Why Did The Rams Abandon St Louis?

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 28 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ •

  • @FootballLoreOfficial
    @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +29

    do you like these videos?

    • @josephmedlin6734
      @josephmedlin6734 4 місяці тому +1

      Yall do a fantastic job! just keep at it and the subscribers and likes and promotions will come yall have quality videos that people will recognize soon!!!

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +2

      we've got another voice actor starting soon, I am going to moving to writing fulltime but thank you so much! We're excited with the growth recently.

    • @waynebrady1819
      @waynebrady1819 4 місяці тому

      Great video. And what's that cool music in the background?

    • @crittoneida958
      @crittoneida958 4 місяці тому

      I am so glad I found this site. Your content is amazing. I grew up in the DC area and am pretty close to Bmore so I saw the post colt move coverage from their local stations. But I never knew abt the imminent domain move MD was gonna pull.....ur content rocks. I now wonder what the butterfly effect league wide would have been if colts never moved? What would the careers of ray Lewis or Peyton manning, Marshall faulk, Kurt Warner, Reggie wayne, tom Brady-Belichek & many more have looked like? Not saying that I suggest that as a future topic but.....

    • @mapleva
      @mapleva 4 місяці тому

      Yes, I love sports history.

  • @kylenickelberry1602
    @kylenickelberry1602 4 місяці тому +70

    St Louis has had the misfortune of having some of the worst owners known to the NFL!

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +7

      I agree

    • @1999bill1999
      @1999bill1999 4 місяці тому +3

      St Louis didn’t keep its promise

    • @jamesrush07
      @jamesrush07 4 місяці тому +8

      The rams didn’t either, they tanked the team on purpose for years.

    • @1999bill1999
      @1999bill1999 4 місяці тому +6

      St Louis promised the Rams a state of the art stadium at no cost to them and promised to keep it state of the art. If St Louis didn’t, the Rams were free to relocate without penalty. St Louis didn’t keep its promise to keep the Edward Jones Dome a state of the art stadium

    • @davidlafleche1142
      @davidlafleche1142 4 місяці тому +5

      @@1999bill1999 Yes, they did. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the Dome. The Cardinals left because they were fussy and greedy.

  • @georgesouthwick7000
    @georgesouthwick7000 4 місяці тому +18

    They abandoned St. Louis for the same reason all professional sports franchises abandon a city…..greed of ownership.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +2

      yep

    • @y2films
      @y2films 4 місяці тому +2

      ​@FootballLoreOfficial do you just write generic responses? All your answers on here are one word replies that either agrees or laughs at what one says. You even human?

  • @davidalexander8996
    @davidalexander8996 4 місяці тому +10

    The football Cardinals are also a three city team (Chicago, St. Louis, Greater Phoenix). If the third time can be a charm for St. Louis it needs to be an expansion team with an owner fully invested in the region, emotionally as well as financially.

    • @WaltGekko
      @WaltGekko 4 місяці тому +1

      They also need heavy corporate sponsorship which also apparently is a requirement for an NFL team now. St. Louis apparently does not have enough corporate sponsorship unless you can somehow get the Busch family involved.

    • @Gage_Brumley
      @Gage_Brumley 3 місяці тому +4

      @@WaltGekko St Louis has a ton of big companies that could sponsor the team. Anheuser Busch, Edward Jones, Purina, Centene, Enterprise, World Wide Technology, Energizer, Ameren, etc...

    • @WaltGekko
      @WaltGekko 3 місяці тому +1

      @@Gage_Brumley From what I heard, besides Busch only McDonnell-Douglas would have been acceptable to the NFL at that time.

  • @jongthedasher
    @jongthedasher 4 місяці тому +11

    As a long-time St Louis Rams fan and former long-time resident, I don’t want the NFL back in STL. Jerry Jones and Stan Kroenke can go to hell.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +2

      I think you guys deserve a team, but I get your perspective

    • @SirManfly
      @SirManfly 3 місяці тому +6

      As a sports fan I'm sure sick and tired of these obscenely rich owners wanting mostly public money to build their shiny new stadiums and arenas !!

    • @VivaLaZach
      @VivaLaZach 2 місяці тому +1

      ​@@SirManfly while being able to profit off said stadium. It's honestly pathetic

  • @carlhicksjr8401
    @carlhicksjr8401 4 місяці тому +26

    To quote Don Ohlmeyer, 'The answer to all your questions is 'money''.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      lol

    • @carlhicksjr8401
      @carlhicksjr8401 4 місяці тому

      @@FootballLoreOfficial And you can say that about EVERY team move.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      @@carlhicksjr8401 i know I've been doing a series about teams moving and it always comes down to a stadium

    • @carlhicksjr8401
      @carlhicksjr8401 4 місяці тому

      @@FootballLoreOfficial Not just the stadium, but also the sweetheart deal the city and state offer the owner.
      I'm a Seahawks fan and I got a close look at this nonsense when Ken Behring [spit to the left] threatened to move the team to LA. There was some pretty sketchy 'midnight legislating' to get the team to stay. Then the Sonics fiasco hit. So yeah, up here we're pretty jaded about team owners.

    • @characterunderconstruction5891
      @characterunderconstruction5891 4 місяці тому

      Money talks, and football teams take a walk.

  • @PorkyJohnson328
    @PorkyJohnson328 4 місяці тому +16

    The Rams, when the team was located in Cleveland, never played in the AFL that was shown in the video. That AFL didn't begin until 1960.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +8

      they were apart of an AFL just not that AFL. Couldnt find a picture of the one from 1940s so used that as a stand in

    • @KKPsi-TubaDawg
      @KKPsi-TubaDawg 4 місяці тому +2

      There have been several leagues called the American Football League.
      American Football League (1926), also known as AFL I (1926)
      American Football League (1936), also known as AFL II (1936-37)
      American Football League (1940), also known as AFL III (1940-41)
      American Football League, also known as AFL IV (1960-1969), merged with National Football League in 1970.
      There have also been a few "minor leagues" that used the name AFL and a league that played in Poland from 2018-2020.
      The Rams were a part of the second AFL until it fell apart.

    • @mapleva
      @mapleva 4 місяці тому +1

      @@KKPsi-TubaDawg NFL merger was significant in that the AFL teams stayed together in the same conference.

    • @deacongowan117
      @deacongowan117 4 місяці тому

      ⁠@@FootballLoreOfficialnot the AFL. You people need to be intelligent on what you’re making a video about and stop using women, it makes you look worse.

