NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

[STL FANATIC]

It's not really about the Dome being a dump or not. It's about whether or not the Dome can meet certain specified marks in terms of merchandising points, consourse widths, number of luxury boxes, number and quality of food vendors, ancillary facilities, seat widths, and anything else that was written into the lease.

And considering the Dome's age, and how many stadiums have been built or gut-removated since then, I'd be surprised if it can meet any significant number of those marks. St. Louis is about to find out what Los Angeles already knew, that Georgia Frontiere wasn't actually very sentimental when it came to money.

That's what it's about to you and MOSTLY to those in this thread. But trust me (and it's not most people on here guilty of this, so maybe I'm just digressing), there are plenty of people who consider the dome a dump. "Blow the roof off." "It's lifeless." "Terrible place to watch a football game."

I hear that all the time, but the truth is, it's a plenty adequate place to watch a football game. And when the game is exciting, it actually allows for a tremendous environment.

I already acknowledged in the post you responded to that this is a separate issue than the one that is currently coming to a head regarding the Rams future in St. Louis, though.

Georgia Frontiere is irrelevant at this point (not to offend the deceased). What we'll find out is what Enos Stanley Kroenke's real intentions and desires are. I'll speculate on that very little anymore. I believe there's plenty of chance that he'll make some concessions to keep the team in St. Louis. How big of a chance that is or how big those concessions are... I don't know. I know many outsiders, like you, don't think those chances or those concessions are high. And that's what we'll just have to wait and find out.

I should note that the Rams COO is on the radio right now. He was talking about the coaching and GM search, but he did just get asked about the lease. I'm not suggesting anybody read anything into this. But for the sake of having all information out there...

He said that the Rams are excited to work with the city on options. He said their goal is to have a building and environment the city can be proud of. They want a building that can host events besides 10 Rams games a year--Final Fours, Frozen Fours, College Football, etc. He said their goal is to end up with something that St. Louis and the Rams are excited about.

[Gothamite]

Sounds like pretty standard press sunshine to me, but okay.

I agree with you that we have no real idea what Kroenke's intentions are. We will soon know the city's, though. Eight weeks or so until the city needs to release its plans.

And I'll take your word for it that the EJD isn't a bad venue. I haven't been, so I can't say. But what you're describing sounds a lot like old County Stadium. County Stadium had a reputation for being an over-the-hill dump, but was in my experience one of the best places on Earth to watch a ballgame.

[bosrs1]

Yeah, I like it. Very au courant.

Here's the old roof design, for comparison:

And from the inside, new and old:

I would prefer and NFL team to play at the stadium below rather than at Farmers:

Biggest problem that stadium now has, is that the redevelopment money that was going toward a lot of the ancillary development around the stadium is now gone. Sure Roski might still be able to build the stadium, but it would in Industry with nothing around it.

[nuordr]

Just out of curiosity, nuordr, did you change your av because you felt like it, or was the change foisted upon you?

Because I felt like it was time for a change. After all, I try to emulate my favorite band and in order to do that it is best to show them off.

[nuordr]

I would prefer and NFL team to play at the stadium below rather than at Farmers:

As would I. I love that design.

I cannot believe we finally agree on something. We may not have the same uniform tastes, but so far so good on the stadium designs.

[BigMac12]

I would prefer and NFL team to play at the stadium below rather than at Farmers:

As would I. I love that design.

I cannot believe we finally agree on something. We may not have the same uniform tastes, but so far so good on the stadium designs.

I don't like the corner club seats stands but I like the general stadium feel.

[rams80]

He said that the Rams are excited to work with the city on options. He said their goal is to have a building and environment the city can be proud of. They want a building that can host events besides 10 Rams games a year--Final Fours, Frozen Fours, College Football, etc. He said their goal is to end up with something that St. Louis and the Rams are excited about.

Translation: "We want a new retractable roof stadium."

[Gothamite]

If true, that adds a couple hundred million to a bar tab St. Louis already can't pay.

[bosrs1]

If true, that adds a couple hundred million to a bar tab St. Louis already can't pay.

