NFL: Chargers move to Los Angeles

[Falco Lombardi]

Who cares if I ignored the rest of your post? That's why I simply referred to the part where you were talking **** about the Rams again (shocker). I think you just wasted your time as you can see, I don't care about rhe Chargers.

I’ve been fairly complimentary of the Rams this year. McVay has been excellent.

It just hasn’t translated into people caring seeing as attendance is seeing a league record drop and ratings are bad. Not sure why you’re upset with me over pointing out a factoid. I thought you were over your obsession with my posts but seemingly not.

Carry on, my dude.

 

[Halladay]

Jordan Hicks was telling the crowd to get louder. I think Jason Peters said they basically have 16 road games.

 

[Vamos Rafa]

I’ve been fairly complimentary of the Rams this year. McVay has been excellent.

It just hasn’t translated into people caring seeing as attendance is seeing a league record drop and ratings are bad. Not sure why you’re upset with me over pointing out a factoid. I thought you were over your obsession with my posts but seemingly not.

Carry on, my dude.

Your sarcastic comment about the attendance drop being like a perfect storm with the Rams coming back to town was petty on your part. You don't think I was embarrassed about the attendance? People will make excuses about the Coliseum. It's a legit excuse but I expect the attendance to improve with how the season has been going so far. Nevertheless, I was not a proud Rams fan when I found out about the attendance on Opening Day. The Rams do have a big fan base here but it still needs to grow. This city is still divided. 20+ years of not having a team made Angelenos alienate other NFL cities and choose their "favorite" NFL teams. The divided NFL fan base here will affect Rams local ratings. So I hope you can shut up about the bad TV ratings here compared to St. Louis'. You're still here trying to convince everyone that the Rams would be in a better situation had they stayed in Stl. Nope!

 

[Falco Lombardi]

Your sarcastic comment about the attendance drop being like a perfect storm with the Rams coming back to town was petty on your part. You don't think I was embarrassed about the attendance? People will make excuses about the Coliseum. It's a legit excuse but I expect the attendance to improve with how the season has been going so far. Nevertheless, I was not a proud Rams fan when I found out about the attendance on Opening Day. The Rams do have a big fan base here but it still needs to grow. This city is still divided. 20+ years of not having a team made Angelenos alienate other NFL cities and choose their "favorite" NFL teams. The divided NFL fan base here will affect Rams local ratings. So I hope you can shut up about the bad TV ratings here compared to St. Louis'. You're still here trying to convince everyone that the Rams would be in a better situation had they stayed in Stl. Nope!

You’re not paying attention. I don’t want the Rams back.

The NFL royally screwed up. You just said yourself the fan base is divided because there’s another team there. That would sound like someone screwed up no?

I’m sorry you’re sensitive to the fact that ratings are bad and attendence is worse.

I’m laughing at the NFL. I don’t care about you or the people of LA one way or another. Everyone knows the type of city LA is. It’s fine. It’s hilarious the NFL expected something different than what they were always obviously going to get.

Support the Rams, don’t support the Rams, support the Chargers, continue to watch the Raiders more than both, I don’t care.

Ole Rog’ looks bad and I find that funny. Nothing more. Can’t help it if it’s because of the people of your city.

The one thing I will say is whatever you think of the Rams situation better here in STL or out there in LA is whatever (and at the very least I think we can agree that putting two teams there certainly wasn’t for the best), but there’s absolutely no way you can tell me with any empirical evidence whatsoever that the NFL is better off without the Raiders in LA.

 

[Datsyukian Deke]

It didn't work the first time LA had 2 teams, and to nobody's surprise, it's not working yet again, shocker.

 

[Voight]

You’re not paying attention. I don’t want the Rams back.

The NFL royally screwed up. You just said yourself the fan base is divided because there’s another team there. That would sound like someone screwed up no?

NFL did not screw up at all. The Rams belong in LA and they did the right thing bringing them back, Kroenke is also going to have a masterpiece of a stadium when its done and I have no doubt the crowds will get bigger. They also have their best group of offensive players since the GSOT days

 

[Falco Lombardi]

The NFL did not screw up at all means you think putting the Chargers in LA was a good idea.

If you think that, I’m sorry but I respectfully disagree.

 

[Vamos Rafa]

You’re not paying attention. I don’t want the Rams back.