    • @deacongowan117
      @deacongowan117 4 місяці тому

      @@KKPsi-TubaDawgno they weren’t as no one considers them AFL, as they weren’t part of the original 8(OAK, KC, DEN, LA;which turned into SD, NY, BUF, HOU, and BOS).

  • @RR-fg2rl
    @RR-fg2rl 4 місяці тому +10

    When rams moved to Anaheim they lost there fan base . The coliseum was in center of the city.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +2

      yep

    • @WaltGekko
      @WaltGekko 4 місяці тому +2

      The LA Coliseum had become outdated even by 1979 for an NFL Team and that was a big reason why the Raiders moved back to Oakland following the 1994 season. Even modified for USC football by the time the Rams returned in 2016, it was still a very outdated stadium. It was why they went to Anaheim.

  • @skidawg22
    @skidawg22 4 місяці тому +24

    You left out all of the lies that Stan (mostly through his minion Kevin Demoff) told to St. Louis about their true intentions, and about St. Louis to everyone else (that they're "just a baseball team") and that the big lawsuit was based on the fact that the NFL ignored their own relocation policy to screw St. Louis - with the riverfront stadium plan, St. Louis did act in good faith to keep the team, unlike San Diego (who put a stadium on the ballot and it failed miserably) or Oakland (who did nothing to keep any of their teams). Further, the relocation policy - which was initially drafted following the league suing Al Davis for moving the Raiders to LA - is now considered an enforceable contract under Missouri state law as a result of this lawsuit. And to this day, they're still trying to figure out what to do with the money.
    With regards to the BattleHawks, clearly the fans are motivated by the anti-NFL sentiment - and this is the only clear way they can demonstrate it. It also helps that the team has been good every season of its existence (3-2 in the 2020 XFL, 7-3 in the 2023 XFL, and 7-3 in the 2024 UFL). And it should be noted that many former Rams players have embraced the UFL and the BattleHawks, some even returning to St. Louis to coach the team.
    These fans suffered through 12 straight years of losing with the Rams, including an NFL-worst 15-65 during a 5 year span (which, ironically, Cleveland matched by going winless one year).
    Lastly, fuck Stan Kroenke and fuck anyone who bought his "St. Louis is just a baseball town" garbage. And... Ka-Kaw is the Law!

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      i dont like Kroenke.

    • @jamesrush07
      @jamesrush07 4 місяці тому +2

      The fact that he’s named after Stan Musial, just makes it even worse.

    • @1999bill1999
      @1999bill1999 4 місяці тому +4

      @@skidawg22 Stan The Man Kroenke. A man of honor and integrity

    • @lanceneol865
      @lanceneol865 4 місяці тому

      ​@@1999bill1999integrity 😂

    • @FalloutSTL
      @FalloutSTL 3 місяці тому

      This!

  • @Robert-ck7nm
    @Robert-ck7nm 4 місяці тому +23

    Nice piece! I enjoyed learning some more Rams history. The Rams never should have left LA in the first place. If they stayed in LA all the suffering of LA fans, then the St. Louis fans would have been avoided. I hope St. Louis gets all their football needs met. The Battlehawks seem like a great start! And, as a current Rams season ticket holder, I welcome any St. Louis Rams fan who comes to SoFi with open arms! Horns up!

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +2

      heck yeah!

    • @therealjaystone2344
      @therealjaystone2344 4 місяці тому +1

      Rams left LA to Anaheim before the Raiders moved to LA. The fans lost faith with the fans and became raider fans.

    • @Homedepotorange
      @Homedepotorange 4 місяці тому

      Fuck the NFL. We don't want those assholes

    • @WaltGekko
      @WaltGekko 4 місяці тому

      @@therealjaystone2344 LA as I remember had more Raider fans even before they moved there. LA, however, has ALWAYS been a Lakers town first (dating back to at least 1980) and is the one city where the NBA trumps the NFL.

  • @jason_l5p
    @jason_l5p 4 місяці тому +15

    Kroenke had the plan to move the Rams to LA from the time he bought the franchise. He and the NFL illegally conspired to move the team.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +2

      i agree

    • @coreylevine8095
      @coreylevine8095 4 місяці тому +2

      Kroenke and the NFL should just say that the Rams are leaving and it nothing St Louis can do about it don't even think about spending money to design a new Stadium the NFL never wanted the Rams in St Louis anyway

    • @JuanMartinez-xf3uz
      @JuanMartinez-xf3uz 3 місяці тому

      Jim Irsay literally stole the Colts from Baltimore and St Louis tried stealing the Patriots. I hope St. Louis never gets an NFL team ever.

  • @TS-wh4ey
    @TS-wh4ey 3 місяці тому +4

    St. Louis fans are very satisfied with the Battlehawks. The attendance at the dome is proof. No need for another clash with the NFL. Forget about it.

  • @marklarson601
    @marklarson601 4 місяці тому +10

    Stadium issue and money. No problems with the Rams going back to Los Angeles. It was the right call. Saint Louis should’ve been chosen for expansion over Jacksonville but I’m sure stadium issues would’ve developed with them as well in the end. The dome became obsolete quickly

  • @andre0239-wd7ng
    @andre0239-wd7ng 4 місяці тому +10

    awesome video

  • @JuanMartinez-xf3uz
    @JuanMartinez-xf3uz 3 місяці тому +1

    The Patriots weren't "trying to take advantage" of the new stadium in St Louis. The original owners were heavily indebted to a St Louis businessman and there was talk of them relocating there. It's pretty fitting that the Patriots first and last Superbowls were against the Rams.

  • @boogitybear2283
    @boogitybear2283 4 місяці тому +21

    The city of St. Louis not Jacksonville Florida should’ve received the expansion team.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +5

      i agree

    • @richardharepax123
      @richardharepax123 4 місяці тому +3

      Yes because Florida has to many teams that don't do well and that team wants to move to England

    • @overbanked
      @overbanked 4 місяці тому +3

      ​@@richardharepax123That's BS!

    • @overbanked
      @overbanked 4 місяці тому +4

      STL effed up that NFL expansion bid, and that ship has sailed over thirty years ago. Get over it. If my aunt had some nads, she would be my uncle...

