Skip to content

Rams say playing in London will be great for St. Louis

070323_wembley_stadium_hmed_7a.standard AP

The Rams have issued a statement responding to the contention by the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission that the team’s lease with the Edward Jones Dome requires all of their home games to be played there. And the Rams’ response focuses not on the language of the lease, but on the team’s belief that playing a game a year in London will be good exposure for St. Louis.

“We think that playing in London is great for the Rams and great for St. Louis,” the Rams’ statement said. “We are in talks with the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission, which is also the region’s chief marketing group, about how to make the most of this opportunity. As the CVC said today, this will ‘elevate an awareness of St. Louis on the global stage.’ We look forward to having amicable and meaningful dialogue with the CVC on many issues and believe those conversations should remain between the parties.”

Missing from that statement is any denial from the Rams of the Convention and Visitors Commission’s contention that the lease requires them to play all of their regular-season home games at the Edward Jones Dome.

Also missing is the Rams’ reasoning for the claim that the Rams playing a game a year in London will be great for the city. Have other cities seen any tangible benefit from having their professional football teams play a game in London? Did Chicago and Tampa see an influx in tourists from England in the last few months after the Bears and Buccaneers met in London in October?

As the Rams prepare for that “amicable and meaningful dialogue,” they’ll need to be ready to explain how, exactly, the team leaving town for one overseas “home” game is great for St. Louis.

Permalink 50 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, St. Louis Rams, Top Stories
50 Responses to “Rams say playing in London will be great for St. Louis”
  1. i10east says: Jan 28, 2012 7:31 AM

    A year later…..The Rams say playing in LA will be great for LA

  2. 1captain1 says: Jan 28, 2012 7:33 AM

    Just put an expansion team over in London and Los Angeles already.

    There’s plenty of room for expansion to a 34 team league.

    Then make the schedule to where London ONLY plays east coast teams and set a road schedule state side that has 4 games each trip that provides state side facilities for the London team.

    PROBLEM SOLVED and money is made and no one is abandoning ship for LA.

  3. tmillhone says: Jan 28, 2012 7:34 AM

    It’ll be great for the people of the city, because it’s one less week they’ll be able to see the Rams live.

  4. rammerray says: Jan 28, 2012 7:35 AM

    RAMS fan here. This is one big mess. Now the conspiracy theorists out there are having a field day with this thinking that this is part of the “master plan” to move the team to L.A. I’ll be glad when all this nonsense is over with!

  5. conseannery says: Jan 28, 2012 7:39 AM

    Rams say playing in London will be great for St. Louis

    I have to agree with the Rams’ brass on this one. Playing in London will spare the good citizens of St. Louis from having to watch that awful team play in person.

  6. p8rtfan says: Jan 28, 2012 7:43 AM

    That’s like saying “Cutting my foot off will be good for my health.”

  7. Topher says: Jan 28, 2012 7:48 AM

    Greedy Bastids.

    Tell that to the extra waitresses and bartenders and all the other people employed on game day!

  8. nflfollower says: Jan 28, 2012 7:52 AM

    Please hold them to the contract!! Like most NFL fans, I hate London games and would love to see goodell’s plan foiled like this.

  9. purplengold says: Jan 28, 2012 7:55 AM

    Still more hot air from the Rams, they just need to pay attention to the contract. The owners of the Edward Jones Dome are in control of any discussions regarding a change to the lease.

  10. deepbacksidedig says: Jan 28, 2012 7:55 AM

    Not buying.
    Tell that to the folks who run restaurants, bars, and vendors who sell souvenirs.

    For the latter, I can think of a nice foam finger variation that could catch on.

  11. mauijim3 says: Jan 28, 2012 7:55 AM

    Yeah, but will the game be blacked out in St Louis?

  12. cheapseater says: Jan 28, 2012 7:57 AM

    Give this contract to the Jags. Khan wants a piece of that pie.

  13. bh83 says: Jan 28, 2012 8:03 AM

    This is the worst argument ever. If a foreign team came over here to play, A. I’m not going to do extensive research on their city and purchase goods or even visit it and B. I just wouldnt care. People have enough to worry about at home with work, family, finances etc…I hardly think the good people of London are going to welcome St Louis to the European Union because of one mediocre 3 hour football game played.

