In one of his pieces yesterday Bernie said that Dave Peacock and Goodell are not just business partners but also friends...and Dave also knows Stan too....He would have not gotten involved in this if he did speak to them already and hear out their expectations and gotten some assurance that he will get a fair shot at this. This isnt some retired guy with nothing better to do with his life, he is only 45 and still in the business world, he wouldn't get involved in this if the Rams are already out the door and to just cover Nixon and other pols.
- 3,767
Anyone hear what La Canfora said this morning on CBSsports 920? I'm sure he is still steadfastly saying that the Rams are moving. I can't imagine Nixon's call changed his mind. Just wondering if anyone heard it and can comment. It was on at 830 this morning.
- 9,566
I didn't listen to it but Tim live tweeted during the interview-
https://twitter.com/tmckernan
Sample;
https://twitter.com/tmckernan
Sample;
I too have NO doubt that the Rams have had discussions with LA folks, you have to if you are the Rams to get a free stadium here, it would be crazy to think Rams were just going to bluff themselves to a new stadium in st.louis without lighting a small fire in LA to get some smoke.LaCanfora on the Rams saying they haven't had discussions with LA: There have absolutely been discussions and talk of playing there in 2015.
- 284
The Raiders and Chargers have had talks as well heck even the Jaguars Vikings Bills have had talks with L.A. at some point all of this isn't even relevant anymore so of course the Rams are going to talk too them and just because they did or do doesn't precisely mean they are moving there besides Goodell already reiterated that he prefer the Rams remain in St.Louis just as he reassured the same for the Bills. Now he hasn't said that about the Chargers and Raiders i completely nearly confident the Rams stay here unless talks abruptly end or our leaders decide that its not worth having the NFL here. I'm interested in the percentage of how much the taxpayers money will go into this potential new stadium and how long of a lease there be. guess we'll know in 59 days. Keeping my fingers crossed
- 271
That area is HUGE. I'm salivating at the possibilities.
- 284
How much of this will be parking ?Greatest St. Louis wrote:That area is HUGE. I'm salivating at the possibilities.
- 3,767
Heard this last week. After winning the reelection, the mayor of Inglewood mentioned having a meeting set with Stan Kroenke tomorrow. On top of that, Demoff had attended a basketball game in Sacramento (THE CAPITAL OF CALIFORNIA) 2 days after the alleged meeting. Butts quotes were then removed from Inglewood's website and Butts would not comment. Very strange! Here is the link
http://www.insidestl.com/Default.aspx?t ... leId=15322
http://www.insidestl.com/Default.aspx?t ... leId=15322
^The next 2 months are going are only going to get uglier.
Rough game yesterday. Nice to see defense playing well and Gregg Williams looking a little more competent, however, still plenty of roles in the secondary when it really matters. Offense just refuses to establish an sort of rhythm- great pass to Cook, then total cessation of passing game. Offensive line should give the game ball back from last week because they were awful. Austin Davis doesn't see the field well and tends to make bad decisions at critical moments. For as much as Tavon Austin is criticized, I wonder how much they are trying to diversify his use, and Austin Davis just doesn't see him: on the bad interception toward Givens, Austin was all alone in the right flat; "get the ball to Tavon in space" everyone clamors....well there he was and not only did AD choose another target, he underthrows Givens who was open. I don't mean to come down too hard on AD, but those are the types of games they need to win to get over the hump of the "close but no cigar mentality" that has haunted Fisher since 2012. Kendricks' illegal block just sums up the Fisher regime to date.
Rough game yesterday. Nice to see defense playing well and Gregg Williams looking a little more competent, however, still plenty of roles in the secondary when it really matters. Offense just refuses to establish an sort of rhythm- great pass to Cook, then total cessation of passing game. Offensive line should give the game ball back from last week because they were awful. Austin Davis doesn't see the field well and tends to make bad decisions at critical moments. For as much as Tavon Austin is criticized, I wonder how much they are trying to diversify his use, and Austin Davis just doesn't see him: on the bad interception toward Givens, Austin was all alone in the right flat; "get the ball to Tavon in space" everyone clamors....well there he was and not only did AD choose another target, he underthrows Givens who was open. I don't mean to come down too hard on AD, but those are the types of games they need to win to get over the hump of the "close but no cigar mentality" that has haunted Fisher since 2012. Kendricks' illegal block just sums up the Fisher regime to date.