    • @crazyman8472
      @crazyman8472 4 місяці тому +1

      @@boogitybear2283 After the Rams debacle, I think St. Louis was about done with the NFL. 🤦‍♀️

  • @patricksutfin9374
    @patricksutfin9374 4 місяці тому +3

    La did not give kronke a stadium he built it himself... he also went from a team with a valuation in lowest 25% to the second highest valuation in the NFL. He has built the best and by far the most expensive stadium ever built. He put a championship quality team on the field. Even if you are a butthurt St Louis resident there is no denying it was the right move for the NFL and the team.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +3

      He did fund it himself thats fair

    • @WaltGekko
      @WaltGekko 4 місяці тому +2

      @@FootballLoreOfficial Yeah, but sadly in doing so replacing one of the most iconic horse racing tracks in the country in Hollywood Park. In fairness, however, even before Hollywood closed Horse Racing in California had been in trouble and Hollywood, which closed in 2013 likely would have closed by now anyway so it was a good repurpose of the land there (in fact, the actual name of the stadium is SoFi Stadium at Hollywood Park).

  • @gregrowe1168
    @gregrowe1168 4 місяці тому +3

    I’ve been to a couple Rams games when they were still in St Louis. There’s literally nowhere to park at the dome. We parked at Casino Queen and took the Metrolink to the stadium. Still had to walk a couple blocks. Ultimately, the owner knew he’d make much more money in Los Angeles than in St. Louis. There were plans for a new stadium that was never seriously considered to be built in St. Louis. At least the dome didn’t get abandoned.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      That's nuts

    • @nitrousexplosion10
      @nitrousexplosion10 4 місяці тому +1

      The dome itself was ok, but yea parking was bottom of the barrel. I'd say this was a big mistake for st louis not to improve parking... We would have had alot more people travel to the games.

    • @Gage_Brumley
      @Gage_Brumley 3 місяці тому

      That new stadium was seriously considered to be built. The city and state approved funding for it and the plans were finalized, but Kroenke looked the other way. St Louis could have offered to build SoFi Stadium and he would have still moved the team to LA.

  • @Becauseimme
    @Becauseimme 4 місяці тому +22

    Los Angeles is where the Rams belong. LA Rams sounds better. We missed our Rams for 21 years and I went my whole childhood without my team. They should have never left but the first Kim Kardashian named Georgia, took our team away. St. Louis should have a team, just not LA’s Rams.

    • @KevinMiller-xn5vu
      @KevinMiller-xn5vu 4 місяці тому +7

      You would have thought St. Louis would have gotten an expansion team.

    • @WaltGekko
      @WaltGekko 4 місяці тому +1

      As I remember, she took them to St. Louis because she was "sick and tired" of the Rams playing second fiddle to the Lakers in the one city where the NBA trumps the NFL and still does to this day.

    • @Becauseimme
      @Becauseimme 3 місяці тому +5

      @@WaltGekko what’s your point? Rams played 2nd fiddle to the Cardinals in St. Louis. Your take is null and void.

    • @dvferyance
      @dvferyance 3 місяці тому

      Why didn't la support them?

  • @99somerville
    @99somerville 4 місяці тому +11

    Money. It’s always about making more money.

  • @Boogenhagen100
    @Boogenhagen100 4 місяці тому +8

    kronke may be an asshole but he isn’t an idiot, he owns sofi stadium, have you seen how many concerts have been held there lately? He’s raking cash hand over fist all 12 months of any given year.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      i love their new stadim

    • @artc1980
      @artc1980 3 місяці тому

      Exactly... St. Louis couldve built the Roman Collesseum and it wouldnt compete cause its St. Louis...

  • @BlueCodeWatch
    @BlueCodeWatch 4 місяці тому +5

    another awesome video

  • @caseycieslikowski2929
    @caseycieslikowski2929 3 місяці тому +2

    Rams belong in LA but SL should get an expansion team.

  • @glennhoefer6212
    @glennhoefer6212 4 місяці тому +14

    My question is why did the Rams abandon Los Angeles in the first place? Los Angeles is the home to the Rams in my opinion

    • @coreylevine8095
      @coreylevine8095 4 місяці тому +7

      It because of Ownership,Staudim issue, and the Raiders moving to Los Angeles and the NFL fear of losing the lawsuit in court to prevent Georgia Frontiere from moving the team

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +2

      facts

    • @dwjoseph59
      @dwjoseph59 4 місяці тому +10

      Los angeles is definitely rams & raiders territory. The chargers still belong in san diego.

    • @y2films
      @y2films 4 місяці тому +2

      City of LA and Los Angeles County refused to build a new stadium or renovate the Coliseum

    • @deacongowan117
      @deacongowan117 4 місяці тому +2

      LA is home to the Raiders.

  • @PorkyJohnson328
    @PorkyJohnson328 4 місяці тому +2

    Also Kroenke helped Georgia Fronteire relocate the Rams from Los Angeles to St.Louis. At the time he owned 30 percent of the team.

  • @rnblase
    @rnblase 4 місяці тому

    Thank you for making this video. I know it's a long shot but I hope one day we will get another NFL team in St. Louis...

  • @KevinMiller-xn5vu
    @KevinMiller-xn5vu 4 місяці тому +1

    The Raiders also played in three different cities-Oakland twice, Los Angeles, and now Las Vegas.

  • @KKPsi-TubaDawg
    @KKPsi-TubaDawg 4 місяці тому +1

    I wish the Cardinals had stayed in Saint Louis. I really liked that the baseball and football teams had the same mascot.

  • @jokerz7936
    @jokerz7936 4 місяці тому +2

    I feel sorry for St. Louis they did get screwed over. But as a Pittsburgher who had no horse in the race LA always felt like the true home of the Rams.
    Also say what you will about the owner Stan Kroenke but the Rams built one of the best stadiums in the League and took no public money to do so just securing some tax breaks. I wish more owners would do that.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      yep

    • @EricPeltz-or9oh
      @EricPeltz-or9oh 3 місяці тому

      @@jokerz7936 Say or think what you want about Robert Kraft, but he also privately financed the Patriots stadium

  • @TheMarmar1988
    @TheMarmar1988 4 місяці тому +3

    Also you forgot to add that kronke had to pay the city of stl over 700 million due to a lawsuit settlement.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      I mentioned it at the end

    • @pep590
      @pep590 4 місяці тому

      Also you forgot to watch the entire video.

  • @Junior_Rocky
    @Junior_Rocky 4 місяці тому +8

    Because The Rams NEVER belonged in St. Louis. They ALWAYS belonged in Los Angeles!!!

