The only way to “make it right” would be to tear it down and start over. If the Rams want to do that on their own dime, fine, but, as a taxpayer, I have no interest in helping them pay for brand spanking new facility every 20 or 25 years. The “investment” is simply not worth the “return”, especially if they’ll only be playing there a dozen times a year! (We already paid their ransom to get them here - they’re making more than enough now to pay their own way.)

If you only go NFL games because of the stadium you need to stay home. What we need is a team that provides excitement. The EJ dome is fine. There are a few improvements that could be made in the choice of music and such but the structure and contents are O.K. with me. Look at Green Bay’s stadium, it has a lot to be desired. It is surviving just fine. Look at the stadium the Chicago Cubs plays in. It’s not the venue of the game, it’s the quality time spent at the game.

Professional sports teams should be like any other business. They should either own their own building or look for something to rent that satisfies them. Taxpayers should never hold the burden of suppling a team with a home. I like everyone else wants to keep that Rams here in town. We can’t let a sports team hold taxpayers hostage until they get what they want with threats to leave.

If the Rams, or any team for that matter are winners or at least good contenders every year, They will pack the dome to the roof. It’s the team, not the building.

I could not care less if a team that pays an alcoholic murderer millions of dollars to entertain people leaves this town. Good riddance.

ExRTD makes an excellent point. If the Rams want a new stadium, let them finance it. Neither the City nor the County should participate. If the Rams don’t like the idea, let’s wish them well in LA.

I really enjoy the Rams, but the Dome makes it difficult to sit through a game.

It looks like a huge electronic football game. Far to clean and crisp for football. Build a new stadium - Outdoors - No roof.

I can appreciate revenue sources, but stop the constant commercial announcements and music. I was at a game when they announced commercials while an opponent was being treated for 10 minutes for a serious injury - I was embarrassed for the city.

I don’t know what the right answer is here. Obviously, keeping the Rams in St. Louis is very important to the overall value of the city. However, building a new stadium just to make good on a 30 year lease signed for the dome doesn’t make any sense. If you built a new stadium to make good at year 20, does that mean at year 30, when the lease is up, they can pick up and leave anyway? I would hope if they do decide to build a new stadium, they at least draw up a new lease and get rid of that ignorant requirement that it needs to be in the top 25% of all stadiums in the NFL.

And in response to Tom’s comment. Lambeau Field recently completed a $295 million redevelopment and is now one of the premier stadiums in the NFL. Not really a good example.

Hey DSpud, Tom’s other team supporting his theory was the Cubs and Wrigley field. The Cubs have a $400 million dollar overhaul in the works…. it’s just up in the air due to the team and stadium being for sale at the time.

As a dedicated Rams fan that has not missed a single home game (pre and regular season) I have a very defined and unique list of what is wrong with the Dome:

-Overall lack of unity with team identity. Color schemes in and out clash with the Rams. No unique Rams decor in or out of the dome. Example, the bathrooms are painted yellow and purple. Seriously?

-Poor concessions. Very little variety. Indepepndent stands a thrown in a clumsy claustrophobic manner throughout the Dome. Up until these supposed new renovations they didn’t even have debit card readers. The food they do offer is as ususal over priced and tasteless.

-Bad employees. The staff manning concessions are slow and seemingly untrained. Ushers are cold and unhelpful. As an example, my family has Cardinals season tickets as well. We’ve consistently made friends with the ushers for our areas. The same guy has been working our section of the Dome forever and I couldn’t tell you his name.

-Seemingly unfixable design flaws. To get in the Dome you must go in through one of a few “choke” points and go up escalators or stairs. This is poor design as it creates awkward bottlenecks instead of allowing fans a free stroll into the concourse. The concourses themselves are already small and cramped with the aforementioned independent vendor carts thrown in to make the situation more uncomfortable. Finally, the building was designed at possible the worst time for a Dome - right before the consistent use of windows and retractable roofs. I assume the accoustics fit in this category since they’ve never been able to work out proper sound.

-They’ve been using the same annoying entertainment for years. The Dancing Elvis video routine. The “rockstar” rigging with lights and smoke enterance. The use of smoke and fireworks in a Dome in the first place. No creativity at all put into the atmosphere beyond trying to bring in a few horrible live “jam” bands to play in the cramped concourses last year. I don’t want to see 50 year olds playing Proud Mary in an area theats horribly crowded.

And my list doesn’t even include how I’d fix it. But heres the question. Will the Rams listen to complaints like these or try their own methods of fixing the place up? I’ll say this, some of those fixes are easy with regard to decor and staff and concession. The built in flaws won’t be cheap or easy, which I think is why everyone talks about a new stadium. I’d imagine there has to be some sort of engineering fix to a few of those issues that would cost less than a new billion dollar stadium. I’m one of the rare persons that has no problem with public funding for sports venues. Like it or not, having professional franchises is part of what gives a city credibility in America these days. So I think a team and its city should be financially tied to one another not to mention they ususally direct the public revenue for the project from the money made in taxes off the stadium itself. And our city has the some of the highest taxes for its sports franchises. But if we can’t work out a fix or worse yet a new stadium, why not another route? When we were mulling the issue over for Busch, wasn’t there an opportunity for the team to jump the river? The decision was made that the team needs to be in downtown St Louis thanks to history, but I don’t think the Rams have that need. Other teams actually have there stadiums outside the city. Orchard Park New York, Irving Texas, Meadowlands New Jersey. Why couldn’t we get Illinois and East St Louis to throw money in for a retractable roof waterfront Stadium designed so that one side shows the panorama of the river and downtown St Louis? Couldn’t that work? They wanted the Cardinals, why wouldn’t they want an NFL team?

Bye Bye Rams.

This is insanity. I like football, but there is no way that the state and/or city should be spending this kind of money on a football team. If they want to move and let somebody else foot the outrageous bill, bon voyage. I’m happy to watch the best game available on TV each weekend. At least there won’t be anymore blackouts. People need to sober up.