LA Vikings?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The league wants a team in L.A. but the problem is that no individual owner wants to be the one to bite the bullet and go there. Why go to a place where you have to build your own stadium when there are plenty of communities in the country willing to give you your own stadium on a silver platter? Especially when that area is one which, historically speaking, has not done well in supporting NFL teams.

The Rams used to set attendance records and with the Fearsome Foursome, all those NFC Championship games, Eric Dickerson etc they were very, very popular.

NFL stooges just claim the city wouldn't support an NFL team because they wouldn't vote to pay for their stadiums. That didn't mean they didn't sell that stadium out or love the team.

 

[Rogah]

The Rams used to set attendance records and with the Fearsome Foursome, all those NFC Championship games, Eric Dickerson etc they were very, very popular.

Oh really? When was that? Sorry but what you say just isn't true. You're not remembering things accurately.

NFL stooges just claim the city wouldn't support an NFL team because they wouldn't vote to pay for their stadiums. That didn't mean they didn't sell that stadium out or love the team.

Like every single sports franchise in L.A., when they perform well they become the "trendy" thing in town to do, but fact is that it is not a rabid fan base and there were PLENTY of fans disguised as empty seats for the Rams during some of the lean years. Just go look at their final 15 seasons and there are many games where they couldn't break 50,000 and even several where they couldn't even break 40,000 (and even a few where they didn't break 30,000).

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

http://www.losangelesrams.org/history.html

They had some down years there at the end but a long and storied history up that point.

 

[Rogah]

http://www.losangelesrams.org/history.html

i think the better question where is the evidence they didn't seel a whole bunch of tickets at Olympic Stadium?

Oldest trick in the internet book, my friend.... putting a link to try and convince people you are right when fact is that there is absolutely nothing in that link that supports your contention and fact is that pretty much for their final 2 decades in LA, the Rams had plenty of attendances under 50,000, and even quite a few under 40,000. They were not a team that sold out with anything that even resembles regularity.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Oldest trick in the internet book, my friend.... putting a link to try and convince people you are right when fact is that there is absolutely nothing in that link that supports your contention and fact is that pretty much for their final 2 decades in LA, the Rams had plenty of attendances under 50,000, and even quite a few under 40,000. They were not a team that sold out with anything that even resembles regularity.

Oldest trick in the internet. Don't post a link and the claim that is somehow more compelling that actually supporting what you claim. The Robinson Rams went south and attendance took a hit but i have family that lives in Westminster and they disagree with you too.

 

[Rogah]

Oldest trick in the internet. Don't post a link and the claim that is somehow more compelling that actually supporting what you claim. The Robinson Rams went south and attendance took a hit but i have family that lives in Westminster and they disagree with you too.

Tell your family they don't know what they're talking about. Here's a link to the Rams' 1994 attendance and from this link you can click "previous season" to go back through all the years. I went back 20 years and there wasn't a single period of time with regular sellouts. There were several games each season with 20,000 (or more) empty seats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Los_Angeles_Rams_season

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Tell your family they don't know what they're talking about. Here's a link to the Rams' 1994 attendance and from this link you can click "previous season" to go back through all the years. I went back 20 years and there wasn't a single period of time with regular sellouts. There were several games each season with 20,000 (or more) empty seats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Los_Angeles_Rams_season

Yeah the owner opting out of the lease and the team sucking had nothing to do with that. The reason why there weren't sellouts is because the Coliseum sat 100k. that they sols out at all should tell you something.

A crowd of 80k sure is terrible....

 

[Rogah]

Yeah the owner opting out of the lease and the team sucking had nothing to do with that. The reason why there weren't sellouts is because the Coliseum sat 100k. that they sols out at all should tell you something.

A crowd of 80k sure is terrible....

1) You can only use that excuse for the final season, but the string of poor attendance goes back over 20 years. The owner didn't opt out in 1977.

2) You look silly trying to support a point that has been proven false. Fact is, as proven by my link, there is no history of solid fan support for the Rams when you look at the final 20 years (and probably even more than that; I didn't bother checking any further back).

3) You just don't know what you're talking about and you are obviously unaware that the Rams played in Anaheim Stadium their final 15 years in L.A. Those 20,000 empty seats gave an attendance of 45,000, not 80,000. When they were at the Coliseum, it was more like 50,000 empty seats.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

1) You can only use that excuse for the final season, but the string of poor attendance goes back over 20 years. The owner didn't opt out in 1977.

2) You look silly trying to support a point that has been proven false. Fact is, as proven by my link, there is no history of solid fan support for the Rams when you look at the final 20 years (and probably even more than that; I didn't bother checking any further back).

