U.S. football fans urge CFL to play in St. Louis

The Canadian Football League (CFL) forum
Fran
Site Admin
Posts: 1204
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:49 am
Location: Southampton, PA
Contact:

U.S. football fans urge CFL to play in St. Louis

Post by Fran » Mon Feb 22, 2016 12:54 am

Won't happen but nice some fans want the CFL in St. Louis

http://www.thestar.com/sports/football/ ... louis.html

Then there are the people that just want to continue watching football in their hometown. A small contingent of heartbroken fans has turned (in varying degrees of seriousness) to the CFL with the hope that they could still have a team to cheer on at the now empty Edward Jones Dome, where the Rams played for the last 20 years.

There have been emails of varying lengths sent to the league’s head office that detail St. Louis’ love of all things Canadian, like hockey, lacrosse and Tim Horton’s. St. Louis fans have tweeted their frustration with Rams owner Stan Kroenke and at the same time have said that there is a football market left empty at the moment, waiting to be tapped.

User avatar
Sam Hill
Site Admin
Posts: 4142
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:29 am
Location: Denver, CO

Post by Sam Hill » Mon Feb 22, 2016 3:40 am

Maybe someone should start a league with teams in St. Louis, San Antonio, San Diego, Orlando, New York City, Portland, Birmingham and Sacramento. You know, all the usual suspects and cities so starved for professional football.
Old enough to remember when bashing the ABA was fun.

FootbalFan
Site Admin
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 7:32 pm

Post by FootbalFan » Wed Mar 23, 2016 1:44 pm

Well, there's the MLFB trying to get moving, but this project seems to be moving on a slower pace than it advertised. This is meant to be a spring league and there's no schedule yet.

Some ex-CFL players went to this league, but I doubt it will work anyway. To me, it's just another WFL, USFL, NFLE or UFL. FXFL is sounder than that project.

I mean, it would be great to see CFL football played in US cities, like St.Louis, but it's obvious that the second this team would be a business success, NFL would be back with some team just not to let the bad weed grow. It's a bit like the Stallions' story. Now, if it happened, I'd be hopefull to see more CFL footbal in US. Rather a fairy wish than a realistic hope, though.
Last edited by FootbalFan on Wed Mar 23, 2016 1:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
preeths
Site Admin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 11:34 pm
Contact:

Post by preeths » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:10 pm

MLF is a very long way from a USFL or NFLE, even a UFL or WFL. Right now it's just an idea with almost no financing. I'd argue that even the worst of those four, probably the WFL, had at least some owners.

FootbalFan
Site Admin
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 7:32 pm

Post by FootbalFan » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:14 pm

[quote=""preeths""]MLF is a very long way from a USFL or NFLE, even a UFL or WFL. Right now it's just an idea with almost no financing. I'd argue that even the worst of those four, probably the WFL, had at least some owners.[/quote]

Agreed.

I didn't want to show disrespect... ;)

FootbalFan
Site Admin
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 7:32 pm

Post by FootbalFan » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:17 pm


LordBy2014
Site Admin
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:54 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Post by LordBy2014 » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:44 pm

while we all know the CFL would probably never venture down south again for expansion . . . IF they did, I think they should keep the teams near the US-Canadian border; St. Louis would be too far south in my opinion . . .

I make that statement not having an idea of where to place a US-CFL team other than possibly Hartford, CT or maybe Boise, ID . . .

User avatar
Sam Hill
Site Admin
Posts: 4142
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:29 am
Location: Denver, CO

Post by Sam Hill » Fri Mar 25, 2016 2:14 am

[quote=""preeths""]MLF is a very long way from a USFL or NFLE, even a UFL or WFL. Right now it's just an idea with almost no financing. I'd argue that even the worst of those four, probably the WFL, had at least some owners.[/quote]

You think the WFL was the worst of those?

Tough call.

The WFL had John Bassett (legit owner), but also the 17 owners of the Detroit Wheels, the non-owners of the Florida Blazers and Tom Origer. Players didn't get paid, games got cancelled and some teams drew flies. Games were on a crappy network.

The UFL had Paul Pelosi and personal guarantees that players would get paid, but they didn't, games got cancelled and some teams drew flies. Games were on a crappy network.

There was a lot of drama in the WFL that played out in a very public way. There was a lot of drama in the UFL that few people heard about because few people heard about the UFL.

And the CFL ain't putting a team in St. Louis or anywhere else in America. St. Louisians are going to have to deal.
Old enough to remember when bashing the ABA was fun.

User avatar
preeths
Site Admin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 11:34 pm
Contact:

Post by preeths » Fri Mar 25, 2016 1:05 pm

I gave the edge to the WFL because the UFL had the cash to meet its modest goals originally. Granted it was a much smaller enterprise and even at that fizzled over its final two mini-seasons, neither of which was completed. The WFL had one great owner, a few decent ones and a handful of dreamers who had little hope of stumbling through a complete season without running out of money. You are right, tough call. Wouldn't blame anyone for picking the UFL.

ca
Site Admin
Posts: 275
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 11:30 pm

a new usfl ...

Post by ca » Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:09 pm

could work here but dont look for the mega tv deal as for cfl expansion windsor imo makes perfect sense

Post Reply

Return to “CFL”