Punching Bag Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 The Rams' relationship with the city of St. Louis seems to be getting more awkward by the day. A few hours after the NFL announced that the Rams would be playing in London next year, the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission (CVC) threw some cold water on those plans. According to the CVC, if the Rams play in London in 2016, that would violate the terms of the lease that the team has to use the Edward Jones Dome for home games. The Rams are on a year-to year lease and have until Jan. 28, 2016 to inform us if they will play the 2016 season at the Edward Jones Dome," the CVC said in a statement. "We have had no formal discussions with the Rams about their 2016 intentions or a London game in 2016, but if they do play in the Dome in 2016, the terms of the lease remain in effect and provides that all Rams NFL home games (other than preseason) will be played at the facilities." http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25389806/rams-in-london-violates-dome-lease-makes-potential-la-move-interesting Well couldn;t any team which does not own stadium arrange for entity to lease stadium from add a clause to lease agreement which makes sense; they could insert a play or pay clause where the entity needs to be be paid for normal use as well as any loss from advertising, parking, concessions, etc they lost. I guess it does not amaze me that the NFL who needs to approve all contracts did not take this clause into consideration before deciding to make Rams home team in London. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That's No Moon Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25389806/rams-in-london-violates-dome-lease-makes-potential-la-move-interesting Well couldn;t any team which does not own stadium arrange for entity to lease stadium from add a clause to lease agreement which makes sense; they could insert a play or pay clause where the entity needs to be be paid for normal use as well as any loss from advertising, parking, concessions, etc they lost. I guess it does not amaze me that the NFL who needs to approve all contracts did not take this clause into consideration before deciding to make Rams home team in London. They did. What it should scream out loud to you is that the Rams are moving to LA in 2016. San Diego will get saved at the last minute and the Raiders will go to LA as well. One AFC and one NFC team. Everyone is happy, except Raider fans in Oakland and Ram fans in St. Louis but lets be honest, the league doesn't give a **** about them anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Horseheads Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 They did. What it should scream out loud to you is that the Rams are moving to LA in 2016. San Diego will get saved at the last minute and the Raiders will go to LA as well. One AFC and one NFC team. Everyone is happy, except Raider fans in Oakland and Ram fans in St. Louis but lets be honest, the league doesn't give a **** about them anyway. I believe Rams are in LA is a done deal. St Louis is a GREAT baseball town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 The only one to me that had the balls, the money, the total lack of loyalty, the shrewd business savvy, and the wherewithal to take his team to LA was Kronke or whatever his name is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 I believe Rams are in LA is a done deal. St Louis is a GREAT baseball town. Let's hope so...this saga in STL has gone on long enough and the Rams are the team that should be in LA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts