• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Los Angelenos...No Football For You!

BoomerD

BoomerD

No Lifer
Or not yet anyway...

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-cole_nfl_downtown_la_stadium_concerns_100611

Despite significant political momentum throughout California for a downtown Los Angeles stadium that would house an NFL team, the league had a recent message for people involved with the project:

Right now, no thanks.

During a Sept. 6 meeting at the NFL offices in New York, commissioner Roger Goodell told Los Angeles Councilwoman Jan Perry and political aide Bernard Parks, Jr. that neither the league nor any team interested in moving there would agree to the business proposal set forth by Anschutz Entertainment Group, according to three sources with knowledge of the conversation. AEG is the private company that has offered to build and operate a retractable-roof stadium, which would be named Farmers Field, on the site that is currently part of the Los Angeles Convention Center.
Click to expand...
 
Eh, the league is just trying to get AEG and the City of Industry groups to bid against each other under the premise that only one of them will get a team. Once the NFL has pushed them for the best deals they can then two of the Chargers/Vikings/Jaguars/Buccaneers/Raiders will move and both groups will have been shafted.
 
i know the sheer number of people in that market is (and will always be) irresistible for the NFL, but the people there have shown time and again that they simply don't care that much about having a team. Even a winning team. There's just too much other stuff to do, people don't seem to have a passion for football like they do in other much smaller places where there's nothing else going on. I don't think they need to put a team in LA yet again only to have it fail and move again.
 
ari_gold.gif
 
Patranus said:
The Los Angeles Chargers of San Diego.

There you go, problem solved.
Click to expand...

Ooh, an even better idea! Do that with the Chargers, Vikings, Jaguars, Bucs, and Raiders. All at the same time. Los Angeles Chargers of San Diego, Los Angeles Vikings of Minnesota, Los Angeles Jaguars of Jacksonville, etc.

Keep each team in their original location BUT have each team play one home game per year in LA.

Hey, if one team is good, then five teams has to be 5x better, right?
 
so the UCLA Bruins don't count? 😀

Patranus said:
The Los Angeles Chargers of San Diego.

There you go, problem solved.
Click to expand...
anyone but the Raiders, please. Al Davis made his own bed, chasing dollars in moving to Oakland. Let's not bribe him to bring 'em back.
 
zinfamous said:
LA has already proven, twice, that they do not deserve a football team.
Click to expand...

It was more the fault of Al Davis and Georgia Frontiere.

Other than refusing to give gobs and gobs of public money to the Rams and Raiders, what did L.A. do wrong?

MotionMan
 
MotionMan said:
It was more the fault of Al Davis and Georgia Frontiere.

Other than refusing to give gobs and gobs of public money to the Rams and Raiders, what did L.A. do wrong?

MotionMan
Click to expand...

I thought attendance was generally low, and apathy for football in LA was like apathy for baseball in LA.
 
zinfamous said:
I thought attendance was generally low, and apathy for football in LA was like apathy for baseball in LA.
Click to expand...
low and apathetic is still lucrative in a greater metro area of 15M people.

The Dodgers drew 4M in a recent season before fans got sick and tired of Frank McCourt's broke-ness.

USC has no problem drawing for home games, and they shouldn't be as popular as an NFL team.

But the regional economy is still a major question mark and if ticket prices are even a little like the Jets/Giants, it'll be challenging to prevent black outs.
 
zinfamous said:
I thought attendance was generally low, and apathy for football in LA was like apathy for baseball in LA.
Click to expand...

The Rams were terrible 1990-94 and were in Anaheim, but never catered to the Orange County crowd, so it was expected that there attendance would be low. The Raiders were better during that time, but not by much. Plus they were boring (coached by Shell) and were in a terrible stadium.

Both teams could have fixed their own problems by spending money on a stadium, better marketing and a better team. Instead, they moved.

MotionMan
 
manly said:
USC has no problem drawing for home games, and they shouldn't be as popular as an NFL team.
Click to expand...

Local college football teams should always be better draws than local pro teams. The college team's fan base is built-in, can be better direct-marketed and is constantly growing with every graduating class. Once an alumni, always an alumni 😉

MotionMan
 
MotionMan said:
Local college football teams should always be better draws than local pro teams. The college team's fan base is built-in, can be better direct-marketed and is constantly growing with every graduating class. Once an alumni, always an alumni 😉

MotionMan
Click to expand...

Yeah, it seems to me that college teams will have much larger, wide-spread and dedicated fan bases than many pro teams.
 
zinfamous said:
Yeah, it seems to me that college teams will have much larger, wide-spread and dedicated fan bases than many pro teams.
Click to expand...
you could spin it the other way too. USC is a private school and their alumni base (if relatively wealthy) is a lot smaller than say massive public schools like tOSU or PSU. And how many graduates move out of the area, no longer able to attend home games?

USC's recent attendance has much to do with BCS title contention and with the vacuum left by the NFL. As hot as the NFL is right now, one pro team in L.A. should still do very well. The Lakers have their own storied history but they've also benefited greatly from the NFL's absence, having unchallenged fan support and attention.

You could even argue USC is L.A.'s professional team. 😀
 
manly said:
you could spin it the other way too. USC is a private school and their alumni base (if relatively wealthy) is a lot smaller than say massive public schools like tOSU or PSU. And how many graduates move out of the area, no longer able to attend home games?

USC's recent attendance has much to do with BCS title contention and with the vacuum left by the NFL. As hot as the NFL is right now, one pro team in L.A. should still do very well. The Lakers have their own storied history but they've also benefited greatly from the NFL's absence, having unchallenged fan support and attention.

You could even argue USC is L.A.'s professional team. 😀
Click to expand...

well, they were certainly better than a few NFL teams for a few of those recent years....


.....but that's easy when you cheat a lot. zing! :awe:
 
zinfamous said:
well, they were certainly better than a few NFL teams for a few of those recent years....


.....but that's easy when you cheat a lot. zing! :awe:
Click to expand...

Notice whenever a team wins, such as USC that you cited, or Auburn, Oregon, Ohio State, etc. violations are always uncovered? It is a ridiculous set of affairs. I would wager you could dig into any Division I program and find violations with minimal effortl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top