  • @Becauseimme
    @Becauseimme 4 місяці тому

    Great job and great video sista. Subscribed!!! Shalawam

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      Thanks for subbing! I write all the scripts but my friend is gonna start doing the voice since people do not like a woman talking football lol

    • @Becauseimme
      @Becauseimme 4 місяці тому

      @@FootballLoreOfficial Be different sis, nickel and dime this all the way to the top. They gone respect you if you remain loyal to your brand. You see how many comments you got? It’s all about the content, as long as you’re putting your videos out there with high quality, can’t nobody say nothing, speak the sport language and be yourself. You got this sis! Find that niche and run with it, I’m in your corner sis, don’t stop doing you.

  • @robt5818
    @robt5818 4 місяці тому +1

    The same reason they "abandoned" Cleveland, Los Angeles, and Orange County, California: money!

  • @allenbass6169
    @allenbass6169 4 місяці тому +7

    The league wanted football back in Los Angeles. As simple as that.

    • @dwjoseph59
      @dwjoseph59 4 місяці тому +2

      They should've worked harder with the spanos family to keep the chargers in san diego though, the chargers just don't fit in the los angeles, ca market correctly

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +2

      eh idk the Raiders and Chargers wanted to move too and the Raiders got shut down

    • @WaltGekko
      @WaltGekko 4 місяці тому +1

      @@dwjoseph59 If anything, maybe in that regard there could have been a complete team swap where the Chargers name went to St. Louis but with the Rams team staying there and taking the Chargers name and with the team that had been in San Diego moving to LA and becoming the Rams while the Raiders also moved to LA and the "new Rams" (former Chargers) and Raiders sharing the LA Coliseum with USC until SoFi Stadium was ready.
      It was the NETWORKS who privately had been pressuring the NFL for years about putting teams in LA as they wanted to be able to have stars of their shows "be seen at the game" seeing how many women in particular watched Lakers games just to see who was there.

    • @dwjoseph59
      @dwjoseph59 4 місяці тому

      @@WaltGekko 💯💯👍👍

  • @coreylevine8095
    @coreylevine8095 4 місяці тому +15

    If the Raiders never move to Los Angeles the Rams would never move to St Louis

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +5

      100%

    • @coreylevine8095
      @coreylevine8095 4 місяці тому +1

      @@FootballLoreOfficial What can Sports Leauges do from being sued by teams owners who want to move and cities that are upset of there teams leave can the Leauges vetted who can own the Pro Sports teams

    • @dumisatonyjohnson8145
      @dumisatonyjohnson8145 4 місяці тому +2

      Didn’t the league sue Al Davis in 82

    • @raheemhamilton8624
      @raheemhamilton8624 4 місяці тому +2

      @coreylevine8095 that's not true. California/LA is not a football town. Even if the Raiders would have not located to LA The Rams would still struggle. The Rams came back to LA and they couldn't even have a sellout from LA people. Even when they won the Super Bowl the Fan base is still struggling. LA is not a football town. Not in the 80s and 90s and not now.

    • @coreylevine8095
      @coreylevine8095 4 місяці тому +1

      ​@@raheemhamilton8624Ok how about the 70's

  • @dwjoseph59
    @dwjoseph59 4 місяці тому +2

    Saint louis probably doesn't want to deal with the nfl anymore, they've already been burned twice (cardinals & rams).

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      true

    • @y2films
      @y2films 4 місяці тому

      $$$ changes that immediately

    • @mreppen1
      @mreppen1 4 місяці тому

      They took the $800 million instead. STL will never get another NFL team in our lifetime because of that.

    • @y2films
      @y2films 4 місяці тому

      @@mreppen1 strong chance of one down the road. But I can see another Spirits deal

    • @mreppen1
      @mreppen1 4 місяці тому

      @@y2films well I’m 65. It’s going to be awhile.

  • @ps50433
    @ps50433 4 місяці тому +5

    Rams are a transient team, they were in a number of cities before St. Louis. Not sure why pple in St. Louis consider it to be their team more than any other city. Yeah they left St. Louis under sketchy circumstances but they also left SoCal for St. Louis under sketchy circumstances. It’s an eye for an eye.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      yes exactly

    • @tonytigeer
      @tonytigeer 4 місяці тому +1

      Transient ???????? The Rams called Los Angeles home for 48 years !!!! Also, the Rams were Los Angeles's first professional franchise in 1946 pre-dating the Dodger's move by 12 years (1958). Do research before you make an insulting comment @ps50433

    • @tonytigeer
      @tonytigeer 4 місяці тому

      @@FootballLoreOfficial - Wow, really with this response

  • @characterunderconstruction5891
    @characterunderconstruction5891 4 місяці тому +2

    The question is? Why did the Rams abandoned Los Angeles.
    And why did the St. Louis Cardinals abandoned St. Louis?
    Now suddenly there's room in Los Angeles for two teams and no team in St. Louis!

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      fr

    • @y2films
      @y2films 4 місяці тому +2

      Rams left downtown LA in 1980 because they refused to make any upgrades to the Coliseum or approve a new stadium.
      They left Anaheim for similar reasons. They were stuck in a baseball field.
      The return was made possible by Kroenke buying the land after he took over the team in 2011

    • @mreppen1
      @mreppen1 4 місяці тому

      @@y2films yes I used to go to games at the Coliseum in the 70s and 80s. it was shithouse. Like the Oakland Coliseum

    • @y2films
      @y2films 4 місяці тому

      @@mreppen1 I can't imagine how bad it got before the Raiders left

    • @WaltGekko
      @WaltGekko 4 місяці тому

      @@y2films Kronke bought the land in 2014 after Hollywood Park closed for Horse Racing in December 2013 and was subsequently torn down. The lakes next to the stadium used to be in the infield at Hollywood and in fact the stadium's actual name is SoFi Stadium at Hollywood Park.
      Rams moved to St. Louis because Georgia Frontierre was "sick and tired" of playing second fiddle to the Lakers. LA has been a Laker town first for DECADES and is the ONE city where the NBA trumps the NFL. Once she died, her children had to sell their interests to Kronke to cover Estate taxes and Kronke was able to move the team back.

