Kroenke points to Cam as a model for the L.A. Rams

[tiger7_88]

6 minutes ago, Nomad82 said:

There's no such thing as a bad sports town, just shitty ownership and teams. 

St. Louis has lost NFL teams... TWICE.

Yes, its all the owners' fault.

[FootballMaestro]

20 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

St. Louis has lost NFL teams... TWICE.

Yes, its all the owners' fault.

Ouch!

I'm not taking a position perse. But that sounds harsh. LOL

FWIW: Going to LA, isn't necessarily a cake walk or a slam dunk as well. Football's been a tough gig down there.

However, I'm almost sure Kroenke's going there for as much a Real Estate (aka Sweetheart) deal, as much football.

That's the way these things usually work

[Liminy]

3 hours ago, tiger7_88 said:

Why do you say this?

Is it because he's moving HIS BUSINESS to an area he and others feel that the team has a greater chance of success? 

I dont mind that hes moving his business, he just never wanted to be here, he was never involved in the community around STL and there has always been a disdain towards him from the locals. I dont think he ever cared about trying to get a good football team in St. Louis. When Georgia owned the team he was weasling his way in to become the majority under the guise that he wouldnt move the team, saying he's from here and his mom goes to all the games etc and that STL should trust him, but I dont think he ever cared about anything except making more money even though he was already worth billions.

[TN05]

Kroenke can want to imitate us and the Rams, but he can't. We are a classy organization, with a classy owner, a classy coaching staff, and a team that is closer than any in the league. The Rams have a liar for an owner, classless coaches and players, and no real direction.

Five years from now, we'll be looking to our trophy cabinet and seeing the fruits of what we've built. The Rams will be looking at another 7-9 season.

[panthers55]

3 hours ago, FootballMaestro said:

Again.

You're confusing TV people who have no part of the decision making process with NFL people..........

 

No need copying the rest. You did an excellent job of revisionist history and here you repeat it. Thank you again for proving my point. 

You obviously don't know what revisionistic history means so here is the definition.  It is presenting scholarly or historical information which contains factual information in order to present a situation in a more or less favorable light.  Rather than presenting an unbiased review of the facts and let the reader decide what they believe, the author uses those facts that support their opinion and presents them as the only opinion and ignores or minimizes any information to the contrary. 

So lets not waste more space redacting the same information. Again, you did an excellent job of presenting a very controversial and highly debated subject and presented your edition of the history as the factual and only credible version. Revisionistic history at its best. 

[saX man]

28 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

No need copying the rest. You did an excellent job of revisionist history and here you repeat it. Thank you again for proving my point. 

You obviously don't know what revisionistic history means so here is the definition.  It is presenting scholarly or historical information which contains factual information in order to present a situation in a more or less favorable light.  Rather than presenting an unbiased review of the facts and let the reader decide what they believe, the author uses those facts that support their opinion and presents them as the only opinion and ignores or minimizes any information to the contrary. 

So lets not waste more space redacting the same information. Again, you did an excellent job of presenting a very controversial and highly debated subject and presented your edition of the history as the factual and only credible version. Revisionistic history at its best. 

If you're going to try and tear down a guy because he's debating the basis for which you said this:

Quote

folks forget many folks thought Cam wasn't a first round guy and would be a huge bust.

Then at least get the term correct while looking crazy defensive and saying how he keeps proving your point for some reason.

 

[Mvp2014]

15 hours ago, TheGreatestOfAllTimeCam said:

 I dont think you're qualified to say that.

 

15 hours ago, TheGreatestOfAllTimeCam said:

 I dont think you're qualified to say that.

Dude looks like a future superstar already.  What are you watching?

 

[panthers55]

50 minutes ago, saX man said:

If you're going to try and tear down a guy because he's debating the basis for which you said this:

Then at least get the term correct while looking crazy defensive and saying how he keeps proving your point for some reason.

 

My post wasn't meant to be critical of Cam simply remarking  that many folks critical of him have now changed their tune and it morphed to this.  My point with FB was that he presented a great biased one sided version of what he believed to be true and only presented facts to support that.  I gave him facts which refuted it not to prove him wrong simply point out his version wasn't the only one.   I have always been very supportive of Cam and while I saw the risk, the rookie cap and his potential upside coupled with the fresh memory of Clausen was delighted we pulled the trigger on him.

All of this  on both sides was debated ad nauseum years ago. He just made a great post using revisionistic history and I pointed it out. Just like many folks do for or agaist him.  I was never debating what was true or not or whether Cam was a first rounder. No one is tearing anyone down and perhaps saying he knew nothing was somewhat harsh. I was somewhat shocked he acted as if none of the controversy was legitimate. I thought it was common knowledge and obvious.

[Raskle]

Wait.. so let me get this straight here. Quite a few posters here have absolutely roasted that place that Earnhardt Jr has partial ownership in, for giving opposing team fans a place to just watch the game, but the owner of the Rams gets a free pass because, "It's just business" to move them to L.A.?

 

I don't disagree that he has the right to move them, and honestly, they have always been and always will be the LA Rams to my old ass, but don't act like it isn't a big deal either. If, for some reason, the Panthers were to switch cities, I fully believe that a lot of folks would be furious about it. Can't say as I blame them either. I lived in St Louis for a couple of years right around the hey day of the greatest show on turf, and those fans were rabid. They have every right to be upset with the owner and the move - I sure as hell know I would be, were I in their situation.

