It's the Rams and Chargers...

[laughedatbytime]

moving to LA. Was hoping it would never happen but at least it isn't the Raiders..

[WorkingAllTheTime]

The Chargers piece is interesting. They have a year to work out a deal with Kroenke in Inglewood. The question, I think, is will Kroenke play nice with the second team venue sharing model or, now that he has what he wants, will he dig in his heels? What motivation would he have to share the market? Conventional wisdom says not much, but he is also trying to create a larger entertainment type complex and he might see the second team as a way to drive interest in hotels, restaurants, etc. And the reality is he did design his Inglewood facility with the potential for two franchises. He might be willing to play nice.

 

The flip side of the coin is perhaps the threat of an imminent move for the Chargers will motivate San Diego to finance a build to keep the team further south.

 

And the Raiders are really still in limbo. Sure, they will get some cash to support a stadium venture in Oakland (or I assume a nearby area), but it is not really certain the area has the money or overall interest to pony up the money to build (San Diego seems more likely to cave to the pressure first). But, then again, perhaps the threat of the green light to move if a stadium is not built, along with the reported promise to give the Raiders first option in Inglewood if the Chargers can not make a deal will motivate Oakland to build.

 

From a very Machiavellian point of view, Goodell played this one well. Kroenke gets his move. The Chargers could still conceivably remain in San Diego and the Raiders could still conceivably remain in Oakland. Roger could possibly get three shiny new stadiums, two of which would be very heavily publicly funded purely by way of extortion.

Edited January 13, 2016 by WorkingAllTheTime

[treeduck]

At last the SAINTS will once again do battle with one of their true nemeses the cursed LA Rams! :madra: :madra: :madra:

[The Analog Cub]

At last the SAINTS will once again do battle with one of their true nemeses the cursed LA Rams! :madra: :madra: :madra:

 

Does that mean the Saints are gonna go back to being the Aints for a few decades again?

[treeduck]

At last the SAINTS will once again do battle with one of their true nemeses the cursed LA Rams! :madra: :madra: :madra:

 

Does that mean the Saints are gonna go back to being the Aints for a few decades again?

No but the Bears are going to become the Gay Bears from 2016 onwards. :banana:

[HemiBeers]

The Chargers piece is interesting. They have a year to work out a deal with Kroenke in Inglewood. The question, I think, is will Kroenke play nice with the second team venue sharing model or, now that he has what he wants, will he dig in his heels? What motivation would he have to share the market? Conventional wisdom says not much, but he is also trying to create a larger entertainment type complex and he might see the second team as a way to drive interest in hotels, restaurants, etc. And the reality is he did design his Inglewood facility with the potential for two franchises. He might be willing to play nice.

His motivation is simple. His team only fills the stadium for 8 games a year. He doesn't get any revenue from the 8 Sundays that the Rams are on the road. Even though the Chargers and Raiders probably feel pimped on this one. One of them will end up in LA. I simply don't see SD or Oakland getting enough community money, I mean support, to build their own stadiums.

 

On top of this, I can't think of any other major city that could cough up money for an NFL stadium if Oakland or SD wanted to move. Portland, San Antonio, Oklahoma City? Too small. Vegas? Ewwww too much gambling for the NFL. St. Louis will have to wait quite a while for another chance, if they even get one.

 

Another advantage of the Rams/Chargers/Oakland mix is that they don't have to switch divisions or conferences. The NFC divisions work out almost perfectly location-wise, with the exception of Dallas in the East. But that won't change. The AFC needs rearrangment. Move Dolphins to South, Colts to North and Ravens to East. Make it happen Rog.

Edited January 13, 2016 by 2112FirstStreet

[JohnRogers]

Bravo the Rams belong in L.A. Where is my old Vince Ferragamo jersey?

[WorkingAllTheTime]

The Chargers piece is interesting. They have a year to work out a deal with Kroenke in Inglewood. The question, I think, is will Kroenke play nice with the second team venue sharing model or, now that he has what he wants, will he dig in his heels? What motivation would he have to share the market? Conventional wisdom says not much, but he is also trying to create a larger entertainment type complex and he might see the second team as a way to drive interest in hotels, restaurants, etc. And the reality is he did design his Inglewood facility with the potential for two franchises. He might be willing to play nice.

His motivation is simple. His team only fills the stadium for 8 games a year. He doesn't get any revenue from the 8 Sundays that the Rams are on the road. Even though the Chargers and Raiders probably feel pimped on this one. One of them will end up in LA. I simply don't see SD or Oakland getting enough community money, I mean support, to build their own stadiums.

