw alot of non city attendance