[saX man]

9 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

My post wasn't meant to be critical of Cam simply remarking  that many folks critical of him have now changed their tune and it morphed to this.  My point with FB was that he presented a great biased one sided version of what he believed to be true and only presented facts to support that.  I gave him facts which refuted it not to prove him wrong simply point out his version wasn't the only one.   I have always been very supportive of Cam and while I saw the risk, the rookie cap and his potential upside coupled with the fresh memory of Clausen was delighted we pulled the trigger on him.

All of this  on both sides was debated ad nauseum years ago. He just made a great post using revisionistic history and I pointed it out. Just like many folks do for or agaist him.  I was never debating what was true or not or whether Cam was a first rounder. No one is tearing anyone down and perhaps saying he knew nothing was somewhat harsh. I was somewhat shocked he acted as if none of the controversy was legitimate. I thought it was common knowledge and obvious.

Fair enough P55.  I guess we'll agree to disagree.  I remember it was a consensus Dareus, Green, Cam, Miller, and Peterson were the for sure top picks.  Just no one knew quite what order.   A select few hyped Gabbert.  yuck.  A lot of people seemed to want Dareus or Green but it wasn't about Cam being a 2nd rounder or late.  Just don't recall or can't seem to find anything of that nature.

 

 

[panthers55]

8 minutes ago, saX man said:

Fair enough P55.  I guess we'll agree to disagree.  I remember it was a consensus Dareus, Green, Cam, Miller, and Peterson were the for sure top picks.  Just no one knew quite what order.   A select few hyped Gabbert.  yuck.  A lot of people seemed to want Dareus or Green but it wasn't about Cam being a 2nd rounder or late.  Just don't recall or can't seem to find anything of that nature.

 

 

I think only 1 guy I ever read was putting him outside of the first round and that wasnt very credible in my opinion.  My point was simply that at the time cam was drafted not everyone was unaminously touting him as a franchise changing sure fire pick  and that five years later he is being touted as the type of player every team wants now and the quarterback of the future.  

[whatever]

8 hours ago, panthers55 said:

You proved my point. Your revisionist retelling of the story is exactly what I am talking about.   Newton was touted as a one read and run quarterback who knew almost nothing about NFL offenses and defenses. He got the number of the play from the coach and ran that play. If his first read wasn't open he ran the ball. Let's not forget he ran the ball almost as much as he threw it. 

You have no idea what you are talking about but let me refresh you memory.  His proday he only completed 50 out of 60 passes with no defenders and his own receivers.  He got mixed results with everyone applauding his strong arm but decrying his poor mechanics and poor accuracy. And this was better than his results at the combine which were not good at all in the throwing drills although he did well running and doing the athletic events. 

His interview with Jon Gruden on national television was a disaster. He couldn't even call out a pro style play instead saying they used numbers like 15 or red gun 12.  The allegations against his father were real and happened. Newton was exonerated in that he supposedly didn't know about them and there was no money exchanged hands but the talks did occur and the father did approach Mississippi state through an agent. Since Cam went to Auburn and received no money things were dropped. But even his father recently admitted he fell on the sword to make sure his son was eligible to play in the NFL and nothing would fall on him. And of course the cheating in exams and receiving stolen property were proven true as he was found guilty of all of that and he left school before he was potentially expelled.

The Panthers did more due diligence than any other team and it took them months to decide he was their man. It was hardly unanimous or even the majority opinion that he would be a star. In fact some insiders like Casserly felt he would need years to be a starter.

And before you  pulled out the hater card, go back and read my posts from 2011. I was one of the first guys to come out and say I wanted him in the draft and have been a huge supporter of his since. I will be at the game tomorrow wearing his jersey.  

But as I said if you think the majority of NFL executives thought that he was the best quarterback in the draft or that he wasn't a huge risk you have no clue. The truth is that he can thank the rookie salary cap as the main reason we took a chance on him.  There is no way in hell we would have signed him to a 100 million dollar contract coming out of college.  But at 22 million for 4 years he was worth the risk.

thanks for proving my point.

 

 

I think you're putting waaay too much stock in the opinions of Mayock, Narwocki, and TRD. Anyone that couldn't see Newton's talent and potential was blind and/or incredibly biased.

[teeray]

2 hours ago, panthers55 said:

I think only 1 guy I ever read was putting him outside of the first round and that wasnt very credible in my opinion.  My point was simply that at the time cam was drafted not everyone was unaminously touting him as a franchise changing sure fire pick  and that five years later he is being touted as the type of player every team wants now and the quarterback of the future.  

Me and you have the scars ro prove it.

P55 and many others were front and center of arguing with guys like TRD and many who were touting guys like Nilan Narwocki as "one of the best in the business"

P55 wanted Cam here as much as anyone, but it was 50/50 on this board and in draftnik world it was about as evenly split.  There was no middle ground here or elsewhere.  At least as I recall

[TheGreatestOfAllTimeCam]

4 hours ago, Mvp2014 said:

 

Dude looks like a future superstar already.  What are you watching?

 

a lot of guys look like future superstars on Saturdays. Johnny Manziel. Vince Young. He hasn't done nothing yet.