05-17-2016, 02:31 PM
(04-23-2016, 08:42 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: The Rams started out in Las Angeles and moved to St. Louis after the Cardinals left for Arizona.
Then, the Raiders left Oakland for Las Angeles then a couple of years later left there and back to Oakland.
Now, the Rams leave St. Louis to head back to Las Angeles.
It don't make sense why Las Angeles gets yet another shot at a franchise when history has shown the city can not or will not support a team. I know it's a huge city with a lot of money floating around, but it's always been huge with a lot of money, I just don't see how the city will support another football team.
Maybe this time will be different though, only time will tell.
By the way, do I have the teams right. For some reason, it just doesn't seem like these teams are correct.
Sorry I'm late to the party, but I just read this thread today, and I wanted to 1) affirm that the teams are correct and 2) suggest that the reason they don't feel right is that your timline is off. The Raiders moved to Los Angeles (1982) and back to Oakland (1994, more than just a couple of years later) before the Rams moved to St. Louis (1996).