 

On top of this, I can't think of any other major city that could cough up money for an NFL stadium if Oakland or SD wanted to move. Portland, San Antonio, Oklahoma City? Too small. Vegas? Ewwww too much gambling for the NFL. St. Louis will have to wait quite a while for another chance, if they even get one.

 

Another advantage of the Rams/Chargers/Oakland mix is that they don't have to switch divisions or conferences. The NFC divisions work out almost perfectly location-wise, with the exception of Dallas in the East. But that won't change. The AFC needs rearrangment. Move Dolphins to South, Colts to North and Ravens to East. Make it happen Rog.

 

True enough. But I do smell expansion sometime down the road. Jax moves to London, but Jax doesn't get another team. St. Louis gets a team out of pity. Toronto gets one for market share. Maybe Mexico City, too. Another one or two (depending upon Mexico City) of sucker cities willing to go down the road of NFL extortion. Roger wants his global 36 team league.

[HemiBeers]

The Chargers piece is interesting. They have a year to work out a deal with Kroenke in Inglewood. The question, I think, is will Kroenke play nice with the second team venue sharing model or, now that he has what he wants, will he dig in his heels? What motivation would he have to share the market? Conventional wisdom says not much, but he is also trying to create a larger entertainment type complex and he might see the second team as a way to drive interest in hotels, restaurants, etc. And the reality is he did design his Inglewood facility with the potential for two franchises. He might be willing to play nice.

His motivation is simple. His team only fills the stadium for 8 games a year. He doesn't get any revenue from the 8 Sundays that the Rams are on the road. Even though the Chargers and Raiders probably feel pimped on this one. One of them will end up in LA. I simply don't see SD or Oakland getting enough community money, I mean support, to build their own stadiums.

 

On top of this, I can't think of any other major city that could cough up money for an NFL stadium if Oakland or SD wanted to move. Portland, San Antonio, Oklahoma City? Too small. Vegas? Ewwww too much gambling for the NFL. St. Louis will have to wait quite a while for another chance, if they even get one.

 

Another advantage of the Rams/Chargers/Oakland mix is that they don't have to switch divisions or conferences. The NFC divisions work out almost perfectly location-wise, with the exception of Dallas in the East. But that won't change. The AFC needs rearrangment. Move Dolphins to South, Colts to North and Ravens to East. Make it happen Rog.

 

True enough. But I do smell expansion sometime down the road. Jax moves to London, but Jax doesn't get another team. St. Louis gets a team out of pity. Toronto gets one for market share. Maybe Mexico City, too. Another one or two (depending upon Mexico City) of sucker cities willing to go down the road of NFL extortion. Roger wants his global 36 team league.

There won't be a london team. Too far away to deal with a full season. I could see Buffalo moving to Toronto. Mexico is too third world country-ish for an NFL team. Drug lords shooting up the stadium wouldn't be a pretty sight.

[lerxt1990]

Bravo the Rams belong in L.A. Where is my old Vince Ferragamo jersey?

 

Age check, when I heard, I said, "Oh the Rams are moving back to LA?"

[lerxt1990]

The Chargers piece is interesting. They have a year to work out a deal with Kroenke in Inglewood. The question, I think, is will Kroenke play nice with the second team venue sharing model or, now that he has what he wants, will he dig in his heels? What motivation would he have to share the market? Conventional wisdom says not much, but he is also trying to create a larger entertainment type complex and he might see the second team as a way to drive interest in hotels, restaurants, etc. And the reality is he did design his Inglewood facility with the potential for two franchises. He might be willing to play nice.

His motivation is simple. His team only fills the stadium for 8 games a year. He doesn't get any revenue from the 8 Sundays that the Rams are on the road. Even though the Chargers and Raiders probably feel pimped on this one. One of them will end up in LA. I simply don't see SD or Oakland getting enough community money, I mean support, to build their own stadiums.

 

On top of this, I can't think of any other major city that could cough up money for an NFL stadium if Oakland or SD wanted to move. Portland, San Antonio, Oklahoma City? Too small. Vegas? Ewwww too much gambling for the NFL. St. Louis will have to wait quite a while for another chance, if they even get one.

 

Another advantage of the Rams/Chargers/Oakland mix is that they don't have to switch divisions or conferences. The NFC divisions work out almost perfectly location-wise, with the exception of Dallas in the East. But that won't change. The AFC needs rearrangment. Move Dolphins to South, Colts to North and Ravens to East. Make it happen Rog.