The NFL royally screwed up. You just said yourself the fan base is divided because there’s another team there. That would sound like someone screwed up no?

I’m sorry you’re sensitive to the fact that ratings are bad and attendence is worse.

I’m laughing at the NFL. I don’t care about you or the people of LA one way or another. Everyone knows the type of city LA is. It’s fine. It’s hilarious the NFL expected something different than what they were always obviously going to get.

Support the Rams, don’t support the Rams, support the Chargers, continue to watch the Raiders more than both, I don’t care.

Ole Rog’ looks bad and I find that funny. Nothing more. Can’t help it if it’s because of the people of your city.

The one thing I will say is whatever you think of the Rams situation better here in STL or out there in LA is whatever (and at the very least I think we can agree that putting two teams there certainly wasn’t for the best), but there’s absolutely no way you can tell me with any empirical evidence whatsoever that the NFL is better off without the Raiders in LA.

You'd be sensitive too but I do know the fact that it isn't a long-term problem. This city is divided. It's the second largest city in the country. Like I said, you're still trying to convince people that staying in Stl would have been the right move.

And I know you don't want the Rams back. But that doesn't stop you from continuing to follow them but the only difference is you're rooting against them. You're like the bitter ex girlfriend that was dumped. You don't want your ex back but you're so obsessed with him not being happy and convincing yourself that it was his loss, not yours. Forget about the Chargers for a second here. It seems like you're using the Chargers to support your bitterness about the Rams. The NFL did not screw up moving the Rams here. Yeah, the Chargers have been a mistake andnthe Raiders moving here would've been the right move. No shit, everyone knows that. THE POSTER ABOVE YOU DID NOT MENTION THE CHARGERS. Can you please explain to me why you keep going the Chargers route when someone tells you that the Rams made the right move to go back to LA. For the record, I don't think the ratings are bad at all. They are misleading for a city of this size and the fact that it's a city of transplants. The fan base will just continue to grow. You don't think that's what the NFL expected? Did they really expect this city to magically turn into a Rams town overnight? You can't be that stupid, can you?

"The Rams moving to LA was right."

You: "That means the Chargers moving there was right too."

Like wtf. Are you serious?

 

[Falco Lombardi]

I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything. What’s done is done. There’s nothing to argue on that. If you think I still am, I’m not.

The Rams and Chargers don’t exist in separate universes. If you’re trying to re-establish a team, putting a second team there is a colossally stupid idea. You split the fan base and thus the money etc. How does that not make sense?

 

[Vamos Rafa]

Let's go back to my original response to you where I only mentioned the Rams. Why didn't you just leave it at that if there's really nothing for you to argue? I think we can all agree that Chargers or no Chargers, the Rams will be fine in LA.

 

[Falco Lombardi]

Let's go back to my original response to you where I only mentioned the Rams. Why didn't you just leave it at that if there's really nothing for you to argue? I think we can all agree that Chargers or no Chargers, the Rams will be fine in LA.

Does that mean we can go back to what I was actually talking about then?

I’m not talking about what’s best for the Rams and never was. I was talking about what’s best for the NFL. Those aren’t the same thing. You took it another direction

The Rams now are worth like 2.5 times as much as they were in STL so obviously that helps them. Not the discussion. Whether or not that was best for the NFL is a different story which is all I’ve ever argued.

The worst stadium situation is the one that still isn’t fixed. It’s also the only market that you could have taken a team from without completely abandoning the market.

As it is, you’ve burned two markets for one that so far has not been a resounding success. Meanwhile the lack of attendance plus the point that the Raiders draw better ratings than both LA teams could lead one to draw a reasonable conclusion that maybe they sent the wrong team there.

As an LA Rams fan, I understand if you don’t like that. If you’re just going to respond “who cares about the Chargers, the Rams in LA is where they should be”, then really don’t waste your time. You’re discussing something totally separate from me.

St. Louis plays no part in the discussion beyond is it better to have teams in 4 markets (San Diego, St. Louis, LA, and the Bay Area) vs teams in 2 markets (LA x 2 and Bay Area x 2) from a LEAGUE perspective not a TEAM perspective, especially considering LA has failed as a market before.

