STlL RED ALICE is banned from all STL RAMS SITES

[HawkAroundTheClock]

Hahaha. Yeah, not so fun flingin' stones once people point out your glass house.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Nice call out Chris. Love when a troll gets pounded hard by facts.

 

[PackerNation]

I am a former LA Rams fan. I attended many games growing up at the collesium.

I'm not getting why fans here are being labeled especially by someone that doesn't even live here. I would say however that since building a stadium requires a lot of land, there are a lot of issues when the area is already built up.

They closed Hollywood Park after 75 years of operation. The Rams owner owns that property, and if one of my favorite tracks of all times closes I would say having the Rams come back to L.A makes it easier to stomach.

If the OWNER wants to move, and the rest of the owners approve, the discussion is OVER. It doesn't matter about the past regarding teams coming and going. The city of L.A would support the team.

So if the Rams do indeed move back to LA, are you a Rams fan again or a Seahawks fan?

Why aren't you a St. Louis Ram fan?

 

[Rex]

This will be the second go round for me with the NFL yanking a team from St. Louis. Plus this time the taxpayers are still paying for a 20 year old stadium. Rams did their part in bringing home a championship to the city of champions. Still waiting on the Blues.

 

[PackerNation]

This will be the second go round for me with the NFL yanking a team from St. Louis. Plus this time the taxpayers are still paying for a 20 year old stadium. Rams did their part in bringing home a championship to the city of champions. Still waiting on the Blues.

I think it's the team owners with permission from the NFL to move the teams. I don't think the NFL is "forcing" teams to move. Especially with the Cardinals moving to Arizona and the Rams moving to St. Louis. Same goes for the Browns move to Baltimore. Teams losing money, relocate, they start making money.

I wish that when a team moves, you have to change names and logos, etc..... I like what Cleveland did when they relocated to Baltimore did. I hate having the lineage from St. Louis now in Arizona. Or the Rams lineage affiliated with St. Louis.

 

[Rex]

This will be the second go round for me with the NFL yanking a team from St. Louis. Plus this time the taxpayers are still paying for a 20 year old stadium. Rams did their part in bringing home a championship to the city of champions. Still waiting on the Blues.

I think it's the team owners with permission from the NFL to move the teams. I don't think the NFL is "forcing" teams to move. Especially with the Cardinals moving to Arizona and the Rams moving to St. Louis. Same goes for the Browns move to Baltimore. Teams losing money, relocate, they start making money.

I wish that when a team moves, you have to change names and logos, etc..... I like what Cleveland did when they relocated to Baltimore did. I hate having the lineage from St. Louis now in Arizona. Or the Rams lineage affiliated with St. Louis.

Losing money? No, not the case now nor 27 years ago. The issue is maximizing profit. Bidwill in AZ lost his ass for 20 years compared to what he was making in St. Louis. Kroenke is making good money in St. Louis too. He wants to make more in LA.

I don't particularly care for a Packer fan's opinion about "lineage" of other cities. Packers are a unique situation in that they are publicly owned. No way will they ever move from Green Bay. I am extremely envious. Packers did it right. NFL won't ever let that happen again. If Rams move to LA then I hope St. Louis sues to keep the Rams name.

 

[chris98251]

This will be the second go round for me with the NFL yanking a team from St. Louis. Plus this time the taxpayers are still paying for a 20 year old stadium. Rams did their part in bringing home a championship to the city of champions. Still waiting on the Blues.

I think it's the team owners with permission from the NFL to move the teams. I don't think the NFL is "forcing" teams to move. Especially with the Cardinals moving to Arizona and the Rams moving to St. Louis. Same goes for the Browns move to Baltimore. Teams losing money, relocate, they start making money.

I wish that when a team moves, you have to change names and logos, etc..... I like what Cleveland did when they relocated to Baltimore did. I hate having the lineage from St. Louis now in Arizona. Or the Rams lineage affiliated with St. Louis.

Losing money? No, not the case now nor 27 years ago. The issue is maximizing profit. Bidwill in AZ lost his ass for 20 years compared to what he was making in St. Louis. Kroenke is making good money in St. Louis too. He wants to make more in LA.

I don't particularly care for a Packer fan's opinion about "lineage" of other cities. Packers are a unique situation in that they are publicly owned. No way will they ever move from Green Bay. I am extremely envious. Packers did it right. NFL won't ever let that happen again. If Rams move to LA then I hope St. Louis sues to keep the Rams name.

Oh like Cleveland and L.A. can't challenge that in court since they had the name on their team first, throw in Anaheim as well.

