St. Louis Stallions

[rams80]

Only in St Louis. I'm confident one of the two LA plans will go through, as confident as I am that St Louis will not be able to build them a new stadium.

But the Rams cannot move before 2015.

One of those plans will go through before than and Jacksonville or Oakland or some other team will move to LA before St. Louis gets a chance to.

The city of St. Louis is going to be hurting for cash enough in a year or two that a quick little settlement can facilitate a pullout if needed.

[Gothamite]

Yeah, the whole "Stick It to those Inner-City Folk Bill" is going to kill any hopes St Louis had of keeping them.

Blame suburban and rural Missouri.

[The_Admiral]

St. Louis's independent city status had already been screwing them over well enough without that bill. The city/county disparity is a lot like Milwaukee's, if Milwaukee additionally had the most godforsaken wasteland ghost town in America next to it.

EDIT: I want to post as "ESTL FANATIC" and threaten all cynics with murder. I am a Crackhouse.

[CubsFanBudMan]

Only in St Louis. I'm confident one of the two LA plans will go through, as confident as I am that St Louis will not be able to build them a new stadium.

But the Rams cannot move before 2015.

One of those plans will go through before than and Jacksonville or Oakland or some other team will move to LA before St. Louis gets a chance to.

Presuming for a moment that the Rams cannot break the lease, and are in fact locked into St. Louis through the 2014 season for a moment...

Jacksonville or Oakland are both in the AFC. So's San Diego, the other most likely candidate. Los Angeles will be needing an NFL team as well, to maintain a balance in the television packages, and so the Rams will be joining the Jaguars or Raiders or Chargers in their new stadium in 2015.

You've been using this argument for a while, and I still don't see it. Seattle switched conferences, so it's not unprecedented, and the Rams make a lot more sense in the AFC South than the NFC West. It doesn't HAVE to be one AFC and one NFC team that moves there, but it certainly will be set up so that the two teams that move are in two conferences once play begins.

It's fine if you think the Rams will be the other team, but I don't think "because they're in the NFC" is a justifiable reason.

[Gothamite]

I'm not sure that the "Rams make a lot more sense in the AFC South than the NFC West" except in as much as they're currently playing in St. Louis, which seems destined to end in a couple years when the "build us a new stadium or kiss us good-bye" clause in their lease comes due.

You're right - switching conferences is not unprecedented in the NFL. But this isn't a Seattle situation, where they moved from one to the other to accomodate an expansion AFC franchise and a grand realignment/overhaul of the divisions.

I think the NFL has as little taste for realignment as the moderators here, but still, let's look at the possibilities.

Jacksonville by all rights should be the first team to move, but their owner seems to want to stay in Florida. I could possibly see them jumping to the NFC.

The Raiders and Chargers are the next most likely candidates, not necessarily in that order. Can you really see either of those giving up their half-century divisional rivalries? I don't see either of those leaving the AFC.

Okay, that leaves the Jaguars as a possibility. You're suggesting that the Jaguars and Rams swap divisions and the Jags move to LA. Why would the Rams agree to that, when at the very least they'll need LA as leverage to force St. Louis to replace their dome? Even if they really really cross-their-heart don't want to leave Missouri, that doesn't make any business sense to me.

I'm not just blindly saying "they will move because they're in the NFC" without considering the various options. I'm saying it because staying in the NFC, and moving, comprise the most logical outcome for the Rams.

[TruColor]

I'm not sure that the "Rams make a lot more sense in the AFC South than the NFC West" except in as much as they're currently playing in St. Louis, which seems destined to end in a couple years when the "build us a new stadium or kiss us good-bye" clause in their lease comes due.

You're right - switching conferences is not unprecedented in the NFL. But this isn't a Seattle situation, where they moved from one to the other to accomodate an expansion AFC franchise and a grand realignment/overhaul of the divisions.

I think the NFL has as little taste for realignment as the moderators here, but still, let's look at the possibilities.

Jacksonville by all rights should be the first team to move, but their owner seems to want to stay in Florida. I could possibly see them jumping to the NFC.

The Raiders and Chargers are the next most likely candidates, not necessarily in that order. Can you really see either of those giving up their half-century divisional rivalries? I don't see either of those leaving the AFC.