 

True enough. But I do smell expansion sometime down the road. Jax moves to London, but Jax doesn't get another team. St. Louis gets a team out of pity. Toronto gets one for market share. Maybe Mexico City, too. Another one or two (depending upon Mexico City) of sucker cities willing to go down the road of NFL extortion. Roger wants his global 36 team league.

 

I think the talent is spread thin enough with enough divisions having mediocre crap in first place. I really and sincerely hope they do NOT expand the league any further.

[goose]

At last the SAINTS will once again do battle with one of their true nemeses the cursed LA Rams! :madra: :madra: :madra:

I was an LA Rams fan as a young kid. Ditched them when they moved. I think having the Rams back in LA will be great for the franchise and the NFL.

 

I'm sure somewhere Deacon Jones is smiling...

 

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/photo/2013/06/03/0ap1000000208874.jpg

Edited January 13, 2016 by goose

[The Analog Cub]

At last the SAINTS will once again do battle with one of their true nemeses the cursed LA Rams! :madra: :madra: :madra:

 

Does that mean the Saints are gonna go back to being the Aints for a few decades again?

No but the Bears are going to become the Gay Bears from 2016 onwards. :banana:

 

I didn't know the Bears moved to Manchester, UK San Fransisco :nya nya:

[alphseeker]

Spanos can't afford to be a 50/50 partner for the $3+ Billion Inglewood Stadium. He'd have to settle for being a tenant and spanos won't be second fiddle to Kroenke. Inglewood is too far north for a lot of the fan base Spanos was hoping to hold on to if he was farther South in Carson. They will end up being the 5th out of Five major sports teams without a proven fan base. Edited January 13, 2016 by alphseeker

[laughedatbytime]

The Chargers piece is interesting. They have a year to work out a deal with Kroenke in Inglewood. The question, I think, is will Kroenke play nice with the second team venue sharing model or, now that he has what he wants, will he dig in his heels? What motivation would he have to share the market? Conventional wisdom says not much, but he is also trying to create a larger entertainment type complex and he might see the second team as a way to drive interest in hotels, restaurants, etc. And the reality is he did design his Inglewood facility with the potential for two franchises. He might be willing to play nice.

His motivation is simple. His team only fills the stadium for 8 games a year. He doesn't get any revenue from the 8 Sundays that the Rams are on the road. Even though the Chargers and Raiders probably feel pimped on this one. One of them will end up in LA. I simply don't see SD or Oakland getting enough community money, I mean support, to build their own stadiums.

 

On top of this, I can't think of any other major city that could cough up money for an NFL stadium if Oakland or SD wanted to move. Portland, San Antonio, Oklahoma City? Too small. Vegas? Ewwww too much gambling for the NFL. St. Louis will have to wait quite a while for another chance, if they even get one.

 

Another advantage of the Rams/Chargers/Oakland mix is that they don't have to switch divisions or conferences. The NFC divisions work out almost perfectly location-wise, with the exception of Dallas in the East. But that won't change. The AFC needs rearrangment. Move Dolphins to South, Colts to North and Ravens to East. Make it happen Rog.

 

True enough. But I do smell expansion sometime down the road. Jax moves to London, but Jax doesn't get another team. St. Louis gets a team out of pity. Toronto gets one for market share. Maybe Mexico City, too. Another one or two (depending upon Mexico City) of sucker cities willing to go down the road of NFL extortion. Roger wants his global 36 team league.

There won't be a london team. Too far away to deal with a full season. I could see Buffalo moving to Toronto. Mexico is too third world country-ish for an NFL team. Drug lords shooting up the stadium wouldn't be a pretty sight.

They could always move the Lions to Mexico City...third world to third world.

[WorkingAllTheTime]

The Chargers piece is interesting. They have a year to work out a deal with Kroenke in Inglewood. The question, I think, is will Kroenke play nice with the second team venue sharing model or, now that he has what he wants, will he dig in his heels? What motivation would he have to share the market? Conventional wisdom says not much, but he is also trying to create a larger entertainment type complex and he might see the second team as a way to drive interest in hotels, restaurants, etc. And the reality is he did design his Inglewood facility with the potential for two franchises. He might be willing to play nice.