St Louis is not their original city, you can claim the Cardinals if that's what your looking for a name. Even then I think Chicago has the first rights on that.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

I'm split on the Rams moving because it's another hit on Missouri's economy and it's an obvious money grab but the fact is it's asinine that the NFL isn't in the 3rd largest media market in the nation. It's just a matter of time before a team will be back in Los Angeles there's too much money to be made for it not to happen.

 

[RedAlice]

This topic is way bigger than me. I will say more thoughts in the shack, but for here:

1. Emotions flying on all sides and many are taking this way too far. Lawsuits being threatened by STL fans to LA fans (not to me), just crazy crazy things. Was nice to see that even STL fans thought that was too far.

2. Time spent on a boat somewhere w/o thinking about the NFL.....made me realize now how much I enjoy it and can get way too serious. I love the Rams, that is a fact. It brings me pleasure to love them.

3. It also brings pleasure to fans who live in STL. Our team can only be in one place. I will love them if they stay, still want them home. Just won't stress about something I can do nothing to control.

4. Even though I blame STL fans for not caring about LA fans when they were excited to get the Rams, I should have some empathy. I will to the nice, rational ones.

5. Will ignore the STL haters and pretty much have nothing else to say about STL until this process is over. I cannot control it, I will accept the outcome.


To those who compare me to a Hawk fan hating on Seattle. Makes no sense. I am more like an STL fan if the Rams move to LA. If that happens, then I will not hate on any STL fans who total hate LA, but love the Rams. I actually also hate LA - would hate to live there.

oh, and Sherm4Prez is a Rams fan? See???? he is just like RamsFanz and the 3 others like him......why be like that? I use one name everywhere. Never change it. Is that your name on all of the Rams boards? Wow. Dude, no need to stalk or troll...you can just be.

 

[RedAlice]

Yeah, we don't really think you're a Ram fan. I did wonder why I never saw any of your posts, though.


How you got kicked off STLtoday or RRF is beyond me, however. Many are disliked on those boards just like you. BUT, RRF is on life support. Those guys, like me, went to ROD. That's a great forum and I admire X for kicking you off it. That's just funny.

You belong here with you pals, man. I come here to to scout. I've found some nice nuggets in the past that were rather enjoyable.

Perfect example of why some places can't have nice things.......................


Oh and for the record. Red Alice has been nothing but a staunch Ram supporter and openly so since she came here, unlike some others that hide behind Seahawks players names or feint Seahawk support.

Need to resond to this one.

First, thank you Chris. I am a Rams fan wherever I post, and annoyingly so in person too. I travel all over and get the pleasure (well, mine) of annoying NFL fans all over about my love of the Rams. Normally, it's the Rams have fans?? smile. Yes!

Second, Sherman4Prez - I am not banned from either site you mentioned (STL Today or RRF). Only ROD and Avenger have banned me. Both for personal reasons based on me doing something not on their board that bothers them. I have done nothing on any Rams board ever - I have always followed the rules on them. I didn't even argue B on Avenger's site - he banned me for arguing against Bradford on this site. ROD either banned me for what I said on this Hawk site, or he used my personal information to stalk me on one other social media site where I argued a position I believe in. I have said nothing else.

Whatever group you belong to that does not think I am a Rams' fan - well, given who I believe your friends are in that group- it's the group that I find embarrassing as you act disrespectful constantly to other team's fans. There is no reason for that. And, what really bothers me is also that you act all tough when you "expect" the Rams to be top, then disappear when they are not. I am a true fan - I post and love them win or lose. Not only when they win or I can brag. I love them good or bad - always have and always will. And, always on all sites with the same name - not hiding anything.

So.

 

[Rex]

This will be the second go round for me with the NFL yanking a team from St. Louis. Plus this time the taxpayers are still paying for a 20 year old stadium. Rams did their part in bringing home a championship to the city of champions. Still waiting on the Blues.

I think it's the team owners with permission from the NFL to move the teams. I don't think the NFL is "forcing" teams to move. Especially with the Cardinals moving to Arizona and the Rams moving to St. Louis. Same goes for the Browns move to Baltimore. Teams losing money, relocate, they start making money.

I wish that when a team moves, you have to change names and logos, etc..... I like what Cleveland did when they relocated to Baltimore did. I hate having the lineage from St. Louis now in Arizona. Or the Rams lineage affiliated with St. Louis.

Losing money? No, not the case now nor 27 years ago. The issue is maximizing profit. Bidwill in AZ lost his ass for 20 years compared to what he was making in St. Louis. Kroenke is making good money in St. Louis too. He wants to make more in LA.

I don't particularly care for a Packer fan's opinion about "lineage" of other cities. Packers are a unique situation in that they are publicly owned. No way will they ever move from Green Bay. I am extremely envious. Packers did it right. NFL won't ever let that happen again. If Rams move to LA then I hope St. Louis sues to keep the Rams name.

