And how exactly does that "neatly solve the problem"? If you mean the St. Louis fans still get another NFL team (the pitiful Raiders), but lose their second team in 30 years, that would be the furthest thing from "neat".
You've misinterpreted my post. I'm talking from the NFLs perspective, not the fans. My point is that the NFL probably views long term market considerations over short term fan feelings. Two ways I see that the problem is solved "neatly" from the NFLs point of view.
One, Rams stay and Carson is built. Two teams in LA, 49ers serving and probably eventually improving the unhealthy Oakland market. St Louis remains an NFL market and not lost. SD remains a viable market within 113 miles. (Yes I know many California fans are outraged about the notion SD and LA are located on the same planet. I think the NFL will expect you to deal with it.)
Two, Inglewood gets built, SD moves in. Raiders move to STL. Two teams in LA, same stuff with SD and Oakland, and the NFL will expect us in STL to be appreciative of the fact we still have NFL football.
Those are the only two scenarios where the NFL doesn't lose a market in THE LONG TERM, not the short term. I expect them to try to get as close to this as possible. What as fans want is most likely going to be discussed as an afterthought.
As far as I'm concerned, of course the Rams leaving is unfair and it sucks. That's why I've been bitching about it since the kick off of the whole process.