3) You just don't know what you're talking about and you are obviously unaware that the Rams played in Anaheim Stadium their final 15 years in L.A. Those 20,000 empty seats gave an attendance of 45,000, not 80,000. When they were at the Coliseum, it was more like 50,000 empty seats.

I'm well aware of the movement. Like I said my uncle was a huge Rams fan from the 60s through the move. Why do you think the Rams moved to Anaheim? It was because LA wouldn't pony up to renovate the Coliseum.

Further if you look at the schedules you will note that in the 1990s they averaged like 5 wins a season. it certainly didn't help them that there was also an AFC team to share the city with throughout the time period that was better.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Los_Angeles_Rams_season

they went 11-5 that season and the attendance was excellent. If you look at the bottom, you will note that a NE team that stank couldn't muster 28k people. You think Boston won't support a team either?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_Los_Angeles_Rams_season

Another good year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Los_Angeles_Rams_season
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Los_Angeles_Rams_season

Rams ownership pissed the people of LA off. They were mismanaged and cheap. This notion that LA cannot support a pro sports team is silly.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Lets also not forget that LA had two NFL franchises throughout the 80s and up until 1994 when both of them left.

 

[NickZepp]

LA La-La.s...

Lets also not forget that LA had two NFL franchises throughout the 80s and up until 1994 when both of them left.

To be fair the Rams were there for about 35 years. The Raiders were there for about 10 and it was pretty much almost always in talks about going back to Oakland the day it went to LA.

 

[NickZepp]

LA is always a city that doesn't care about their teams unless they were winning. Even in some of the 90s seasons when the Lakers were down or the year or two after Shaq left the Lakers were a bit down the attendance probably went down some. But look at this history of the Dodgers you probably see the same thing. A team can thrive in LA but that team better not be losing for a long period of time especially in a sport like football that costs a ton of money to keep going. The Raiders don't count because LA was pretty much always seen as a temporary home for Al Davis from day one.

 

[Rogah]

I'm well aware of the movement.

Bullcrap. When I said there were 20k empty seats, you replied that meant they had 80k in attendance. You clearly didn't know that they left the LA Coliseum 15 years prior to leaving LA altogether.

I just don't understand people like you. Don't you realize that you look infinitely less foolish by just stepping back and saying "I made a honest mistake and was wrong - my bad" than you do by defending a clearly incorrect statement?

Like I said my uncle was a huge Rams fan from the 60s through the move.

Gee, I guess that makes you an authority then.

Why do you think the Rams moved to Anaheim? It was because LA wouldn't pony up to renovate the Coliseum.

They moved to Anaheim because they wanted to increase their chances of not having a blackout because it's easier to sell out 65k seats.

Further if you look at the schedules you will note that in the 1990s they averaged like 5 wins a season.

Yes, thank you for supporting the point I made 3 posts ago that LA fans just don't turn out during the down years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Los_Angeles_Rams_season

they went 11-5 that season and the attendance was excellent.

Average attendance: 58,846. It's pretty sad that you consider under 60,000 as being "excellent".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_Los_Angeles_Rams_season

Another good year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Los_Angeles_Rams_season
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Los_Angeles_Rams_season

Average attendance for those 3 seasons were 59,285, 62,550 and 52,970. Pretty sad that you went back 20 years and those are your best examples. Only one single season where they averaged more than 60,000.

Rams ownership pissed the people of LA off. They were mismanaged and cheap. This notion that LA cannot support a pro sports team is silly.

Any town in this country can support a pro football team because the lion's share of football revenue comes from TV and not from tickets. All I'm saying is that no individual owner wants to go to LA because they can do far better in other parts of the country. You may not realize it, but your own data has done more to prove my point than yours.

 

[Doomsday101]

I don't care to see LA get a team but bottom line is they will. It is the 2nd largest city in the US and it is one of the major media centers. Be it the Vikes or Jags or some other team in the end a team will be moved to LA.

NFL has been trying to this well before Goodell took over. Only reason Houston ended up with a new team over LA was there was a funding plan in place for a stadium to be built but the NFL had intended that LA get that franchise over Houston

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

L.A. has had more chances provided them by the NFL then any other city in the country, by far. They are clearly not interested. I wish the NFL would stop trying to force the issue. I understand the draw of it all if you are the NFL but honestly, if they don't give two thoughts of care about the idea, it's going to fail no matter how much money and effort you put into it. That's just how it is.

