Good bye Rams

[Hawktawk]

League owners have voted to allow the Rams to move to Inglewood for the 2016 season reported moments ago on NFL network.

[burrrton]

Why not keep them in the NFCW?

[SalmonBB]

Back home. And the Cards should return to St. Louis.

GO SEAHAWKS!!!

[Oly]

Rams move from one non-football town to another. Meh (for them, at least).

But I love the move, as it reduces travel time for the Hawks and, if I understand schedule rules correctly, will mean one fewer potential 10am start for the Hawks. (Assuming that they stay in the NFCW, of course, but I'd have to imagine that they finally belong in that division now and won't be leaving.)

[obiken]

Back home. And the Cards should return to St. Louis.

GO SEAHAWKS!!!

RIGHT ON that what should have happened in the first place. The people of St. Louis just got a double screwing.

[obiken]

Here's my plan. Put the Cards back in St. Louis, the Colts back in Baltimore, the Ravens back in Cleveland, the Rams back in LA, Build the Raiders a new house, leave the Chargers where they are. Then tell Phoenix and Indy to get their own teams.

[EmeraldBullet]

Here's my plan. Put the Cards back in St. Louis, the Colts back in Baltimore, the Ravens back in Cleveland, the Rams back in LA, Build the Raiders a new house, leave the Chargers where they are. Then tell Phoenix and Indy to get their own teams.

Literally LOL.

Damn though, that's a big decision. I visited the Edwards Jones dome and it wasn't that bad (coming from a mariners fan that has fond memories of the king dome haha)

[jshawaii22]

For the team it's 4000 less travel miles and 1 less 10am start (7am out here) that's about what we will get, now that the RAMS move back to LA.

Rams will stay in the NFCWest. No reason for them (or the Hawks) to move, even if SD or the Raiders end up sharing with them.

With LAX about 10 minutes from the Old Hollywood Park, I can come see the Seahawks once a year and never have to rent a room or a car.. crap --- there are red-eyes both ways to LA. Yeah!

[obiken]

Here's my b**** Emy, the Fans in St Louis have had their hearts ripped out 2x now, and Roger is protecting the shield when he isn't porking it!

[EmeraldBullet]

Here's my b**** Emy, the Fans in St Louis have had their hearts ripped out 2x now, and Roger is protecting the shield when he isn't porking it!

I think I came off the wrong way. It's painful when a city loses their franchise, and I understand that. I wasn't being sarcastic about thinking the Edwards jones dome was ok, I enjoyed my time there. I apologize for being so insensitive before in my eelier comment. If the rams get moved I will feel for the St Louis fans, I really will. And imo it makes more sense for the chargers to get moved there if anyone does, considering that's over a quarter of their fan base anyways.

[obiken]

No problem guy! I lived in Seattle for 8 years, 76-84, I have lived in Oregon for the last 32 years, and I will always be a Hawk. However, I was bummed when it looked like the Mariners were going to move out of Seattle, and I am not a baseball fan. Its all about money for the league. The Fans don't matter to most of them.

[The POPE]

I am glad to see the Rams coming to LA. Inglewood is a nicer location than the other proposed option and without the Raiders there a Hawk fan that lives in Ca may be able to go to a game without having to deal with gang banging idiots. Most of those wanna be gangstas are 9er or Raiders fans out here. Leave there asses in the Bay Area. I have never been to a game in Phoenix but from what I have read in this forum it sounds like the crowd is pretty laid back. I can see this happening in LA with the Rams. Then I might be convinced to make an appearance at a game and support my team without having to constantly look over my shoulder. The Pope has selfish reasons for approving this move, but I think that after the last go around with the Raiders in LA and there encouragement of the gang culture that the Raiders were never in serious contention to move. Maybe the NFL got it right this time.

