Finally, a bit of good news for St. Louis Rams fans, emphasis on the St. Louis part. NFL Commissioner Rodger Goodell told Bob Costas that opening up shop in Los Angeles would require the league to add two more teams, bumping the total number of teams up to 34. You can see video of Goodell's interview at PFT.
Goodell told Costas that the NFL does not really want to move any of its teams. That doesn't mean they won't allow a team like the Rams or the Vikings to use vacant stadium projects in LA as leverage points, but uprooting a team is bad PR for an entity that goes to great lengths to project its brand.
Why two teams? Because adding just one would make for scheduling problems by pushing the league to 33 teams.
LA has two potential stadium projects, Farmers Field located downtown and a project led by Ed Roski in the City of Industry, about 20 minutes from downtown LA. Facilities aside, two teams in the LA market, the second largest media market in the country, is viable, especially given the league's popularity.
Altruistic statements about uprooting teams aside, expanding the league also means more money, lots more money, and the NFL has an owner-friendly new labor deal that frees up the league to start looking for more revenue streams.
As for Rams owner Stan Kroenke's bid for the Dodgers, the NFL would first have to put a team in LA for the cross ownership rules to be a problem for him. When that happens, he would have options. One thing to remember here is that he could transfer ownership of the team while holding onto the a Dodgers sports network worth billions because of the team's broadcasting rights. There isn't as straight of a line between the Dodgers and the Rams to LA as some have imagined.
Goodell's interview after the jump.
Breaking sports news video. MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL highlights and more.
0 recs | 34 comments
Goodell
He is on record to stay he wants the Rams to stay in STL, even football for that matter
L.J. Lawshee - February 3, 2012
Lip service means nothing! Next!
kevio3000 - February 3, 2012 via Android app
GREAT NEWS!
but with 34 teams, there would be uneven divisions. Wonder how they’d work it out.
Brick Top - February 3, 2012
divisii
TimRamFan - February 3, 2012 via mobile
damn phone...
I meant division realignment but accidentally entered. If there were 2 more West coast teams would the Rams move out of the NFC West?
TimRamFan - February 3, 2012 via mobile
But then at least 2 divisions would have 5 teams
how would you schedule the division games?
Brick Top - February 3, 2012
doesn't balance
I agree, cant see how to balance divisions out.
TimRamFan - February 3, 2012 via mobile
Divisions get first priority
Some teams simply get 8 division games. Making up for those is a simple question they’ll find a way to take years to not answer finally resulting in the need to add 2 more teams, then 4 more teams. 40 teams, 8 5-team divisions, resulting in….drum roll please…..18 game seasons.
dbcouver - February 3, 2012
Too many teams there
would kill the level of competition, drain talent pool
Brick Top - February 3, 2012
Its not like that hasn't already happened
Seagulls, Bucs, Jags, and Panthers. Oh and Texans and Browns
LARams1968 - February 3, 2012
the plural for division?
I did not know that!
dbcouver - February 3, 2012
I think Goodell is full of it!!!
First of all the Los Angeles Rams is one of the most iconic “brands” of all time and second of all what the hell good is saying teams can’t move because he wants to preserve the brand but that they can use LA as leverage? I don’t see how any team can get “leverage” if their current cities know They can’t move….this is stupid and makes no sense, I don’t buy it one bit.
LARams72 - February 3, 2012
Correction: The Los Angeles Rams were one of the most iconic brands.
They ceased to exist in 1995.
As for Goodel, I wouldn’t trust one thing he says.
However I do think it makes sense to discourage team movement because it does create negativity and can cause fans to holdback on their emotional investment in their respective teams. However if a team were to actually have financial struggles that their market couldn’t or wouldn’t fix the League wouldn’t stand in the way of a move.
I read into Goodels remarks a desire for the league to take a punitive approach to discourage a team moving strictly to take advantage of a bigger market. Nothing new. The Rams had to pay a fee to the League to move and I’m pretty sure any team moving back to LA for profit would be forced to pay up. There not going to try and block any move directly as long as they get their cut.