  14. stl45fan says: Jan 28, 2012 8:08 AM

    If the Rams home game in London doesn’t sell out, will it be BLACKED OUT in St. Louis?

  15. motownroaren says: Jan 28, 2012 8:13 AM

    Rams management sound like politicians that want you to believe that their idea makes sense. Saying that this is good for the local economy and that it could bring business to the region…how dumb do they think that their fan base and the community of St. Louis is? That comment is just incredible.

  16. seanmmartin says: Jan 28, 2012 8:15 AM

    They should be in other countries. You don’t wanna play in London, how about Australia, Japan, South Africa, or Brazil?

  17. patriotsdefense says: Jan 28, 2012 8:16 AM

    Come 2014, it will be the Los Angeles Rams and the St. Louis Jaguars.

    I know it. You know it. They know it.

  18. waltdawg says: Jan 28, 2012 8:19 AM

    Why are we giving this much attention to this team?

  19. LoCoSu@%s says: Jan 28, 2012 8:23 AM

    The Rams management must really think their fans are stupid.
    The only reason they are playing in London is for lots of $$s. Be honest and say it.
    Insulting the intelligence of your fans is … well…. pathetic.

  20. 1buckeye76 says: Jan 28, 2012 8:27 AM

    The whole idea of playing NFL football in Europe is idiotic. If they want to watch the games, they can buy the Sunday Ticket like the rest of us. Does the English Premiere League come play games in the US? What percentage of NFL players are European?

  21. TheWizard says: Jan 28, 2012 8:35 AM

    This whole London thing is crap.

    Send a MLB game instead, they have 162 of those.

  22. ridingwithnohandlebars says: Jan 28, 2012 8:36 AM

    Rams say playing in Las Angeles will be great for St. Louis.

  23. pftcensorssuck says: Jan 28, 2012 8:36 AM

    Have other cities seen any tangible benefit from having their professional football teams play a game in London? Did Chicago and Tampa see an influx in tourists from England in the last few months after the Bears and Buccaneers met in London in October?

    ———————————————————
    Yeah ….. um….. if I live in London, and watching an NFL team makes me want to vsit the U.S., I somehow think that I’m not going to hop on an airplane and fly to a city whose claim to fame is a big-a$$ arch and a stadium that looks like it’s still under construction ……..

    not when there’s New York, Boston, or San Fran instead.

    So good luck with that logic, Goodell.

  24. TheWizard says: Jan 28, 2012 8:37 AM

    Why are we giving this much attention to this team?

    Cause next time it might be your team losing a home game.

    With only 8 of them, it’s a big deal. I have no interest in seeing the Patriots play overseas and now they’re going for a second time.

  25. basexc9 says: Jan 28, 2012 9:02 AM

    Looks like Fisher chose the right messed up team, haha

  26. purplengold says: Jan 28, 2012 9:02 AM

    Rams: “They’re not buying it, sir.”

    Goodell: “Silence!”

  27. realitypolice says: Jan 28, 2012 9:08 AM

    St. Louis has a downtown stadium. That means lots of sports bars and restaurants that are a helluva lot busier on game day Sundays than
    non-game day Sundays.

    Believe me, I’ve been to downtown St. Louis both when there are Rams/Cardinals games, and when there aren’t. There is a huge difference.

    What about the bar and restaurant owners and their employees? What about the hotels where the visiting team or out of town fans would typically stay?

    Is the NFL cutting them a check?

    And how does having this game “raise awareness” of St. Louis? I’m pretty sure most people have heard of St. Louis, and having their football team play a game in another country isn’t going to tell people much more about the city than that.

  28. jackntorres says: Jan 28, 2012 9:11 AM

    It’s the NATIONAL football league not the international football league. St Louis deserves 8 home games and London deserves 0 this is ridiculous. They can have a preseason game, but the real fans deserve the real games. It’s a shame the nfl puts dollars before fans. In fact, if they keep it up they’re will be a lot less of those dollars to put before the fans.

  29. themonster49 says: Jan 28, 2012 9:52 AM

    I’ve got an idea what Kroenke will say.

    “Either let me make some money in London, or I’ll make the money in a move to L.A.”

  30. prior0knowledge says: Jan 28, 2012 9:56 AM

    This is such a stupid idea. There will NEVER be a viable cross continent league. You can’t have London play only East coast teams. Not only will that cause a competitive imbalance, it will foul up the rest of the schedule because West coast teams will have to play with each other more. The only way that a cross continent league will work is if supersonic travel returns, and that will never happen because of the fuel costs and the faster flight time is drown in the security time for air travel.

    So a cross continent league will occur when gasoline drops below a dollar again and the bad guys no longer want to blow up airplanes. Don’t hold your breath.

    The economic advantage to the NFL is also suspect. They hope to generate gobs of revenue from Europe by keeping the NFL popular in Europe and earning money there, possibly by a re-introduction of NFL Europe. That’s unlikely to happen until their version of “futbol” loses its popularity… right.

    So all this is stupid.

  31. kingjoe1 says: Jan 28, 2012 9:57 AM

    It is good to see that the xenophobic atmosphere of the State of the Union address has carried over to NFL fans.

    The NFL like any organization needs to continue to look for new revenue streams. It is roughly 500 miles more than the distance for east coast to west coast games. This is maybe an extra hour fight, what is the big deal? Other than the fact that most of you appear to be scared or hate foreign countries, like our wonderful president.

    One last thing, the Rams in St Louis are in the bottom 5 of % of capacity for their stadium. The avg about 55k per game, that sucks. The team should leave because there is a lack of interest.

  32. jessethegreat says: Jan 28, 2012 9:59 AM

    Breach of contract. I only wonder why the localities don’t throw “poison pill” deals out that essentially forces the team to stay where the citizens likely built them a stadium even thru ownership changes.

    Ex, The Green Bay Packers will receive 4 first round picks in the event that the New York Jets trade him to Minnesota, Steve Hutchinson’s deal is fully guaranteed if he plays more than 3 home games a year in Seattle.

    I believe it would be pretty easy for the municipality to craft a deal where “The Minnesota Vikings will reimburse the city of Minneapolis in the amount of $50,000,000 for every home game during the life of the 30 year lease that is played not in Minneapolis.”

  33. micronin127 says: Jan 28, 2012 10:26 AM

    The league is obviously paying the Rams something for giving up a home game in each of the next three seasons.

    So long as the league brings its checkbook and compensates the stadium authority too… this might all still work out.

    Do they really want to watch the Rams that badly or do they just want to be compensated for lost revenue?

  34. ironworker329 says: Jan 28, 2012 10:29 AM

    What are you talking about? You want MORE! Lawyers involved?
    Baaaaad idea!

  35. bing253 says: Jan 28, 2012 10:31 AM

    Also if the NFL wants to expand it’s brand in Europe why don’t they become partners with FIFA? That way NFL merchandise could be sold in stadiums all over the world.
    The Yankees have a deal with Manchester United that allows merchandise to be sold in their stadium and vice versa. This deal is beneficial for both teams bringing in money and helping expand their brands. The Yankees have never had to play in Europe to help expand their brand and they might be the most recognized sports franchise in the world.

  36. samoanjungle says: Jan 28, 2012 10:32 AM

    It sounds like they are going to pretend this is a done deal that they are going to play in London. Using words like “will” instead of “would”. That has to be a smack in the face to the commission. Sort of like if a parent tells a kid they can’t go to a party and the kid says “I’m going to have fun at this party”.

  37. i10east says: Jan 28, 2012 10:39 AM

    It’s a shame when a fan (Jaguars) can’t cordially defend their team and city without the post getting deleted. Yeah, we are ‘definitely’ gonna lose the Rams to STL! *wink wink*

  38. jackntorres says: Jan 28, 2012 10:46 AM

    jessethegreat says:
    Jan 28, 2012 9:59 AM
    Breach of contract. I only wonder why the localities don’t throw “poison pill” deals out that essentially forces the team to stay where the citizens likely built them a stadium even thru ownership changes.

    Ex, The Green Bay Packers will receive 4 first round picks in the event that the New York Jets trade him to Minnesota, Steve Hutchinson’s deal is fully guaranteed if he plays more than 3 home games a year in Seattle.