Okay, that leaves the Jaguars as a possibility. You're suggesting that the Jaguars and Rams swap divisions and the Jags move to LA. Why would the Rams agree to that, when at the very least they'll need LA as leverage to force St. Louis to replace their dome? Even if they really really cross-their-heart don't want to leave Missouri, that doesn't make any business sense to me.

I'm not just blindly saying "they will move because they're in the NFC" without considering the various options. I'm saying it because staying in the NFC, and moving, comprise the most logical outcome for the Rams.

I know how much the mods hate these kinds of discussions, but I've just gotta say: IF the Jaguars move to L.A., put them in the NFC West, move the Rams to the NFC South, and also move the Panthers to the AFC South. Boom. Done.

[IceCap]

I'm not sure that the "Rams make a lot more sense in the AFC South than the NFC West" except in as much as they're currently playing in St. Louis, which seems destined to end in a couple years when the "build us a new stadium or kiss us good-bye" clause in their lease comes due.

You're right - switching conferences is not unprecedented in the NFL. But this isn't a Seattle situation, where they moved from one to the other to accomodate an expansion AFC franchise and a grand realignment/overhaul of the divisions.

I think the NFL has as little taste for realignment as the moderators here, but still, let's look at the possibilities.

Jacksonville by all rights should be the first team to move, but their owner seems to want to stay in Florida. I could possibly see them jumping to the NFC.

The Raiders and Chargers are the next most likely candidates, not necessarily in that order. Can you really see either of those giving up their half-century divisional rivalries? I don't see either of those leaving the AFC.

Okay, that leaves the Jaguars as a possibility. You're suggesting that the Jaguars and Rams swap divisions and the Jags move to LA. Why would the Rams agree to that, when at the very least they'll need LA as leverage to force St. Louis to replace their dome? Even if they really really cross-their-heart don't want to leave Missouri, that doesn't make any business sense to me.

I'm not just blindly saying "they will move because they're in the NFC" without considering the various options. I'm saying it because staying in the NFC, and moving, comprise the most logical outcome for the Rams.

I know how much the mods hate these kinds of discussions, but I've just gotta say: IF the Jaguars move to L.A., put them in the NFC West, move the Rams to the NFC South, and also move the Panthers to the AFC South. Boom. Done.

Not needlessly complex enough.

[Panthers]

Just acquired the St. Louis prototype and will post pics as soon as I receive it.

[St Louis Cardinals]

this conversation is depressing

[STL FANATIC]

I don't think I ever realized this thread had become the haven for uninformed speculation. Huh. The discussions that have come since in the Sports In General thread have been significantly better and smarter.

[NYCdog]

I'm not sure that the "Rams make a lot more sense in the AFC South than the NFC West" except in as much as they're currently playing in St. Louis, which seems destined to end in a couple years when the "build us a new stadium or kiss us good-bye" clause in their lease comes due.

You're right - switching conferences is not unprecedented in the NFL. But this isn't a Seattle situation, where they moved from one to the other to accomodate an expansion AFC franchise and a grand realignment/overhaul of the divisions.

I think the NFL has as little taste for realignment as the moderators here, but still, let's look at the possibilities.

Jacksonville by all rights should be the first team to move, but their owner seems to want to stay in Florida. I could possibly see them jumping to the NFC.

The Raiders and Chargers are the next most likely candidates, not necessarily in that order. Can you really see either of those giving up their half-century divisional rivalries? I don't see either of those leaving the AFC.

Okay, that leaves the Jaguars as a possibility. You're suggesting that the Jaguars and Rams swap divisions and the Jags move to LA. Why would the Rams agree to that, when at the very least they'll need LA as leverage to force St. Louis to replace their dome? Even if they really really cross-their-heart don't want to leave Missouri, that doesn't make any business sense to me.

I'm not just blindly saying "they will move because they're in the NFC" without considering the various options. I'm saying it because staying in the NFC, and moving, comprise the most logical outcome for the Rams.

I know how much the mods hate these kinds of discussions, but I've just gotta say: IF the Jaguars move to L.A., put them in the NFC West, move the Rams to the NFC South, and also move the Panthers to the AFC South. Boom. Done.