[obiken]

I am glad to see the Rams coming to LA. Inglewood is a nicer location than the other proposed option and without the Raiders there a Hawk fan that lives in Ca may be able to go to a game without having to deal with gang banging idiots. Most of those wanna be gangstas are 9er or Raiders fans out here. Leave there asses in the Bay Area. I have never been to a game in Phoenix but from what I have read in this forum it sounds like the crowd is pretty laid back. I can see this happening in LA with the Rams. Then I might be convinced to make an appearance at a game and support my team without having to constantly look over my shoulder. The Pope has selfish reasons for approving this move, but I think that after the last go around with the Raiders in LA and there encouragement of the gang culture that the Raiders were never in serious contention to move. Maybe the NFL got it right this time.

Problem I have Popester as a Hawk and NFL fan, is the ST. Louis fans get screwed2X, and its the Raiders that need a move WAY more than the other 2. That Stadium is a DUMP and an eyesore, it needs a redo. Moving the other 2 is just for the money and TV market. Add to all that, the LA area has never supported FB in the first place, that's why 2 teams moved in, and 2 teams moved out. How will this be different? I don't think they care to be honest. Too much to do. Beaches, Bikinis, Disney, Lakers, ect ect ect.

[RiverDog]

So where does that leave the Chargers and Raiders? The league said that they would not support two stadiums, and they can't pencil it out without league funding.

I guess I'll have to do some research.

Edit: Answering my own question. The Chargers have an option to join the Rams in Inglewood and if they decline, the Raiders will be offered the same option.

[obiken]

Research is spot on Rivy! I don't know how you feel but like I was saying to Pope, the odd team out in all of this is the Raiders, and they needed a new stadium the worst!

[burrrton]

The Chargers have an option to join the Rams in Inglewood and if they decline, the Raiders will be offered the same option.

Yup- I actually caught the announcement live yesterday, and I know it's a subject that of course interests me, but what a fascinating news conference. Explaining the rationale, defending it against reporters obviously perturbed, answering questions from reporters obviously pleased, etc.

[c_hawkbob]

Not sure why the thread title is saying goodbye to the Rams, they are moving closer, not going away ...

Personally I think it sucks because the annual game in St Loo was the most convenient (and fun) one for me to attend.

Otherwise though I think it most appropriate that the rams return to LA, I was a huge LA Rams fan back in the Fearsome Foursome era. "LA Rams" just feels right.

[PasadenaHawk]

For me personally, this is the best possible option since I live in L.A. I am stoked! Like River said, Hawks fans for the past few years have been turning the Arizona game into a home game with all the 12s in attendance. I think we can and will do the same thing here in L.A.

[The POPE]

Problem I have Popester as a Hawk and NFL fan, is the ST. Louis fans get screwed2X, and its the Raiders that need a move WAY more than the other 2. That Stadium is a DUMP and an eyesore, it needs a redo. Moving the other 2 is just for the money and TV market. Add to all that, the LA area has never supported FB in the first place, that's why 2 teams moved in, and 2 teams moved out. How will this be different? I don't think they care to be honest. Too much to do. Beaches, Bikinis, Disney, Lakers, ect ect ect.[/quote]

Like I said, my reasons for approval are totally selfish. Gives me an opportunity to see the Hawks at least once a year. Went and watched them 1 time at the coliseum back in the LA Raider days. Would never go back there, what a gang infested sh*t hole, and that was back in the 90's.
I do agree the Raiders need a new stadium, but their past actions have put them where they are at and now they have to hope another city wants to throw money at them. It may happen, but I'm not here to predict what ifs. Al danced with the devil one to many times and now his team has been vanquished to a rat hole in Oakland. So while the Raiders roam in purgatory I will be watching the Hawks in LA. If the Rams can win in LA they will be successful, if not they will get little support. Cost of living is too expensive in LA to waste money on a losing team. If they win whole new generation of Rams fans or bandwagon turds will be born, if not LA will at least host a Super Bowl every 4-5 years.

[RiverDog]

IMO the Rams in LA gives us one more natural rival in our division and one less 10:00 am start. I never like seeing any city lose their team, but St. Louis is a baseball town first and foremost. Even during their Greatest Show on Turf days, the town wasn't all that passionate about their team, at least not to the degree Cleveland and Baltimore were when they lost their teams.

