What I remember ...
The lease agreement the Rams had in St Louis required the team to play all of it's home games in St. Louis. The Rams were forced to back out of the agreement simply because it violated the lease. And yes, the Rams did play that one game in London during this timeframe but I think the Rams negotiated the terms of that game due in part to time constraints involved. (i.e. that London game was already in motion.) Part of the terms IIRC was that the Rams had to pay all of the Stadium workforce as if the game was played in St. :
Louis.
AlbaNY_Ram
