Rams Unlikely To Move To Los Angeles

In a lengthy piece that recounts the litany of recent failures to bring the NFL back to Los Angeles, Jim Thomas of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch makes a convincing argument that the St. Louis Rams are unlikely to return to their L.A. roots even though the Rams are up for sale. With the Rams and Raiders gone since 1995, there doesn’t appear to be any momentum toward bringing football back to the City of Angels at this point. “I recall saying at the time that if we lost the Rams, we would lose the Raiders,” agent Leigh Steinberg said. “And it would be 20 years, if ever, before we got an NFL team back in Southern California. And people said, ‘Oh no, no, you’re wrong. The NFL has to have a team back in the nation’s second-largest market. The television contract would demand it.’ . . . Here we are, and we’re not one step closer to having a team. In some ways, we’re further away.” Although television ratings for NFL games remains high in L.A., there’s still a lot of apathy as far as trying to obtain another NFL franchise. With strong opposition by taxpayers to help fund a new stadium, the NFL potentially returning to L.A. appears to be a dead issue. As far as the Rams’ potentially moving, the team’s lease provisions at Edward Jones Dome requires that that they maintain top-tier status among the NFL’s top eight stadiums. Otherwise, the Rams can move after the 2014 season. Citing league sources, Thomas reports that California developer Ed Roski hasn’t approached the Rams about buying the team.