 

[Vamos Rafa]

No, they didn't send the wrong team if you're talking about the Rams. You can go back to what you were talking about but I'm only trying to discuss the part that I dragged from your post. I'm just merely saying that you're wrong for bringing up the Rams to go along with the Chargers' failure. If your argument is that LA was a "failed market" before then why should the Rams have stayed in Stl when they were once a failed market as well? Besides you being bitter, don't you agree that LA is where the Rams should be? It might be hard for you to admit but forget about the Raiders and Chargers for a second. Why do you have so much against LA getting the Rams back? So the Chargers moving here was the wrong move. What has that got to do with the Rams' move here in 2016? I don't remember Plaschke writing an article about LA not wanting the Rams. So help me understand. Why bring up the Rams when this is the Chargers' own problem?

As for your last paragraph, LA-OAK-SD (without Stl) woul've been just fine.

 

[Falco Lombardi]

I was against LA getting the Rams because they were my team.

Putting that aside, it also logically didn’t make sense for the reasons I laid out. In fact, the Rams to LA logically made the least amount of sense.

To answer your next question, the Rams are affected by the Chargers being there. That’s why they’re included in the discussion. It’s not just the Chargers struggling, it’s also the Rams. It’s a problem both are dealing with.

When defending why ratings are bad and attendence is low, you said as part of a defense that they’ve split the fan base. It’s a reasonable point on your part because they’re connected. How well one team does affects the other. That’s why it’s brought up.

Now, it’s your turn. You put your fandom aside and answer these questions objectively:

If you can be in 4 markets instead of 3, why wouldn’t you? Especially if it means you can get to LA without completely abandoning a market?

If ratings for the Raiders have consistently been higher than the Rams or Chargers the past two years and both teams currently in LA have so far struggled to draw (both statistical facts) why isn’t it reasonable to wonder if the wrong team is there?

How does it make sense to take a team from a market that had a stadium plan like St. Louis did but leave the team in Oakland that had/has no plan and hadn’t for significantly longer than St. Louis?

 

[Vamos Rafa]

No, I know you were against the LA Rams for the obvious reason. It just amuses me when you bring up any negative fact about the LA Rams as if it was some moral victory for you when you know this isn't a long-term problem and the new stadium is still 3 years away. Two years in bro...two years in. Also coming off a long streak of no winning season. Just give it time. No one is denying that the Raiders are the more popular team but stop acting like the Rams have the same problem as the Chargers.

Hypothetically speaking, let's say the Raiders are set to stay in Oakland and it's between the Chargers or the Rams who will move to LA. You don't think the Rams would make more sense?

And tge Chargers can leave or stay in LA, it has no affect on the Rams. They would just shrug it off and say Bye Felicia. And you're right, Stl did have a stadium plan but. the league was not a fan of contributing $100 million. Too bad. And Kroenke wanted to move back to LA. Just like Frontiere wanted to move to Stl. Are we even now?

And what do you meanby completely abandoning the market? You either abandon or you don't. One team in LA, one team in Oakland, and one team in SD is just as good as 4 markets that include Stl. So let me get this straight, you're not okay with the league leaving the Stl but you're completely fine with the Raiders leaving Oakland. What, just because the Bay already has the Niners? Please. That's kinda a double standard, don't you think? Bay Area fans are proud people. They would have a hard time supporting a team in LA. So why aren't you a Chiefs fan yet? After all, KC isn't "completely out of the Stl market" amirite?

 

[sabremike]

Spanos is pure garbage in human form and any decent human being should take glee in his misfortune. I'd say the NFL and the owners should be filled with guilt and shame but I don't think they are capable of that.

 

[Falco Lombardi]

The Bay Area is literally one tv market. San Fran/Oakland/San Jose is one market. Look it up. Kansas City and St. Louis are two separate markets. So no, it’s not a double standard.

And if the Chargers have no effect on the Rams, why did you use it as a crutch earlier?

You earlier today:
“They split the fan base.”

You now:
“The Chargers have no effect on the Rams”

Which is it?

For a guy who has continually hounded me as some overly emotional basket case, you sure don’t have any objective answers to anything.

And if you really want me and others to quit laughing at the NFL because of LA (and understand, it’s the NFL people are laughing at. The people of LA themselves aren’t who anyone is talking about), go prove us wrong. Or else deal with it.

 

[Vamos Rafa]

No, I'm talking about the Raiders leaving their loyal fans in Oakland. The NFL was just fine for 22 years with no team in LA and they sure as hell will be fine without St. f***ing Louis. So you're okay with Stl fans keeping their team at the expense of Oakland fans losing theirs. That's the double standard I see from you. I know the Bay Area is one market, you knucklehead.