So since the city is going to have a hell of a time paying in either San Diego or St. Louis I'm guessing we'll be hearing more about the Los Angeles Chargers of the AFC and the Los Angeles Rams of the NFC in the near future.

[Gothamite]

That's long been my prediction for the two teams to move. Recent events have only solidified that for me.

[IceCap]

The problem's that there are to many teams that should head to LA. The Rams, Chargers, Jaguars, and Raiders all need new stadiums that their cities can't or won't pay for. It's going to be very interesting for the two teams that don't make it to Los Angeles.

[Gothamite]

The problem's that there are to many teams that should head to LA. The Rams, Chargers, Jaguars, and Raiders all need new stadiums that their cities can't or won't pay for. It's going to be very interesting for the two teams that don't make it to Los Angeles.

Very true.

Once two teams move, that will open up two possible relocation options for the teams who missed out on LA. Not great options, I grant you, but perhaps either San Diego or St. Louis will have been sufficiently wounded by the loss of their team to leverage themselves for a new stadium.

That's why I find Khan's purchase of the Jaguars so interesting.

[STL FANATIC]

For the record, the Jags don't need a new stadium.

They just need people to come to it.

That may well lead to the same result, but still worth noting the difference.

[nuordr]

For the record, LA does not need a team because they have shown in the past that they do not support them. I really like the design I mentioned above, but in reality I hope a team does not relocate there. The NFL has done great without a team in LA for a many of years and hopefully it continues to stay that way. Now if a team does relocate, I hope it is either the Raiders or the Chargers because I really do not want to see Minnesota lose another team to LA or a team like the Rams moving back to their previous location because it just seems stupid to me. Finally, I really hope the Jaguars stay in place due to having to re-align the league again because they still will not do it the right way.

[Gothamite]

For the record, LA does not need a team because they have shown in the past that they do not support them.

Um, no. The two teams left LA over stadium disputes, plain and simple.

Just for the record.

[nuordr]

For the record, LA does not need a team because they have shown in the past that they do not support them.

Um, no. The two teams left LA over stadium disputes, plain and simple.

Just for the record.

Maybe so, but it still doesn't change the fact that they shouldn't move back. The owners moved the team and they should stick to the city they are in. Hell, just because Cleveland built a new stadium should not be reason for the Ravens to come back home. Besides if the city supported the team, they would have found a way to build a new stadium like the Giants/Jets, Patriots, Cardinals, Eagles, Broncos, Bengals, Steelers, Colts, Buccaneers and Seahawks. All of these teams could have left their cities, but they stuck it out unlike the Rams and Raiders who flew the coup for better nesting areas.

[Gothamite]

better nesting areas.

Again, you're asserting facts not in evidence.

I don't particularly like franchise relocation, having spent virtually all my life in markets that bear old scars from it. But I understand the process.

Teams move for many reasons. Sometimes that's as simple as a better offer elsewhere. New York isn't a better market than LA because it recently built a stadium for the Jets and Giants while Los Angeles dragged its collective feet nearly twenty years ago (no, New York's a better city than LA for entirely different reasons ).

[nuordr]

better nesting areas.

Again, you're asserting facts not in evidence.

I don't particularly like franchise relocation, having spent virtually all my life in markets that bear old scars from it. But I understand the process.

Teams move for many reasons. Sometimes that's as simple as a better offer elsewhere. New York isn't a better market than LA because it recently built a stadium for the Jets and Giants while Los Angeles dragged its collective feet nearly twenty years ago (no, New York's a better city than LA for entirely different reasons ).

You said is your previous posts that "The two teams left LA over stadium disputes, plain and simple." Therefore, me saying "better nesting areas" is correct according to what you stated. So is it me asserting facts or you?

[IceCap]

For the record, LA does not need a team because they have shown in the past that they do not support them.

Goth already addressed this, but something's bugging me.

The "Market A lost Team X so they obviously don't deserve another team" is one of most ludicrous arguments trotted out in sports. It was ridiculous when people said "why should Winnipeg get an NHL team back, they obviously didn't care enough about the Jets" and it's ridiculous when people say "why should LA get another NFL team? They couldn't keep the Rams and Raiders."

