debunking the myth and propaganda that LA is not a football town.

Okay I have seen some clueless babbling going on by at LEAST two people here who have fallen for the lies and propaganda over the years that LA is not a football town,that they have fickle sports fans. oh really? the Rams have not had a winning season in over 13 years and have been in st louis for 21 years yet despite that fact.look at this.

fickle football fans.comedy gold.


45K deposits in 48 hours?!? that's almost 1000 an hour. that's almost a sell out at dodger stadium. why oh why oh why people (and not just back east who sneer at fickle californians) think el lay won't support an nfl team is beyond me. ‪

http://www.therams.com/news-and-eve...Two-Days/330d44ab-4548-48be-827d-4bd25482cc39

oh and i guess al michales who used to broadcast Rams games out there is lying in this video interview as well right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCOfrIBkWZ0

grow up.



first this troll ignores overwhelming evidence the rams were coming back to LA saying it was nothing but a pipe dream saying LA was not going to have one this year,THEN when i proved him wrong he said carson with the raiders and chargers would be the teams going in.lol

THEN he claims that LA lost TWO sports teams,another lie when they only lost the Raiders.

The Raiders were there for only a dozen years and the reason they moved back to oakland was they had terrible fan support in LA,that stadium was half empty all the time for games out there.

the year the Raiders won the superbowl out there in LA the next season for their home opener they only drew a crowd of only 44,000 or so,the oakland raiders might have won a superbowl out there in LA but nobody in LA cared.lol


the rams on the other hand,they were there for over 50 years,they were always in the top five in league attendance,had the evil womans husband that she murdered to move them to st louis if he was still alive,they never would have left.

yes the raiders FAILED in LA thats why they were only there for a dozen years.that cannot be disputed.

the rams though were there for over 50 years so that is hardly failing.duh.comedy gold.

LA lost ONE team the raiders because they failed.

they did not lose the Rams,.the fans BEGGED the evil woman to sell them,they hated that evil woman owner,not the rams,LA did not lose the rams,that evil woman stole them from the city.big difference.duh.

 

still no word i see.lol.the cat gots their tongue.lol

 

Chargers are the original AFL LA franchise. They have lost 3 teams not 2. And its not the LA doesn't like football. LA likes winners more. The structure in the NFL is such that an LA team cannot suffer through the ups and downs of an NFL franchise. It took only about 5 bad seasons for the LA fan base to totally abandon the Rams in the early 90s. Fans will leave in droves as soon as the team goes through a rebuilding phase. And/or outcry from fans for quick fixes will make any rebuilding worse dooming the franchise. In a game that is still won from the inside out expect an LA franchise to spend way too much money on the 3rd and 4th wide receivers and next to nothing on the offensive line. A hard salary cap league and LA simply dont mix.

 

The chargers dont count since they were only in LA for one year.lol

You might be right in the last 3 or 4 sentences there but you are not aware of the facts though in the first couple or so because you are way off here not even close..

The structure in the NFL is such that an LA team cannot suffer through the ups and downs of an NFL franchise.

Oh REALLY? is that WHY The Rams lasted in LA for over 50 years?

And its not the LA doesn't like football. LA likes winners more.

Oh REALLY? Better check the facts. That was WHY the chargers left LA after being there for only one year in the first place was because they could not compete with the Rams in attendance.

Their one year there even though they finished the season with an 8-4 record and made it to the divisional round playoff game the average crowds they drew for games were just a little over 11,000 people.

The RAMS on the other hand,even though they finished the season that same year with the opposite record going 4-8,guess how many fans THEY averaged that year? over 77,000.

Also the year the very first year the Raiders were in LA they had just come off winning a superbowl out in oakland but despite that fact,the very first year they were in LA,they only drew a small crowd of just over 42,000.lol

The the year they won the superbowl out there,the next season for their home opener,they only drew a small crowd of just over 44,000.

what did the Rams draw for their home opener that same year? over 65,000 in a standing room only game.

The oakland raiders might have won a superbowl out there in LA but nobody cared.that was why they moved back to Oakland because even though they had great teams out there that always made the playoffs,that stadium was half empty all the time even the superbowl year.

doesnt sound like a city that has to have winners to me.

That is why it is a joke that the NFL is even talking about Bringing the chargers back.they would flop every bit as bad as they did the first time even if they win.


