Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When I lived in Missouri in the 90s I was glad to see St. Louis getting the Rams.
Here we are 20 years later and NFL is already talking about moving them to another city unless NFL get a new stadium
Does NFL have any loyalty to its fans?
Seems like NFL teams offer zero loyalty to their fans.
Keep in mind, I have a different perspective because I grew up watching soccer where teams have been playing in the same city for more than 100 years even when they go almost bankrupt they stay in the same city.
What are your thoughts about NFL team loyalty to fans and NFL relocating teams when cities don't build them a stadium?
Well, in fairness.. each team is its on entity and if that team desires to move, as Al Davis and the Oakland Raiders proved, there is not much the NFL can do about it. But in a more general sense, you are right. The NFL and the Teams do not have a lot of loyalty to the fans. Bottom line is money and if they are not getting enough of it in ST LOUIS, they will go somewhere else.
The NFL was not loyal to the fans the Rams and Raiders cultivated in LA. So why would they be loyal to the fans the Rams have cultivated in St Louis?
The NFL is a cabal of 32 owners (well, 31 and the community of Green Bay), each with different priorities, interests, and viewpoints on this. Some owners want the teams in the biggest markets as possible, to maximize league revenue and value. Some have more appreciation for franchise stability and not relocating teams.
I think with the recent Buffalo Bills sale, and the number of owners who came out in support of the hope that local ownership would result from the sale leaving the team in Buffalo, it shows the individual owners tend to prefer to keep teams grounded than moving them around, so long as they think the franchise can be viable (which includes having, newer, state of the art facilities). Buffalo doesn't have that, but the league seems confident the new owner group will push for a new facility by the current end of the lease and there is already a lot of chatter on what, and where it will be built (seems to be pointing towards a downtown dome facility with convention center similar to Lucas Oil Field in Indy).
Time will tell. Having LA open and threatening to move is a good way to bully municipalities into stadium construction too.
The NFL is a business for profit, and a huge one at that. They are not a catering service to the fans. As long as the stadiums get filled, and the merchandise is purchased, they will not care how many disgruntled fans there are. If you're selling out stadiums, and getting huge TV advertising contracts, that's all they need. Throughout sports history, the only way you could send a message to a league would be a fan-wide boycott, but that will never happen.
The NFL is a business for profit, and a huge one at that. They are not a catering service to the fans. As long as the stadiums get filled, and the merchandise is purchased, they will not care how many disgruntled fans there are. If you're selling out stadiums, and getting huge TV advertising contracts, that's all they need. Throughout sports history, the only way you could send a message to a league would be a fan-wide boycott, but that will never happen.
Or you could do what we did in Cleveland when Modell announced the move of the Browns. Protest like crazy to the NFL! I think even they overlooked the significance of what the Browns meant to the city of Cleveland and that having a team in Cleveland was very profitable for them, given the legions of fans that supported the team (and still do) win or lose. Now will the fans of St. Louis do that? I'm not sure. It worked for us, and we received an expansion team with the Browns name, history, and colors attached to it. To add, back in the day had Baltimore for example done what we did, they may have still been able to keep the Colts name, and not made to wait 13 years before getting (or stealing) another team from another city, with a new name.
Or you could do what we did in Cleveland when Modell announced the move of the Browns. Protest like crazy to the NFL! I think even they overlooked the significance of what the Browns meant to the city of Cleveland and that having a team in Cleveland was very profitable for them, given the legions of fans that supported the team (and still do) win or lose. Now will the fans of St. Louis do that? I'm not sure. It worked for us, and we received an expansion team with the Browns name, history, and colors attached to it. To add, back in the day had Baltimore for example done what we did, they may have still been able to keep the Colts name, and not made to wait 13 years before getting (or stealing) another team from another city, with a new name.
And if Tagliabue hadn't acquiesced to Jack Kent Cooke, Redskins owner, Baltimore would have had its own expansion team before the Browns moved there. The Redskins had a decades long waiting list for tickets and they were still so greedy they wanted a monopoly in the area. It's probably more Tagliabue's fault than it is Modell's, that the Browns moved to Baltimore. Of course, they might still have moved somewhere else. Maybe if Baltimore had received an expansion team, it would have given Cleveland more time to head off any move.
Year after year Baltimore had the best package presented to the NFL for an expansion team, yet Tagliabue withheld for Cooke's sake.
And if Tagliabue hadn't acquiesced to Jack Kent Cooke, Redskins owner, Baltimore would have had its own expansion team before the Browns moved there. The Redskins had a decades long waiting list for tickets and they were still so greedy they wanted a monopoly in the area. It's probably more Tagliabue's fault than it is Modell's, that the Browns moved to Baltimore. Of course, they might still have moved somewhere else. Maybe if Baltimore had received an expansion team, it would have given Cleveland more time to head off any move.
Year after year Baltimore had the best package presented to the NFL for an expansion team, yet Tagliabue withheld for Cooke's sake.
Modell also had a hand in preventing expansion to Baltimore. If you remember when the Jags and Panthers were slated to come into the league via expansion the city of Baltimore was listed as one of the city's to potentially land one of them. Modell voted against expansion to Baltimore. I guess now we know why. But in regards to the Redskins owner, that was kind of a d*** move as well.
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,700 posts, read 41,718,665 times
Reputation: 41376
The NFL will be loyal......as long as there is a profit for them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
