[aeneas1]

Thats comical, they were the SOSAR rams before they ever went to St Louis

great avatar!

[actionjack]

I'm not taking a shot at Stl when I say that he's got a real point.
(Full disclosure... NOT a Plashke fan... at least TJ was funny)

The scrutiny *is*different and they need to learn how to deal with the market.

But.. the rest of it? They need to realize they're a *losing* organization and change that.
Look at the transformation of the Lakers this offseason... and it's much deeper than just Luke, if you read up on it.

The scrutiny is different and should be much greater in a big market like LA. St Louis wasnt too happy about it the losing either. But the RAMS were a losing/dysfunctional organization when they left the LA market. They have had a good run and then returned to a losing organization. Unfortunately location doesnt really matter

[St. Loser Fan]

The scrutiny is different and should be much greater in a big market like LA. St Louis wasnt too happy about it the losing either. But the RAMS were a losing/dysfunctional organization when they left the LA market. They have had a good run and then returned to a losing organization. Unfortunately location doesnt really matter

I don't understand the whole "LA doesn't tolerate losing sports teams". Show me a city that does. Especially at modern prices of $100 nosebleed tickets, $100 parking and $12 beers.

If Green Bay had consecutive 3-13, 2-14 and 1-15 seasons mixed into a whole decade of losing, Lambeau Field wouldn't be full.

[snackdaddy]

Thats comical, they were the SOSAR rams before they ever went to St Louis

Too be more accurate that phrase was coined by the 49ers in 1995. Their first year in St Louis. Although the reference was to the losing they experienced before the move. Thats why they said same old Rams. Nothing's changed from the LA days.

They did have a few rough years before the move. But since the 1970 AFL/NFL merger the Los Angeles Rams were 49 games over .500 in 24 seasons, even with that 5 year losing stretch before the move. I sure remember a lot of wins in my first two decades as a fan.

In comparison, the St Louis Rams were 51 games under .500 in 21 seasons. Even with that 3 year 37-11 record from 99-01.

This year's LA Rams don't seem to be any better though. Lets hope that changes in 2017.

[PARAM]

I think it would be depressing if I lived in either St. Louis or L.A.. But I don't.

I look at it this way.
The possible move was a distraction all of last season.
The actual move will be a problem all of this season.
They have a short honeymoon period with the L.A. fanbase.
Hard Knocks was going to be a distraction but it was also going to help assimilate to the new city.
A home game over seas was going to be difficult.
Nothing earth shattering was going to happen if they didn't win this year.
Moving to L.A. wasn't suddenly going to make them winners.

The media is going to do their job.....and their job is to report what they see. When things are going good they will cozy up to the coach, the players, the event. When things aren't going good they will cozy up to being conspiracy theorists. If there isn't any new news, invent something.

"The Rams are still a St. Louis team"? That's a dig at the fans of St. Louis and an insult for the fans of L.A.. B.P is a putz.

[kayfabe]

I'm not taking a shot at Stl when I say that he's got a real point.
(Full disclosure... NOT a Plashke fan... at least TJ was funny)

Yes and yes! Can't tell you how many times over the last month or so I've wished
Simers was in those pressers, being all over the Rams and watching Fisher give his
standard non-answer answers or deny, deny, deny. As it is the LA media is actually
braver than I thought they'd be with the Rams in town, but still nowhere as critical
as Simers would be. And it wouldn't end well for Fisher: the next day there'd be a
TJ article and somehow not only would Fisher have to apologize but by weeks end
Fisher and the Rams would be making thousand dollar donations to Simers' favorite
charity and also paying off some wager with Simers' daughter.

As for Plaschke...

This Deadspin article from a decade ago still stands " Plaschke writes the way he
does: with clean, simple, one-sentence paragraphs; with thoughts and concepts not
cluttered with logic or statistical proof; like high-powered magnets, his thoughts
are too weighty to put side-by-side...we searched about a dozen offerings and
found nary a connected thought. All of this flies in the face of his early work as
a reporter for the Times, which was quite good..."

So I'm sure Plaschke just came up with a tidy "The LA Rams are the St. Louis Rams"
take only after Stephen A. Smith personally called him out on Monday's First Take
epic Rams rant. Neat, non-sensical, very Plaschke.