It took only about 5 bad seasons for the LA fan base to totally abandon the Rams in the early 90s. Fans will leave in droves as soon as the team goes through a rebuilding phase.

see you are ignorant of the facts here like so many others are. yes it is true that the LA fanbase abandoned the Rams in the early 90's but it is not because of what you said,that they were losing,it was because they hated THE OWNER of the team with good reason mind you.

the fans BEGGED her to sell the team because she purposely traded away Eric Dickerson,Kevin Greene,Toby Harrah,and other Ram greats. she did that on purpose so she could get what she wanted and have the fans stop showing up for games so she could move the team to her hometown in st louis where she was showgirl.

they hated the OWNER,not the team or the poor play on the field.THAT was why they stopped showing up for games.you been listening wat too much to the propaganda mainstream media,stop doing that.

If they wanted winners and not losers,according to your logic,they would have all abandoned the Rams in 1960 and jumped on the bandwagon for the chargers since they were winners and the Rams were losers. that did not happen.

fans went though MANY rebuilding phrases with the Rams in the 50 years plus they were there in the years they were bad and stuck with them,thats why unlike the chargers or raiders,THEY lasted there for over 50 years.

You been taken in by the propaganda of the mainstream media,LA lost two teams because of two stupid owners they all hated and despised who were a couple of idiots.not because of poor play on the field

other than the early 90's,the Rams were always in the top five in league attendance matter of fact.

LA clearly has passion for the Rams and will stick with them win or lose.they just wont support the chargers or raiders as history has proved.It is RAMS country only.

when they have an owner they like as they all love Kroneke now for bringing them back,they will get behind the team.

had the evil woman who took over ownership of her husband when he died,had she never took over ownership of the team and HE was still alive,the Rams never would have left LA and they would STILL have been in LA the past 21 years.

 

So thats you argument? We were loyal in the 60s and the only reasons we weren't loyal in the 90s was because of the owner? And the Dickerson trade? Dickerson had what, two good years after that? It was a good trade. You should thank your owner that she traded him away rather than sign a running back with 2 good years left to a new 6 year contract.

And there is the problem. LA fans want flash and stars. Dickerson was a star but a falling star. It was also the best time to trade him. Fans went ballistic.

 

Dickerson was in the prime at the time they traded him,horrible mistake.two good years left,thats grasping at straws.lol

oh and nice game of dodgeball there that the facts prove they stopped showing up in the 90's cause they hated the OWNER,not the poor play of the team.nice game of dodgeball as well ignoring they did not jump ship for a winner,the chargers and stuck with a loser the Rams in 1960.glad you're not my lawyer,you would lose every case for me in court.

really excellent job of dodgeball there as well that despite the fact LA was getting a superbowl winner coming to them in 1982 in the raiders,the place was half empty for the first game ever in LA for them

and that even though they won the superbowl out there,nobody cared the fact the next year for the home opener the stadium was half empty.

geez just be mature and admit you are wrong and have been taken in by the propaganda media.you CLAIM they want winners and yet when I prove that to be wrong and they did not support two winners,the raiders and chargers,and stuck with the rams when they were losing other than the early 90's cause they hated the evil b!tch OWNER,not the team,you play dodgeball.

god why is it people who can hide behind the computer are too arrogant to admit when they are wrong?

get over your hate of LA and deal with the facts that it if is the RAMS,they support them win or lose,they just wont support the chargers or raiders even if they are GREAT.

you cant dodge these pesky facts either that they hated the b!tch owner,not the poor play of the team.

you clearly hate the city of LA or something the fact you cant admit when your wrong.

 

LA is a big city with a huge football following. You would be surprised how many Rams and Raider fans there are from both LA and Orange counties, even after the Rams and Raiders departed. Hell, 30% of the Chargers ticket sales came from Los Angeles citizens.

Los Angeles is very much into football and they are great fans as can be seen by the UCLA and USC fan bases , both are highly supported and bandwagon (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s are highly frowned upon.

The Rams are on the up and up, the only thing they are missing is a true threat at QB. But you can bet your ass Todd Gurley is going to put people in the seats, as well as the formidable defense that will come to light next year.

The Rams will be fine in Los Angeles, the people have been wanting it despite the jealous (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s that just hate anything LA when it comes to sports.

