“Bad blood” from relocation litigation could prevent another NFL team from landing in St. Louis

Tampa Bay Buccaneers v St Louis Rams
Getty Images

The fact that only one day of mediation resulted in a lump-sum settlement between St. Louis and the NFL means that an expansion team won’t be part of the negotiated package. Instead, the St. Louis entities get a lump-sum payment.

So will the conclusion of the courtroom hostilities in a mutually-acceptable manner lay the foundation for the NFL returning to St. Louis if/when (when) the league inevitably expands? At one source with knowledge of the dynamics predicted on Wednesday, the “bad blood” arising from the months of litigation that eventually forced the league to fork over nearly $800 million means that the NFL’s business in St. Louis has been concluded for a very long time, if not for good.

Some will say that the NFL will eventually need St. Louis if, as we recently explained, the league could begin a push toward 40 teams. Even if two teams land in London, that’s six domestic locations that will be needed, in time.

But here’s the reality. The future growth of the league will be driven not by dropping teams in specific cities but by broadcasting games to all of them, specifically to the ones in which sports betting is legal. Smaller markets with smaller stadium can support teams moving forward, because the “where” doesn’t matter. The revenue from the game location doesn’t matter. The TV and gambling money from each game will become the key.

What matters is more. More teams. More games. And the push by St. Louis for more from the league after the Rams left could mean that any eventual expansion plans will pass St. Louis by.

Thus, all that St. Louis will possibly ever get from the NFL, ever again, is the current $790 million settlement.

8 responses to ““Bad blood” from relocation litigation could prevent another NFL team from landing in St. Louis

  1. It’s ok, hopefully San Diego and Oakland will follow suit and hit the owners hard in the pocketbooks!

  2. So the NFL is gonna punish the citizens of St. Louis for the city’s objection (and sought legal remedy) to the Rams’ unwillingness to negotiate in good faith?

  3. Why would it be bad blood as opposed to common sense — two teams have failed and left that location already.

  4. Charleston South Carolina. Surrounded by Panthers and Falcons but it’s been named the #1 city in the world and has the loyal and affluent type population as well as the #1 ranked city (with the tourists) in the world.

  5. it’s time the NFL greed machine got slapped. St. Louis is still a very viable sports market and shouldn’t be penalized for standing up for its own interests

  6. jonathankrobinson424 says:
    November 24, 2021 at 8:13 pm
    St. Louis will never get another NFL team. That had two cracks at it.

    Um… Los Angeles lost three! (3) NFL teams: Chargers in 1961, Rams and Raiders in 1994. And Washington has lost god knows how many MLB teams, and yet the league did everything in its power to relocate the Expos there in 2005. Teams leave for all sorts of reasons, most of them having nothing to do with a market’s feasibility. STL is a sports town, period.

  7. If there’s any bad blood it should still come from St. Louis. Kroenke was negotiating in bad faith for a long time and the city was spending money having plans for a new stadium drafted, etc. The reason St. Louis won is because they deserved to win.

    If the NFL feels chippy about losing the lawsuit it’s their own fault for allowing Kroenke to screw over his team’s current city to seek drier pastures and build his $5 billion monument to his ego.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.