[The Ripper]

Yes and no. If you look at it as self serving than yes. I have been posting on this for months on other boards. There's not enough corporate support for 3 possibly 2 teams in St Louis. The Cardinals garner a majority of the corporate support and the other teams suffer. If another team was added to the mix the already miserable revenues would get worse for the Blues and the Rams. The other issue is that MLS would never allow Kroenke to make money from another MLS team in St Louis. The desperate are saying that Kroneke could move his team to the city but why would he if he already has doubts in regards to the cities ability to generate long term support.

The Blues have tons of issues making money and selling tickets, I was actually shocked at how many issues they were having. They're having problems selling out playoff games even. I think that's a pretty big sticking point for the Rams, because while people will point to their poor record and say that's the problem, it doesn't tell the entire story. Of course attendance will dip because of poor play, but you can't expect a team to be good forever. If a playoff team is having issues selling 19,000 seats, how are they to confidently invest hundreds of millions of dollars and expect a good ROI? I've noticed some people act as if there's unlimited money there for the taking, the team just has to be good enough, but that's not the case. There's a pie, and it's all about taking as much of it as possible. They will always be in competition with the Cardinals, and when the GSOT was in town the Cardinals attendance, while still good, dipped a little. It jumped back up after the Rams got worse. That's not a slight on St Louis fans, but it's similar to what the market study said, there is a lack of a robust area to draw fans and money from. The reason why a city like Los Angeles or New York can have so many teams and yet more teams are trying to get in, the pie is so much bigger, even if they get a smaller percentage, they're getting a lot more money.. And if they get a large percentage?....

Great to have you here.

[AltiTude Ram]

Sounds like he stumbled into him at a cafe, at least that's what Hokahey is saying.

Some of us know Hokahey from RRF and though he's a bit of a piece of work, i don't know that he's ever straight out made anything up. But he's wrong all the time and sees everything in the best possible light for St. Louis' chances.

And what's Demoff saying? It's not over yet. What else is he going to say at the beginning of the season?

And this his Hokahey's best spin, someone who desperately wants the Rams to say, who's in the same camp as Shane Gray...

This. Hokahey is extremely biased and can only see things from one perspective. How he interprets them. Demoff mighta said something totally different than what Hokahey is saying, but Hokahey hears what he wants. Hokahey was the guy who once said anyone who doesn't live in the St, Louis area can't be as good a Rams fan as those who do live in St. Louis. He doesn't understand people have been fans decades before they moved there and he jumped on the bandwagon. I believe he's also the one who said if they leave they won't be his team anymore. Not sure I'd call that a true Rams fan. More of a true St. Louis fan.

This is about as close to the truth from my experience with Hokahey as it gets. I have no doubt Demoff visited his work place and he/friends got a few minutes with him. My past experience with him makes me believe that he heard some of what he wanted to hear and spun it in his own words. He has a special filter to hear what he wants and ignore the bad stuff. I know some of what he posted wasn't that great but I'm sure he spun some of the other things to his agenda. Also, like others have pointed out....Demoff isn't and hasn't said Fabriani type comments. He's as good as it gets at dancing around questions.

[Rams the Legends live on]

Yea I don't recall him ever out and out lying. However I always found he was not a honest debater if ya countered his points he was apt to never show up in the conversation again or he would side step ya and argue with someone else who like him was arguing from a emotional vantage point. So I agree have never found him to out and out lie I just never put much stock into his opinion. He was one of the guys if he posted a link I would go read it as I was sure his interruption was gonna be off or filled with a agenda. I never took anything he said at face value where some posters ya do and are able to, he was not one I would count as such.

[OldSchool]

Yea I don't recall him ever out and out lying. However I always found he was not a honest debater if ya countered his points he was apt to never show up in the conversation again or he would side step ya and argue with someone else who like him was arguing from a emotional vantage point. So I agree have never found him to out and out lie I just never put much stock into his opinion. He was one of the guys if he posted a link I would go read it as I was sure his interruption was gonna be off or filled with a agenda. I never took anything he said at face value where some posters ya do and are able to, he was not one I would count as such.

Seems to be a common point with those defending St Louis in a lot of ways. Shane is the same he'll talk with you in threads about his articles but if you question a fact of his he won't acknowledge you.

[The Ripper]

Yea I don't recall him ever out and out lying. However I always found he was not a honest debater if ya countered his points he was apt to never show up in the conversation again or he would side step ya and argue with someone else who like him was arguing from a emotional vantage point. So I agree have never found him to out and out lie I just never put much stock into his opinion. He was one of the guys if he posted a link I would go read it as I was sure his interruption was gonna be off or filled with a agenda. I never took anything he said at face value where some posters ya do and are able to, he was not one I would count as such.

Seems to be a common point with those defending St Louis in a lot of ways. Shane is the same he'll talk with you in threads about his articles but if you question a fact of his he won't acknowledge you.

I have noticed that with Shane except last week he went back and forth with someone that had the correct information.

[Rams the Legends live on]

Yea Shane, his last 3 articles he has posted, I have questioned him and no response as of yet. He is getting old, his MO seems to be the same each time. he says we are making such headway then says we are just checking off boxes as they come along. He would lead ya to believe there are more boxes to check off than a 1200 piece puzzle. The only real boxes that need to be checked off are land acquisition and firm financing in place neither of which have yet to be checked off. I am beginning to think we are checking off boxes is code for we still have our fingers crossed and trying like heck even though our future and destiny is outta our hands.

[BuiltRamTough]

100% accurate.

The only real boxes that need to be checked off are land acquisition and firm financing in place neither of which have yet to be checked off.

[snackdaddy]

Yea I don't recall him ever out and out lying. However I always found he was not a honest debater if ya countered his points he was apt to never show up in the conversation again or he would side step ya and argue with someone else who like him was arguing from a emotional vantage point. So I agree have never found him to out and out lie I just never put much stock into his opinion. He was one of the guys if he posted a link I would go read it as I was sure his interruption was gonna be off or filled with a agenda. I never took anything he said at face value where some posters ya do and are able to, he was not one I would count as such.

Seems to be a common point with those defending St Louis in a lot of ways. Shane is the same he'll talk with you in threads about his articles but if you question a fact of his he won't acknowledge you.

Yeah, I remember a thread he started at RRF with one of his articles spinning positive st. louis stuff. He quoted a "trusted source". I commented, more in jest than anything that I have a couple trusted sources that I don't trust. He got offended and defended himself saying he has integrity and would never make something up.

[Hacksaw]

Judging from the number of responses in this thread, it seems Mr "today is a good day to die" ruffled many a feather. Guys like him, as much as they pissed us off, are the guys who will feel the most pain (if) when the Rams do exactly what we thought they might do.

[TSFH Fan]

Mr "today is a good day to die"

I had no idea. I thought you were making a Klingon reference. No, it's Sioux/Crazy Horse!