If people said LA fans suck and only support winners they are out of their damned minds. Look at the Lakers, win or lose they are constantly in the top 10 of NBA teams for highest attendance percentage. Last year the Lakers reported a 98% turnout, and this year so far they are at 99.7%....thats damn near selling out every game .AND BOTH YEARS THE LAKERS SUCK BALLS and we have been on the decline for quite awhile. And eventhough LA is Lakertown, the Clippers didnt put up terrible numbers either, they were the loveable losers and had between 85% to 90% attendance when they sucked and that was forever, now they rank in the top 5 for the last 5 years or so, but have taken nothing away from the Lakers even though right now they are the better squad.

Then We have the Dodgers who have a very loyal fan base, even when they lose.

LA is a sports city, no matter what anyone says. And it is about time they got a football team back. It wasnt my Raiders like I was hoping for but now I can't wait for the Raiders to visit LA so I can enjoy some NFL football with my Ram loving brother.

I just hope the stupid ass chargers stay in San Diego, no point for a team with a serious history of choking to bring their skid marks to LA. They will not survive because LA will not support them. Now that they have the Rams they dont have to buy Charger tickets to see a game.

Just watch, when the Rams and Raiders face off in LA, the city is going to go nuts as all the Raiders and Rams fans are going to flood the stadiums and bars and you will see the NFL fan base come to life. ITS ON !!!!!!!

 

I was hoping you would show up.you took him to school same as I did.

I Told you it was going to be the rams and chargers IF there was another team,the owners dont want a Davis owned Raiders franchise in LA so thats why as long as mark davis is the owner,they will never come back to LA.

I honestly think the NFL just planted that story of wanting two teams there so they can contiune to use LA as leverage for the chargers and raiders to get new stadiums,they dont want to lose TWO markets to get to LA.that would be taking one step forward and one step back, plus unlike st louis,san diego and oakland are way too valuable of markets in the NFL to lose.

He ignores the fact that it was that evil b!TCH OWNER of the rams for the reason Rams fans stopped showing up to games because they hated her and begged she to sell the team,had nothing whatsoever to do with the poor play on the field.

if that was true,the Rams never would have survived in LA for over 50 years.

Like I said before,had she never taken over ownership of the team and carrol rosenbloom was stil alive today,they never would have left LA in the first place.

 

I think the money is what allowed the Rams to move over the Raiders. The Rams owner is having the stadium privately funded, tax payers dont have to spend a dime. In all honesty that is how it should be. The Raiders and Chargers together couldn't even have pulled that kind of money together comfortably.

In this case I feel this was the right decision as well based simply off of that, the fans not having to suffer the brunt of building a stadium. Hopefully the Chargers build a new stadium in SD, then the Raiders can work something out with the Rams and Ill be in NFL heaven.

As for the Rams leaving in the first place, yeah that woman was an evil succubus. Kroenke has them going in the right direction, first head west and then become a contender. I feel bad for the fans in STL though, because they were very loyal. They got burned worse than LA did. The fans in STL were down to pay for a new stadium, and Kroenke still left lol.

 

Yeah that indeed was the MAIN reason why they chose Inglewood over carson just as I knew they would.I never had any doubts that Inglewood would win out because Kroneke is the owner with deep pockets.the rich guys always win out everytime. thats why I think its safe to say that the chargers wont join the Rams because yeah,even combined,they would not have enough money to be able to afford the relocation fee Kroneke had to pay.

That is why LA went so long without a team is because they were smart,they told the NFL they did not want an NFL franchise where it would require them to use public funds to build the stadium. Oakland is standing pat on that which is why it has been having a hard time getting a new stadium.

Dude get over it,the Raiders are never coming back to LA.Many of the owners,many that are very influential like jerry jones and robert kraft,both who were big supports of Inglewood,dont want the Raiders back in LA.They dont want a Davis owned franchise in LA.Many of them are still sore at Al for sueing the league to move to LA in the first place,there is some bad blood with the owners towards the Davis family.

here read this article,it is the most objective,in depth article you will find WHY they wont be coming back to LA.

http://withthefirstpick.com/2015/12/28/oakland-raiders-arent-moving-los-angeles/

Yeah I dont think Kroneke ever had any serious intention of trying to win in st louis myself.Now that he is in LA though,he will pull out all the stops to try and win.If Fisher doesnt have at least a 9-7 record this year,he will be out the door.

