Terry Bradshaw says Rams are 100% LA bound

Thank god Terry has no credit, no source, and sucks at his job, or I may have been worried.

quote:

---

Stan hasn't spoken publicly in StL since 2012 when he introduced Fisher. That says it all. I'm sure he is just shy.

---

Stan doesn't speak publicly much at all. His silence on the Rams isn't any different.

You'd hardly know that he owns the Denver Nuggets, Colorado Rapid, and the majority owner of Arsenal.

The man is in it for the money, not the publicity.

From a purely selfish perspective, I would welcome the move. The stadium in Inglewood would be 20 min away from my house. And to me the Rams never felt like a St Louis team. Partly because they came after I had moved away from Rolla.

Win/win for me. A team down the road and I think it would benefit the Tigers.

quote:

---

I think it would benefit the Tigers

---

That is an interesting concept. Would St. Louis take their football dollars to Mizzou...even moreso than they do now?

I could see the cat from Champaign, IL who owns the Jags bringing them up to St. Louis down stream. Downtown has a lot to offer with the Casino, arch and riverfront....fingers crossed for an NFL future in the lou


I'd like to see Illinois and mizzou play in the Edward jones dome as well... It was an awesome game to attend( they served Booz)

Same here.Feels weird rooting for any KC team.Sucks if they leave, but life will go on.

quote:

---

You would really have to think Mizzou would greatly benefit from this.

---

that argument seems specious,, "some" benefit is not the same as "great" benefit, so benefit yes, but greatly, not so sure.

Maybe it will benefit the Cardinals as much or the Blues may ramp up sales, Mizzou's recent success will bring some "new" fans so it will be impossible to ever know which is which.

The Rams/Kroenkes/NFL will certainly do well in ticket sales and raking in the money from the move, not that it will actually translate to a large number of fans in the stand for very long.

Like national politics it sort of reminds me of when the Dems and Repubs change ownership of a house in congress, tons of money gets spent/wasted, lots of worthless crap is debated and at the end of the day, nothing really ever changes.

quote:

---

Mizzou would gain from STL not having football, but I think people are assuming this gain would be significant, which it wouldn't.

---

really? wherever did you get that idea?


When I was kid the whole family would huddle around the TV to watch Len Dawson, Ed Podolak and the boys march to Hank Stram's orders on one channel then spin the knob(that's how you changed the channel back then) to watch Jim Hart bumbling and stumbling over his own feet on one play to follow it up with a bomb to Mel Gray on the next.

It was fukking awesome, they can take everything I have but they can never take those memories away from me.

I think it would make a huge impact for Mizzou. The Rams pull in 55,000+ fans a game, The average ticket price for a Rams game in 2013 (most recent data I could find) was $200 a ticket. That's $11,000,000 on ticket revenue alone. Mizzou games are far less expensive to attend. Last year we averaged 65,000 fans a game. About 6,000 short of averaging a sale out. Is it fair to say that with limited discretionary funds available at least 10% of those regular attendee Rams fans chose to spend on Rams tickets rather than Mizzou tickets?

I say that as well because that person not only has limited finances but limited time. Even if they had the money, not a ton I would think are going to give up an entire Saturday to attend a Mizzou game and then most of their Sunday at the Rams game. So I think it is reasonable that St Louis not having an NFL team frees up the time and money of at least 6,000 fans a week that would cause us to average a sellout which would be program changing. It would lead to more revenue and a stadium expansion as we would have a justiable motive for more seats.