  • @rolliemosley
    @rolliemosley 4 місяці тому +1

    I'm from St. Louis. Stay in Dallas now & LA is my favorite city to visit. I love LA and St. Louis is nowhere near LA, obviously. The Rams belong in LA and St. Louis is a small market. Hence, I left. But LA fans are NOT better football fans than St. Louis fans. St. Louis deserves a football team. I don't get why the Raiders and Rams aren't in LA and Chargers isn't in Vegas. And give STL an expansion team or Jacksonville Jags should be St. Louis Jags.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      St Louis definitely deserves a spot in the NFL. I think Raiders Rams was a way better fit for LA too

  • @nitrousexplosion10
    @nitrousexplosion10 4 місяці тому +2

    Kroenke was going to move the team no matter what st louis did. His new stadium in LA costed him over 5 billion dollars, while we can play the blame game that should tell you all you need to know. If not for him being married into money and having a pipe dream the rams might still be in st louis.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      Yeah, that is really the end goal. I think he had a plan in mind

  • @tytratar2114
    @tytratar2114 3 місяці тому +1

    Stan Kroenke thought the people of St. Louis were a bunch of losers! And he was kind of right! In st. Louis it’s all about the cardinals. Kroenke hated that! Also the nfl desperately wanted a team in Los Angeles. So it was a very easy decision for kroenke!

  • @tahart27
    @tahart27 2 місяці тому

    Actually, Kroenke has his roots in Missouri, which made his decision to leave that much more of a kick in the gut.

  • @jasonbecke
    @jasonbecke 4 місяці тому +5

    I’ll never understand why St. Louis is mad we LA “stole” their team and we should feel bad for them when they “stole” our team first and no one ever said poor LA we should feel bad for them. Rams belong in LA

  • @matthewgliatto7339
    @matthewgliatto7339 4 місяці тому

    For the record, they *had* to replace Kurt Warner with Marc Bulger in 2002. They wanted to keep starting Warner, but the problem was that Warner was losing every game while Bulger was winning every game. For whatever reason, Kurt Warner’s talents just suddenly vanished right after the Rams’ defeat in Super Bowl 36. And he wouldn’t get them back until several years later, by which time he played for the Arizona Cardinals.

    • @y2films
      @y2films 4 місяці тому +1

      Kurt got banged up during that time resulting in a decline

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      dam

    • @patricksutfin9374
      @patricksutfin9374 4 місяці тому +1

      He had a thumb injury that prevented him from having a firm grip on ball. This caused poor thrown passes and excessive fumbles. He still was a better option than Bulger. He went to Giants and had a winning record before being pulled for Eli Manning who proceeded to lose 6 of 7 games (but later won 2 superbowls).

    • @matthewgliatto7339
      @matthewgliatto7339 4 місяці тому

      @@patricksutfin9374 Perhaps you are right that the Rams never should’ve let Kurt Warner go. But when we focus on the two post-Greatest-Show seasons when Warner was still there (2002-03), it’s pretty hard to deny that starting Bulger at QB was a smarter decision than starting Warner at QB.
      Who knows the hypotheticals of alternative “timelines”, but what’s not hypothetical is that Marc Bulger clearly performed better than Kurt Warner did during the 2002 and 2003 St. Louis Rams seasons.

  • @Weebledude
    @Weebledude 3 місяці тому +1

    The Oilers, Browns, Colts, Raiders moves feel justified compared to what the Rams did.
    St. Louis would have eventually built them a stadium but the Rams wanted that LA Market money and the NFL was pushing to have the Rams move too. St. Louis never had a chance to keep them.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  3 місяці тому

      St Louis would have been a great city for an NFL team and they're not even interested anymore

  • @jaayace
    @jaayace 4 місяці тому +3

    They were returned home after being stolen by Georgia Frontiere. Thank you Stan

  • @PorkyJohnson328
    @PorkyJohnson328 4 місяці тому +1

    Kronke does have roots in Missouri. He was born in Columbia, Missouri. Also, he is a graduate of the University of Missouri Columbia

    • @schitz240sx
      @schitz240sx 4 місяці тому

      Hes also named after two Cardinals greats. But Fu*k Kronke.

    • @Homedepotorange
      @Homedepotorange 4 місяці тому +1

      He was also named after Cardinal Legends Stan Musial and Enos Slaughter

    • @oscaru5342
      @oscaru5342 3 місяці тому

      None of that matters! He brought our team back home where it belongs. Thank you Mr Kroenke & let's Go L.A Rams!!

  • @CocoBro97
    @CocoBro97 Місяць тому

    The only way I see stl getting a new nfl team is if the ufl folds and the rock becomes an owner then forms the team in st.louis . I don’t want the battlehawks to go anywhere cause those are some of the best games to go to and brings stl together in the best way imo.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  Місяць тому +1

      i agree but the battlehawks have so much support

    • @CocoBro97
      @CocoBro97 Місяць тому

      @ i agree, but compare stl to the rest of the league. I don’t want it to happen either. But one city can’t fund a whole league like this long term.

  • @guyherring6235
    @guyherring6235 4 місяці тому +11

    Its the 13% figure it out

  • @tcwilson815
    @tcwilson815 4 місяці тому +2

    St Louis has had the misfortune of Losing the Hawks (NBA), Rams, Football Cardinals, and the St Louis Browns (Baltimore Orioles)that Definitely needs to be discussed.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      dam

    • @y2films
      @y2films 4 місяці тому +1

      Spirits too

    • @mapleva
      @mapleva 4 місяці тому

      Interesting that the two teams that swapped ownership, both moved from the coasts to the Midwest.

  • @okenwa1983
    @okenwa1983 4 місяці тому +2

    Q: Why did the Rams abandon St. Louis?
    A: MONNNNNNEYYYYYY

  • @RPB_33411
    @RPB_33411 4 місяці тому +1

    The media outlets for 2015 was better than 1995...... Which is why....you moved a team outta small market St Louis. Next??

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      wat

    • @RPB_33411
      @RPB_33411 3 місяці тому +1

      @@FootballLoreOfficial Social media...NFL TV...and the round the clock coverage of the NFL on the internet wasnt around then....

  • @jamesmoss3424
    @jamesmoss3424 4 місяці тому +1

    Football should come back one St. Louis for the third time one day. 😀👍🏈

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      Hope so

    • @Homedepotorange
      @Homedepotorange 4 місяці тому +1

      We have it

    • @BillJohnson-x6s
      @BillJohnson-x6s 4 місяці тому +1

      I went to a Battlehawks game once.

    • @mapleva
      @mapleva 4 місяці тому +1

      Washington DC got a third chance with the MLB Nationals, but after losing two teams, it's virtually impossible to get a third unless you are a big market.

