KCRag Forum

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=A ... &type=lgns

Teaser:

Though it hasn't been publicized in the wake of longtime owner Georgia Frontiere's death earlier this year, the St. Louis Rams are on the market, according to several NFL sources.

The possible sale of the franchise could have major ramifications, with a potential return of the team to Southern California hanging over any transaction. Adding intrigue to the situation: One of the prospective buyers who has had preliminary discussions with an intermediary about buying the Rams is Eddie DeBartolo, who owned the rival San Francisco 49ers from 1977 to '98.

"I know that they are definitely in play," DeBartolo told Yahoo! Sports last week. "Georgia's kids (son Chip Rosenbloom and daughter Lucia Rodriguez) have decided to sell the team. I've talked to some people who are brokering things, and they've told me about the price and what the deal might entail."


So, if St. Louis lost the Rams, they'd be a two sport market again.......

As long as the Cardinals do not leave nobody will notice.   

Los Angeles Rams Part II?  Will fans really get excited about getting that team back?

Even if they do sell the team LA would have to get a new stadium completed before the NFL would even consider relocation. It is still 3-4 years away from happening

LenexatoKCMO wrote: Los Angeles Rams Part II?  Will fans really get excited about getting that team back?

For about a season.

KansasCityCraka wrote: Even if they do sell the team LA would have to get a new stadium completed before the NFL would even consider relocation. It is still 3-4 years away from happening

They already have a developer with a stadium plan in place - plus they could always play at the Colliseum or the Rose Bowl for a season or two.  I am sure the NFL wouldn't be too upset about getting some 100k+ crowds here and there. 

LenexatoKCMO wrote: They already have a developer with a stadium plan in place - plus they could always play at the Colliseum or the Rose Bowl for a season or two.  I am sure the NFL wouldn't be too upset about getting some 100k+ crowds here and there. 

They do not meet NFL standards. The league has already said that those are not an option. And yes I know about the stadum but it is still a couple years from even breaking ground (if it even does happen) and then it will be another 2-3 years before a team can move in.

The Colosseum may not be up to NFL standards and may not be an option in the long term, but if LA can get a team back and there is a stadium on the drawing board, I'm sure they would let it slide for a few years. 

The owner is at least saying the right things....

Owner says he's intent on keeping Rams here

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports ... enDocument

"They cheated to win their Super Bowl anyway!"  -  kcrag forumers

Maitre D wrote: "They cheated to win their Super Bowl anyway!"    -  kcrag forumers

  I know this is a KU reference, but I couldn't help but think, "St. Louis Patriots."

KansasCityCraka wrote:
They do not meet NFL standards. The league has already said that those are not an option. And yes I know about the stadum but it is still a couple years from even breaking ground (if it even does happen) and then it will be another 2-3 years before a team can move in.

They let the Bears play at UI for a year while they redid Soldier Field.  Hard to imagine that the Rose Bowl or Colliseum are any less worthy. 

NDTeve wrote: http://www.losangelesfootballstadium.com/

Sounds familiar....

The new stadium propsed in southern california is hardly in Los Angeles... if the map is correct, it looks like it's near the 60 and 57 interchange...

that's not too far from DTLA, but it is def. in the Inland Empire... I think Cal Poly Pomona is near that interchange, and I know having almost attended Cal Poly_Pomona that there is vacant land near the campus.  Great Location.

Having said that, I don't think the Rams are leaving and it's all speculation.  Although it would be good for the Chiefs to be the only NFL team in the state of Missouri again.

It looks like they're trying to "pull a Kansas City," and build a beautiful new venue in the hopes of attracting a tenant.

bahua wrote: It looks like they're trying to "pull a Kansas City," and build a beautiful new venue in the hopes of attracting a tenant.

Yeah but I am pretty sure that developer has said he isn't breaking ground until there is a team in place.  Money is there, plans are there - just insert team and they will build. 

That certainly seems more prudent.

sprint center is doing better than projections and paying off early....by all accounts it is a success...not sure how that relates to a football stadium which isn't  as multifunctional and needs a football team to work.

KCPowercat wrote: sprint center is doing better than projections and paying off early....by all accounts it is a success...not sure how that relates to a football stadium which isn't  as multifunctional and needs a football team to work.

Funding sources?    State of MO (incl you Powercat) picks up 12M/yr of debt service on the Dome.  While the SC is strictly a KCMO strain.


So even if the Rams leave, STL won't bear the burden on the Dome.  MO taxpayers largely will.