Dude how can you POSSIBLY feel bad for st louis? they laughed at you guys in LA wen you lose the Rams.they put up a sign that said TOO BAD LA.

they are such hypocrite bandwagon fans there that I laughed at them when they lose the team.They are not loyal to their team.they lost the cardinals which is their REAL football team so they knew how bad it felt to lose a team. so what do they go and do as result? they go and STEAL a team that did not belong to them and laughed at you all in LA.If that is not being a hypocrite I dont know what is.

Baltimore at least when they took the Ravens,they did not steal a team,they let cleveland keep the team name.

when I point out that fact to st louis that they stole a team they then say LA stole the dodgers. See I DO feel bad for the fans in brooklyn who lost the dodgers back then and the brooklyn fans who are still alive that still follow them because Brooklyn fans WERE loyal to the dodgers,thats why if they ever moved back to Brooklyn,I would be completely fine and okay with that.

the fans in st louis though,they are bandwagon fans,they never even wanted the Rams in the first place.I have friends that live there and they would tell me the first four years there when they were horrible,it was easy as pie getting a good seat to a game there even in the lower level,wasnt till kurt warner and marshall faulk came along and made them good again,that they started to show up.

then once after they left and got bad again,less and less people showed up over the years year after year.

It is a baseball and hockey town but it has never been a football town,that was why the cardinals left.

If st louis so badly wants a football team back they should be filing a lawsuit against the Bidwell family for taking the cardinals out of st louis instead of this laughable comedy of thinking they can sue stan kronke.

the people in st louis are ignorant fools,thats why i dont feel one bit sorry for them at all.they hate kroneke and want to file a lawsuit against him when the REAL villian of the story they SHOULD be mad at and should be filing a lawsuit against is the city of st louis because the Rams honored the terms of the contract and the lease agreement signed 21 years ago with them and the city.they did everything that was asked of them in the agreement,the city on the other hand,THEY violated the terms of the agreement so thats on the city,not stan kroneke.

oh and just so you know,the st louis stadium plan they come up was a joke from the very get go with no chance to succeed,did not have a prayer because the city is STILL millions in debt trying to pay off the CURRENT edward james dome,so they for sure never had a chance to fund the new one.that was what st louis fans never understood when I tried to explain to them there was no way the rams were going to stay.

Like i said,st louis fans are bandwagon fans.Thats just the total opposite of Raider fans in Oakland.they have been equally as horrible on the field over the last 13 years same as the Rams yet unlike st louis fans,THEY are loyal and dedicated fans,they sold out every home game this year as well as last year.

PLUS last year after they got off to an 0-13 start,they STILL sold out a thursday night game against the chiefs in a driving pouring rainstorm no less.now that is dedication and loyalty,they got the most loyal fans in the world so to take the raiders out of oakland would be a disgrace to the NFL.

as i said,nobody in LA even cared or ever showed up to games there when they were GREAT having half empty stadiums there then you,yet oakland fans sell out all their games even when they are the crappiest team in the NFL and you want them BACK in LA? what kind of logic is THAT?

keep dreaming and living in your fantasyland.

the NFL had to lose the st louis market to get to LA,which was fine because st louis is bankrupt and not a football town,they dont want to lose TWO markets to get there,that would be taking one step forward and one step back. Oakland and san diego are way too valuable markets for them to lose.

that is also WHY i dont feel sorry for st louis fans for losing the cardinals as i would for oakland fans if they lose the Raiders to LA because Oakland IS a good football town with dedicated loyal fans.

Unlike st louis,Oakland wont take just any other team to replace the Raiders if they left. That was why it was important for the NFL to bring the Rams back because of their history,LA fans didnt want just any team,an expansion team or something,most of them wanted ONLY the Rams or no football team same as me.

st louis on the other hand,they will take ANY new team same as they did 20 years ago with the rams cause they have no loyalty to their teams there.

 

that is also WHY the raiders need to stay in oakland and the chargers need to stay in san diego.Unlike in st louis where they have had fewer and fewer fans show up for games over the years with half empty stadiums,the fans in both san diego and in oakland had an INCREASE in season ticket sales.

st louis is willing to take another team to replace losing the rams just as they were willing to take the rams when they lost the cardinals,they have no loyalty to their teams there. the cities of oakland and san diego however,are just the opposite,they wont take just any team if they lost the chargers or raiders.

they want only the chargers and only the raiders nobody else. that was why the majority of fans in LA wanted as well,they didnt want just any team to replace losing the Rams like an expansion team,they wanted the Rams,nobody else.