  • @WaltGekko
    @WaltGekko 4 місяці тому

    Very simple:
    The Rams as I remember moved to St. Louis in the first place because then-owner Georgia Frontierre was "sick and tired" of playing second fiddle to the Lakers, as LA is still the one city where the NBA trumps the NFL (and MLB with the Dodgers also often trumps the NFL). When she passed away, her children were forced to sell their interests because of Estate taxes to Stan Kronke. Add in years of pressure the NFL had been getting from the networks to have teams in LA so stars of their shows could "be seen at the game" (seeing how many women in particular who don't follow sports otherwise would often watch Lakers games on TNT/ABC/ESPN just to see who was at the game) and that played into the return of the Rams to Los Angeles after 2015, to be joined a year later by the Chargers.
    Another factor with St. Louis was the lack of corporate sponsorship available. Aside from Anheuser-Busch, the only other company big enough in St. Louis at the time was apparently McDonnell-Douglas and Busch to me anyway didn't have anywhere near enough interest to help keep the Rams in St. Louis (and likely also played heavily into why the football Cardinals went to Arizona after the 1987 season and have actually been in Arizona longer than they were in St. Louis). Corporate sponsors are apparently huge in the NFL to where you need that.

  • @juanescabar951
    @juanescabar951 4 місяці тому +3

    Thats a good question

  • @TheCountofToulouse
    @TheCountofToulouse 3 місяці тому

    Georgia was losing money in Anaheim. What isn't mentioned in this video is that Stan Kroenke was actually a part owner when the Rams landed in St. Louis, as Georgia needed money. The Rams were in dire straights, being one of the poorest teams in the league. Business is messy and it takes money to make things happen. In the end, the Rams landed on their feet and I know people in St. Louis are still bitter about it, I don't blame them. The Rams won a title game while in that city, their FIRST title, now they have an incredible stadium, a great coach and hope. I am going to call out the LA Rams fans, who IMO, are pretty weak. Letting the 9ers sell out SoFi when they play in LA is fan treason. That is when the Rams need you the most and they gladly sell them out.

  • @robjohnson1145
    @robjohnson1145 4 місяці тому +2

    Stan Cronkey it’s just an ass! I’m live in St. Louis and people support it St. Louis rams stood behind the rams until they started losing you. You don’t put the product on the field to win people will lose interest no matter what city you play in.

  • @stakknation123
    @stakknation123 4 місяці тому +2

    Yeah Stan still won't let us watch the Nuggets in Denver.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      lol

    • @stakknation123
      @stakknation123 3 місяці тому

      @@FootballLoreOfficial outside of nationally televised game we literally have to stream games.

  • @dwjoseph59
    @dwjoseph59 4 місяці тому

    An average of 34,000+ fans for the saint louis battlehawks of the UFL is wild!! Saint louis definitely likes pro football 👍👍!!

  • @DireHammer
    @DireHammer 2 місяці тому

    Am I supposed to feel bad for St Louis fans that the team they stole from LA went back to LA? Good luck.

  • @tylerroussin1623
    @tylerroussin1623 4 місяці тому

    You left out the part where St.louis proposed major renovations to the dome and even a new stadium.

    • @tylerroussin1623
      @tylerroussin1623 4 місяці тому

      The Rams/NFL also mislead the city and cost STL millions.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      They came up with that after the plans to move, I do mention it at the end.

    • @tylerroussin1623
      @tylerroussin1623 4 місяці тому

      @FootballLoreOfficial no. That's why the city sued. They broke the lease because the dome was not in the top ten, and the rams refused the citys plans to refurbish the current stadium. The Rams went to a year to year at that point. The city operated in good faith to put together a new stadium proposal and cost the taxpayers 30 million in the process. Which was part of the NFL bylaws. The Rams moved after that and did not operate in good faith. That's why there was a law suit and the NFL/Rams settled to avoid discovery.

  • @RealStarbursts
    @RealStarbursts 4 місяці тому +1

    We need a NBA team 💯

  • @josephburke7224
    @josephburke7224 4 місяці тому

    In st Louis. The city had all concessions. The team only got part of the gate. The owner not only want a new stadium. He wanted some if not all the parking and concessions. Now he has 100% of all that plus a hotel and a big convention center. With more to build. St louis should have worked this out. They will never do that.

  • @mapleva
    @mapleva 4 місяці тому +1

    Really, I think the Cardinals should have stayed in St. Louis and the Rams should have stayed in LA.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      the cardinals fit perfectly, weird they decided to go be mediocre in Phoenix.

    • @mapleva
      @mapleva 4 місяці тому

      @@FootballLoreOfficial I don't think the Cardinals ownership have always acted in the team's best interest.

  • @chriswalls5831
    @chriswalls5831 4 місяці тому +1

    My new idea bring st louis nfl team without rams logo but different logo renegades or something

  • @anthony_rivera4735
    @anthony_rivera4735 4 місяці тому +2

    I'm glad Stan Kroenke bought the rams to move them to Los Angeles. The rams should've stayed in Los Angeles 1995-2015. Maybe the jaggies or packers should move to St. Louis. Green Bay doesn't need any teams in any sport.

  • @mapleva
    @mapleva 4 місяці тому

    End result? The two LA pro football teams that represented the city in the early 60s, the Rams and the Chargers, are both, once again, representing LA.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      Yeah, but the Rams really are the true LA team

    • @mapleva
      @mapleva 4 місяці тому

      @@FootballLoreOfficial Chargers are like the Clippers or the Nets.

  • @florida1289
    @florida1289 4 місяці тому

    Rams & Chargers just played last week and looked like there was about 200 fans, total. LA doesn't deserve 1 team let alone 2. When i lived there nobody cared about football.
    Harbaugh going from Michigan,nthe Big House, 100k to 200 fans has to be a shock to the system. He be there 4 years then gone.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      lol

    • @coreylevine8095
      @coreylevine8095 4 місяці тому +1

      It were 66,112 at the game not 200

    • @mreppen1
      @mreppen1 4 місяці тому +1

      It was a friggin exhibition game. Nobody gives a shit about those games, come on. Weak man.

  • @briansmith5293
    @briansmith5293 4 місяці тому

    St Louis can't afford to build a new stadium. Unless an owner is willing to build St Louis a new stadium there won't be another NFL franchise in St Louis. It doesn't seem feasible at this point.

