Tweet
The NFL is allowing the St. Louis Rams to return to LA. They have also paved the way for the Chargers to move there as well. The Rams originally moved because of lack of support. The Raiders went back to Oakland because of lack of support. Why is the NFL so intent in moving not only one but two teams into that market?
-
Where oh where is our T. Boone Pickens. -
Empathy is powerful.Originally posted by wusphlash View Post -
This was the result that always made the most sense. The Rams are LA's team. They have some pretty decent history. The old Rams owner ran the Rams into the ground to force the move out of LA (and took a large amount of cash for herself for making the move).
While STL is a great sports town, it is definitely not a great NFL town. The Rams were always going to be third behind the Cardinals and Blues; two great fan bases.
I believe this opens the door for both the Chargers and Raiders to get new stadiums in their respective markets. Now that they get $100M from the NFL and exhibited a real threat to leave, they will get the funding they "need" to build their stadiums (probably their plans all along).
The NFL has changed a lot in 20 years. It is at the peak of its popularity. Going without something for so long, might make people realize just how much they missed it. Even if they aren't successful, they will be talked about simply because they are in LA. Two teams in LA is a risk though. They (NFL) would probably be best to see LA embrace one team and do everything they can to keep Oakland and San Diego put.The AssmanComment
-
The process was a farce. It was about what Stan the man with the $ Kroenke wanted and nothing else. How did Oakland and San Diego get that extra $100M? Just 2 weeks ago the NFL lambasted the St Louis Plan because it included an extra $100M they were told they would get.
It's funny that you say STL is not a great NFL team given that the STL Rams last 10+ years have been the worst 10+years in the NFL history and they still drew more fans then LA did before the move.
As of right now I am done with the NFL. If they would have been truthful from the start it would be one thing, but they were completely false from the start.Comment
-
From people I have talked to in STL, before this whole relocation talk began. They ALL said that the Rams were the obvious 3rd team in town.Originally posted by jdmee View Post
I do feel bad for STL and genuine fans. They were hoodwinked in all of this, but this has happened to other cities and in other sports (Baltimore Colts, Minnesota North Stars, Cleveland Browns, Seattle SuperSonics, Brooklyn Dodgers, etc.). It sucks, but not everything in life is fair.
Like I said, the NFL has changed since '94. I think the NFL has a better chance to be a success now. Time will tell.The AssmanComment
-
It was never about the fans. It was just the owners taking care of the other owners. Gee that sounds a lot like other things in this country.Comment
-
It's always about the money, that's why the Rams left Cleveland in the first place.Comment
-
Why does the NFL feel they need a team in the LA market though? A market that has repeatedly failed. It can't be because of TV money. No more TV sets will be turned on because a team is in LA.
Billionaires egos.
And then some municipality and the state will spend a billion for infrastructure improvements. A state almost bankrupt just a few years ago.Where oh where is our T. Boone Pickens.Comment
Comment