- 3,767
Could this alleged meeting with Mayor Butts in Inglewood, be the Rams equivalent to Davis of the Raiders going to San Antonio... Not likely, but the fact that this leaked, surprises me. Either Butts is an idiot or the Rams wanted this to get out. I think it is likely the fact that he got a bit overzealous, due to the fact that it disappeared from the Inglewood newspaper's quote magically. I think the Rams are doing some major wheeling and dealing behind the scenes. I think they want out of STL. It is just a matter of getting their ducks in a row to appease the league. I think the League wants a billionaire like Stan to own the LA team. Why would you want a sort of rich guy or an whacko like Davis running the NFL's most important emerging market. I think the Butts quote makes me think a Rams move is even more likely. If the Rams do stay, I'd love to see a name change, so we can finally distance ourselves from LA and let the LA fans have their logo and name back. I'm sick of being linked to LA. If they leave and somehow the Jags come here, I'd like to change the name. It is time STL has it's own identity.
I've had enough of the NFL at this point, needed to organize my thoughts, didn't have a particular outlet for them, so I put it here. Just figured I'd share.
http://RejectTheShield.com
As for the Inglewood stuff... it's just a continuation in the process. Nothing I'm getting worried about. Of course Stan has talked to LA. I never believed he hadn't. (Not to mention the fact that we know he owns that land, so it's only natural he'd be in contact with the Mayor of Inglewood, whatever the subject matter.)
I still think they stay in St. Louis.
The game yesterday was brutal. Mostly because officials continue to screw us on major game changing calls. Happens nearly every week. Has cost us AT LEAST 2 games this year. Not to mention the fact that our defensive line is almost certainly held more than any other d-line in the league but never gets the benefit of the call.
Plus, our secondary isn't very good at covering other than EJ Gaines (big time 6th round steal, and I'm not even a Mizzou fan). That secondary is so loaded with raw talent, but at some point if that talent remains raw year after year, it's a failure right?
But I won't let go of the ref thing. It changed the whole game. Players make mistakes, but the rules are supposed to be the rules.
http://RejectTheShield.com
As for the Inglewood stuff... it's just a continuation in the process. Nothing I'm getting worried about. Of course Stan has talked to LA. I never believed he hadn't. (Not to mention the fact that we know he owns that land, so it's only natural he'd be in contact with the Mayor of Inglewood, whatever the subject matter.)
I still think they stay in St. Louis.
The game yesterday was brutal. Mostly because officials continue to screw us on major game changing calls. Happens nearly every week. Has cost us AT LEAST 2 games this year. Not to mention the fact that our defensive line is almost certainly held more than any other d-line in the league but never gets the benefit of the call.
Plus, our secondary isn't very good at covering other than EJ Gaines (big time 6th round steal, and I'm not even a Mizzou fan). That secondary is so loaded with raw talent, but at some point if that talent remains raw year after year, it's a failure right?
But I won't let go of the ref thing. It changed the whole game. Players make mistakes, but the rules are supposed to be the rules.
- 284
I don't think the Rams are going to move either however if they do i'd be dead 
. I do agree with you DogtownBnR that in these negotiations there should be a heavy consideration of a name change so that St.Louis has it's own identity in the NFL and not some other city lurking in from behind.
. I do agree with you DogtownBnR that in these negotiations there should be a heavy consideration of a name change so that St.Louis has it's own identity in the NFL and not some other city lurking in from behind.- 597
Just wanna say, I strongly disagree with changing the name of the Rams - maybe if they had done it in 1995 but not now, not after 20 years in St. Louis and a Super Bowl victory. Did the Dodgers change their name after they moved from Brooklyn? The Lakers after moving from Minneapolis? These are tough times but if we get through it, we'll get through it as the St. Louis Rams.
As for the game, our defense is coming around, we just need to shore up our O-Line (again) and draft a QB. I'd be ok going into 2015 with Bradford/Davis/1stor2ndRoundQB
As for the game, our defense is coming around, we just need to shore up our O-Line (again) and draft a QB. I'd be ok going into 2015 with Bradford/Davis/1stor2ndRoundQB
Agreed on QB. If the Rams can make it work financially, I'd love to keep Bradford as a possibility. I think we've seen enough out of the Rams offense with Davis to say that if Sam were healthy, this offense could excel. It wouldn't even require Sam to develop into a star (although that'd be awesome). He'd just need to be steady, as he's been when he's played.