LA is a divided city and the Chargers are only a small part of it. The Rams are more worried about the Raiders' fan base. So yeah, the Chargers basically have no effect on the Rams.

And I don't see anything wrong with being emotional. You're being emotional, too. You take every opportunity to take a shot at the LA Rams. Look at you, no one said anything remotely big about the Rams in this thread until you pretended that the Rams are in the same situation as the Chargers. Move on buddy.

And why would a Stl fan laugh at LA and the NFL. Those two mean $$$. The only thing people should laugh at is the 0 NFL games scheduled in St. Louis.

 

[Voight]

I was against LA getting the Rams because they were my team.

Putting that aside, it also logically didn’t make sense for the reasons I laid out. In fact, the Rams to LA logically made the least amount of sense.

To answer your next question, the Rams are affected by the Chargers being there. That’s why they’re included in the discussion. It’s not just the Chargers struggling, it’s also the Rams. It’s a problem both are dealing with.

How did Rams to LA not make any logical sense? They should have never left LA, but Ms Frontiere decided she wanted a team in her hometown and moved them there. Then Kroenke was finally able to get a good stadium deal done and made plans to build one and he moved them back. They had the best plan out of the 3 teams.

 

[John Price]

 

[John Price]

Rams to LA made sense. The problem is LA couldn't take two teams. Spanos moved the Chargers to LA even though the Rams were already there. It's a disastrous move. They should have stayed in SD but stadium issues.

Maybe Chargers can move to St Louis

 

[No Fun Shogun]

The Chargers move made no sense at the time, and makes no sense now still. This is because of the three different types of fans in LA (increased from two upon further reading on the issue):

1) Fans that just wanted a team back - these fans were satiated by the first team to return, a la the Rams. They weren't going to support a second team regardless, so no luck here for the Chargers.
2) Fans that just wanted the Raiders back - not only are these fans not interested in the Chargers, but they now actively hate the Chargers even more than they used to as the Chargers moving in blocked their team from returning. Again, no luck for the Chargers.
3) Fans that just like the NFL in general/like another team - these fans are just ticked at Chargers, as that means that they're stuck with a team that they don't care about eating up their regular TV broadcast space. Yet again, no luck for the Chargers, but then again not like these guys would be paying customers to begin with.

Just an incredibly boneheaded move by Spanos. He wanted to be a big show in a big market and let that dream delude him into ignoring the reality.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Rams to LA made sense. The problem is LA couldn't take two teams. Spanos moved the Chargers to LA even though the Rams were already there. It's a disastrous move. They should have stayed in SD but stadium issues.

Maybe Chargers can move to St Louis

I don't agree with the idea that LA couldn't work with two teams

Problem is the 2nd team is not team that would succeed. It should have been Raiders/Rams back in LA and it would have been fine IMO for NFL in longrun

Rams and Raiders both still have sizeable fan bases in LA region (Raiders probably biggest)

 

[IslesFan2017]

I don't agree with the idea that LA couldn't work with two teams

Problem is the 2nd team is not team that would succeed. It should have been Raiders/Rams back in LA and it would have been fine IMO for NFL in longrun

Rams and Raiders both still have sizeable fan bases in LA region (Raiders probably biggest)

I agree that Raiders/Rams in Los Angeles would have had a chance to succeed, but the Rams did't want the Raiders to move to Los Angeles, since they knew that the Raiders were very popular and feared losing fans to the Raiders.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Chargers could've worked, if they were the first (non-Raiders) team to go there. They lost that chance to bolt there first, so their avenue for success in LA was killed. Even if Spanos was convinced that San Diego wasn't tenable, he should've taken his ego out of the picture and started looking at other markets instead, whether that be Vegas or San Antonio or Oklahoma City or somewhere else entirely. The animosity in San Diego and the complete lack of interest in Los Angeles were both entirely avoidable and entirely his fault.

Spanos is the middle-aged equivalent of a wide-eyed teenager without any real talent convinced that they can make it big in Los Angeles regardless of all other factors.

 

[Voight]

I don't blame Spanos for leaving SD as he pretty much exhausted all of his options, and I can understand why he chose LA, figuring the Charger fans in SD would be willing to commute to LA 8 times a year.