quettefan Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 With the prospects of St. Louis potentially relocating to L.A., I've been thinking about how the Cleveland "rule" might apply to name changes and have the following suggestions: L.A. becomes the Rams (again) St. Louis (IF they ever get another team) become the Cardinals (again) Arizona becomes the Arizona Phoenix highly doubtful that the Bidwell's would consider changing the name (if I have my history right, they're the oldest franchise in the league? initially they were the Chicago Cardinals and founding members of the NFL?)..but if the Cleveland rule is to be honored, shouldn't Arizona adopt a new name? ...oh: not what you were expecting when you saw the title? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Interesting thoughts. Just a heads up, this probably belongs in ATL (Around the League) since it's not really Redskins related. May want to move it before the Mods "help you". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 With the prospects of St. Louis potentially relocating to L.A., I've been thinking about how the Cleveland "rule" might apply to name changes and have the following suggestions: L.A. becomes the Rams (again) St. Louis (IF they ever get another team) become the Cardinals (again) Arizona becomes the Arizona Phoenix highly doubtful that the Bidwell's would consider changing the name (if I have my history right, they're the oldest franchise in the league? initially they were the Chicago Cardinals and founding members of the NFL?)..but if the Cleveland rule is to be honored, shouldn't Arizona adopt a new name? ...oh: not what you were expecting when you saw the title? I think that's a cool idea. I like re-establishing the legacy and history that some cities and franchises had. Having a Cardinals franchise in St. Louis would be pretty cool. But, does that mean that the Cardinals team that has been playing in Arizona for a quarter of a century would forfeit all of its history when they become the Coyotes/Phoenix/Cactus? Or would they keep the past 25 years and the St. Louis Cardinals would pick up where they left off (whichever year they moved to Phoenix)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 St. Louis Jaguars doesn't sound bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 St. Louis Jaguars doesn't sound bad. I think the Jaguars would much rather have the Cardinal's history, than the Jaguars'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Id feel bad for the cardinals in that scenario because Arizona Phoenix is awful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roanoker Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 It will probably be the LA Chargers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazel-Ra Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 So would season ticket holders for San Diego have first dibs for renewal if they wished to make the drive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 LA Coyotes St Louis Swisher-Sweets Arizona Dry Heat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quettefan Posted December 22, 2015 Author Share Posted December 22, 2015 Interesting thoughts. Just a heads up, this probably belongs in ATL (Around the League) since it's not really Redskins related. May want to move it before the Mods "help you". thanks goskins...it was my mistake and that's *exactly* what happened (within 30 minutes the mod's had gently moved my baby to the right crib) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quettefan Posted December 22, 2015 Author Share Posted December 22, 2015 I think that's a cool idea. I like re-establishing the legacy and history that some cities and franchises had. Havg a Cardinals franchise in St. Louis would be pretty cool. But, does that mean that the Cardinals team that has been playing in Arizona for a quarter of a century would forfeit all of its history when they become the Coyotes/Phoenix/Cactus? Or would they keep the past 25 years and the St. Louis Cardinals would pick up where they left off (whichever year they moved to Phoenix)? Unfortunately I'm sketchy on how the league handles stats for teams that move. Hoping someone can help clarify. The way I think it works is as follows (using examples): - when Baltimore moved to Indianapolis and remained the Colts, then all of Johnny Unitas' Baltimore Colts records went to Indianapolis, too BUT - when Cleveland lost the Browns to Baltimore, and they became the Ravens, I don't think that the Browns stats went to Baltimore IMHO, stats/records should remain with the City, and not follow the team. As an extreme example, say that "frozen tundra" Packers move to sunny Miami...Green Bay climate is nothing nothing like Florida so the stats from the old team really aren't indicative of their new location or fan base. St. Louis Jaguars doesn't sound bad. I thought that the Cleveland rule mandated that the team moniker would never again leave the City's fanbase (so, the "Browns" would always stay with Cleveland, "Jaguars" always with Jacksonville, etc.) If I'm wrong, someone please correct me (and should probably shut down this thread, too) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 I don't think there's a standard...I think it's something that they do on a case-by-case basis. When Cleveland left for Baltimore, it was determined that there was far too much history with that city so they would essentially have a couple-year break and then the expansion Browns would continue history. The new Ravens (the old Browns team) started with a blank record book. In other cases, the Rams and Cardinals simply moved cities but the franchise stayed in tact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurgundyMalaise Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 Id feel bad for the cardinals in that scenario because Arizona Phoenix is awful How bout . . . Phoenix Phoenixes (PHX on ya tv) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 Jaguars should move to Mexico City. Work the logo a bit to give it a Aztec feel and it will fit right in. Have them play 7 of their home games in LA. Leave the cardinals where they are. Threaten to send the raiders to Alaska if they keep complaining. Explain to San Diego that the choice is between where they are and Jacksonville. Apologize to the Rams for leaving them in a hell hole like St Louis. Problems solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirtyfive2seven Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 St. Louis is a hell hole. Everything about that place pretty much sucks and I've been there quite a bit for work. Yuck. Not to mention aren't they having some underground fire at a nuclear waste site? That place may not exist too much longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor 36 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 The LA Gang-Bangers sounds more appropriate to me. Since the Chargers officially applied for the venue change, let them have it, though Southern California really doesn't deserve an NFL franchise in LA or SD. They only care about college football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 St. Louis is a hell hole. Everything about that place pretty much sucks and I've been there quite a bit for work. Yuck. Not to mention aren't they having some underground fire at a nuclear waste site? That place may not exist too much longer. That landfill fire has been burning underground since 2010. The illegally dumped nuclear waste is roughly 1,200 feet away with no barrier. The EPA says the fire is contained while the locals claim the fire is moving. So St Louis could be the next Pripyat, Ukraine. This parallels the 1962-infinity mine fire in Centralia, PA. That fire isn't contained and is still moving underground. So what do they do? Do they move the Rams to LA or leave the trash team in the trash city? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.