Oh like Cleveland and L.A. can't challenge that in court since they had the name on their team first, throw in Anaheim as well.

St Louis is not their original city, you can claim the Cardinals if that's what your looking for a name. Even then I think Chicago has the first rights on that.

I know the history well. Cleveland didn't sue for the Rams name. LA didn't sue for the Rams name. I hope St. Louis does sue for the Rams name since the city has paid for it.

 

[PackerNation]

Losing money? No, not the case now nor 27 years ago. The issue is maximizing profit. Bidwill in AZ lost his ass for 20 years compared to what he was making in St. Louis. Kroenke is making good money in St. Louis too. He wants to make more in LA.

I don't particularly care for a Packer fan's opinion about "lineage" of other cities. Packers are a unique situation in that they are publicly owned. No way will they ever move from Green Bay. I am extremely envious. Packers did it right. NFL won't ever let that happen again. If Rams move to LA then I hope St. Louis sues to keep the Rams name.

OK, maximizing profits and better stadium deals, etc. is a better way to look at it.

As a Packers fan, we are unique, but being a part of the NFL, Packer fans still have an opinion on what happens around the league. I would hate to lose the Bears, Vikings and the Lions as division rivals, as much as I loathe the teams. The "Black and Blue" division is a long standing tradition that makes our lineage and our history what it is today.

As far as the Rams moving back to LA, I think they should be entitled to keep the Rams name over St. Louis. Just like I thought the Cardinals name should have stayed in St. Louis. I know the history of the teams and while they were not started in these respective cities, they have a solid history. The Rams in LA go all the way back to like 1946 or something.

I was merely commenting on the fact that teams moving cities should have to follow the Baltimore Ravens example and start over with fresh uniforms and team names. Then, if another team is formed in the city that lost the team, they can pick up where they left off. In other words, the Los Angeles Rams will always be in Los Angeles, etc....

 

[Rex]

Losing money? No, not the case now nor 27 years ago. The issue is maximizing profit. Bidwill in AZ lost his ass for 20 years compared to what he was making in St. Louis. Kroenke is making good money in St. Louis too. He wants to make more in LA.

I don't particularly care for a Packer fan's opinion about "lineage" of other cities. Packers are a unique situation in that they are publicly owned. No way will they ever move from Green Bay. I am extremely envious. Packers did it right. NFL won't ever let that happen again. If Rams move to LA then I hope St. Louis sues to keep the Rams name.

OK, maximizing profits and better stadium deals, etc. is a better way to look at it.

As a Packers fan, we are unique, but being a part of the NFL, Packer fans still have an opinion on what happens around the league. I would hate to lose the Bears, Vikings and the Lions as division rivals, as much as I loathe the teams. The "Black and Blue" division is a long standing tradition that makes our lineage and our history what it is today.

As far as the Rams moving back to LA, I think they should be entitled to keep the Rams name over St. Louis. Just like I thought the Cardinals name should have stayed in St. Louis. I know the history of the teams and while they were not started in these respective cities, they have a solid history. The Rams in LA go all the way back to like 1946 or something.

I was merely commenting on the fact that teams moving cities should have to follow the Baltimore Ravens example and start over with fresh uniforms and team names. Then, if another team is formed in the city that lost the team, they can pick up where they left off. In other words, the Los Angeles Rams will always be in Los Angeles, etc....

Yet St. Louis has done what neither Cleveland nor LA would do which is build a stadium. LA still won't! St. Louis is left paying on a 20 years old stadium because more money can be made elsewhere? LA metro in '95 was still 6 times the population of the St. Louis metro area yet LA won't show the support demanded from St. Louis 20 years ago and outrageously enough today! St. Louis has paid dearly for the Rams name!

 

[PackerNation]

Yet St. Louis has done what neither Cleveland nor LA would do which is build a stadium. LA still won't! St. Louis is left paying on a 20 years old stadium because more money can be made elsewhere? LA metro in '95 was still 6 times the population of the St. Louis metro area yet LA won't show the support demanded from St. Louis 20 years ago and outrageously enough today! St. Louis has paid dearly for the Rams name!

Cleveland was going to build Model the new stadium he wanted. They just agreed to do it after he decided to leave. He felt slighted and wanted to be gone. Then came the lawsuit prompting his inability to use the Cleveland name and colors, etc.

I don't think cities should be charging it's taxpayers money to build the stadium either. The owner, already vastly wealthy, gets even richer at the expense of the fan. Just my 2 cents.

Anyway, I take it you are from St. Louis and are a Ram fan? Were you a Cardinal fan before the move?