By moving the Rams and pairing them with either the Chargers or Raiders relieves the league of the need to do another realignment. Had the Chargers and Raiders proposal been accepted, there's no way they could have allowed them to play in the same conference let alone the same division.

Apparently one of the factors influencing the owners is that they did not want Mark Davis in LA, a point that we discussed a couple months ago when the Carson City group brought in that CEO from Disney, an announcement that supposedly gave that group a leg up in the stadium battle and explains why the Raiders where the odd man out.

Personally, I'm glad the Rams are coming back to the west coast. IMO they're going to have a fan base that's closer to the Cards than it is to a Packers or Bronco fan base and tickets should be relatively easy to score, at least until they get into their new digs. Flights to LA are convenient and relatively cheap.

The next drama will be what Spanos does with the Chargers. The reason San Diego's stadium proposal was rejected by the league was that it was reliant on a public vote. Does San Diego go ahead and have the vote anyway? Or can they come up with enough private funding to do the trick? Or does Spanos give San Diego the middle finger?

[RiverDog]

Like I said, my reasons for approval are totally selfish. Gives me an opportunity to see the Hawks at least once a year. Went and watched them 1 time at the coliseum back in the LA Raider days. Would never go back there, what a gang infested sh*t hole, and that was back in the 90's.
I do agree the Raiders need a new stadium, but their past actions have put them where they are at and now they have to hope another city wants to throw money at them. It may happen, but I'm not here to predict what ifs. Al danced with the devil one to many times and now his team has been vanquished to a rat hole in Oakland. So while the Raiders roam in purgatory I will be watching the Hawks in LA. If the Rams can win in LA they will be successful, if not they will get little support. Cost of living is too expensive in LA to waste money on a losing team. If they win whole new generation of Rams fans or bandwagon turds will be born, if not LA will at least host a Super Bowl every 4-5 years.

The Rams may not get as much local fan support, but they'll still sell out. The league and society has changed in the 21 years since the Rams last played in LA. Tickets are so much more marketable nowadays than they were back in the 90's. No such thing as NFL Ticket Exchange back then. That's why you see virtual take-overs from visiting teams like we do when we play in Arizona. And unlike St. Louie, LA is a destination city, especially in the winter months when snow birds are looking for a reprieve from the dreary days of November and December. So they will succeed regardless of local fan support. Also, there's one heck of a larger corporate presence in LA than there is in StL and with the larger marketing opportunities, LA is less dependent on fan support than smaller markets are.

[Hawkstar]

I definitely feel for the Rams fans in St Louis. It sucks to lose a team, even for the causal fan. I wasn't a diehard Sonic fan by any stretch, but there was a sense of loss when they left. (of course I can care less now...)

LA Rams is win for the Hawks and Hawk fans - for all the reasons outlined. (tickets, shorter flights et...)

The move or no move that baffles me is the Raiders. I read this am that they end up in San Antonio. I feel like the current Raiders are paying the price for Al continually raising his middle finger to whomever he deemed in his way. They easily have the worst facility in the league. I guess I dont understand all the dynamics in play with Relocation.

[RiverDog]

I definitely feel for the Rams fans in St Louis. It sucks to lose a team, even for the causal fan. I wasn't a diehard Sonic fan by any stretch, but there was a sense of loss when they left. (of course I can care less now...)

LA Rams is win for the Hawks and Hawk fans - for all the reasons outlined. (tickets, shorter flights et...)

The move or no move that baffles me is the Raiders. I read this am that they end up in San Antonio. I feel like the current Raiders are paying the price for Al continually raising his middle finger to whomever he deemed in his way. They easily have the worst facility in the league. I guess I dont understand all the dynamics in play with Relocation.

I don't think the Raiders end up in San Antonio. That's Jerry Jones territory, and they'd be splitting up an existing market rather than taking advantage of a new market like they are with the LA move.

Once the LA market is settled, look for the league to try to get a team in London. I'm not saying that the Raiders will be that team, but the league definitely has their eyes cast across the pond.

Ditto your sentiments about the fans in St. Louis. I can't see the league going back, either.