    I believe it would be pretty easy for the municipality to craft a deal where “The Minnesota Vikings will reimburse the city of Minneapolis in the amount of $50,000,000 for every home game during the life of the 30 year lease that is played not in Minneapolis.”
    ——
    I think the problem comes in with your poison pill when the Metrodome collapses and they must play somewhere else. Or when the Saints had to play 2006 on the road due to you know what. But I agree barring acts of god these teams should be strapped to the tables. The cities invest too much, and depend too much on 8 Sundays a year for their local economies.

  39. jrspike says: Jan 28, 2012 10:56 AM

    Hog Wash, London here we come. Jacksonville is St. Louis only hope. This
    Stan can’t wait to leave. As the song goes “his bags are packed and ready to go, I leaving on a jet plane. “. But unlike the song he is ready to & won’t be back
    again.

  40. marcinhouston says: Jan 28, 2012 10:58 AM

    Just like Pujols playing in LA is great for St. Louis, and a catasrophic overtopping of the Mississippi river levees within the city limits would be great for St. Louis.

  41. biist says: Jan 28, 2012 11:17 AM

    It would seem the NFL is stealing tax revenue from cities playing in UK.

    If the NFL had to pay for its venues/stadiums instead of the tax payers, NFL would be out of business.

    I understand for NFL to grow it needs more eyeballs and more seats but it cannot use taxpayer revenue to do that. It will have to risk its own capital. Perhaps restart NFL-Europe.
    But leave the poor tax-payer alone.

  42. patsfiend says: Jan 28, 2012 12:21 PM

    Without even reading this article, just looking at the “Rams Say Playing in London Will Be Great for St. Louis”…. you know it’s a bunch of baloney. Spin-baloney.

    Yeah, it’s GREAT for St. Louis, just like the Bills playing in Toronto is GREAT for Buffalo.

    The writing is on the wall, Rams fans. Ridiculous.

  43. geetee52 says: Jan 28, 2012 12:39 PM

    31 owners want this.

    The majority of 70 million fans don’t want this.

    Everyone should know basic NFL math by now.

    31 > 70,000,000

  44. randomjim says: Jan 28, 2012 12:50 PM

    1captain1 says:
    Jan 28, 2012 7:33 AM
    Just put an expansion team over in London and Los Angeles already.

    There’s plenty of room for expansion to a 34 team league.

    Then make the schedule to where London ONLY plays east coast teams and set a road schedule state side that has 4 games each trip that provides state side facilities for the London team.

    PROBLEM SOLVED and money is made and no one is abandoning ship for LA.
    ===================================

    I’m disappointed I can only give this one thumbs down.

  45. thepatriotsaregay says: Jan 28, 2012 1:03 PM

    I can’t wait to see those classic yellow and bule uniforms back in So Cal. The Rams current uniforms are hideous and a slap in the fact to the originals.

  46. richardmb52 says: Jan 28, 2012 1:24 PM

    So does this mean Rams season ticket holders pay less for season tickets since there is one less home game ?

  47. richardmb52 says: Jan 28, 2012 1:26 PM

    Or do season ticket holders get free airline tickets to London

  48. jackybadass says: Jan 28, 2012 1:54 PM

    the further away from st louis the better! pats 19 point favorite!

  49. jessethegreat says: Jan 28, 2012 2:33 PM

    jacknntorres,

    I think the problem comes in with your poison pill when the Metrodome collapses and they must play somewhere else. Or when the Saints had to play 2006 on the road due to you know what. But I agree barring acts of god these teams should be strapped to the tables. The cities invest too much, and depend too much on 8 Sundays a year for their local economies.
    —————————————————————-
    I was thinking the same thing… there could be a simple solution though; Change the wording to “plays any home games out of x state” or something like that. They could even inclued a “catastrophy clause” that allows the team to play in another location if a natural disaster happens.

    I believe that if the states/local municipalities are paying 100s of millions of dollars towards the development and construction of stadiums, they owe it to their tax payers to have attorneys draft agreements that are in the state’s best interests.

  50. docboss says: Jan 28, 2012 6:00 PM

    Rams tell season ticket holders that they will be reimbursed for London game. I guess they could have applied the money to playoff games. Yikes. If I get my money back for the London game, I promise I will not spend it at Wal-Mart. Can you think of anyone (Stan) who in the span of two weeks has gone from a public relation high (Fisher), to a lower than low (London)?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!