Rams belong in LA,Raiders belong in Oakland,and Chargers belong in San Diego.period.

 

btw it doesnt look good for the chargers to stay in SD. I like you want them to stay but its looking bad for them now.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/jan/29/chargers-rams-agree-principle-decision/

 

yahoo!!! we BOTH got our wish geddon,the chargers ARE staying in san diego one more year anyways.

http://www.chargers.com/news/2016/01/29/statement-dean-spanos

this is going along all the way i said it would,rams are back in LA like i said they would be two years ago,chargers are staying in san diego,and the raiders will stay in oakland.

 

From what I see the Chargers and Raiders are only guaranteed for 1 more year in their respective cities. BUT what does look good is that they are being offered around $700million to help for a new stadium for the NFL and city combined. Hopefully they take it and keep their bolty asses down there lol.

Raiders, I dont trust a *******n thing the Davis family does. After this year I do feel we will be in LA or San Antonio.

 

you need to read that link i posted.what part of the phrase many of the owners with a lot of influence such as jerry jones and robrt kraft dont want a Davis owned franchise in LA do you not understand? :

why do you think it came down to the rams and chargers being the two mentioned?

I called this two years ago that the Rams would be back in LA and even said back then that IF there was another team,and that would be a MAJOR if,that it would be the chargers. I called it correctly back then,dont know why you doubt me now?

dont you think there is a possible strong possibility i have connections out there which is why i knew it would come down to the rams and chargers two years ago? lol there is this one fool here you'll see for yourself on my rams thread that no matter how much i spelled it out for him,he dismissed everything i said ignoring everything i posted. are you going to make the same mistake? lol. I spend hours on this each day,the Raiders are never coming back.

they do have the option of going there if the chargers dont but trust me,they are just saying that to make it look like they are not discriminating and to give lip service to the raiders.

that was WHY recently the NFL strongly encouraged the raiders to get somethign done in oakland because they dont want them there in LA.

I guarantee you that was one of the conditions Kroneke told the NFL when he came in was that he would abide by the guidelines they set up for a second team to come in as long as it was NOT the raiders which they had no problem with no doubt.

that is probably why Kroneke a few weeks ago said that he would be much more open to having the chargers come in and join him as tenant over the raiders because he knows the chargers are no threat to him hurting his fanbase if they come in,where the Raiders coming in WOULD hurt the Rams fanbase.He did say that,that the Raiders would hurt the fanbase so i guarantee there is a deal in place where they wont let the Raiders back because the NFL wants to succeed in LA and bringing the Raiders back which would hurt the Rams fanbase badly,the NFL coming back to LA would not succeed.

Dont see that happening with san antonio either,Davis lost LA as leverage so now he is just using SA as leverage. I dont see them going to san antonio because jerry jones will oppose it.He was against the NFL giving Houston an expansion team when they awarded them the Texans,that was bad anough of a pill for him to swallow.He for sure would make sure that the Raiders did not come there especially since they have such a huge national following.same with Bob Mcnair of the Texans.the NFL isnt going to want three teams there in texas. whats really funny is he even is now starting to use LAS VEGAS as leverage.

If worse comes to worse and Oakland doesnt get something done,trust me the worst that will happen is they will join the 49ers in santa clara.

Matter of fact that is what the league encouraged davis to do but he wisely told them that he wasnt interested in doing that.the reason that was wise of him to do so is many 49er fans who were season ticket holders in san fran,they arent going to the games out there because the team gave them the middle finger and left them.

I know many of them who have become raider fans now instead.lol I dont blame them either.Had I grown up in san fran and the team left my city like that,I would turn against them as well.they are san francisco in NAME ONLY now.

It was reported on ESPN last night that the chargers would know withing two to three months of they will stay there permanetely or not.that is why I dont see them leaving SD because if spanos goes back there this summer and doesnt try and work with them again,then the NFL will have a lame duck season on their hands because no charger fans will show up to games this year when they know they are leaving and he isnt even trying to work with them again.

 

Yeah I wasn't thinking about jerry jones , he sure as hell wouldn't want raider nation based in Texas , the Cowboys would lose revenue because then those in west Texas would have to go all the way to Dallas or Houston to support the Cowboys. And as big as raider nation really is they will make an impact .

