LA Rams to Return?

Schrute

Assistant __ ___ Regional Mod
LOS ANGELES -- The St. Louis Rams could be headed back to Los Angeles as early as 2016.
A year after purchasing 60 acres of land in Inglewood adjacent to the Forum and Hollywood Park, Rams owner Stan Kroenke has teamed up with the owners of the Hollywood Park site to build an NFL stadium, the Los Angeles Times reported Monday.
Stockbridge Capital Group, which owns the 238-acre Hollywood Park site, already had plans for a mixed-use community on the land that formerly housed the famed thoroughbred racing track, which closed in late 2013. Those plans will now include an 80,000-seat stadium and a 6,000-seat performance venue, the companies told the newspaper.
[+] Enlarge<cite style="margin: 0px 0px 4px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; display: block; color: rgb(171, 171, 171); background: transparent;">AP Photo/Tom Gannam</cite>Rams owner Stan Kroenke plans to build an 80,000-seat stadium and a 6,000-seat performance venue on the land that formerly housed thoroughbred racing track Hollywood Park, according to a report.


Many proposed stadium plans have come and gone in the hopes of bringing the NFL back to Los Angeles after the city lost both the Raiders and Rams after the 1994 season, but none of those plans were ever backed by a current NFL owner capable of moving his team into the country's second-largest market.
The Rams are expected to convert their lease at St. Louis' Edward Jones Dome to a year-to-year agreement later this month and, if the team and the city fail to come to an agreement to build a new stadium, the Rams could move back to the area it called home from 1946 to 1994.
"We are excited to unveil an expanded plan that will bring a world-class sports and entertainment district to Hollywood Park," Terry Fancher, founder of Stockbridge, said in a statement to the Times. "We are committed to working with [the Kroenke Group] to build a project that will put Inglewood back on the map as home of the truly great sports and entertainment venues."
Developers of the project told the Times that no tax dollars would be used for the construction project, including the stadium, which could be completed by 2018. Before construction can begin, however, the project must pass several political and environmental hurdles and the Rams must, of course, commit to moving back to Los Angeles after the 2015 season.
Any NFL franchise interested in relocating for the next season would have to apply between Jan. 1 and Feb. 15 of that year, according to league bylaws, and prove it has exhausted all attempts to remain in its current location. The earliest a team could relocate to Los Angeles would be January 2016, and that team would likely play in either the L.A. Coliseum or the Rose Bowl until a new stadium is completed.
NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said last month that no teams would be moving to Los Angeles for the 2015 season.
The two teams that have always made the most sense to relocate to Los Angeles are the last two NFL teams to leave Los Angeles 20 years ago: the Oakland Raiders and the Rams.
The Raiders' lease to play at O.co Coliseum, formerly known as the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum, has expired, and the team is now on a year-to-year agreement. Meanwhile, the Rams can get out of their lease agreement with the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission to play at the Edward Jones Dome, as well.
The third team in play for L.A., the San Diego Chargers, can announce its intention to leave San Diego between Feb. 1 and May 1 of each year through 2020 if it pays an early-termination fee tied to the bonds used to expand Qualcomm Stadium in 1997.
The original plan for Hollywood Park, which is 3 miles east of the Los Angeles International Airport, included the construction of 2,995 homes, 620,000 square feet of retail space and 25 acres of parks. A major park called Champion Park is slated to be constructed as part of the first phase.
There are two other stadium proposals currently on the table for NFL stadiums in Los Angeles. The Anschutz Entertainment Group, the company behind Farmers Field, a proposed $1.5 billion football stadium and convention center expansion in downtown Los Angeles, got a six-month extension in October to its existing agreement with the city of Los Angeles for the project.
AEG requested an extension to allow for additional time to pursue an NFL team and to further assess and develop an alternative development plan for the expansion and modernization of the Los Angeles Convention Center and the potential construction of another large hotel at L.A. Live.
It committed to spend up to $600,000 over the next six months to commission designs for a proposed alternative plan for the convention center expansion and improvement, as well as the possibility of an additional 750-room hotel adjacent to L.A. Live and the Convention Center.
A competing stadium proposed by real estate magnate Ed Roski in the City of Industry, California, a suburb of Los Angeles, has been deemed shovel-ready for years. But as is the case with Farmers Field, it needs a long-term commitment from an NFL team before construction can begin.
Roski's 600 acres in the City of Industry could be used for commercial development if a stadium never materializes. Nearly 20 years ago, NFL owners approved a plan to build a new, privately financed $200 million stadium in Hollywood Park to keep the Raiders in town after the Rams had already bolted for St. Louis.
The stadium would have been the home of the Raiders, at least two future Super Bowls and potentially a second NFL team. Raiders owner Al Davis, however, balked at the idea of sharing a stadium with a second team and headed back to Oakland.
Two decades later, the NFL could be looking at a return to Los Angeles and to the last, best stadium proposal the city had to keep the NFL in the first place.
 