His motivation is simple. His team only fills the stadium for 8 games a year. He doesn't get any revenue from the 8 Sundays that the Rams are on the road. Even though the Chargers and Raiders probably feel pimped on this one. One of them will end up in LA. I simply don't see SD or Oakland getting enough community money, I mean support, to build their own stadiums.

 

On top of this, I can't think of any other major city that could cough up money for an NFL stadium if Oakland or SD wanted to move. Portland, San Antonio, Oklahoma City? Too small. Vegas? Ewwww too much gambling for the NFL. St. Louis will have to wait quite a while for another chance, if they even get one.

 

Another advantage of the Rams/Chargers/Oakland mix is that they don't have to switch divisions or conferences. The NFC divisions work out almost perfectly location-wise, with the exception of Dallas in the East. But that won't change. The AFC needs rearrangment. Move Dolphins to South, Colts to North and Ravens to East. Make it happen Rog.

 

True enough. But I do smell expansion sometime down the road. Jax moves to London, but Jax doesn't get another team. St. Louis gets a team out of pity. Toronto gets one for market share. Maybe Mexico City, too. Another one or two (depending upon Mexico City) of sucker cities willing to go down the road of NFL extortion. Roger wants his global 36 team league.

 

I think the talent is spread thin enough with enough divisions having mediocre crap in first place. I really and sincerely hope they do NOT expand the league any further.

 

Oh, don't get me wrong. I am not in favor of expansion and agree it is a terrible, terrible idea. Roger, though, wants that cash.

[laughedatbytime]

The Chargers piece is interesting. They have a year to work out a deal with Kroenke in Inglewood. The question, I think, is will Kroenke play nice with the second team venue sharing model or, now that he has what he wants, will he dig in his heels? What motivation would he have to share the market? Conventional wisdom says not much, but he is also trying to create a larger entertainment type complex and he might see the second team as a way to drive interest in hotels, restaurants, etc. And the reality is he did design his Inglewood facility with the potential for two franchises. He might be willing to play nice.

His motivation is simple. His team only fills the stadium for 8 games a year. He doesn't get any revenue from the 8 Sundays that the Rams are on the road. Even though the Chargers and Raiders probably feel pimped on this one. One of them will end up in LA. I simply don't see SD or Oakland getting enough community money, I mean support, to build their own stadiums.

 

On top of this, I can't think of any other major city that could cough up money for an NFL stadium if Oakland or SD wanted to move. Portland, San Antonio, Oklahoma City? Too small. Vegas? Ewwww too much gambling for the NFL. St. Louis will have to wait quite a while for another chance, if they even get one.

 

Another advantage of the Rams/Chargers/Oakland mix is that they don't have to switch divisions or conferences. The NFC divisions work out almost perfectly location-wise, with the exception of Dallas in the East. But that won't change. The AFC needs rearrangment. Move Dolphins to South, Colts to North and Ravens to East. Make it happen Rog.

 

True enough. But I do smell expansion sometime down the road. Jax moves to London, but Jax doesn't get another team. St. Louis gets a team out of pity. Toronto gets one for market share. Maybe Mexico City, too. Another one or two (depending upon Mexico City) of sucker cities willing to go down the road of NFL extortion. Roger wants his global 36 team league.

 

I think the talent is spread thin enough with enough divisions having mediocre crap in first place. I really and sincerely hope they do NOT expand the league any further.

 

Oh, don't get me wrong. I am not in favor of expansion and agree it is a terrible, terrible idea. Roger, though, wants that cash.

32 is perfect.

[HemiBeers]

The owners must have thought that the Rams situation was the most dire. SD can move and play at the LA stadium and it's not without reason that Oakland could play at the 49ers stadium....assuming the 49ers get that dogpile field fixed. Edited January 13, 2016 by 2112FirstStreet

[troutman]

The Chargers piece is interesting. They have a year to work out a deal with Kroenke in Inglewood. The question, I think, is will Kroenke play nice with the second team venue sharing model or, now that he has what he wants, will he dig in his heels? What motivation would he have to share the market? Conventional wisdom says not much, but he is also trying to create a larger entertainment type complex and he might see the second team as a way to drive interest in hotels, restaurants, etc. And the reality is he did design his Inglewood facility with the potential for two franchises. He might be willing to play nice.

His motivation is simple. His team only fills the stadium for 8 games a year. He doesn't get any revenue from the 8 Sundays that the Rams are on the road. Even though the Chargers and Raiders probably feel pimped on this one. One of them will end up in LA. I simply don't see SD or Oakland getting enough community money, I mean support, to build their own stadiums.