Hell I remember going too the thanksgiving game back in 2014 in Dallas, and damn did raider nation show its face. We Barely lost but (*)(*)(*)(*) we made our presence known, I couldn't believe how many of us and how loud we were in the Cowboys own home. (*)(*)(*)(*) was amazing. Yeah, jerry don't want to lose fans lol.

True with a he Rams as well but the thing is, it may hurt the Rams fan base a tad but the stadium being used every week in rotation would just mean more revenue in the end since Kroenke and only one other person are the owners of the stadium . Chargers won't bring the fans, the raiders will and do. And I'm sure the raiders would have to buy a lease from Kroenke to play in his stadium and would still be paying Kroenke part Of their ticket and merchandise sales.

There are enough fans in LA to greatly support both the raiders and Rams.

Maybe you do have inside information, I'm just going by what I see and know. The Rams need to either stay solo in LA and have a monopoly on the fans which obviously would just create new ones. Or allow the raiders to come, keep that stadium constantly bringing in revenue during the season. And could you imagine the when both teams make the playoffs ? And you better believe it is coming because the Rams and raiders are on the rise. Good days are upon bothe squads . The Chargers meanwhile, can just keep sucking in their new stadium lol.

 

btw Geddon,its obvious you did not read that link i posted earlier,because had you done so,you would understand clearly as well as I do that the Raiders are never coming back to LA and WHY that is so.

Here it is for you again.The Raiders will never be in LA again.this is why.

http://withthefirstpick.com/2015/12/28/oakland-raiders-arent-moving-los-angeles/

If you dont take the time to read it,well then I can only lead a horse to its water so many times but unable to get him to drink it.lol

 

what the NFL is doing is they are SAYING they want two teams in LA,but i guarantee they are just doing that so they can continue to use LA as leverage for teams in the future to get new stadiums as they are for the raiders and chargers. the NFL is never going to let the Raiders come back to LA. like i said,they were willing to lose the st louis market because the city is bankrupt and its not an NFL town.they are bandwagon fans who will take any new team to replace it.

Oakland and san diego are way too valuable of markets for them to lose.losing two cities to put two teams in LA is taking one step forward and one step backward.they lose money that way where they make more money of they stay in their home markets.thats what its all about money, they might have an expansion team join the Rams in say five to ten years,but they dont want to lose the oakland and san diego market.oakland and SD unlike st louis,they wont take just any team if they lost the raiders or chargers,their fans in their cities are loyal to their teams.

here is another great article why the raiders wont go back to LA again.

http://withthefirstpick.com/2016/01/25/oakland-raiders-are-not-leaving-and-never-were/


you may be right there are enough fans in LA to support both,im just reporting what Kroneke has said,that he is much more opposed to the Raiders coming than the chargers which is why the NFL gave the chargers the option to join him but not the raiders.lol they want to take care of dean,they dont like mark davis.lol


here is why I think the chargers will stay in SD permanetly as well.

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/san-diego-chargers-nfl-relocation-unlikely-to-happen-013016

 

Actually that is not true, the Raiders do have the option to go if the Chargers decide to stay in SD. Permission was given to both teams, but the Chargers get the first chance.

And there is one thing that people do not understand about the Raiders and their fans. It will not take a huge blow if the Raiders were to move to LA because Raider fans are very very loyal. The only way you would lose the Raider Nation fan base is if you moved the team and changed their name. Good luck getting those fans to jump ship and support that. If you destroyed Raider Nation, at best you might have a bump in Rams fans now, but never will they fly a chargers flag. The NFL will lose a (*)(*)(*)(*) ton of revenue by doing that. And dont lie, you know just as well as I do that no matter where the Raiders moved, we will follow because we love the franchise and history. Just like the Rams, they moved to STL but still had a large fan base in LA after the fact, they never really lost fans and ended up simply gaining more in STL. Now move the Green Bap Packers and see what happens, Green Bay people will not follow and they will only gain bandwagon to wherever they moved. There is no team that has the fan base the Raiders do, we are everywhere and we stay loyal to the Silver and Black until death, or change of the name lol.

But no matter where my Raiders go, I just would like to see a new stadium in our near future. And if the football gods were to have it so, would be for the Davis family to hand over operations to someone who is not a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing idiot. Like me lol. Just kidding, but someone who has what is best for the Raiders in mind and does what we need to stay competitive. I fear the days Khalil Mack, David Carr and Amari Cooper ask for their new contracts, because the Davis family is cheaper than a bunch of Jews arguing about prices in a dollar store.