Sggladden - February 3, 2012
Nothing says they wouldn't replace The Rams in St Louis with an expansion team
But really, I think Goodell will let the Rams or Vikes move if they don’t get their stadiums. Or the Jags if their two fans don’t procreate soon
King Sam Rules! - February 3, 2012 via mobile
Money talks and BS walks!!!!
He will let them do whatever will make the owners more rich, he is a puppet with 32 hands up his a$$ pulling the strings…
LARams72 - February 3, 2012
LARam72, I'm totally LMAOF from your comment...
Do you think Goodell has room for two more expansion hands? I’ve heard he’s pretty anal.
Da Rams! - February 3, 2012
scheduling problems? that’s stupid!! Didn’t at one poin the nfl have 31 teams (odd numbers) Also, doesn’t a computer make up the schedule. How smart can it be?
nj_rams_fan - February 3, 2012
computers are pretty smart.
I’m actually a computer, though a cheap, lower-end model built for sports blogging.
Ryan Van Bibber - February 3, 2012
Alright Rams arent moving
Can the LA folks get over it?
RG31 - February 3, 2012 via mobile
Don't be so sure yet
Brick Top - February 3, 2012
Teams movimg ???-
Goodell didn’t say teams can’t move,but he dosn’t want them too.There for if a deal get’s worked out and Rams don’t get what they want they still can move.
he said 2 stadiums deals in LA but nfl has said 1 of them wasn’t a good deal for the NFL.That dosem.t count the Dodgers deal the Rams are bidding on now
specks5069@yahoo.com - February 3, 2012
I thought Al Davis already proved that teams can move if they want to.
LARams1968 - February 3, 2012
Expansion team in London ;-)
I wish
Jae-So - February 3, 2012
i said that an expansion team has to go to LA
Although 2 is a bit far out.
They should look to create a 2nd Franchise somewhere like Mexico City or in one of the more northern or north westerly states.
2 new teams in LA would be interesting, the rivalry in a couple years would be awesome.
At the end of the day, relocating = losing money for the NFL subsidising the move, 2 new teams means fuck loads of new income. Its a no brainer.
Infemous - February 3, 2012 via mobile
If they put an expansion team in LA and they are in the NFC west
The Rams are history to me
LARams1968 - February 3, 2012
Never thought of that
dbcouver - February 4, 2012
Does that really say Farmers Field on that dome?
lol
dbcouver - February 3, 2012
Do they mean farmer as in a guy that plays in the dirt
or do they mean farmer as in Farmer Juan saugages and stuff
LARams1968 - February 3, 2012
Farmers Insurance.
FailureDrill - February 4, 2012 via Android app
Dang there must be Farmers evrywhere
LARams1968 - February 4, 2012
there are
dbcouver - February 4, 2012
This dome project proposed by farmer John and his trusty tractor
dbcouver - February 4, 2012
So, Goodell is showing his hand
and it’s placing an expansion team in LA while adding another team, somewhere…Meanwhile, he’ll allow the LA area to exist without a team in order to allow current franchises to extort money from their locations for upgrades or new venues like St. Louis.
While it actually makes the most sense for LA to have an expansion team, the numbers will still be skewed to some point. If he adds two teams to the NFC, there will be 18 teams to 16 in the AFC. If he adds one to each, that will be 17 teams in each and that is an odd number, ooooo…There will still be scheduling problems (the same holds true with 34 teams as there would be for 33. At 33, five teams would play 10 divisional games as opposed to 8; At 34, 10 teams will play 10 divisional games as opposed to 8)…Unless, he allows a team to move without expansion. So, unless there’s another city that is NFL ready (as I don’t see LA ready for two new teams right out of the gate), including a new stadium, LA isn’t getting a team any time soon. This puts Koenke and the CVC at a stalemate.
Guitpik - February 4, 2012
Interesting point on the extortion theory, never thought of that but I will now.
I don’t think any stalemate will exist though, as a result of an odd number of teams or team placement whatsoever. Every league has spent a part of it’s history running with odd numbers of teams. It’s a scheduling hitch that can be fixed with the bye week, and some non divisional flexibility.
dbcouver - February 4, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Turf Show Times to post a comment.