  • @jamesyates4319
    @jamesyates4319 8 днів тому

    The real question should be, Why did St Louis abandon St Louis?😅

  • @edwardellis3038
    @edwardellis3038 4 місяці тому +3

    The Rams belong in LA imo.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +2

      i agree

    • @dwjoseph59
      @dwjoseph59 4 місяці тому +1

      Kroenke wanted to get it crunk in los angeles, it probably was the best decision. Battlehawks are loved in 'the lou!!"

  • @overbanked
    @overbanked 4 місяці тому +1

    The Jaguars team has been a struggling team most of its existence; wins havent came consistently until recently. For you to say that STL is a better NFL market than JAX is BS. Jacksonville has much more upside than St Louis; metro population growth, fast growing city, better political climate, and on and on

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +2

      found the jaguars fan

    • @josephburke7224
      @josephburke7224 4 місяці тому +1

      A large part of the jags income is that they play at least one game a year out of the country. The NFL pays a lot for that.

    • @overbanked
      @overbanked 4 місяці тому

      @josephburke7224 It's not like the Jags are the only team that plays 'home games' in London. There are several teams that's getting that international loot

  • @mreppen1
    @mreppen1 4 місяці тому +3

    Because STL ripped off the LA Rams to start the mess. But I have to say I did like the video. Thank you.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      Fair enough

    • @coreylevine8095
      @coreylevine8095 4 місяці тому

      Georgia Frontiere ripped off the Rams from Los Angeles the NFL try to stop it but didn't want to go to court in order to stop her because they lost to Al Davis in 1982

    • @coreylevine8095
      @coreylevine8095 3 місяці тому +1

      Georgia started this mess

  • @henrywallacesghost5883
    @henrywallacesghost5883 3 місяці тому

    Just root for the Chiefs. It's like 4 hours away and the team is better than what an expansion team would be.

  • @jamesbonnen
    @jamesbonnen 3 місяці тому

    St Louis is a baseball town and maybe hockey ask the Hawks how St Louis does in other sports

  • @maureencora1
    @maureencora1 4 місяці тому +1

    Kansas City or St. Louis Should Have a NBA Team?

  • @westcoastnative2523
    @westcoastnative2523 4 місяці тому +2

    The Rams sucked in St Louis. Outside of the greatest show on turf, which was about four years, they had a losing season ever year. The Rams have been back in LA for eight years (nine coming up) and have already had more winning seasons than the entirety of st Louis. It was a no brainer why kronke wanted out of st Louis (💰💰💰).

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      dam

    • @gregrowe1168
      @gregrowe1168 4 місяці тому

      Should have won one more super bowl at least. That team that lost in 2001 was far superior to the Patriots that year. They fell off a cliff after that season. They only managed one more playoff win after that in St Louis.

  • @grazynazambeanie5963
    @grazynazambeanie5963 2 місяці тому

    The name of the game is "Milk the Public" get public funds for a new stadium, get tax breaks , get financing, interest free ,to help the bottom line . Then move when offered a better deal elsewhere . What about the fans ? What about them ? The money the fans pay for tickets ect. Is peanuts compared to tax breaks , T.V. rights . The NFL can make a profit even if no fans show up

  • @christiansoldier77
    @christiansoldier77 4 місяці тому

    The real question is why they ever left LA?

  • @astrosjer822
    @astrosjer822 2 місяці тому

    The Rams have become vagabonds. They follow the money when necessary.

  • @oscaru5342
    @oscaru5342 3 місяці тому

    Bottomline, the Rams left st louis because they(the Rams) were given the option to move when st louis refused to renovate that domed stadium and bring it up to par with the top 25% of the stadiums in the NFL as per the lease agreement! Honor the the terms of the lease and the Rams "would not" have been given the option to leave... That's what you people in st louis fail to acknowledge. Now deal with the consequences...

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  3 місяці тому

      yes, but still sucks for the fans who have no control over the situation.

  • @mrh6431
    @mrh6431 3 місяці тому

    At least they still have Kansas City.

  • @flibber123
    @flibber123 4 місяці тому

    I think it was because Los Angeles is too big a market to ignore forever. This means a team has to move to LA, or the league needs to expand. I don't think league owners wanted expansion. That leaves having a team move. Another problem is no one wants to play in the Coliseum anymore. It's too old and the area around it is not up to NFL standards. This means a new stadium is needed. But LA politics won't allow for taxpayers to pay for a new stadium. This means the team owner who moves needs to have the resources to make a new stadium happen. The Rams owner has the money and the Rams have their previous history in LA to build on. So they moved.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      I think they definitely needed to come back to LA, but the Raiders Chargers and Rams all wanted back. They didn't have to let the Rams move back. I think Kroenke won the battle because he was willing to pay for his stadium.

    • @coreylevine8095
      @coreylevine8095 4 місяці тому

      I don't think the Chargers or the Raiders have the money for a new Stadium i heard that there were going to ask Goldman Sachs for money i still don't know how that going to work

  • @00ga-booga
    @00ga-booga 4 місяці тому +2

    What I'm hearing is, St. Louis knew what they had to do to keep the Rams there, and they didn't want to do it. Then when they finally decided to meet the obligation they agreed to, they asked the owner to pitch in, which sounds like it wasn't part of the agreement. So they never met really their obligation, and he left. I wouldn't have stuck around either, they couldn't be trusted.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      exactly

    • @BobbyBoucher228
      @BobbyBoucher228 4 місяці тому +1

      Kroenke was never going to play ball with St. Louis and was always intent on moving the Rams to LA. That’s why when the city of St. Louis sued Kroenke and the Rams they settled because they had recordings and emails saying that Kroenke had always intended from the time he bought the team to move the Rams to LA. It was a slam dunk case and St. Louis had Kroenke, the Rams, and the NFL by the balls and could have taken the case to trial and would’ve likely won with over a billion dollars in damages with all of the evidence that they had against Kroenke.

    • @tonytigeer
      @tonytigeer 4 місяці тому

      Rams should have never moved to St Louis also - Stan Kronke paid for the move and for the 5 Billion dollar SOFI stadium. The city of Inglewood paid ZERO $ for SOFI - Also St. Louis should have bid on an expansion team in 1995 like the Panthers or Jaguars rather than accept a business deal with the thief Georgia Frontiere! St. Loius signed the stadium contract and knew the Rams had an escape clause.

  • @jayyflako724
    @jayyflako724 4 місяці тому +3

    Rams were always meant to be in LA

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      i agree

    • @treyblaze22
      @treyblaze22 4 місяці тому +2

      ​@@FootballLoreOfficialthe st. Louis Rams and the LA Rams have one thing in common: a super bowl championship. Crazy huh?