Davis would be infinitely better if he could avoid the bad throws or the panicked decisions (and maybe he'll get there). That is the thing Sam Bradford may be better at than any other QB in the league. He takes care of the football.
BUT, under no circumstances can they enter 2015 counting on a healthy Sam Bradford. You just can't. You don't have to give up on him, but you better be prepared for another option. And that doesn't mean just a good back up. It means someone that could be the QB of the future.
And if you get to camp and Sam is still around, playing well, and he stays healthy, then you can let things play out before deciding who's committed to long-term. But if Sam can't get healthy or his past injuries are impacting his play, you have to have a real plan b. Really more of a plan 1b.
And it may just be that they move on without Sam at all. Financially, they may be forced to do that unless Sam will re-sign at a lesser deal (but the cap stuff is all a bit over my head). We'll just have to see what happens.
Austin Davis also still has another 7 games to make an impression, although I'm not sure he can do anything that wouldn't just confuse the picture. He could be amazing, and I still don't think you could enter next year counting on just him or even him and Bradford.
It's just a weird unfortunate situation the Rams are in at QB. You could end up in a spot next year where the Rams have 3 legitimate starting quarterbacks on the roster. That'd be best case. But even in that best case scenario, it'd be problematic in figuring out how to handle it.
Davis would be infinitely better if he could avoid the bad throws or the panicked decisions (and maybe he'll get there). That is the thing Sam Bradford may be better at than any other QB in the league. He takes care of the football.
BUT, under no circumstances can they enter 2015 counting on a healthy Sam Bradford. You just can't. You don't have to give up on him, but you better be prepared for another option. And that doesn't mean just a good back up. It means someone that could be the QB of the future.
And if you get to camp and Sam is still around, playing well, and he stays healthy, then you can let things play out before deciding who's committed to long-term. But if Sam can't get healthy or his past injuries are impacting his play, you have to have a real plan b. Really more of a plan 1b.
And it may just be that they move on without Sam at all. Financially, they may be forced to do that unless Sam will re-sign at a lesser deal (but the cap stuff is all a bit over my head). We'll just have to see what happens.
Austin Davis also still has another 7 games to make an impression, although I'm not sure he can do anything that wouldn't just confuse the picture. He could be amazing, and I still don't think you could enter next year counting on just him or even him and Bradford.
It's just a weird unfortunate situation the Rams are in at QB. You could end up in a spot next year where the Rams have 3 legitimate starting quarterbacks on the roster. That'd be best case. But even in that best case scenario, it'd be problematic in figuring out how to handle it.
- 3,767
Arch_Genesis wrote:
I would also be for a name change if the Jaguars or another franchise moved here. I think we'd want to break the ties to Jacksonville right away. I would not want the Stallions logo. I agree Arch, the Rams should have changed their name right away, when they moved here in 95'. It would have been cool , at the very least, if the Rams changed their colors to Big Red RED. At least the empty seats would match the fans...
In the Rams case, I would only be for a name change if we had the rights to the Big Red (Football Cardinals logo). That is the one I really wish we still had. I know none of this name change stuff is realistic, but ultimately, the Cards logo is the one I want. If not, the Rams name would stay, unless LA gets an expansion team. Then Stan should sell the logo to LA and start fresh in STL, new name, new venue and a huge boost in franchise value, support etc. I am sick of LA claiming the Rams and saying things like 'bring them home' etc.. As if this franchise is the same beyond the name. Georgia has passed, the coaching staff, front office, roster and everything is different. It's links to LA have all but diminished, besides the name. I understand their nostalgia, but 20 years later, you'd think they'd get over it.Just wanna say, I strongly disagree with changing the name of the Rams - maybe if they had done it in 1995 but not now, not after 20 years in St. Louis and a Super Bowl victory. Did the Dodgers change their name after they moved from Brooklyn? The Lakers after moving from Minneapolis? These are tough times but if we get through it, we'll get through it as the St. Louis Rams.
As for the game, our defense is coming around, we just need to shore up our O-Line (again) and draft a QB. I'd be ok going into 2015 with Bradford/Davis/1stor2ndRoundQB
I would also be for a name change if the Jaguars or another franchise moved here. I think we'd want to break the ties to Jacksonville right away. I would not want the Stallions logo. I agree Arch, the Rams should have changed their name right away, when they moved here in 95'. It would have been cool , at the very least, if the Rams changed their colors to Big Red RED. At least the empty seats would match the fans...
