seahawk12thman":h4b4f5kr said:
RolandDeschain":h4b4f5kr said:
seahawk12thman":h4b4f5kr said:
You deserve better St Louis..
I'll argue this one all day long. Why does the city of St. Louis deserve better?
When the team won they were supported. Maybe you were too young but did you see the Kingdome in the 90's when Behring wanted to move the team?? Remember the blackouts?? The Seahawks were such a joke of a franchise California didn't even want us. The Rams had a great following before Kroenke flushed it down the toilet.
Kroenke didn't ruin the team. Frontiere did on her way out of SoCal. Rams then had a very brief glory reign with the GSOT and then they sucked again. Then end of that is not Kroenke's fault. I've supported the Rams through the winning and losing - so I've no sympanthy for StL fans who say, "Oh, but they've sucked so we don't support them."
Also, stick to facts: St. Louis put a clause in the lease they used to draw the Rams to St. Louis in the first place that clearly and legally stated that they were required to keep the stadium in the top 25% of stadiums. They refused to do this and per the lease the legal right of the Rams was to relocate if this was not met.
So, St. Louis does not deserve better. They should've honored the terms of the lease they used to draw in the Rams in 1994. Per Kroenke, the Rams initially only asked for the right to sue, but St. Louis wanted the right to relocate instead.
It's always very sad when good fans lose their team (I know) and I do have sympathy for good StL fans - especially families that have been going to the games.
But, StL got what they set up for themselves with that lease in 1994 that took my team away. Hard to say they deserve any different since they set it up.