    • @Becauseimme
      @Becauseimme 4 місяці тому

      Absolutely yes!

  • @ericletford1178
    @ericletford1178 4 місяці тому +1

    Because Stan Kronke is a greedy Person a man who a Is billionaire Did not like St Louis And thought he could make more money that he doesn't need in LA St Louis Support the Rams Greatest Show on Turf

  • @Homedepotorange
    @Homedepotorange 4 місяці тому

    St. Louis doesnt want to be in the NFL. Real football is played in the spring

  • @myfootballjesus
    @myfootballjesus 4 місяці тому +1

    Why did the Cardinals LEAVE St Louis? thats a Video ?

  • @tonytigeer
    @tonytigeer 4 місяці тому +1

    The definitive answer to why the Rams left Los Angeles is Georgia Frontiere! She inherits the franchise and what she does next is the premise from the 1989 movie “Major League” It was also painful to witness my childhood team win a Superbowl in our Golden Yellow and Royal Blue colors for another city. This is the reason they rebranded the following year. The Rams should have never left Los Angeles. St. Louis needs to be reminded of how they failed to take care of their original NFL franchise the Cardinals - it’s sad how St. Louis treated Big Red as a stepchild compared to the city’s first love the baseball Cardinals.

    • @mreppen1
      @mreppen1 4 місяці тому +1

      I've been trying to say that for years. Perfect words.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      I wish both Cardinals were still there

    • @WaltGekko
      @WaltGekko 4 місяці тому

      The real problem then and now is LA is the ONE city where the NBA with the Lakers (and to a lesser extent, the Clippers) and NOT the NFL rules. LA has been a Laker town first for DECADES and Frontierre grew "sick and tired" of playing second fiddle to them. That's why they went to St. Louis, where they were already building the dome to land an NFL team (much like Indy did and had it ready when the Colts suddenly moved). The NETWORKS wanted teams in LA for years after the Rams and Raiders moved.

    • @mreppen1
      @mreppen1 4 місяці тому

      @@WaltGekko actually the Rams owned LA from 1946 to 1980;when they moved to OC. I know cause I experienced it living there then. The Lakers were mediocre, the Dodgers heyday was the 60s. In the 80s the Lakers took over LA.

    • @WaltGekko
      @WaltGekko 4 місяці тому

      @@mreppen1 1980 is about when the Lakers took over, but really from the DODGERS, who continued to be a top team throughout the '70s. The Rams even then were the second team and were playing in a stadium that never really was suitable for the NFL (as the Raiders would later find out). Even when the Rams played in a modified version of the Coliseum from 2016-'19 it was still outdated.

  • @stakknation123
    @stakknation123 4 місяці тому

    St. Louis is not getting a 3rd crack at the NFL.

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      i think so, if they expand to like 40 teams there arent big enough markets other than St Louis

    • @y2films
      @y2films 4 місяці тому

      St. Louis and San Antonio are next up

  • @artc1980
    @artc1980 3 місяці тому

    The Rams didnt move back to their original location... That wouldve been Cleveland... 🤷🏻‍♂️

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  3 місяці тому

      ok

    • @y2films
      @y2films 3 місяці тому

      ​@FootballLoreOfficial you should do actual research and quit pretending you are good at this

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  3 місяці тому

      @@y2films I could not possibly care less about you or your opinion. Oh and I will be flooding black construction with 1 star reviews. sandyhook road, valley view court

    • @y2films
      @y2films 3 місяці тому

      @FootballLoreOfficial not sure what any of that has to do with my statement
      Why you gotta be racist to Black Construction tho?

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  3 місяці тому

      @@y2films lol, okay Joey. Have a good day and work on your opsec next time. Gonna keep making videos. Hope knoxville is treating you well.

  • @valerianportus7409
    @valerianportus7409 4 місяці тому

    The Rams abandoned Los Angeles. The Cardinals abandoned St. Louis.

  • @romanclay1913
    @romanclay1913 4 місяці тому

    Too humid.

  • @onknight
    @onknight 4 місяці тому +3

    If you put something in a lease you have to abide by it. St Louis didn't do that and in my opinion shouldn't have a dime from the NFL or Stan cronky.

  • @nathanjoyner2447
    @nathanjoyner2447 4 місяці тому +1

    Should have never moved to St. Louis in the first place.

  • @gene1278
    @gene1278 4 місяці тому +1

    No Please....St. Louis does not want the NFL! I'm done with the NFL, St. louis has a great soccer team. Screw the NFL.

  • @arizonawrestlinginterviews1040
    @arizonawrestlinginterviews1040 4 місяці тому

    At least Stan Kroenke had the decency to let St. Louis say goodbye to the Rams, unlike Robert Irsay who....ironically, briefly owned the Rams!

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому +1

      LOL

    • @WaltGekko
      @WaltGekko 4 місяці тому

      The City of Baltimore was about to take the team from Irsay through eminent domain and that's why the move happened (plus, Indy had a stadium already in place). NFL should have righted this wrong after 1995 when the Browns moved to Baltimore by making Irsay give up the Colts and instead let them move back to Baltimore while getting the former Browns in return (with that team likely renamed the Racers after the old WHA franchise in Indy with Indy Cars on the helmets), even if it meant giving the new Indy team the first two picks in the 1996, '97 and '98 drafts AND special salary cap considerations to make that happen. Paul Tagliabue could have righted a wrong by doing that.

  • @bengalsfan97
    @bengalsfan97 4 місяці тому

    Dick Vermeli drafted Lawerence Phillips and traded Jerome Bettis

    • @FootballLoreOfficial
      @FootballLoreOfficial  4 місяці тому

      yes

    • @gregrowe1168
      @gregrowe1168 4 місяці тому

      Phillips had hall of fame talent but zero discipline. He was a beast in college but a complete bust in the NFL.

    • @y2films
      @y2films 4 місяці тому

      Phillips was drafted by Rich Brooks, who traded Bettis.
      Vermeil was hired in Lars 2nd season and wanted to work with him but that didn't work out

  • @chriszenko3598
    @chriszenko3598 4 місяці тому

    Why did the Cardinals abandon St Louis

  • @l.carlossimental6096
    @l.carlossimental6096 3 місяці тому

    This is easy to answer. The Rams doubled their market value by simply moving back to L.A. Also, SoFi stadium was as much a real estate development deal as a stadium deal. In other words, the numbers made sense to move.