I think it's important to remember what was actually said when the Rams decided to move.
[
www.forbes.com]
Quote
"St. Louis lags, and will continue to lag, far behind in the economic drivers that are necessary for sustained success of an NFL franchise."
"Any NFL Club that signs on to this proposal in St. Louis will be well on the road to financial ruin, and the League will be harmed."
"Even the most cursory analysis of the St. Louis financial proposal makes no economic sense for an NFL team."
And in bold print, the application says, "No NFL Club Would Be Interested In The … New St. Louis Stadium."
So, in terms of St. Louis itself, the Rams relocation application simply said it lags in economic drivers. Everything else was about the very questionable proposal. Which was ludicrous.
It deserved to be dismissed with contempt. The Inglewood mayor worked with and accommodated Kroenke. St. Louis battled him and ultimately proposed that Kroenke should pay for more than half of a new stadium and then give control of the venue to St. Louis. It was absurd.
I really don't see where St. Louis thinks it's got a leg to stand on in this situation. The Rams were not legally required to stay, they did not break the terms of the lease so they weren't contractually allowed to stay and they didn't have a history of fulfilling promises to the team or to the NFL. They offered a terrible deal that was outmatched by someone else. Now, they're crying crocodile tears because they mismanaged the situation, presented a lame duck offer and spent millions to come up with what they did come up with.