RedAlice
Well-known member
kidhawk":1lou5z51 said:RedAlice":1lou5z51 said:The Rams have always had a bye after their London games and an East coast game the week before - making it one really long road trip and then a bye. This year was Detroit - London - home for bye.
This really sucks if it is true. It's one thing for the Rams to give up a home game, but even worse to give up a home divisional game.
Last year, it was determined during the season that the Rams would host in London whichever team in the NFC East finished in the same position as them - which is how the Giants ended up with the game. So, they probably have already decided which team.
It's also rumored Rams play Niners in Shanghai in 2018, another divisional game. Rams have a 3 year International game contract until the new stadium is built.
For some reason, I thought the Giants had to play a game in London because they won a super bowl bid? I know I read somewhere that it was part of the new bidding rules to get a super bowl in your home stadium, to play in an international series within 5 years. Maybe it's just a "happy coincidence"? Or maybe it didn't kick in until after the NY Super Bowl?
It was announced during the season last year that whichever team in the NFC East finished in the same position as the Rams would play in London.
At the time, the team was not known yet. It came down to the final game between the Giants and the Eagles - whichever team lost would be going to London. Rams fans knew this, I remember paying attention to the game - even the announcers mentioned it as well. Giants lost.
No idea how the SB bid fits into that - If the Giants had beat the Eagles they could not have played the Rams in London as they would not have been on the Rams schedule this year - the Eagles would've.
It also has to fit into the actual schedule - and the "home" teams are the ones who make the contracts. The "away" teams are the ones who seem to change. Rams and Jax have contracts for multiple years.