[dieterbrock]

They didn't need public money to build NY Giants/Jets stadium which didn't even need to be rebuilt. The Jets were looking for a place that they could call home. There were proposals to build in NYC but ultimately when no public funding was needed, the new Meadowlands won

[kayfabe]

Agree there's nothing but word salad in this article and it really is all
over the place (great find BTW) but for me it can be summarized in one sentence --

Written by a true out-of-towner (oh and the Inglewood mayor likes hardhats).

That said there's a bunch of issues brought up here that hit a nerve with me
before diving into two big ommissions from this article --

* The race/class stuff in there is really uncalled for (seriously, what does
minority/poverty info have to do with an article about levels of LA Rams fandom?
"the median household income is less than $50,000. The population is over 90%
minority..."). Wink, wink. In an article where you're ostensibly trying to gauge
how much LA Ram fans do/would like the Rams. Huh? Mean, irrelevant and probably
some serious confirmation bias going on here. Plus does the author even know what
downtown LA was like before LA Live (skid row), 3rd Street Promenade Santa Monica
(homeless encampment), even Glendale pre-Rick Caruso? No way Downtown L.A. was a
destination location even as late as a decade ago.

* The lack of realization that while LA can certainly be a bandwagon town, not every
team here gets the same treatment. Not even close. And conflating about how current
St. Louis Rams fans and hypothetical random new Rams fans in L.A. feel about climbing
aboard an NFL bandwagon without any stats to back it up is guesswork at best and a
really big shark jump at worst. And that leads to absurd out-of-touch
generalizations like this --

"As well as the two NHL teams, the L.A. market is home to two MLB teams,
two NBA teams, one MLS team and two major Division I college programs.
When L.A. teams are winning, the city galvanizes".

Sorry, nope. Because L.A's problem isn't that teams aren't winning: it's that
THE RIGHT TEAMS AREN'T WINNING. And the Rams -- for anyone who remembers
clearly -- were definitely one of those teams in 1979 (to be fair, so were
the LA Raiders after their move). In fact I believe LA is really built for
only four current teams to win: it's a Lakers town #1A, it's a Dodgers town #1B,
it's a USC Football town #2 and a UCLA Basketball town #3. And everybody
else get in line, there's a huge drop (and for the record I'm both
a HUGE Angels and Kings fan, and I never imagined in my lifetime the
Halos winning in 2002 or the Kings winning two championships in three
years). But I'm telling you it's not the same as the Dodgers or Lakers
winning; when that happens the whole town galvanizes. Otherwise just a
few more car pennants...

The truth is that the Dodgers last won the World Series in 1988, the
Lakers in 2010 (and yes, for LA fans five years is waaaaay too long to wait),
USC football in 2004, UCLA Basketball in 1995. So -- and this is sort of
hard for carpetbaggers or out-of-towners to comprehend -- this city actually
is in a bit of a drought, particularly when it comes to the Dodgers...

The Rams in L.A. would immediately be that fifth team, and winning would vault
them easily into spot #1 or #2. To be fair, the Raiders would be up there too,
I believe (and as for the LA Chargers or Carson Chargers with no city history...
don't get me started).

But instead I'll focus on two massive omissions from this article -- the lack
of mention as to the revitalization that has already gone on in the area --
particularly with the Forum -- (and no, I don't see how 3 Starbucks are an
indicator of anything), and the complete neglect as to what the LA public
transportation system will be like say in 2019, when the new Inglewood Rams
Stadium could very well open.

To the first point: MSG [Madison Square Garden] has bought and revitalized the
(still Fabulous) Forum. Sold naming rights and everything (it's technically known
as "The Forum, presented by Chase"). And it's basically next door to Stan's new stadium,
with plenty of parking available. It's been hosting events like crazy (um, this very
weekend alone you can go see Boston, Imagine Dragons, and/or Phish). Plus just last
Thursday night those always dangerous Nickelodeon Kids Choice Awards were held there,
featuring the always scary Riley Curry. That was after hosting last year's
MTV Video Music Awards, the Stones, a week of The Eagles, and numerous boxing cards.
And tomorrow if you're up early you can drop by the Forum starting at 730 AM, stay
until 11 AM and you'll be able to watch the 2015 World Special Olympics Torch and
athletes sail by and be feted...

