So, in the St. Louis Rams last home game...

SpartanInNH wrote:I'll say it, since nobody else will, apparently: there should be an apostrophe after the "s" in "Rams." It's a possessive.

Get it right, Nigel, if you ever want to be an effer again.

Turtleneck wrote:Making your way in the world today takes everything you got.

Giant Moose wrote:I don't give a ram.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

SpartanInNH wrote:I'll say it, since nobody else will, apparently: there should be an apostrophe after the "s" in "Rams." It's a possessive.

Get it right, Nigel, if you ever want to be an effer again.

Wouldn't it just be multiple Ram? Their logo seems to think so.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:Rams have sweet unis. Will they keep their colors when the franchise is moved to LA?

Turtleneck wrote:Making your way in the world today takes everything you got.

That’s why many were shocked to read the 29-page document he sent this week to other NFL team owners outlining his reasons for wanting to move the St. Louis Rams to a new stadium in Los Angeles.

The document, obtained by The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, reads like a nasty divorce petition. Kroenke is not only repulsed by St. Louis, but he feels let down by St. Louis. The differences can’t be reconciled. There is no way this marriage can be saved. He never really was in love.

He dings the city’s slow economic growth. He criticizes it for a shrinking population.
“Compared to all other U.S. cities,” Kroenke wrote, “St. Louis is struggling.”

He insists St. Louis can’t support three pro sports teams – the Rams, the baseball Cardinals and hockey Blues. He thinks St. Louis’ push to keep the Rams with a new $1.1 billion riverside stadium is awful: “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.”