And yes about the Chargers, it would be stupid for them to leave their only true fan base because nobody else outside of SD really likes them. They are not a nationally supported squad and they now will lose a ton of that 30% of ticket sales from LA because most of that will go to the Rams. And moving and losing the great majority of your fans in SD would be the kill shot for that franchise. They better just love SD and worry about winning 1 super bowl.

 

Thats just lip service the NFL is giving to everyone to make it look like they are not discriminating.lol. you dont REALLY think the NFL is going to be honest and come out and say to the public- we will let the chargers join the rams but not the Raiders do you? lol when has the NFL EVER been honest about anything?

you're missing what i just stated,the Raider fans in OAKLAND if the Raiders left,they would not take any team to replace losing the Raiders if they left because they are very loyal to the Raiders.

the NFL does not want to lose the Oakland market,it is WAY too valuable to them,they know Oakland fans wont take any other team and they do not want to lose the oakland market,it is ranked number one in the economy on the rise economic wise so thats the last thing they want is to lose the oakland NFL market.

if the NFL left Oakland for LA,they would be leaving the biggest economic city on the rise ranked number one for a city that is ranked number 17.thats not good business sense,they lose money that way,do the math.

Also there is no guarantee how the NFL will do with two teams in LA at the same time which is what would be the case if another joined them next year. they are going to play it safe and experiment with just one team for at least the next five years or so.

Yes I know that no matter where the Raiders moved,people like you will follow them but it is well known that the reason the Rams came back to LA is because of an owner with deep pockets,many of the most influential owners dont like the Davis family.Al was an astute businessman and knew how to run an organization,Mark though is a bumbling clown they dont like.thats very well known.

buy into that myth that the Raiders can move there if the chargers stay in SD,I really dont care but you're in for a major dissapointment if you think there is any chance they are coming back.Im just trying to spare you the dissapointment,I have no dog in this.

Having two teams in LA and both doing very well is no guarantee.you dont know for a fact how well if it will succeed,neither do I.None of us do including the owners. thats why if there is another team,it will be sometime down the road being an expansion team.

Yes Ram fans in LA never gave up on the Rams when they left,they were not willing to take just any team to replace the team they lost,they remained Ram fans which is what st louis did when they lost the cardinals,they will take any team as they did back then.

thats the point you seem to not be able to grasp here is the NFL does not want to lose the san diego or oakland market.they are not like the city of st louis who will take any team.the NFL cant just expect to lose the raiders or chargers to go to LA and expect those two cities to embrace a new team to come in to replace them like st louis did with the Rams.wont happen.

your in for a very big dissapointment if you're going to hold on to a dream of the Raiders coming back to LA next year when the chargers decide to stay in SD.if you want to have your dream shattered,well thats fine by me,I dont care,makes no difference to me. thats on you if you wont read that link in keep posting that they wont ever be coming back.

again,Im only trying to spare you the heartache of getting your hopes up of the raiders coming back.I was accused for a long time by people of getting desperate grasping at straws when i was posting facts that the Rams would be back in LA,but they were too ignorant to not look at the facts where "I" looked at every angle possible that i might be wrong and that they might not come back before i started posting that they would be back because i found NO HOLES in all the research i did.

its up to you if you want to be dissapointed on the raiders coming back,it makes no difference to me one way or another since i dont live in cali..again Im just trying to spare you the heartache i went through when the Rams left LA.

I have no dog in this.I just know from all the facts out there,they wont be coming back,they would have to completely rebrand change the colors and logo to get corporate sponsorships and the NFL doesnt want them to do that,the raiders have way too much of a history with the colors and logo.



- - - Updated - - -

that being said,just wondering,did your brother become one of those 55,000 people who became a season ticket holder?

 

oh one more thing Geddon you're apparently not aware of,you are going to have to cross your fingers and hope that the chargers dont get a deal to stay in san diego and go then decide to move to someplace like oh st louis or somewhere else.lol which is about as probable as me becoming the next president because take a look at this.

There was a clause in the contract with Davis and Spanos that if either one got a deal in their respective home market, the deal would void.
http://withthefirstpick.com/2016/01/25/oakland-raiders-are-not-leaving-and-never-were/

i can only lead the horse to the water so many times.not my fault if you wont drink it.

oh and it gets even better.read these comments below.

