duma

NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

Recommended Posts

Joe Buck admitted on a radio interview (I guess this morning—maybe yesterday) that he was trying to get the discussion rolling by making those comments. That doesn't mean he lied when he said he's heard things. In fact, I doubt he is. But he might be being liberal about exactly what he's heard to get that discussion rolling.

It's also worth noting that Joe Buck is a business partner with Dave Peacock (the man leading the charge in St. Louis) on Jamba Juice franchises (if nothing else). They appear to have a relationship, so it certainly follows that Buck would be stirring up some buzz that might benefit what P

eacock is doing.

[http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/STLSports/STLRams/tabid/137/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/15446/Buck-Says-He-Wonders-What-His-Dad-Would-Say-About-Rams-Possible-LA-Move.aspx]

Another thing that's happened recently is that ESPN's Chris Mortensen said he's been told by owners that the Rams aren't a fit in LA, while also noting that we know Kroenke is exploring it. Mortensen says he anticipates the Rams staying in St. Louis.

[http://www.101sports.com/2014/11/19/mort-reports-fast-lane/]

And I'll save the crazy for last. Remember I posted that elaborate rumors a month or so ago from a guy on a message board? Well he's back with more crazy elaborate rumors. The gist of it is, Kroenke buys the Broncos (keeps his Denver empire alive and well), and then one of two things happens. 1. An ownership group led primarily by Dave Peacock buys the Rams and keeps them in St. Louis with the new stadium deal. 2. Someone affiliated with AEG buys the Rams and moves them to Farmer's Field in LA, and St. Louis still goes forward with their stadium deal attracting another team like the Jags or the Panthers (as their owner has supposedly seen the stadium plans and is very impressed!). Kroenke is apparently not even involved in the stadium discussions in St. Louis.

Like I said before, big ups to someone for piecing together a story like that. While it has intriguing parts that follow some logic (Kroenke going to Denver really would make sense if nothing else)... well... no. But it's fun to read.

[http://interact.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1076572]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe Buck admitted on a radio interview (I guess this morning—maybe yesterday) that he was trying to get the discussion rolling by making those comments. That doesn't mean he lied when he said he's heard things. In fact, I doubt he is. But he might be being liberal about exactly what he's heard to get that discussion rolling.

It's also worth noting that Joe Buck is a business partner with Dave Peacock (the man leading the charge in St. Louis) on Jamba Juice franchises (if nothing else). They appear to have a relationship, so it certainly follows that Buck would be stirring up some buzz that might benefit what Peacock is doing.

[http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/STLSports/STLRams/tabid/137/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/15446/Buck-Says-He-Wonders-What-His-Dad-Would-Say-About-Rams-Possible-LA-Move.aspx]

Another thing that's happened recently is that ESPN's Chris Mortensen said he's been told by owners that the Rams aren't a fit in LA, while also noting that we know Kroenke is exploring it. Mortensen says he anticipates the Rams staying in St. Louis.

[http://www.101sports.com/2014/11/19/mort-reports-fast-lane/]

And I'll save the crazy for last. Remember I posted that elaborate rumors a month or so ago from a guy on a message board? Well he's back with more crazy elaborate rumors. The gist of it is, Kroenke buys the Broncos (keeps his Denver empire alive and well), and then one of two things happens. 1. An ownership group led primarily by Dave Peacock buys the Rams and keeps them in St. Louis with the new stadium deal. 2. Someone affiliated with AEG buys the Rams and moves them to Farmer's Field in LA, and St. Louis still goes forward with their stadium deal attracting another team like the Jags or the Panthers (as their owner has supposedly seen the stadium plans and is very impressed!). Kroenke is apparently not even involved in the stadium discussions in St. Louis.

Like I said before, big ups to someone for piecing together a story like that. While it has intriguing parts that follow some logic (Kroenke going to Denver really would make sense if nothing else)... well... no. But it's fun to read.

[http://interact.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1076572]

Interesting points and makes sense for Joe Buck to exaggerate a bit if he's close with Dave Peacock.

That said, how in blue blazes are the Rams not a fit for LA?! The Rams (at least for now) have an unresolved stadium situation, an owner who's given no signs of staying, and, and owns enough land has enough money to build a stadium in Los Angeles! Unless, of course, this is the NFL who may yet find a way to (1) milk as much as they can from current markets, (2) milk as much as they can from a potential market, (3) show how Roger Goodell hasn't lost his stride in his path towards world domination, or (4) all of the above.