 

On top of this, I can't think of any other major city that could cough up money for an NFL stadium if Oakland or SD wanted to move. Portland, San Antonio, Oklahoma City? Too small. Vegas? Ewwww too much gambling for the NFL. St. Louis will have to wait quite a while for another chance, if they even get one.

 

Another advantage of the Rams/Chargers/Oakland mix is that they don't have to switch divisions or conferences. The NFC divisions work out almost perfectly location-wise, with the exception of Dallas in the East. But that won't change. The AFC needs rearrangment. Move Dolphins to South, Colts to North and Ravens to East. Make it happen Rog.

 

True enough. But I do smell expansion sometime down the road. Jax moves to London, but Jax doesn't get another team. St. Louis gets a team out of pity. Toronto gets one for market share. Maybe Mexico City, too. Another one or two (depending upon Mexico City) of sucker cities willing to go down the road of NFL extortion. Roger wants his global 36 team league.

There won't be a london team. Too far away to deal with a full season. I could see Buffalo moving to Toronto. Mexico is too third world country-ish for an NFL team. Drug lords shooting up the stadium wouldn't be a pretty sight.

They could always move the Lions to Mexico City...third world to third world.

 

 

 

[troutman]

Mark Davis,

 

Is an idiot! Just sell the team to some one who wants to stay in Oakland. Where the team belongs. :madra:

[alphseeker]

Mark Davis,

 

Is an idiot! Just sell the team to some one who wants to stay in Oakland. Where the team belongs. :madra:

Ditto for San Diego - Spanos can't afford to be an outright partner with Kroenke, he needs to swallow his pride, fire Fabiani the team's lawyer/spokesman and get a damn deal done in San Diego.

[HemiBeers]

The Chargers piece is interesting. They have a year to work out a deal with Kroenke in Inglewood. The question, I think, is will Kroenke play nice with the second team venue sharing model or, now that he has what he wants, will he dig in his heels? What motivation would he have to share the market? Conventional wisdom says not much, but he is also trying to create a larger entertainment type complex and he might see the second team as a way to drive interest in hotels, restaurants, etc. And the reality is he did design his Inglewood facility with the potential for two franchises. He might be willing to play nice.

His motivation is simple. His team only fills the stadium for 8 games a year. He doesn't get any revenue from the 8 Sundays that the Rams are on the road. Even though the Chargers and Raiders probably feel pimped on this one. One of them will end up in LA. I simply don't see SD or Oakland getting enough community money, I mean support, to build their own stadiums.

 

On top of this, I can't think of any other major city that could cough up money for an NFL stadium if Oakland or SD wanted to move. Portland, San Antonio, Oklahoma City? Too small. Vegas? Ewwww too much gambling for the NFL. St. Louis will have to wait quite a while for another chance, if they even get one.

 

Another advantage of the Rams/Chargers/Oakland mix is that they don't have to switch divisions or conferences. The NFC divisions work out almost perfectly location-wise, with the exception of Dallas in the East. But that won't change. The AFC needs rearrangment. Move Dolphins to South, Colts to North and Ravens to East. Make it happen Rog.

 

True enough. But I do smell expansion sometime down the road. Jax moves to London, but Jax doesn't get another team. St. Louis gets a team out of pity. Toronto gets one for market share. Maybe Mexico City, too. Another one or two (depending upon Mexico City) of sucker cities willing to go down the road of NFL extortion. Roger wants his global 36 team league.

There won't be a london team. Too far away to deal with a full season. I could see Buffalo moving to Toronto. Mexico is too third world country-ish for an NFL team. Drug lords shooting up the stadium wouldn't be a pretty sight.

They could always move the Lions to Mexico City...third world to third world.

I think the Browns would be better a better fit for a third world country. Their colors are somewhat Hispanic.

[HemiBeers]

I'd be real surprised if there's a quick decision by the Chargers. This gives them another year to play the San Diego community against LA to get the best deal. Perhaps that was the line of thinking in this deal all along, rather than jumping immediately back to LA with 2 teams.

[New World Kid]

Kroenke pretty well forced himself out of St. Louis by trashing the city in his relocation request to the NFL.

 

Mayor Francis Slay called him and the NFL "pathetic", remarking that, "they were not being truthful" and "we were being led on."