Davis got 2nd seat rights to LA, that is a done/approved deal in Houston. If the Chargers pass, Davis makes the call to LA. But can he do it financially? Since the Carson break up GS pulled out, so Davis is back to square one. The only way he goes to LA is as a tenant, he will owe the NFL $65 million for the next ten years!!!! Question is this, with GS out, how can Davis pay that money? He can't, especially knowing the Raiders are living on NFL revenue sharing welfare. Here is the math: $300 million from the NFL + $550 million in relo$ saved + $150 million in moving costs/new training facility & headquarters = $1 billion (so Z. Abraham is right, it is a $1 billion swing for Davis to stay in Oakland) it is true that the NFL did approve the Raiders to LA and removed all stops if the Chargers pass on NFL2LA, but there remains one big stop: Daivs' own pocket book! Show me the money Mark!
(It's Mayor Schaaf not Schaff and the Chargers have been in San Diego for 55 years not 54)

Either way you slice it, raiders aren't moving to LA. Hence the Las Vegas ploy...it's the only leverage spot they have now

there is a slight difference between the Chargers and Raiders moving here. The Rams agreed to negotiate fairly with the Chargers and the league put in place undisclosed measures to make sure Stan played nice with Dean. However, I've not heard anything of the sort in regards to the Raiders. In other words, the Raiders may have been given the right to move to LA if the Chargers decline, but I have no idea if Stan is obligated to cut them a fair deal. If there are no mechanisms in place to force Stan to play nice with Mark, then Stan could easily only offer a deal that is prohibitively expensive in an effort to block the Raiders out. And if the league truly doesn't want the Raiders in LA, they'll be fine with that.

that last paragraph is what i was telling you earlier.

 

Shut up and let me dream lol. Im a Raider fan man, I handle bad situations pretty good OK lol.

Like I said, I really don't care if the Raiders stay in Oakland or move to LA, or San Antonio , etc. etc. Just as long as they can get a nice stadium going. The only reason I would like them to move to Los Angeles is because it would be easier for me to be able to attend games since one half of my family is in Los Angeles. I have a cousin who lives in san Fransisco but I really just don want to travel there and then go into Oakland, too much of a hassle. But for right now I have to settle for away games at San Diego, where more of my family lives, or wait until they go to Nashville, New Orleans, or Dallas. I can also go to Cleveland since I have family up there as well.

But I would just like to attend a home game for once *******n it lmao.

There was a story last night about Las Vegas, because I know they are building a professional stadium. Pipe dream because the NFL will not allow it, but I would REALLY REALLY love that lol.

 

this article here is saying exactly what i been saying forever,that the raiders wont be in LA again because there is bad blood toward the Davis family because of Al's actions in sueing them to move there.I cant blame them because mark seems to be no different than his father the fact he says he wants to be in oakland but has not shown that he is committed to it as kronekes actions always showed he was committed to LA. Kroneke did not have to use words to prove he was committed to LA,it was always his actions and Davis in his actions is showing he is a liar not committed to oakland like he claims.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...y-regarding-al-davis-still-influences-owners/

that is why i can respect kroneke because he never came out and said i want to stay in st louis,his actions spoke for themselves that he was committed to LA.he was smart by being silent stan but mark davis on the other hand is pissing off oakland fans by saying one thing and doing another.

that was how al davis operated and the NFL did not like him because of that.

 

hey geddon,check out these two videos here.as you can see from watching them,they debunk the myth that LA did not support the Rams there.the first one is from a game in 75 against the cardinals who were always crappy when they were in st louis yet and were a horrible team that year yet despite that,as you can see,the stadium is PACKED to the max.not one empty seat in the place.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GP61GDj25x8

then when you look at this game in 1991 against the eagles,same thing,not an empty seat in the house INCLUDING the UPPER levels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iepQ6vAipA

so much for that fairy tale they do not support NFL football.

 

Thats what I mean, people who say that LA is not big with sports fans have their head stuck up their asses. We are very loyal fan base. Like I said look at the Lakers attendance through the years and win or lose we pack the house. During baseball season you will see Dodger shirts and jerseys all over the place, and the stadium stays quite full.

Even college sports are huge no matter if UCLA or USC sucks donkey balls at a sport.

The Rams will pack the house, no question about it.