Also, and I know it's a crazy theory and all, but yea, I don't see Pat Bowlen selling the Broncos anytime soon. Maybe if Kroenke is hellbent about either moving the Rams to LA or putting a significant investment in building a St. Louis stadium, he'll sell the Avalanche and/or Nuggets in order to eat up some of those relocation fees and/or stadium costs, but that's about it. (And I don't think he sells the Denver teams.) The Jaguars aren't moving anytime soon while the Panthers have just completed a stadium renovation.

Edited by DustDevil61

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That said, how in blue blazes are the Rams not a fit for LA?! The Rams (at least for now) have an unresolved stadium situation, an owner who's given no signs of staying, and, and owns enough land has enough money to build a stadium in Los Angeles! Unless, of course, this is the NFL who may yet find a way to milk as much as they can from (1) current markets, (2) milk as much as they can from a potential market, (3) Roger Goodell is showing how he hasn't lost his stride in his path towards world domination, or (4) all of the above.

According to Mortensen, it has to do with the rules that the NFL came up with for relocation after one of the Raiders lawsuits. Basically, he says there's been adequate fan support and public investment in St. Louis, therefore the team can't move. That sounds pretty dodgy to me because the NFL doesn't really have to abide by its own rules, and I don't think they've gotten such great fan support anyway, but whatever. He does note that some owners want the team in Los Angeles, and that the Chargers can't stop a team from moving in.

I like the one interview with Joe Buck where he says to go talk to all the great Football Cardinals of the past, then struggles to come up with anyone but Dan Dierdorf. And therein lies the problem!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically, he says there's been adequate fan support and public investment in St. Louis, therefore the team can't move.

That's stretching the definition of "adequate" a bit. Not to mention that the "public investment" they're contractually obligated to make wasn't actually forthcoming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope we don't have an ugly situations like the literal overnight move of the Colts to Indianapolis or the downfall of the '95 Browns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope we don't have an ugly situations like the literal overnight move of the Colts to Indianapolis or the downfall of the '95 Browns.

It wouldn't be. The Rams would be returning home. Or at least a place they called home for nearly 50 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope we don't have an ugly situations like the literal overnight move of the Colts to Indianapolis or the downfall of the '95 Browns.

It wouldn't be. The Rams would be returning home. Or at least a place they called home for nearly 50 years.

I'm not worried from a historical standpoint, I'm just unsure of how St. Louis fans would react to losing their team. Maybe we should just put the Cardinals back in St. Louis, and have the Rams move to L.A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would Arizona feel about that?

I don't know about how they would react if/when it happens, but St. Louis fans have an opportunity to stand up now and loudly proclaim that they want the team to stay. So far they've done pretty much the opposite. Does that mean they don't care? Or they're resigned to it? Or don't believe it'll happen? We can only guess. But if they stood up now, Mortensen might actually have a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope we don't have an ugly situations like the literal overnight move of the Colts to Indianapolis or the downfall of the '95 Browns.

It wouldn't be. The Rams would be returning home. Or at least a place they called home for nearly 50 years.

I'm not worried from a historical standpoint, I'm just unsure of how St. Louis fans would react to losing their team. Maybe we should just put the Cardinals back in St. Louis, and have the Rams move to L.A.

Top two responses:

"We had a football team? Besides Mizzou?"

"It's "X" days until pitchers and catchers report."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also worth noting that Joe Buck is a business partner with Dave Peacock (the man leading the charge in St. Louis) on Jamba Juice franchises (if nothing else). They appear to have a relationship, so it certainly follows that Buck would be stirring up some buzz that might benefit what Peacock is doing.

The concept of Joe Buck being involved with a Rams ownership group is almost as disconcerting as Rush Limbaugh being involved with a Rams ownership group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than the joking at the end by the radio hosts and Buck, there was nothing about Buck being involved with the ownership group. He's simply a business partner and a friend of Dave Peacock who is one of the St. Louis leaders that has been working on the stadium deal. Buck loves St. Louis and he's a friend of Peacock, so I get the sense he's helping out, not that he has any official capacity in the matter.

I think adequate fan support is an entirely fair perspective for what St. Louis has given the Rams. They haven't gone over the top and filled up the dome for every terrible game, nor have they completely abandoned one of the worst teams in football history. And despite not meeting the first tier clause (which was just a clause and an option of sorts, not an obligation in the strictest sense), they've invested three quarters of a billion dollars in the Rams stadium during the Rams short 20 year tenure in St. Louis, so I think it's fair to say they've financially invested in the team.