One thing that finally moving a team or teams to LA is that it takes away a weapon that the league has used for 20 years to blackmail cities into ponying up taxpayer money for ever increasing outrageously priced new stadiums. One of my biggest complaints about the NFL is that the league and owners are not paying a large enough share of the cost of a new stadium. I was disappointed that this wasn't addressed in the new CBA.

[Uppercut]

Pete will enjoy the game in the Colosseum next fall, will be old home week for him.

Raiders and Niners should have got smart and built a joint stadium in a good location and hared it..but I suspect the two owners would not be that smart

Levi is not that great I think it will be a wet bog during SB is El Nino keep up its work.

[RiverDog]

Pete will enjoy the game in the Colosseum next fall, will be old home week for him.

Raiders and Niners should have got smart and built a joint stadium in a good location and hared it..but I suspect the two owners would not be that smart

Levi is not that great I think it will be a wet bog during SB is El Nino keep up its work.

If we lose Sunday, don't be surprised if rumors start circulating about the possibility of Pete returning to LA.

Putting the Raiders into the same stadium as the 49'ers would have been a horrible move. Those are two of the most thuggish fan bases in the league. They quit holding annual preseason games that dated back to the 60's before the merger due to security reasons. Just imagine what it would be like when they would play once every 4 years sharing the same stadium.

[NorthHawk]

Just an observation, but we will be the only team in our Division that plays on artificial turf (I'm assuming the new stadium will be natural turf).
LA Rams has a better ring to it for me and like others above I welcome the same time zone for games against them.

[obiken]

Sacrilege Alert! But that brings up a question, Why don't we move to Safeco and you could have the roof to protect the Grass field? Is that doable?

[obiken]

If we lose Sunday, don't be surprised if rumors start circulating about the possibility of Pete returning to LA.

Putting the Raiders into the same stadium as the 49'ers would have been a horrible move. Those are two of the most thuggish fan bases in the league. They quit holding annual preseason games that dated back to the 60's before the merger due to security reasons. Just imagine what it would be like when they would play once every 4 years sharing the same stadium.

I agree River on Pete going back to LA no matter what next year. Hope I am wrong.

I never found the 9er fans nearly as thuggish as the Raider fan base.

[Hawktawk]

[quote="RiverDogIf we lose Sunday, don't be surprised if rumors start circulating about the possibility of Pete returning to LA.

I dismissed your comments initially. But I watched the Wed Carroll presser. He was asked about the Rams return to LA and was effusive in his praise and excitement, not only about the relocation, but the overall concept Kroneke is proposing. So maybe you are on to something.

Isn't he under contract for a while yet? It would be a disaster to lose him.....

[obiken]

I dismissed your comments initially. But I watched the Wed Carroll presser. He was asked about the Rams return to LA and was effusive in his praise and excitement, not only about the relocation, but the overall concept Kroneke is proposing. So maybe you are on to something.

Isn't he under contract for a while yet? It would be a disaster to lose him.....

It would be rough but with the Cogs we have in place we would survive, depending on the replacement.

[Hawktawk]

There's only one Pete Carroll. The guy is a genius in the mold of Tom Landry or Bill Walsh in terms of revolutionizing the concept of practice, holistic therapy for players, and constant competition regardless of stature or reputation.
Carroll is the heart and soul of this franchise.It would be a travesty to lose him in the division.

[Seahawks4Ever]

Would that change if we win another S.B.?? Would Pete decide that his work here in Seattle is done?? I hope not... But, the Rams ARE sticking with Fisher for the time being because he has been through this before with the Houston Oiler/Tennessee Titans move. I know there will be many players on the Rams that will love moving to L.A. because more than a few are from California and then there is that nice weather and Hollywood and celebrities and all of that jazz.

The NFL and Goodell are throwing around a lot of money why don't they throw some Oakland's way (the city) and help them build a new stadium, their fans deserve it. Don't move the Raiders, again Davis. he problem is that Mark Davis like his dad doesn't have the money that most current owners have. He is just a "managing general partner" with skimpy pockets. maybe what the Raiders need is a new owner, a new "partner" with some real money. Instead of buying an NBA team maybe Magic Johnson can put together an owner group to buy the Raiders. Then between them and the NFL they can get a new stadium, a righteous new stadium that Raider fans deserve! Just a thought, because Mark Davis really doesn't have the coin to operate a modern NFL team.

