What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Raiders to St. Louis, Rams to Los Angeles? (1 Viewer)

Native

Footballguy
As crazy as it sounds, part of me understands where this guy is coming from. The Rams were one of the Leagues original eight franchises and have a storied history in LA that goes back 60 years. Its too bad they had to move in the first place. Oh well.

Anyway, the guys suggestion is totally ludicrous as many others have already stated. Raiders in St Louis? What did St Louis ever do wrong?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Floyd The Barber

Footballguy
This is great! California has a long, rich history of STEALING other city's franchises and it happens to them once, and "boo-hoo-hoo!"

Cleveland called. They say Los Angeles jumped their claim to the Rams. Now go steal the Chargers or Saints.

 

Despyzer

Lousy Attention Whore
As crazy as it sounds, part of me understands where this guy is coming from. The Rams were one of the Leagues original eight franchises and have a storied history in LA that goes back 60 years. Its too bad they had to move in the first place. Oh well.

Anyway, the guys suggestion is totally ludicrous as many others have already stated. Raiders in St Louis? What did St Louis ever do wrong?
I agree that this would be unjust treatment for anyone in the greater St. Louis area, but your history is a bit askew.In 1920, the original teams were the Akron Pros, Decatur Staleys, Buffalo All-Americans, Chicago Cardinals, Rock Island Independents, Dayton Triangles, Rochester Jeffersons, Canton Bulldogs, Detroit Heralds, Cleveland Tigers, Chicago Tigers, Hammond Pros, Columbus Panhandles, and the Muncie Flyers.

The Rams didn't join the league in Cleveland until seventeen years later.

 

fatness

against the grain
In other news, Dan Snyder is selling his team to an native American casino which is building a new stadium on a reservation. Hail to the Redskins.

 

cdwood

Footballguy
As crazy as it sounds, part of me understands where this guy is coming from. The Rams were one of the Leagues original eight franchises and have a storied history in LA that goes back 60 years. Its too bad they had to move in the first place. Oh well.

Anyway, the guys suggestion is totally ludicrous as many others have already stated. Raiders in St Louis? What did St Louis ever do wrong?
I understand where the columnist is coming from too. But he's missing one big point, beggers can't be choosers. Just because LA fans won't have a big affinity with the Jags, Bills, or Saints, that doesn't give them the ability to pick and choose which team will move to LA. They'll either have to accept the team that moves to LA or ignore the team.I will give the columnist credit for the statement that its better to move an existing franchise to LA than granting them an expansion franchise.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top