In a little over a year MSG has done a tremendous job of re-establishing Inglewood
as a premier LA entertainment location, something ESK can certainly easily piggyback
and capitalize on (and certainly LARGE advantage over Carson). Because I believe once
given the the greenlight from the NFL and an entertainment-centric neighbor, the
Rams will see plenty of extra business, hotels and the like popup well before the team
even gets here. No reason to think that indoor and outdoor arenas won't at least
attract all kinds of tourism and business opportunities, especially with its immediate
proximity to LAX Airport.

Which leads to the second point: the relationship between accessibility and willingness
to commit to attending an LA Rams game in person. 2019 will bring the extension of
the Crenshaw/LAX Metro Line, with the Florence/La Brea stop being a mere 15-minute
walk to the Forum, another five to ESK Inglewood. Even now Inglewood stadium would be
a mere five miles from LAX by car, perfect for taxis, shuttles, even the Uber/Lyft
services that were approved in LA just last week. This is certainly no worse than the
current walk you have to make from the Great America parking lot to Levi's Stadium or
the walk I made from the Six Flags parking lot while at JerryWorld last year. Plus
I gotta imagine that there will be services available like the bus at Oakland-Alameda
that transfers you from BART to the stadium, that's something the Rams could provide
straight from the airport, or Inglewood could provide, or LA Metro. And I'll guess
that regardless there'll be some shopping shuttles or hotel shuttles or casino shuttles
that will spring up straight to the stadium or its surrounding businesses.

In all you'll probably be able to get to ESK Stadium about as fast as Niners fans
can get to Levi's via BART from San Francisco. With about as much walking
involved. Plus the proposed stadium is just as close for shuttles as Levi's is
to San Jose Airport. And with next year's Expo Line extension to LA's Westside
and this fall's Metro Gold Line extension to (ironically enough Irwindale and) Azusa,
I'm calculating less than an hour sans car to arrive at the front steps of
Stan's Stadium from anywhere in L.A proper -- including from Hollywood or the
San Fernando Valley -- all by light rail and a bit of walking.

And if somehow legalized sports gambling is approved in the interim and Hollywood
Park Casino is right there, uhh, I'm guessing there wouldn't be many attendance
issues at the new Rams Park, perhaps regardless of win-loss record.

So yeah, a really shallow article if you ask me. And I'd be shocked if the author
was from around L.A. Doesn't seem to know about the changed landscape here. Or
the ridiculous potential that a Rams Inglewood stadium brings with it.

[moklerman]

How did it take 20 years again?

I think the most important factor was the Coliseum's stranglehold on football in the LA area. They had the final say on whether or not NFL football could be played within a certain distance of their location so anyone wanting to move a team to LA either had to play in the Coliseum or get their approval.

Once that contract finally ran out is when we started to see all this activity.

[Hacksaw]

How did it take 20 years again?

I think the most important factor was the Coliseum's stranglehold on football in the LA area. They had the final say on whether or not NFL football could be played within a certain distance of their location so anyone wanting to move a team to LA either had to play in the Coliseum or get their approval.

Once that contract finally ran out is when we started to see all this activity.

This is true. I remember noticing the talk from AEG and Roski beginning not long afterward. Now I'm hoping the Coliseum will hold out for only one team to return. oh the irony.

[Hacksaw]

BTW, good read kayfabe.

[Hacksaw]

Here is a response from Peter King regarding the article posted the other day. "The NFL Wants L.A., But Is It a Requited Love? by Emily Kaplan,

• The MMQB,without meaning to, may have given the Rams another push on their road back to Los Angeles.

I hope you saw Emily Kaplan’s story on our site about the apathetic reaction the potential NFL return to Los Angeles was getting by local citizens. “It’s been so long I stopped caring,” English teacher Katie Cole told Kaplan. The upshot of the story, at least the one I took from it, is that the area isn’t burning with passion for the return of the NFL, gone since Christmas Eve 1994. Here’s why this story is better for the Rams than for either the Chargers or Raiders, both of whom have the same kind of wanderlust as the Rams: The Los Angeles area, as polls over the years have shown, won’t be a lock to support one team through thick and thin, never mind two. And what’s the team most likely to garner support early? Probably the Rams. They have the best remaining local fan base, from the looks of it. It’s not overwhelming support, to be sure, and who knows? The locals might be more enthusiastic to get a team with a quarterback. San Diego’s Philip Rivers, though he’ll be entering his 14th year and appears to not want to move to L.A., would be the best day one quarterback, and Oakland’s Derek Carr number two … but on the other hand, a former USC player (Jeff Fisher) would likely be coaching the Rams, and a franchise running back (Todd Gurley) would be a looming star, and the St. Louis defense could be good enough to be a playoff defense in 2016. When owners meet to discuss L.A. on Aug. 11 in Chicago, I think the weight of having to support two teams in a market that appears to be just fine with zero is going to fall on the shoulders of the owners, and they’re more likely to say, “Let’s just put one there for now” instead of opting for two. It’s just the safer move, even if it means stadium-poor San Diego and Oakland have to put up with bad venues for a year or two longer while each team considers other options. If the Rams are the golden franchise that gets to move, then St. Louis and San Antonio step to the front of the line for one of the dissatisfied California franchises, and then it’s back to ground zero for the two losers in the L.A. derby.