[NorthHawk]

It's my belief that a lot of the magic with Carroll is how well he works with John Schneider.
Interestingly, both of their contracts end after the 2016 season.
Read what you will into that.

[RiverDog]

You're going to have to mention Paul Brown if you want to talk about innovative coaches. He was 50 years ahead of his time.

If Pete wins another SB this season, my guess is that he'd stick around another year to see if he could get another one. Just getting to a 4th straight would put him in a league by his own, surpassing even Belicheck amongst active coaches.

But if he doesn't, I think there's a good possibility that he might be itching for a move. He sold his house in Seattle last spring, and to my knowledge, hasn't bought a new one. IMO he's leaving his options open.

[mykc14]

He sold his house in Seattle last spring, and to my knowledge, hasn't bought a new one. IMO he's leaving his options open.

Yeah, there is some confusion surrounding that. He definitely sold a Hunt's Point home last spring, which is this house here:

http://seattle.curbed.com/archives/2015 ... or-61m.php

That may not have been the house he was actually living in, though. It looks like he may have bought 2 houses, right next door to each other and then sold one. This is the house that he apparently kept:

http://mansion-homes.com/dream/pete-car ... e-address/

I don't know for sure whats going on with any of it, but it does look like he does still own a house here.

[Hawktawk]

You're going to have to mention Paul Brown if you want to talk about innovative coaches. He was 50 years ahead of his time.

If Pete wins another SB this season, my guess is that he'd stick around another year to see if he could get another one. Just getting to a 4th straight would put him in a league by his own, surpassing even Belicheck amongst active coaches.

But if he doesn't, I think there's a good possibility that he might be itching for a move. He sold his house in Seattle last spring, and to my knowledge, hasn't bought a new one. IMO he's leaving his options open.

Wasn't Walsh from the Paul Brown tree? I know lots of coaches were. You get my point though.Some guys just think outside the box.
Pete has really matured as a coach here. Hes twice as good as he was in 2010. Hes a hundred times better than his first 2 NFL gigs.Thats the mark of the great ones, they never stop trying to improve.
Carroll did discuss the impact the relocation would have on the Seahawks as well to be fair. I dont think he would leave after this season under any circumstances.
Id expect at least one more year win or lose.
I hope a lot more.

[obiken]

There's only one Pete Carroll. The guy is a genius in the mold of Tom Landry or Bill Walsh in terms of revolutionizing the concept of practice, holistic therapy for players, and constant competition regardless of stature or reputation.
Carroll is the heart and soul of this franchise.It would be a travesty to lose him in the division.

I wouldn't go Cantonizing him yet guys. Yes runs a good upbeat team, but he has had issues. Moreover no way is he Landry or Walsh.
He got rid of a lot of Holmy dust, but he not an innovator. He just gets rid of guys that don't or cant play football.
I appreciate what he has done, but remember he was a Flop in the NFL before this.

[RiverDog]

I wouldn't go Cantonizing him yet guys. Yes runs a good upbeat team, but he has had issues. Moreover no way is he Landry or Walsh.
He got rid of a lot of Holmy dust, but he not an innovator. He just gets rid of guys that don't or cant play football.
I appreciate what he has done, but remember he was a Flop in the NFL before this.

I was one of the biggest critics of Pete, of his hiring, and of his style, and even I have to admit that if he gets to and wins this next Super Bowl, it would almost guarantee him a gold jacket. His brief stints at New England and the Jets will be forgotten just as Belichek's stint with the Browns will be forgotten.

[obiken]

I was one of the biggest critics of Pete, of his hiring, and of his style, and even I have to admit that if he gets to and wins this next Super Bowl, it would almost guarantee him a gold jacket. His brief stints at New England and the Jets will be forgotten just as Belichek's stint with the Browns will be forgotten.

BIG IF River. Lets get the 2nd skin on the wall as John Brodie would say!