Was reading about this (some where else i forget) - would be a good time and probably the right team to move - meaning they have a young solid nucleus ( at least on defense) that should get better. While just being in LA it will bring fans but having a team you can root for and likable makes it that much better...
 
This is like a never ending soap opera - I'm starting to think we'll see a team in London before there's ever one in LA again...
 
Raiders need to come back. Bullshit St. Louis fans would lose a team when there isn't another one in the area to root for as if Chargers or Raiders moved to LA
 
Aren't the Chargers and USC enough to keep the football fans busy? I guess the NFL's got to fail there a few times a century as a reminder.
 
Attendance will be terrible.

I tend to disagree. I was in San Diego when the Rams played there in November. Half the stadium were Rams fan. There's an old school fan base for the Rams. The only way attendance will be terrible is if it's all about corporate seating and price tags. The NFL makes a big mistake when it comes to pushing out the middle class I believe. That's where the majority of the true fan base is. Levi Stadium in Santa Clara is a joke. The building is nothing but metal and cement with little charm unless you're paying the big money to be in the clubhouse which takes you away from the game itself.

Side note. The greatest bargain a football fan can take advantage of is the Direct TV NFL Ticket. $20 a week during the season and you get everything.
 
It would be a shame to move the Rams, again. Move the Jags. Or expand by two to LA and London or Toronto, give us two more teams without quarterbacks. But don't screw St. Louis for LA, how many times does the NFL need to be convinced it doesn't play in Los Angeles?
 
It would be a shame to move the Rams, again. Move the Jags. Or expand by two to LA and London or Toronto, give us two more teams without quarterbacks. But don't screw St. Louis for LA, how many times does the NFL need to be convinced it doesn't play in Los Angeles?
I rather Los Angeles than london.
London wants nothing to do with a team,why force it
 
Cleveland sells out. Sucks, sells out before the season even begins, sucks again, repeats. The NFL appreciates retards.
 
I'll believe this when they actually put a shovel to the ground. I don't even think this goes to vote in the city of ingle wood until June.. Interesting to see how this plays out

I also don't think la is a great sports city at all, tons of transplants lots to do, etc. besides the lakers , there isn't much support unless the team is good for any of the teams.
 
I'll believe this when they actually put a shovel to the ground. I don't even think this goes to vote in the city of ingle wood until June.. Interesting to see how this plays out

I also don't think la is a great sports city at all, tons of transplants lots to do, etc. besides the lakers , there isn't much support unless the team is good for any of the teams.
Think I've been reading for two years now that AEG owns a huge plot of land next to Staples where they want to build a stadium, so like you, I'll believe it when I see it.

The other thing, sure it'll be packed at the start - what happens when the team starts to suck, and blackouts start coming into effect? I seem to remember Anaheim Stadium being half full most of the time before the Rams left...
 
The thing is, it's probably impossible for an NFL team to not make money. The last guy to bleed money was Modell, and that wasn't a market problem. The Browns were his only business, the city fucked him sideways, and he had a lot of debt. These owners need to stop and smell the roses, keep the teams in NFL cities, we'll watch the games.
 
Think I've been reading for two years now that AEG owns a huge plot of land next to Staples where they want to build a stadium, so like you, I'll believe it when I see it.

The other thing, sure it'll be packed at the start - what happens when the team starts to suck, and blackouts start coming into effect? I seem to remember Anaheim Stadium being half full most of the time before the Rams left...

I am not familiar with the area but isn't Anaheim a good ride away from LA and the park/area not a good set up for football. I know LA has horrible traffic but it's only 10 games a year on Sundays maybe 1 Monday ?
wouldnt more corporations by seats if in LA? Only have to pay for 10 games vs 40 or 81 for others
 
I am not familiar with the area but isn't Anaheim a good ride away from LA and the park/area not a good set up for football. I know LA has horrible traffic but it's only 10 games a year on Sundays maybe 1 Monday ?
wouldnt more corporations by seats if in LA? Only have to pay for 10 games vs 40 or 81 for others
Been a few years since I've been to Anaheim, but can't imagine it's much worse than heading out to the Meadowlands or Foxboro.

As for the tv thing I alluded to, I always remember hearing how Los Angeles is a huge tv audience for the NFL, so to put a team in LA that might be not so great, you're a) taking viewers away from the national 4 PM games who might not necessarily watch the LA game instead and b) risking blackouts if it doesn't sell out. The only reason I bring up blackouts is because we get our American stations here in Ottawa from Detroit, and when Ford Field doesn't sell out, we don't get a different game here on Fox or CBS - we get re runs of Matlock or CSI Miami instead.

So, basically, the NFL could actually end up losing fans (ie tv audience) if a new team isn't a competitive one.
 