Saw firsthand too what jamming two unrelated ideas together and coming up with
a take looks like with Plaschke; years ago he was on a sports panel with the late/
great author David Halberstam where a question came up around Plaschke's latest
newspaper column: it was the year that Hootie Johnson and CBS/The Masters Golf
tournament were coming under severe scrutiny for hosting a major at a private,
(discriminatory?) club. Plaschke's column called Tiger Woods personally out for not
making this a cause celebre, presumably for no other reason than Woods as a high-
profile African American athlete had an obligation to represent his whole ethnic
class and definitively choose a side (as if Woods has ever been a Jim Brown or
Muhammed Ali or Rosey Grier type...which he's never been). When the questioning
came around to Halberstam he looked Plaschke right in the eye -- in front of like a
thousand people -- and said that was maybe the dumbest thing he had ever read.

[St. Loser Fan]

One of the reasons the Rams failed in St. Louis is they were never a St. Louis team.

When Georgia moved the Rams to St. Louis she hadn't been back here in like 40 years. Even after that she continued living in Los Angeles while John Shaw ran the team for her from his Century City offices.

Then when she died her kids (a teacher and a movie writer IIRC) sold the team to Stan Kroenke, a guy with a dozen homes (none of which are in St. Louis) and hired a Los Angeles guy (Kevin Demoff) to run the team.

[Hacksaw]

One of the reasons the Rams failed in St. Louis is they were never a St. Louis team.

When Georgia moved the Rams to St. Louis she hadn't been back here in like 40 years. Even after that she continued living in Los Angeles while John Shaw ran the team for her from his Century City offices.

Then when she died her kids (a teacher and a movie writer IIRC) sold the team to Stan Kroenke, a guy with a dozen homes (none of which are in St. Louis) and hired a Los Angeles guy (Kevin Demoff) to run the team.

True points. And they came from a mega city where they had played for half a century. It was hard for folks anywhere outside StL to wrap their head around that.

The bottom line to SOSAR was all under GF. They were still a great team until she got her hands on them.
Started off by canning SR and then the cuts, tightwad negotiations with the likes of VF, BB, JR, ED, FD and so on.
Sure they had a nice run with Dickerson and Robinson's USC O. That and a decent D we thought it might work out. But the FO was a mess. It just wasn't the same as the DR era or CR's relatively short run.
StL got her org,, and most of the time they were there, she was in charge.

The greatest days of the modern era Rams occurred in StL. But it was squandered away like a rudderless ship in a typhoon by GF and her brainless trust in less that 3 seasons.

ESK may be all about money, but at least there is now some stability with the franchise. Their own stadium, no threat to relocate, a young upcoming team (if they find the right field management), and no more GF to run things amok.

This take may not be favorable to StLousians or to her numerous charity recipients, but the eye test showed me. And I've been watching since the 60's.

[St. Loser Fan]

True points. And they came from a mega city where they had played for half a century. It was hard for folks anywhere outside StL to wrap their head around that.

The bottom line to SOSAR was all under GF. They were still a great team until she got her hands on them.
Started off by canning SR and then the cuts, tightwad negotiations with the likes of VF, BB, JR, ED, FD and so on.
Sure they had a nice run with Dickerson and Robinson's USC O. That and a decent D we thought it might work out. But the FO was a mess. It just wasn't the same as the DR era or CR's relatively short run.
StL got her org,, and most of the time they were there, she was in charge.

The greatest days of the modern era Rams occurred in StL. But it was squandered away like a rudderless ship in a typhoon by GF and her brainless trust in less that 3 seasons.

ESK may be all about money, but at least there is now some stability with the franchise. Their own stadium, no threat to relocate, a young upcoming team (if they find the right field management), and no more GF to run things amok.

This take may not be favorable to StLousians or to her numerous charity recipients, but the eye test showed me. And I've been watching since the 60's.

This might be the first time in the entire Rams football history they've had a favorable ownership setup.

They moved from Cleveland, played in someone else's stadium, swapped owners, had that owner die strangely, again moved to someone else's stadium, didn't get what they wanted, moved again etc.

Granted Stan isn't an LA guy. But once they move into Inglewood the Rams will be in their best situation ever. And there are claims Malibu is Stan's favorite place to be out of the dozen + residences he has.