I like the idea ...but 1 too many moves.

If the Jags go to LA, just flip-flop the Jags & Rams: Jags to the NFC West, Rams to the AFC South.

In this case, the NFL would have its LA-SF-AZ triangle rivalry and in the AFC South, look at St Louis' location in relation to Indianapolis & Nashville. If the Rams stay in St Louis, I could see rivalries forming between the Rams, Titans & Colts just because of how close they are to each other.

Done.

[Jezus_Ghoti]

I know how much the mods hate these kinds of discussions, but I've just gotta say: IF the Jaguars move to L.A., put them in the NFC West, move the Rams to the NFC South, and also move the Panthers to the AFC South. Boom. Done.

This would somehow make the AFC South, by far the NFL's bluest division, even less color scheme-diverse.

[Buffalo]

On a quick note of the Browns/Ravens, is there anyone else who recalls Vinny Testaverde's comments to an ESPN correspondent that the recently-moved Browns were going to be known as the "Stallions"? It was shown on a SportsCenter segment about the team's move, and I think it was shown after the Super Bowl had been played that year. I remember talking to a friend of mine about it on the phone that night as well, but never seen it mentioned here.

And that feaux Hound Dogs' "M" is the font "Air Millhouse Itallic", and it is the same as what Mtn Dew uses on their packaging.

The REAL typeface is called Serpentine. "Air Millhouse" is just some hackjob freeware version

[Claystation360]

Why are most of you all bound and determined to see the Jaguars relocated to Los Angeles or some other locations ? I would like to know how many of you have even been to Jacksonville, FL. If anyone really knows much of anything about the Jacksonville Jaguars beyond what ESPN, NFLN and random national media outlets feed you.

Now as for divisions I couldn't see them moving the Jaguars to the NFC as long as they are in Jacksonville, with Atlanta to the north and Tampa to the south with them both being NFC cities.

And the NFL doesn't want to split up the Rams / 49ers rivalry because they have been in the same Division since the 49ers joined in 1950.

The Seattle situation was unique because they wanted to put Houston back in the AFC since the Oilers were always in the American football league/AFC and and they didn't mind moving the Seahawks to the NFC they spent their first season in 1976 in the NFC.

[Gothamite]

Why are most of you all bound and determined to see the Jaguars relocated to Los Angeles or some other locations ? I would like to know how many of you have even been to Jacksonville, FL. If anyone really knows much of anything about the Jacksonville Jaguars beyond what ESPN, NFLN and random national media outlets feed you.

Nothing personal. It doesn't reflect any animus towards or ignorance about your city or region.

When a team scrambling for a playoff berth has to do so before wide swaths of empty seats, that's a golden Wonka ticket to the relocation conversation.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

On a quick note of the Browns/Ravens, is there anyone else who recalls Vinny Testaverde's comments to an ESPN correspondent that the recently-moved Browns were going to be known as the "Stallions"? It was shown on a SportsCenter segment about the team's move, and I think it was shown after the Super Bowl had been played that year. I remember talking to a friend of mine about it on the phone that night as well, but never seen it mentioned here.

I can't say that I remember that. I'd wager that Testaverde was mistaken, at least about the possibility of the relocated Browns using the "Stallions" nickname. Don't forget that, at the time of the Browns' move to Baltimore, the CFL's Baltimore Stallions were still there, and had in fact just won the Grey Cup. (Here's a shot from Box Seat Photography, the team's official photograher, of Mike Pringle being held aloft by Shar Pourdanish, showing the Stallions' beautiful unis: )

At first, the Stallions' owner Jim Speros announced that the club would stay in Baltimore, despite the arrival of the NFL team. But, soon afterwards, he decided to take the opportunity to move the club to Montreal to become the new version of the Montreal Alouettes.

This club had already been in a dispute with the NFL over its original intention to use the name "Colts" in its inaugural season of 1994. The NFL was able to get an injunction blocking this; so the club dropped the name, and played the season under the name "Baltimore Football Club", sometimes called "Baltimore CFLs" or "CFLers". They adopted the "Stallions" nickname the following season. The club made the Grey Cup both years, losing to BC in 1994, and defeating Calgary in 1995.