I'll believe this when they actually put a shovel to the ground. I don't even think this goes to vote in the city of ingle wood until June.. Interesting to see how this plays out

I also don't think la is a great sports city at all, tons of transplants lots to do, etc. besides the lakers , there isn't much support unless the team is good for any of the teams.

dont the Raiders have one? obviously not approaching the Lakers but I know on my tv the only reason I get Raiders preseason games is because we get the local LA channels on our cable systems like KTLA which show them
 
I'll believe this when they actually put a shovel to the ground. I don't even think this goes to vote in the city of ingle wood until June.. Interesting to see how this plays out

I also don't think la is a great sports city at all, tons of transplants lots to do, etc. besides the lakers , there isn't much support unless the team is good for any of the teams.

Dont the nhl kings do well?
They have drawn 15k a year for the last 15 years and that's 41 games ....
 
Been a few years since I've been to Anaheim, but can't imagine it's much worse than heading out to the Meadowlands or Foxboro.

As for the tv thing I alluded to, I always remember hearing how Los Angeles is a huge tv audience for the NFL, so to put a team in LA that might be not so great, you're a) taking viewers away from the national 4 PM games who might not necessarily watch the LA game instead and b) risking blackouts if it doesn't sell out. The only reason I bring up blackouts is because we get our American stations here in Ottawa from Detroit, and when Ford Field doesn't sell out, we don't get a different game here on Fox or CBS - we get re runs of Matlock or CSI Miami instead.

So, basically, the NFL could actually end up losing fans (ie tv audience) if a new team isn't a competitive one.

Hopefully, the blackout policy will be gone by the time LA gets a team.

WASHINGTON -- Senators from both parties warned the National Football League on Thursday to get rid of a four-decade-old TV "blackout'' rule or risk congressional action to restrict the league's lucrative antitrust exemption, which allows NFL teams to negotiate radio and television broadcast rights together.

The blackout rule, which bars home games from being televised in a local market if they have not sold out, is unfair to fans who have helped the league reap billions of dollars in revenue from broadcast rights to games that are among the most-watched programs on TV, lawmakers said.
In return for their loyalty, "fans in the public are often treated like a fumbled football,'' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. "When places like Buffalo, New York, fail to sell out its 74,000-person stadium, the Bills game is blacked out for local fans.''



The Federal Communications Commission voted this fall to stop enforcing the NFL's blackout policy, but the action did not end blackouts, which are written into the NFL's private contracts with broadcast and cable companies.
Blumenthal and other lawmakers at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing said Thursday the blackout rule has long outlived its usefulness. The rule was adopted in the 1970s to encourage ticket sales at NFL games, which now routinely sell out at stadiums across the country.

"The simple fact is that these rules only serve to benefit sports leagues and their member teams at the expense of the hardworking fans who support them so loyally through their money, time and passion,'' said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

During last year's NFL playoffs, fans of the Cincinnati Bengals, Indianapolis Colts and Green Bay Packers came close to experiencing blackouts when those games had not sold out just days before kickoff, McCain said. The blackouts were averted when local businesses bought tickets to bring the total above the NFL's required threshold.
A bill co-sponsored by Blumenthal and McCain would revoke the league's antitrust exemption unless it removes the blackout rule.

The senators made it clear at Thursday's hearing that they would prefer not to enact a bill. Blumenthal and other lawmakers urged the NFL to act on its own.

"I think they'd become heroes rather than the opposite, which they are now,'' Blumenthal said.
Gerard Waldron, a lawyer who represents the NFL, said the proposed bill would harm the people it intends to help -- the fans -- by undermining "the complex business and legal structure that allows the NFL to be the only professional sports league that offers all of its regular-season game to viewers at no charge'' through over-the-air broadcasts.

Without the certainty of paid attendance provided by a blackout rule, NFL games are likely to migrate from free broadcast TV to pay TV such as cable and satellite, Waldron said.

The bill also aims fix a problem that largely does not exist, Waldron said, noting that no NFL games have been blacked out this season and only two games were blacked out in 2013. Without threats of a blackout, advertisers may not be willing to spend as much money to sponsor NFL games, he said.

"The key factor that distinguishes the NFL from other types of programming is its ability consistently to deliver a mass audience at a fixed time,'' he said.
But David Goodfriend, chairman of the Sports Fans Coalition, an advocacy group, said the government should not support "anti-fan activities'' by professional sports leagues such as the NFL.

"When a sports league receives a public benefit'' such as the antitrust exemption and other subsidies, "the fans should get a fair return or the subsidy should go away,'' Goodfriend said.

Lawmakers at the Thursday's hearing appeared generally sympathetic to Goodfriend's argument, but two Minnesota senators told him should have done a better job researching his audience. A Green Bay Packers fan, Goodfriend wore a Packers tie to the hearing -- which was noted by Democratic Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken of Minnesota.


"It might not have been your smartest move, given that half of the senators here are from Minnesota,'' Klobuchar told Goodfriend.
 
And, the blackout rule has been lifted in the NFL for 2015. For once, the NFL is actually doing the obvious, logical thing. Although they have put a caveat on it that it is only for one year..as of right now.
 
Back
Top