The Rams should have to forfeit their championship in St. Louis as a penalty for moving back to L.A.

Vacated.

There are two points I'd like to make here:

1. I don't think major pro sports franchises should be allowed to move anymore.  It's no longer 1955 where the only way you can see Mickey Mantle is to go to a game at Yankee Stadium.

In 2016, you can be a fan of literally any team you choose and watch them play on a hand-held device from just about anywhere in the world.  The actual spot where franchises are located is becoming less and less important.  And I don't want to here about how "you need a big market to fill a stadium" blah blah blah.  There's one easy recipe that always draws fans to games, no matter the location: Have a good team.

Which brings me to my second point...

2. The Rams sold out 95 straight games in St. Louis from when they first moved there in 1995 through their peak Kurt Warner/Marshall Faulk years of the late 1990s/early 2000s.  Now they stink, things are bad, and they want out.  But that already happened once before, when they left Los Angeles in the first place.  And now they're going back there?  Are you kidding me?  They're like a spoiled little child who decides he doesn't like the toy he has and cries until he gets a different one, but then when he's given a new one he realizes the first one was better after all.

How is that OK?  Why not teach the Rams a lesson, NFL?  I don't think the league should've let them return in the first place, but since it is happening, there should at least be a penalty.  If I were the supreme leader/commander/all-powerful-being in charge of the NFL, I'd tell the Rams this:

"Oh, you don't like St. Louis anymore?  You want to move back to L.A.?  Fine.  But if St. Louis is no longer good enough for you, you don't get to have that Super Bowl XXXIV title in your record books.  That 23-16 victory on January 30, 2000 officially never happened."


Follow @LucidSportsFan