What If There Were No Baltimore Ravens?
When attendance and stadium issues forced the 1994 Los Angeles Rams to contemplate relocating their franchise, one of the first options considered was a move to Baltimore. Baltimore had lost the Colts ten years earlier in 1984 and was hungry for professional football. Ultimately, the Rams decided on moving to St. Louis, another city that had lost their pro football franchise when the Cardinals had moved to Phoenix years earlier.
What would’ve been different had the Rams decided Baltimore was the place for them? Art Modell had moved his Cleveland Browns to Baltimore after having stadium issues in Cleveland, but if the Rams were already there then that move wouldn’t have happened. Would the Browns have moved to St. Louis if that were an option? If not and the Browns had stayed in Cleveland then there would have been no need for a replacement franchise awarded to Cleveland. The Houston Texans franchise was justified because the NFL likes to add teams in pairs to keep the number of teams even. If there was no team added to Cleveland because the Browns had not moved, then would Houston have been given a team? If so, then with Cleveland not getting a replacement franchise who would’ve gotten the second team awarded to balance out the addition of Houston? Maybe St. Louis would’ve gotten an expansion franchise, or maybe it would’ve gone to Los Angeles.
Its always interesting to see how one move or circumstance affects everything around it. The NFL could look a lot different if the Rams had chosen Baltimore over St. Louis.