Can St. Louis Get a Super Bowl?

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

RamsJunkie

ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED!
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
2,073
As soon as they get the new one built I bet within 3 or 4 years they will get a superbowl
 

69superbowl

Rookie
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
234
I've talked and clickety-clicked til blue in the face over this issue - usually to crickets, as most people seemed to have given up. The Ram's of St. Louis should have had the offer long ago. However, no one in the organization ever publicly seemed the least bit interested in it. Could it be that she/he/they were using it as leverage (carrot and stick) to get the new and improved ED, or other stadia plans? How'd that work out? Now the place is considered too small and shitty for a bowl. They could have long ago added enough seating and a goddam scoreboard big enough to satisfy the NFL quota for attendance gorging (they're mostly out of towners anyways, right?) It's disgusting that there is apparently no one in the city of St. Louis, or maybe even the state, that screamed bloody murder about this issue. It's been almost two decades now. Believe me, where the new Frisco stadium is located can be cold as hell, windy and raining on any given Sunday in February. Something stinks about the lack of Ram SB hosting buzz for the past two decades. Maybe E. Stash wants one in London. Love this franchise to the grave, but sheesh, at least stick your chest out and act like you've been there before.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
If the city of St Louis wants a Super Bowl, they must be willing to fund some of the stadium costs.
 

HometownBoy

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
3,527
Name
Aaron
Not with the hellhole known as the Dome, they're gonna need to relocate the stadium, the Jones Dome is right next to the ugliest part of the city, not exactly what you wanna show when you're trying to impress the big dogs of the NFL.

I'd rather it be in the Savvis Center than the Dome.
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,950
Name
mojo
Is the EJD really that bad and outdated? I wouldn't know simply by watching games on the tube.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
Is the EJD really that bad and outdated? I wouldn't know simply by watching games on the tube.
To be a viable SB venue yeah,but St. Louis is a great place for a Super Bowl,.l
 

HometownBoy

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
3,527
Name
Aaron
Is the EJD really that bad and outdated? I wouldn't know simply by watching games on the tube.
It's pretty bad, it's in the worst part of downtown, the best spot would be where Busch is standing. Makes sense, given Saint Louis' infatuation with the Cardinals, but it didn't leave much prime real estate for the Jones Dome.
 

Lesson

Oh, really?
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
2,104
It's pretty bad, it's in the worst part of downtown, the best spot would be where Busch is standing. Makes sense, given Saint Louis' infatuation with the Cardinals, but it didn't leave much prime real estate for the Jones Dome.

The Dome's location isn't in a bad place. In fact, it's probably located in the 2nd best area out of the 3 professional arena sports locations in STL(with Busch being in the best location and Scottrade being in the worst). Also, I think it gets too much of a bad rep. Yes, it looks dark on TV(it isn't that dark at the game) and yes the audio quality may not sound the best, but with regards to the actual view of the game, seat space, etc., it's fine. The one main complaint that I would side with is entering the Dome, but I don't think there's much more that can be done about that.
 

69superbowl

Rookie
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
234
http://www.turfshowtimes.com/2010/5/28/1491651/could-the-super-bowl-come-to-st

This ^ 2010 article is about as feisty as the media discussion gets about a SB game in St. Louis gets. Five skinny paragraphs, a cheesy poll and a few reader comments. I'm still wondering why no one in the City put up much of a fuss about not even being considered? The old Stanford Stadium, cavernous though it was, had mostly wood bench seating with barely high school level concessions. The men's bathroom was closer to circa 19th century than the 21st in quality of the amenities. Indy and Detroit have less to offer the tourist SB fan that St. Louis. Why had no Ram, City, County or State official - in two decades - not given enough of a rip to object to this civic snub? Or provide an explanation why not. I've whooped this horse (once again) aplenty, so I'll stop now. I hope E. Stan gets his land, stadium and Super Bowl. The city deserves it.
 

moklerman

Warner-phile
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
2,185
http://www.turfshowtimes.com/2010/5/28/1491651/could-the-super-bowl-come-to-st

This ^ 2010 article is about as feisty as the media discussion gets about a SB game in St. Louis gets. Five skinny paragraphs, a cheesy poll and a few reader comments. I'm still wondering why no one in the City put up much of a fuss about not even being considered? The old Stanford Stadium, cavernous though it was, had mostly wood bench seating with barely high school level concessions. The men's bathroom was closer to circa 19th century than the 21st in quality of the amenities. Indy and Detroit have less to offer the tourist SB fan that St. Louis. Why had no Ram, City, County or State official - in two decades - not given enough of a rip to object to this civic snub? Or provide an explanation why not. I've whooped this horse (once again) aplenty, so I'll stop now. I hope E. Stan gets his land, stadium and Super Bowl. The city deserves it.
I've wondered the same thing. If a new stadium is what gets a city the Super Bowl, why didn't St. Louis ever get one? Not only did they have a new stadium in 1995 but a new team and new excitement for the NFL. It's centrally located and at the very least, as good a venue as Indianapolis. But nothing then and nothing anytime soon from the looks of things.
 

brokeu91

The super shrink
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
5,546
Name
Michael
If St. Louis builds another stadium downtown, then probably yes. But if they build a new stadium somewhere outside of downtown, like the Fenton site then the chances go down, because travelers won't want to commute there.

