The Coliseum Is a Natural for the NFL

Re “To the Coliseum,” editorial, May 24: Regarding the return of the NFL to Los Angeles, I wholeheartedly agree that a renovated Coliseum is the best venue.

As the son of a 15-year veteran of the Los Angeles Rams, I can attest that our city strongly supported its team playing beneath the majesty of the peristyle end. Even now, 30 years after my father retired, on those now rare occasions when my last name provokes the question, “Are you any relation to ... ?,” I am often treated to a wistful story of “father and son” memories of Sunday afternoons at the Coliseum -- seated among 80,000 to 90,000 fans.

Those Rams fans are the audience the NFL owners ought to be remembering as they evaluate potential sites. Forget the bad behavior of Raiders’ fans during their occupancy. The Coliseum and the L.A. football fan shouldn’t be judged by the marauding ethos promoted by the Raider Nation.

It’s an idyllic memory, but there used to be an older woman who greeted my father, win or lose, with freshly baked brownies after every game just outside the Coliseum where the tunnel let out. She’s certainly not the corporate patron coveted by the modern NFL, but she represents the soul of a fan base that once proudly and enthusiastically supported the NFL -- in the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.

Chris Scibelli

Los Angeles

*

The games the NFL has played with Los Angeles for the last decade have gone on for far too long, and it is gratifying to see The Times call out the league in its May 24 editorial. It has been clear all along that the Coliseum is the only sensible location for pro football in L.A., and your editorial reinforces that.

It is indeed time to stop dithering. What it is time for is to welcome back professional football to Los Angeles, and the place to do that is at the Coliseum.

James Hu

Los Angeles

*

The May 24 article on the pros and cons of an National Football League team in Pasadena’s Rose Bowl, “Where NFL Means No Football in My Backyard,” missed a huge part of the story, perhaps because the city of Pasadena likes to pretend that the thousands of joggers, walkers, equestrians, bike riders, skaters and others who daily use the three-mile loop around the Bowl to get their exercise don’t exist.

I imagine that the city discounts this public use in a public park because it provides no revenue and because the city can’t restrict the users of this “commons” to only Pasadena residents. By ignoring this use, the city can avoid building additional restrooms and providing drinking water and can claim that an NFL team would have no negative impact.

On the contrary, the impact on recreational users would be huge. What Pasadena should do is recognize that the Arroyo Seco and the Rose Bowl are a regional resource, beloved by millions for a variety of reasons.

I find it ironic that Pasadena would promote a use of the Rose Bowl that would result in thousands of people sitting on their behinds watching hours of football games over a use that has thousands getting fit and healthy. Ah, the smell of money!

Nancy L.C. Steele

Altadena