 

Other St. Louis natives in the spotlight have made their thoughts known publicly, from NHL goaltender Ben Bishop, who chirped Stan Kroenke through Twitter after shutting out the billionaire's NHL team that night, to Andy Cohen, who gave Kroenke the double finger salute on his Bravo program.

 

Then there was Joe Buck, son of St. Louis legend Jack Buck and current national broadcaster for Fox Sports, who spoke out on the issue on Twitter recently:

 

"Suck the life out of a team, run it down, raise prices, then say it isn't supported and leave. Great example for the NFL to celebrate JOKE!"

 

As for the sports fans of St. Louis themselves, they've made their thoughts known as well:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrMflpOLq4M

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyPZ2d14Iyw

 

In all, as a St. Louisan and sports fan, I'm sad to the Rams go, but the ownership did everything it possibly could to alienate a city renowned for having a loyal, dedicated fan base. From making the team an unwatchable comedy-of-intentional-errors suckfest for an entire decade, to throwing the city of St. Louis and the fans that patronized the team under the bus.

 

For me personally, I always wanted to support the Rams, but the NFL's slimey attitudes made for a very conflicting kind of support from me. Now that the team is gone, and has pissed all over my city, I can firmly say that the NFL is a disgusting joke of an operation. Too interested in marginal profit returns to deal with the on-field injury and concussion crisis in it's sport, and the off-field antics of it's stars.

 

f**k the NFL. f**k Stan Kroenke.

 

Now St. Louis can actually spend the money it was going to waste on a new stadium on something more important. And there are no end to the things that need funding in St. Louis. Public education is an embarrassment, as is mass transit in the area. Plus you can use some of that stadium money on other entertainment items that will bring in better return on investment. I saw someone advocating for the country's largest aquarium to be put on the shore of the Mississippi River for less thant he cost of a new stadium. And in their calculations, it estimated that it'd bring in millions more in revenue for the city than an NFL team. And then, of course, we could always use this money to bring in more, and better, law enforcement, and training programs, so that we can avoid a mar on our city again like the Michael Brown/Darren Wilson/Grand Jury fiasco/Robert McCullouch joke. Of course, now we're entering the realm of politics, and that's best left for SOCN.

 

Edit to include stuff from Joe Buck.

Edited January 14, 2016 by New World Kid

[laughedatbytime]

Kroenke pretty well forced himself out of St. Louis by trashing the city in his relocation request to the NFL.

 

Mayor Francis Slay called him and the NFL "pathetic", remarking that, "they were not being truthful" and "we were being led on."

 

Other St. Louis natives in the spotlight have made their thoughts known publicly, from NHL goaltender Ben Bishop, who chirped Stan Kroenke through Twitter after shutting out the billionaire's NHL team that night, to Andy Cohen, who gave Kroenke the double finger salute on his Bravo program.

 

As for the sports fans of St. Louis themselves, they've made their thoughts known as well:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrMflpOLq4M

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyPZ2d14Iyw

 

In all, as a St. Louisan and sports fan, I'm sad to the Rams go, but the ownership did everything it possibly could to alienate a city renowned for having a loyal, dedicated fan base. From making the team an unwatchable comedy-of-intentional-errors suckfest for an entire decade, to throwing the city of St. Louis and the fans that patronized the team under the bus.

 

For me personally, I always wanted to support the Rams, but the NFL's slimey attitudes made for a very conflicting kind of support from me. Now that the team is gone, and has pissed all over my city, I can firmly say that the NFL is a disgusting joke of an operation. Too interested in marginal profit returns to deal with the on-field injury and concussion crisis in it's sport, and the off-field antics of it's stars.

 

f**k the NFL. f**k Stan Kroenke.

 

Now St. Louis can actually spend the money it was going to waste on a new stadium on something more important. And there are no end to the things that need funding in St. Louis. Public education is an embarrassment, as is mass transit in the area. Plus you can use some of that stadium money on other entertainment items that will bring in better return on investment. I saw someone advocating for the country's largest aquarium to be put on the shore of the Mississippi River for less thant he cost of a new stadium. And in their calculations, it estimated that it'd bring in millions more in revenue for the city than an NFL team. And then, of course, we could always use this money to bring in more, and better, law enforcement, and training programs, so that we can avoid a mar on our city again like the Michael Brown/Darren Wilson/Grand Jury fiasco/Robert McCullouch joke. Of course, now we're entering the realm of politics, and that's best left for SOCN.

I heard that the last straw was when Kroenke wanted them to bring in June Jones as the coach and the city responded, "Hands up, don't run and shoot."