I followed this team pretty closely in those years; and I took a keen interest in the Browns' potential (later realised) move to Baltimore. I became a regular caller on Baltimore's WBAL, calling often about the Stallions, and on Cleveland stations WWWE and WKNR. I was saddened by the Browns' move, not only because of the injustice to Cleveland, but also because it disrupted what was becoming a love affair in Baltimore.

I was paying close attention to the whole matter; and I don't remember any talk of the "Stallions" name being adopted by the NFL team, even after the CFL club moved to Montreal. I admit that I never heard of Testaverde's comment, despite my having paid close attention. Still, I strongly suspect that this was never a possibility.

[LuvTheNats]

This thread conjured up memories of this.....

[robbman21]

On a quick note of the Browns/Ravens, is there anyone else who recalls Vinny Testaverde's comments to an ESPN correspondent that the recently-moved Browns were going to be known as the "Stallions"? It was shown on a SportsCenter segment about the team's move, and I think it was shown after the Super Bowl had been played that year. I remember talking to a friend of mine about it on the phone that night as well, but never seen it mentioned here.

I can't say that I remember that. I'd wager that Testaverde was mistaken, at least about the possibility of the relocated Browns using the "Stallions" nickname. Don't forget that, at the time of the Browns' move to Baltimore, the CFL's Baltimore Stallions were still there, and had in fact just won the Grey Cup. (Here's a shot from Box Seat Photography, the team's official photograher, of Mike Pringle being held aloft by Shar Pourdanish, showing the Stallions' beautiful unis: )

At first, the Stallions' owner Jim Speros announced that the club would stay in Baltimore, despite the arrival of the NFL team. But, soon afterwards, he decided to take the opportunity to move the club to Montreal to become the new version of the Montreal Alouettes.

This club had already been in a dispute with the NFL over its original intention to use the name "Colts" in its inaugural season of 1994. The NFL was able to get an injunction blocking this; so the club dropped the name, and played the season under the name "Baltimore Football Club", sometimes called "Baltimore CFLs" or "CFLers". They adopted the "Stallions" nickname the following season. The club made the Grey Cup both years, losing to BC in 1994, and defeating Calgary in 1995.

I followed this team pretty closely in those years; and I took a keen interest in the Browns' potential (later realised) move to Baltimore. I became a regular caller on Baltimore's WBAL, calling often about the Stallions, and on Cleveland stations WWWE and WKNR. I was saddened by the Browns' move, not only because of the injustice to Cleveland, but also because it disrupted what was becoming a love affair in Baltimore.

I was paying close attention to the whole matter; and I don't remember any talk of the "Stallions" name being adopted by the NFL team, even after the CFL club moved to Montreal. I admit that I never heard of Testaverde's comment, despite my having paid close attention. Still, I strongly suspect that this was never a possibility.

I never really took it as a possibility, either. It was aired - that I saw - only once on the 5pm central Sportscenter, the interviewer had caught Testeverde outside somewhere...training facility? Restaurant? Anyway, I believe the NFL had just ruled on the move but that the "Browns" identity stayed behind, and his comment when asked something to the affect of "do you know what the team will be called now" was basically, "Uhh...I think we're gonna be the Stallions", and grinned when he said it. His comment never struck me as serious even though my friend and I had a phone conversation about it later that night, as he had heard it, too. I believe there was a couple of other posters in this thread that saw the same piece that I did. Like so many things you see on Sportscenter, it was mentioned one time then swept under the rug lol.

[tron1013]

Testaverde never said they would be the Stallions, he said they would be the Mustangs. Nixed due Milwaukee arena team. http://articles.latimes.com/1996-02-07/sports/sp-33238_1_vinny-testaverde

[robbman21]

Testaverde never said they would be the Stallions, he said they would be the Mustangs. Nixed due Milwaukee arena team. http://articles.latimes.com/1996-02-07/sports/sp-33238_1_vinny-testaverde

Mustangs!! Okay just confused my horses after 16 1/2 years lol...thanks so much for that link, that's awesome!