 

[Rex]

Yet St. Louis has done what neither Cleveland nor LA would do which is build a stadium. LA still won't! St. Louis is left paying on a 20 years old stadium because more money can be made elsewhere? LA metro in '95 was still 6 times the population of the St. Louis metro area yet LA won't show the support demanded from St. Louis 20 years ago and outrageously enough today! St. Louis has paid dearly for the Rams name!

Cleveland was going to build Model the new stadium he wanted. They just agreed to do it after he decided to leave. He felt slighted and wanted to be gone. Then came the lawsuit prompting his inability to use the Cleveland name and colors, etc.

I don't think cities should be charging it's taxpayers money to build the stadium either. The owner, already vastly wealthy, gets even richer at the expense of the fan. Just my 2 cents.

Anyway, I take it you are from St. Louis and are a Ram fan? Were you a Cardinal fan before the move?

I was speaking of the 1946 Cleveland and the Rams moving to LA.

St. Louis is now in the position of having to build two stadiums in 20 years for the Rams. Meanwhile LA refuses all along to build one. That is why I say St. Louis has paid dearly for the Rams name.

Yes I am a St. Louis Rams fan. Until Bidwill blamed St. Louis fans and moved I was a Big Red fan.

 

[PackerNation]

I was speaking of the 1946 Cleveland and the Rams moving to LA.

St. Louis is now in the position of having to build two stadiums in 20 years for the Rams. Meanwhile LA refuses all along to build one. That is why I say St. Louis has paid dearly for the Rams name.

Yes I am a St. Louis Rams fan. Until Bidwill blamed St. Louis fans and moved I was a Big Red fan.

ah, LOL. 1946 was not even on my radar.

Yea, I can imagine your frustration.

 

[chris98251]

St Louis isn't any different then Seattle, we paid for two Football stadiums, and a Baseball Stadium along with a Basketball Arena renovation that was announced as state of the art and in less then ten years told it was a joke for a NBA team. You don't own the Rams name, L.A. never stopped loving the Rams, they hated the owner after she by many people and opinions had or murdered Carroll, locked out his kids and told L.A. they were a joke along with their fans.

My Statement about Cleveland and the L.A. markets suing is both cities had the Rams longer then St Louis and justifiably could claim that name as their own as well. The Rams owe St Louis nothing, blame Bidwell for moving the Cards and sue to get them back, but like the Rams they were initially in Chicago as well. Maybe an expansion team in 5 years if your good and build a Stadium that is suitable for NFL type play.

Your not going to get a bit of sympathy here, your whining that L.A. doesn't deserve the Rams is a weak out, we know better then anyone that a owner can manipulate things to turn a fan base sour to use as an argument to leave. Georgia did that and more, she alienated the L.A. fans as best she could then her immediate family, stole their inheritance and took credit for something she never created.

I'm sure you felt real bad for all those L.A. diehards that lost their team as well.

 

[Scottemojo]

Any Rams fan that was ecstatic to get the Rams when they moved to STL had better ST*U about an LA fan being happy they will move to LA

 

[RolandDeschain]

Any Rams fan that was ecstatic to get the Rams when they moved to STL had better ST*U about an LA fan being happy they will move to LA

People pointing out hypocrisy is ever so inconvenient, don't you think, Scotte?

 

[Rex]

St Louis isn't any different then Seattle, we paid for two Football stadiums, and a Baseball Stadium along with a Basketball Arena renovation that was announced as state of the art and in less then ten years told it was a joke for a NBA team. You don't own the Rams name, L.A. never stopped loving the Rams, they hated the owner after she by many people and opinions had or murdered Carroll, locked out his kids and told L.A. they were a joke along with their fans.

My Statement about Cleveland and the L.A. markets suing is both cities had the Rams longer then St Louis and justifiably could claim that name as their own as well. The Rams owe St Louis nothing, blame Bidwell for moving the Cards and sue to get them back, but like the Rams they were initially in Chicago as well. Maybe an expansion team in 5 years if your good and build a Stadium that is suitable for NFL type play.

Your not going to get a bit of sympathy here, your whining that L.A. doesn't deserve the Rams is a weak out, we know better then anyone that a owner can manipulate things to turn a fan base sour to use as an argument to leave. Georgia did that and more, she alienated the L.A. fans as best she could then her immediate family, stole their inheritance and took credit for something she never created.

I'm sure you felt real bad for all those L.A. diehards that lost their team as well.

Well Cleveland didn't sue for the Rams name. Neither did LA.

You have a problem with Georgia? Then dig her up and have a conversation. Dig up Carroll also because he married her and didn't take care of his kids in his will.

And for the umpteenth time LA has refused to build a single stadium for the Rams while St. Louis is being demanded to build two stadiums in 20 years for the Rams. Yet LA has 6 times the population of St. Louis!

So your whining about my facts would be better saved for your orthodontist.