Adequate. It's not a compliment. It's not an insult. I think it's perfectly valid.

I'm also not convinced it will matter to the NFL. The potential stadium deal will matter much more as to whether the NFL follows their own rules. If St. Louis puts out a world class stadium proposal with a significant amount of public funding behind it, I don't think the NFL will let the Rams walk from it. I don't think the fan support has been extreme enough in either direction to make a difference, but I know some of you disagree with that.

While I do believe the NFL will do what it wants, it's rules be damned, Mortensen did bring up one interesting point about that. The Raiders won their lawsuit because the NFL didn't have strict relocations in place. As Mortenson put it, the court said the league can have rules to regulate this stuff, but they didn't. So now they do. And if they don't enforce them this time (which probably is their right), would that set a precedent for other teams in the future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope we don't have an ugly situations like the literal overnight move of the Colts to Indianapolis or the downfall of the '95 Browns.

It wouldn't be. The Rams would be returning home. Or at least a place they called home for nearly 50 years.

I'm not worried from a historical standpoint, I'm just unsure of how St. Louis fans would react to losing their team. Maybe we should just put the Cardinals back in St. Louis, and have the Rams move to L.A.

'We', or anyone, can't just 'put' teams back any where.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope we don't have an ugly situations like the literal overnight move of the Colts to Indianapolis or the downfall of the '95 Browns.

It wouldn't be. The Rams would be returning home. Or at least a place they called home for nearly 50 years.

I'm not worried from a historical standpoint, I'm just unsure of how St. Louis fans would react to losing their team. Maybe we should just put the Cardinals back in St. Louis, and have the Rams move to L.A.

'We', or anyone, can't just 'put' teams back any where.

I can be a pretend commissioner, can't I? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rams have basically been a quasi-home game for most/all of their opponents since the mid-2000s at least. If not for the secondary market and centrality of the city of St. Louis, the attendance numbers would be a lot worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's truth to that for sure. Doesn't really change my stance though that St. Louis fans have done an adequate job supporting a historically bad football organization.

Now you can come back and say that St. Louis Rams fans are terrible or nonexistent. Gothamite can state that it doesn't matter what the product has been, the time is now for Rams fans to make their case. And we can all keep saying it for another 180 pages.

;)

Really, I think we've all done a nice job keeping this on topic, but it'd be funny to go back and see how many times we've just repeated the same POV at each other over the span of 184 pages. January 5th can't come soon enough!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope we don't have an ugly situations like the literal overnight move of the Colts to Indianapolis or the downfall of the '95 Browns.

It wouldn't be. The Rams would be returning home. Or at least a place they called home for nearly 50 years.
I'm not worried from a historical standpoint, I'm just unsure of how St. Louis fans would react to losing their team. Maybe we should just put the Cardinals back in St. Louis, and have the Rams move to L.A.

Given that the Rams are currently 2nd or 3rd-fiddle in St. Louis sports, behind the MLB Cardinals and Blues, I wouldn't anticipate the same levels of vitriol as Clevelanders experienced in 1995 during their ugly relocation saga of the original Browns.

I'm also not sure they have enough in-play history in Missouri to "tarnish the team legacy" should the Rams relocate, given how their only notable era is the "Greatest Show on Turf," and that only lasted for 5-6 years (power team under Kurt Warner and decent team under Marc Bulger).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to clarify, that the Rams are EASILY the second most popular St. Louis team. I sorta think that stinks because the Blues deserve better. The Blues do have good fan support and are loved in St. Louis (although, recently the attendance is not good enough, and that's perplexing). But it comes down to NHL vs. NFL, and we know that in the US, the NFL wins pretty much every time. And that's the case here.

So no matter how bad the Rams are, there is no question that they have the 2nd largest fan base in St. Louis. I don't think it's all that relevant to any discussion as the NFL topping an NHL team is almost a given (unfortunately), but it makes fan support sound unfairly worse when it's suggested they can't even compete with an NHL team.

As for what the Rams situation means to history? Eh. The Rams have had three home markets in their existence: Cleveland, LA, and St. Louis. LA by far has the longest tenure, but St. Louis is developing some history. The Rams have never been that successful of a franchise in any market. Just brief spurts in each.

Point being, I don't really think the Rams "belong" anywhere. We'll see where they wind up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.