While it is very frustrating to continually read, and their voice is potentially more loudly heard given the market, I can understand LA fans' call to bring them back. Given your own admission of a desire to hold on to the Big Red, how can you criticize them for the same thing given that it's a real possibility to bring not just the logo but the actual franchise back.
If in 2078, the stars aligned so that for some reason AB InBev had to dissolve or redistribute its components and the possibility arose to re establish an independent Anheuser Busch in St. Louis, would future locals dig into our nostalgic pride and form a movement to publicly support "bringing them home"?
Or to keep it in sports, I'd campaign to bring back the Hawks if ATL's situation were in jeopardy and someone was working to acquire them here.
If in 2078, the stars aligned so that for some reason AB InBev had to dissolve or redistribute its components and the possibility arose to re establish an independent Anheuser Busch in St. Louis, would future locals dig into our nostalgic pride and form a movement to publicly support "bringing them home"?
Or to keep it in sports, I'd campaign to bring back the Hawks if ATL's situation were in jeopardy and someone was working to acquire them here.
- 8,155
^ Doesn't matter what sport, but I'd love to have a Saint Louis Stars professional team again. And another Spirits of Saint Louis would be great... I wish we used that aspirational phrase more often in general to help us focus and get out of our blahs. I have no fondness for the Browns though.
But I really wish that we had a Saint Louis Spiders in our past. That could be really cool to work with today.
But I really wish that we had a Saint Louis Spiders in our past. That could be really cool to work with today.
- 1,792
^I always liked St. Louis Pilots for a name. Ties into both our riverboat and aviation history and I'd imagine duel mascots named Twain and Lindy. Probably a little "cute" for football though. Works better for basketball or soccer.
- 284
I'm in complete disagreement. I highly recommend the Rams change the name of the team that fits more personally for the fans of St.Louis like when the Browns moved to Baltimore and changed the name to the Ravens and the Houston Oilers moving to Memphis then to Nashville and changing the name to the Titans. These 2 owners were quite wise to shed the teams original name for the sake of the fans. Fans there can probably tell you they feel more involved with the team than St.Louis does with the Rams. Keeping the Rams name will only keep the glass half emptied. This team will be forever identified not only as the St.Louis Rams but the L.A. Rams and thats not fair to St.Louis. I know that the name change will probably never happen but i personally think it will get fans here more excited about the team and get them to come to the games more often. I get what you are saying that other teams haven't changed their names after moving however you fail to realize soon after the Giants and Dodgers left NY immediately got another team however i respect everyones opinion.
As for Bradford i think this guy has the potential to be a star if he can stay healthy and get that key receiver. He plays very efficient although he's not the most mobile QB. Ive also liked what I've seen out of Mason however i like them to play Benny Cunningham more too. The defense is starting to play much better and if they can finish the rest of the season on i high note this team has the potential to finish the season 7-9 again . One thing i can say is like Austin Davis but i think he's trying to do too much knowing he has little to work with.
As for Bradford i think this guy has the potential to be a star if he can stay healthy and get that key receiver. He plays very efficient although he's not the most mobile QB. Ive also liked what I've seen out of Mason however i like them to play Benny Cunningham more too. The defense is starting to play much better and if they can finish the rest of the season on i high note this team has the potential to finish the season 7-9 again . One thing i can say is like Austin Davis but i think he's trying to do too much knowing he has little to work with.
By the way here's the names to my fantasy football teams.
St.Louis Rams 6-4 record
St.Louis Cardinals 5-5 record
St.Louis Stampede 8-2 record
St.Louis Avengers 4-6 record
St.Louis Stallions 7-3 record
St.Louis Rams 6-4 record
St.Louis Cardinals 5-5 record
St.Louis Stampede 8-2 record
St.Louis Avengers 4-6 record
St.Louis Stallions 7-3 record
- 182
I am in agreement about tying a team name to the city in some way. The Blues are a terrific example.