Teams leave markets for a variety of reasons. Most of those reasons have little to no baring on a market's ability to support a team. Sometimes the current owners want out, and the best offer to buy the team has intentions elsewhere. Sometimes the team and city can't agree on a deal to build a new arena or stadium. Sometimes *cough*North Stars*cough* the owner just needs to get out of town. Sure, lack of fan interest does factor into teams relocating in a lot of cases, but when you look at the reasons why a team might move, possibilities that have no barring on a fanbase's ability to support a team outnumber possibilities that do factor in a lack of fan support. The Rams and Raiders left LA due to stadium disputes. That has nothing to do with whether or not the market can support a team (or two). It just means that, at the time, factors arose which meant LA couldn't work in the NFL at that time. Now the city seems ready to deal with those factors and build a stadium. Which means the primary reason the Rams and Raiders left will no longer count against LA as a NFL market.

Look at the Winnipeg Jets 2.0. That team's been a cash cow for the league since moving to a city that apparently couldn't support a NHL franchise.

The NFL has done great without a team in LA for a many of years and hopefully it continues to stay that way. Now if a team does relocate, I hope it is either the Raiders or the Chargers because I really do not want to see Minnesota lose another team to LA or a team like the Rams moving back to their previous location because it just seems stupid to me. Finally, I really hope the Jaguars stay in place due to having to re-align the league again because they still will not do it the right way.

I'm sorry, but none of this makes sense.

You think it's stupid for the Rams to move back? Why is it stupid? I don't see how it it's stupid. If LA can offer the Rams a better deal on a stadium then St. Louis, it makes sense to move back. Nothing stupid about it.

Furthermore you think it's stupid for the Rams to go back to their previous location, but you're fine with the Raiders or Chargers moving to LA? Both of those teams used to play in LA too. As far as moving back to previous locations they're in the same boat as the Rams. Is it stupid for the Chargers, Raiders, or Rams to move back to LA or is it ok for the Chargers, Raiders, or Rams to move to LA?

Finally Jacksonville has proven to be an unreliable market, at best. Saying "realignment would get screwed up" is not a valid reason to keep them in a market that just isn't working as well as LA would. You want a realignment scenario that works with the Jags in LA? Jags go to LA, and move to the NFC West. The Rams move to the NFC South. The Panthers move to the AFC South. Problem solved.

[RedSox44]

Alright, I'm breaking down nuordr's post, bit by bit.

For the record, LA does not need a team because they have shown in the past that they do not support them.

What Gothamite and Ice_Cap said.

And what makes you think that Los Angeles (the second largest city in the United States) wouldn't be able support a football team? Just because the two previous LA teams relocated for reasons other than attendance?

I really like the design I mentioned above, but in reality I hope a team does not relocate there. The NFL has done great without a team in LA for a many of years and hopefully it continues to stay that way.

And think about how good the NFL would do if they had a team in the second largest metropolitan area in the country. Just because they're doing great now doesn't mean there's no room for improvement.

Now if a team does relocate, I hope it is either the Raiders or the Chargers because I really do not want to see Minnesota lose another team to LA or a team like the Rams moving back to their previous location because it just seems stupid to me. Finally, I really hope the Jaguars stay in place due to having to re-align the league again because they still will not do it the right way.

Minnesota is apparently very close to getting a stadium deal to remain in the state, so they're not on the relocation docket. The Raiders have a very real possibility of moving back to Los Angeles now that Davis is gone. I don't think the Chargers will move to Los Angeles, though.

Why does moving the Rams back to LA seem stupid to you? Is it because they had success during the Warner era in St. Louis?

And you want the floundering (in the NFL sense) Jaguars to remain in Jacksonville because "they might not do the realignment right." The realignment would be relatively simple, with the LA Jaguars taking a place in the AFC West, the Chiefs moving to the AFC North and the Ravens (probably, aren't they the furthest south team in the AFC North?) moving to the South. EDIT: Ice_Cap's realignment plan is better.