I will say this, I've been to Minnesota in late January, it is not pleasant at all. It pretty much sucks, bad and that is an understatement. The high temp that day very well might be below 0. If they can get a Superbowl, then St. Louis can too
 

Prime Time

PT
Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
20,922
Name
Peter
Chicago hope? Five cities NFL needs to give a Super Bowl
Vinnie Iyer @vinnieiyer---Email RSS

Congratulations to Minneapolis, which will host the Super Bowl for the second time in 2018. If you’re keeping score, after New York/New Jersey’s gig in 2014, now half of the NFL’s current cities have had the big game come to their metro areas.

That also leaves half the league having never hosted the league’s championship game and cash cow. Now that February weather during either the Super Bowl or the week leading up to it is less of a factor, here are the five cities that deserve one most:

1. Chicago. The Midwest’s most passionate sports town is our kind of town. New York, Los Angeles and Houston have all had their chances to host as most populous centers, and Chicago fits right in between. Mayor Rahm Emanuel needs to keep pushing commissioner Roger Goodell like he did last year. It feels right to crown a champ in such an All-American city.

There’s only one considerable factor working against the Windy City. Even after the revamping of Soldier Field and potential for seat expansion, its projected capacity of 62,871 give it the smallest in the league. Given the Super Bowl is more of a television event, anyway, that shouldn’t override the optimism. At the very least, Chicago should land the soon-to-be-mobile NFL draft as a consolation prize.

2. Denver. The Broncos have been in seven Super Bowls and played in the most recent one, so you would think as another proud franchise in a vibrant, albeit wintry city, they deserve the chance. Denver has pulled off plenty of AFC title games in January, and it’s Mile High time they got the ultimate championship. It will be interesting, after holding off from bidding on 2018, if city officials will re-enter the fray for ’19 or ’20. Sports Authority Field has no problem with capacity, seventh in the NFL at 76,125.

3. Seattle. For your average Seahawks home game, or for Major League Soccer's Sounders, for that matter, CenturyLink Field is one of America’s most exciting sports venues. We already know it’s the loudest. Now that Seattle fans have brought the noise all the way to a Super Bowl, it’s time to bring the Super Bowl to them.

The Kingdome wasn’t good enough to reign in one, but their shiny still new open-air home can hold up to 72,000. The weather in February is more pleasant than it would be in New York/New Jersey, too. Seattle is booming in many ways, and its sports commission should continue to be more vocal about its Super push.

4. St. Louis. It wouldn’t work in the Rams’ current home, the Edward Jones Dome. For one, it may not be their home for much longer, and as it is, it has the smallest capacity (66,000) of any indoor NFL venue. But the city should take a good hint from San Francisco/Santa Clara, Minneapolis and soon, Atlanta (again). If you build a new state of the art stadium, the NFL will come calling with its biggest revenue prize.

As the Greatest Show on Turf days have faded, St. Louis remains firmly baseball first and football a distant second, maybe, if hockey isn’t in between. It’s still a good traditional sports city with a community that would fully support a Super Bowl. It would be the biggest motivating factor to get the Rams a more permanent venue. It’s only been 19 years for the Ed, but it’s already outdated. They should soon follow the Falcons, who will be replacing the Georgia Dome after just 25 years in 2017.

5. Pittsburgh. As long it doesn’t involve the Gotham Knights and Bane, the Steel City needs to be in play. When you think Super Bowl era, the Steelers are the first team that come to mind with their six-ring history. So why shouldn’t Black and Gold headquarters get one chance to show off its hosting colors?

Pittsburgh hasn’t been known as a big sporting event city of late, save for the Penguins’ Stanley Cup run of five years ago. But the Pirates just ended a long playoff drought, and the Steelers are bound for a rebound. It’s time to turn Steel into Super soon.

The negatives for Heinz Field — its less than 70,000-seat capacity and its often shoddy natural grass surface — can be outweighed by rewarding the league’s most passionate fan base south of Green Bay.
 

A55VA6

Legend
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
8,208
I think with a new stadium, St. Louis could definitely get a Super Bowl.
 

den-the-coach

Fifty-four Forty or Fight
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
22,473
Name
Dennis
Retracable Roof in an area with added hotels & restaurants will bring the NFL to the Gateway City and a Super Bowl too...I hope it all works out because the area could use the jolt and the Rams could too...If they let Stan build it, they will come!