Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

The owner of the St. Louis Rams plans to build an NFL stadium in Los Angeles County, boosting the chances
that pro football could return to the region, according to a newspaper report.

Stan Kroenke has partnered with Stockbridge Capital Group, owners of the 238-acre Hollywood Park site
in Inglewood, the Los Angeles Times reported Monday (http://lat.ms/1BA13Ye ).

Kroenke and Stockbridge say they plan to add an 80,000-seat NFL stadium and 6,000-seat performance venue
to a massive development of retail, office, hotel and residential space.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/0 ... 17442.html

Good! The Rams should have never left Los Angeles. Moreover, the Cardinals should have never left St. Louis. And most of all, the Colts should have never left Baltimore.

Joe Zagorski wrote:Good! The Rams should have never left Los Angeles. Moreover, the Cardinals should have never left St. Louis. And most of all, the Colts should have never left Baltimore.

While I wholeheartedly agree with you I wonder how a 15 year old Rams fan in St Louis might feel...

While I wholeheartedly agree with you I wonder how a 15 year old Rams fan in St Louis might feel...

There aren't any. My wife's family is from St. Louis. I happened to have a Torry Holt rookie card and brought it a few years ago for Christmas to give randomly to one of her approx. 15 year old cousins. I think I did a "guess what I have in my hand" type thing. Blank stares when they saw what it was. Kind of an unexpected reaction to me coming from a city that lives and dies by it's football team. (Buffalo) They're all about the baseball Cardinals and Blues there. Even the nostalgia of the football Cardinals is more popular than the Rams there. My father in law still gets teary eyed talking about Jim Hart, Dan Dierdorf and Air Coryell.

The concept of "St. Louis Rams" just doesn't sound right, no more than "St. Louis Bears" or "St. Louis Giants" would have.

SixtiesFan wrote:The concept of "St. Louis Rams" just doesn't sound right, no more than "St. Louis Bears" or "St. Louis Giants" would have.

Whenever the Rams and Ravens were mentioned together (by city), it seemed my immediate thought was Cardinals and Colts.

Or, as my friend Joel says when the Ravens play the team from Indianapolis: "There's a Baltimore/Colts game on today!"

Likewise "Cleveland/Rams" (Browns vs. Rams) and St Louis/Cardinals (Rams vs. Cardinals).
Come to think of is, my friend Joel is kind of annoying...

Move the Rams back to Cleveland when you move the Colts back to Baltimore, the Cardinals back to Chicago. The Ravens can move to Pottstown, for all I care....

To this day, I will see a score flash up on the screen saying "BALTIMORE 7, ST. LOUIS 0" and immediately think to myself "Oh, the Colts just went up on the Cardinals."

ChrisBabcock wrote:

While I wholeheartedly agree with you I wonder how a 15 year old Rams fan in St Louis might feel...

There aren't any. My wife's family is from St. Louis. I happened to have a Torry Holt rookie card and brought it a few years ago for Christmas to give randomly to one of her approx. 15 year old cousins. I think I did a "guess what I have in my hand" type thing. Blank stares when they saw what it was. Kind of an unexpected reaction to me coming from a city that lives and dies by it's football team. (Buffalo) They're all about the baseball Cardinals and Blues there. Even the nostalgia of the football Cardinals is more popular than the Rams there. My father in law still gets teary eyed talking about Jim Hart, Dan Dierdorf and Air Coryell.

It's very much a baseball town, from my experiences.