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/07/22/peter-king-nfl-mailbag/

[Elvis]

Yes, good write up Kayfabe. What i find amusing is how on the one hand Inglewood (though it's clearly on the rise) is somehow undesirable yet anytime anyone mentions the proposed riverfront stadium in St. Louis the word blighted is also usually in the sentence...

[Ramfan46]

Hey guys I'm over from ROD and originally familiar with the online Rams community from RealRamsfans.com. I'm in Woodland Hills so the vibe around here is a great change of pace compared to the animosity over at any STLcentric site. I just wanted to add my little nugget to this. I was the city of Inglewood's website a month or so ago and they had the parking plans for the stadium along with detailed analysis of traffic flow and how to direct flow in and out of the stadium. They had a parking diagram for season ticket holders. I noticed Kroenke's 60 acres was the biggest lot for the stadium parking. They also had the economic impact from the projected stadium. They projected no Super Bowls and just one team in this instance. The key thing to me was they planned to have 100-110 additional events using either the stadium or the 6000 seat performance venue that is built into the complex. There is a detailed plan by those involved to maximize the usage of the development. I just found it interesting the ecomonic study was basically a rogue scenario with one team and no Super Bowls. They planned for the worst case scenario, I don't even think they'll need to worry because the initial plan is so strong. I really believe 100% that it's happening. Can't wait for Camp in Oxnard!

[The Ripper]

Hey guys I'm over from ROD and originally familiar with the online Rams community from RealRamsfans.com. I'm in Woodland Hills so the vibe around here is a great change of pace compared to the animosity over at any STLcentric site. I just wanted to add my little nugget to this. I was the city of Inglewood's website a month or so ago and they had the parking plans for the stadium along with detailed analysis of traffic flow and how to direct flow in and out of the stadium. They had a parking diagram for season ticket holders. I noticed Kroenke's 60 acres was the biggest lot for the stadium parking. They also had the economic impact from the projected stadium. They projected no Super Bowls and just one team in this instance. The key thing to me was they planned to have 100-110 additional events using either the stadium or the 6000 seat performance venue that is built into the complex. There is a detailed plan by those involved to maximize the usage of the development. I just found it interesting the ecomonic study was basically a rogue scenario with one team and no Super Bowls. They planned for the worst case scenario, I don't even think they'll need to worry because the initial plan is so strong. I really believe 100% that it's happening. Can't wait for Camp in Oxnard!

Great to have you over herer. The worst case scenario is done for the city's approval process to show that the city will benefit no matter what.

[dieterbrock]

Hey guys I'm over from ROD and originally familiar with the online Rams community from RealRamsfans.com. I'm in Woodland Hills so the vibe around here is a great change of pace compared to the animosity over at any STLcentric site. I just wanted to add my little nugget to this. I was the city of Inglewood's website a month or so ago and they had the parking plans for the stadium along with detailed analysis of traffic flow and how to direct flow in and out of the stadium. They had a parking diagram for season ticket holders. I noticed Kroenke's 60 acres was the biggest lot for the stadium parking. They also had the economic impact from the projected stadium. They projected no Super Bowls and just one team in this instance. The key thing to me was they planned to have 100-110 additional events using either the stadium or the 6000 seat performance venue that is built into the complex. There is a detailed plan by those involved to maximize the usage of the development. I just found it interesting the ecomonic study was basically a rogue scenario with one team and no Super Bowls. They planned for the worst case scenario, I don't even think they'll need to worry because the initial plan is so strong. I really believe 100% that it's happening. Can't wait for Camp in Oxnard!

Welcome aboard man
No Super Bowl? I guess we'll just have to settle for a couple NFC championship games instead.