BTW, there is a lot of talk about Minnesota but don't sleep on Miami. I understand that there is a lot of rumor right now about Ross wanting to move the Fins to L.A.

 

[Primetime42]

It's the NFL owners who don't want a franchise there.

The deal with L.A. is that it's absolutely perfect blackmail material for teams to use against their communities. "If you don't give me $400M for a stadium, I'll move the team to L.A." It has the plausibility that smaller markets lack.

Given that the TV deal and CBA are locked in for years and so much of the NFL's revenue is national, not local, I suspect that L.A. is more valuable to them without a team than with one.

This guy nailed it.

 

[Seven]

Would be another meaningless name... Vikings were named for the Nordic population in Minnesota and Lakers were named such for "Land of 10,000 Lakes"...

.............and 1 fish. :

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Bullcrap. When I said there were 20k empty seats, you replied that meant they had 80k in attendance. You clearly didn't know that they left the LA Coliseum 15 years prior to leaving LA altogether.

I just don't understand people like you. Don't you realize that you look infinitely less foolish by just stepping back and saying "I made a honest mistake and was wrong - my bad" than you do by defending a clearly incorrect statement?
Gee, I guess that makes you an authority then.
They moved to Anaheim because they wanted to increase their chances of not having a blackout because it's easier to sell out 65k seats.
Yes, thank you for supporting the point I made 3 posts ago that LA fans just don't turn out during the down years.
Average attendance: 58,846. It's pretty sad that you consider under 60,000 as being "excellent".

Average attendance for those 3 seasons were 59,285, 62,550 and 52,970. Pretty sad that you went back 20 years and those are your best examples. Only one single season where they averaged more than 60,000.
Any town in this country can support a pro football team because the lion's share of football revenue comes from TV and not from tickets. All I'm saying is that no individual owner wants to go to LA because they can do far better in other parts of the country. You may not realize it, but your own data has done more to prove my point than yours.

Mostly posturing and assertions instead of facts.

the move to Anaheim is in every discussion of the history of the Rams history. Sorry I was not completely on the ball about occupancy figures.

I don't have the average NFL attendance during those years I know now the average attendance is now is around 65k. Anecdotaly, the attendance figures did not seem low in comparison to the other figures of the era. they seemed average and that was even considering bad teams and having to share the market with the Raiders.

]The Los Angeles Rams led the NFL in attendance 11 times in franchise history, spent a majority of their time in the top 5, and averaged well over the NFL average during their stay in the City of Angels. The television ratings were also significantly higher when the Rams were in Los Angeles as opposed to ratings of random teams (including the Raiders) on television in Southern California during the previous 16 seasons. The Rams were at one point the pride and joy of Los Angeles and they had a very large following both when they played at the Coliseum and Anaheim Stadium.

http://losangelesrams.org/myths.html

According to this the NFL average attendance in 1969 was 54k.

http://www.profootballresearchers.org/Coffin_Corner/13-04-430.pdf

You are right though teams con do better in other cities. The reason is not because they cannot make money in the second largest US media market but rather because LA is not going to pay for an NFL team's stadium.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

ST. PAUL, Minn. -- A Minnesota Senate committee narrowly approved a public subsidy on Friday to help the Vikings build a new football stadium, reviving the team's struggling effort just hours after NFL commissioner Roger Goodell visited the state Capitol to jumpstart what had been a stalled stadium debate.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7...dy-help-vikings-build-new-stadium-minneapolis

 

[Kristi]

I'm one of the last people that wants the Vikings to get a new stadium. I have had a lot of fun in the Metrodome and memories that will last a lifetime. However, I don't want to see the Vikings leave Minnesota either. I'd hate to give up my sweet spot on the field and chances to meet players in the tunnel, but if getting a new stadium keeps them there, at least I still get to see the Cowboys when they play Minnesota.

I'd rather see them play, then not play at all. Vikings fans are loyal -- gotta love them. My family is full of Vikings fans. The Dome is always sold out and very loud.

I doubt I'll be seeing a game this year unless Minnesota and Dallas make the playoffs and by some miracle they play each other in the playoffs and the game is in the Minnesota. Fat chance -- I probably have better odds winning the lottery.

New stadium or not -- in Minnesota or LA -- they are a couple of years away from getting in it. Hoping next year I can see the Cowboys play in the Metrrodome one last time.

I don't know why and my dad and many others have been saying it for years is for them to change the gaming laws -- allow slot machines at the horse track and pay for the stadium with that. Probably won't happen though with an Indian casino literally down the street from the horse track. It would save the tax payers a lot of money that's for sure.