Given the Saint Louis connection and the crusades, Knights would be a good secular mascot. Black and Red colors scheme? The Black Knights always triumph!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4
Or, if you like puns, call the team The St. Louis Archers and have a logo with the Arch as the letter "A" in the name. Then have like the Disney Robin Hood Fox as a mascot.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ocQd9NhqHDU/U ... n-hood.png
Given the Saint Louis connection and the crusades, Knights would be a good secular mascot. Black and Red colors scheme? The Black Knights always triumph!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4
Or, if you like puns, call the team The St. Louis Archers and have a logo with the Arch as the letter "A" in the name. Then have like the Disney Robin Hood Fox as a mascot.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ocQd9NhqHDU/U ... n-hood.png
Why not the Steamers? Yeah, that was for soccer, but it would be great for football. Could have some good sound effects for various plays.
I'm down for that if we get a different team, but if we don't, they oughta stay the Rams. It's a shame that sports franchises and cities couldn't decide to keep names in cities long ago, but they didn't, so now we have a complete mixed bag of scenarios.
You've got traditional names like the Lakers and (trolley) Dodgers in Los Angeles, even though they really only made much sense in Minneapolis and Brooklyn.
The Jazz play in Utah, so New Orleans couldn't take back that fitting name. Instead they were the Hornets until they decided to find something with a bit more relevance with the Pelicans. Charlotte didn't get to keep Hornets when their team fled, so they had the Bobcats...until New Orleans made the change in which case Charlotte got Hornets back.
The Rams started in Cleveland, played in LA, and now call STL home. The football Cardinals started in Chicago, played in St. Louis, and now call Arizona home. The Colts started in Baltimore and moved to Indianapolis overnight remaining the Colts. But when the Browns moved to Baltimore overnight, the name was kept in Cleveland and Baltimore became the Ravens. Cleveland got their team and identity back eventually.
The Winnipeg Jets moved to Phoenix to become the Coyotes. The Atlanta Thrashers moved to Winnipeg and became the Jets.
But it's not just with the names. It's mixed history. You wish that teams left it in town too. Those Phoenix Coyotes are the ones who own the history of Bobby Hull (Brett's father). The fans in Winnipeg root for their Jets again and remember the Golden Jet, but their history is from the Thrashers. It's all a mess.
And at this point in the game, there's no easy way to clean it up. It just is what it is. Kind of a bummer to think about, huh?
Sorry for the tangent. Just something that's always been kind of peculiar.
You've got traditional names like the Lakers and (trolley) Dodgers in Los Angeles, even though they really only made much sense in Minneapolis and Brooklyn.
The Jazz play in Utah, so New Orleans couldn't take back that fitting name. Instead they were the Hornets until they decided to find something with a bit more relevance with the Pelicans. Charlotte didn't get to keep Hornets when their team fled, so they had the Bobcats...until New Orleans made the change in which case Charlotte got Hornets back.
The Rams started in Cleveland, played in LA, and now call STL home. The football Cardinals started in Chicago, played in St. Louis, and now call Arizona home. The Colts started in Baltimore and moved to Indianapolis overnight remaining the Colts. But when the Browns moved to Baltimore overnight, the name was kept in Cleveland and Baltimore became the Ravens. Cleveland got their team and identity back eventually.
The Winnipeg Jets moved to Phoenix to become the Coyotes. The Atlanta Thrashers moved to Winnipeg and became the Jets.
But it's not just with the names. It's mixed history. You wish that teams left it in town too. Those Phoenix Coyotes are the ones who own the history of Bobby Hull (Brett's father). The fans in Winnipeg root for their Jets again and remember the Golden Jet, but their history is from the Thrashers. It's all a mess.
And at this point in the game, there's no easy way to clean it up. It just is what it is. Kind of a bummer to think about, huh?
Sorry for the tangent. Just something that's always been kind of peculiar.
- 182
No worries. Tangential conversations makes for interesting one.
You can add the Okalahoma City Thunder/Seattle Supersonics on that pile as well.
I suppose it may matter to some about the ownership of team records and rings of honor and what not (I'm looking at you baseball), but as a for instance Dan Dierdorf who never played for the Rams is in the St. Louis ring of honor. Kurt Warner will likely end up in Arizona's and St. Louis'. Football is sort of a different beast as a significant number of the teams haven't been in their current cities for more than a generation.
You can add the Okalahoma City Thunder/Seattle Supersonics on that pile as well.
I suppose it may matter to some about the ownership of team records and rings of honor and what not (I'm looking at you baseball), but as a for instance Dan Dierdorf who never played for the Rams is in the St. Louis ring of honor. Kurt Warner will likely end up in Arizona's and St. Louis'. Football is sort of a different beast as a significant number of the teams haven't been in their current cities for more than a generation.