PDA

View Full Version : Los Angeles Saints????


CloakNNNdagger
06-30-2006, 01:46 PM
Benson, prior to Katrina was looking for a way out..........he may now have an additional 12.5 million reasons....................

From Profootball Talk (6/30/06):

Lost in an AP report regarding the $15 million that the State of Louisiana will save by cutting subsidy payments to the NFL's New Orleans Saints and the NBA's New Orleans Hornets is that the reduction of the Saints' annual chunk of charity change from $15 million to $2.5 million constitutes a potential breach of the ten-year agreement signed in 2001 to keep owner Tom Benson from moving his football team.

The real story here is that, once the State of Louisiana puts the Saints officially on notice of the $12.5 million haircut, all hell could break loose.

But there's no mention of that possibility in the AP account, which reads, frankly, like an adroitly-crafted effort to win public support for the notion that Louisiana is doing nothing wrong by shorting the Saints and that, if the Saints balk, they'll look like insensitive a-holes.

Jeff Duncan of the New Orleans Times-Picayune reports that the team has declined comment on whether it will accept the reduced payment. The AP version curiously mentions no effort of any kind to obtain a response from the team.

Though the folks who run the Superdome seem to think that the Saints can get the lost money from their business interruption insurance policy, our experience with insurance carriers is that they don't like to give money away unless they absolutely have to. (Even then, they still are inclined at times to try to find ways to avoid paying up.) In this case, if the insurance carrier concludes that the State of Louisiana owes the money to the team and that the reduced payment isn't justified by any fine print in the contract, there's no way that the insurance company will cough up a dime.

So then the question becomes whether the Saints will eat the $12.5 million loss, sue the State of Louisiana for the money, or declare a breach and move the team out of town.

That's the news item that the AP should be pimping. Even though the NFL has successfully managed to keep a muzzle (and perhaps a straitjacket) on Benson for most of calendar year 2006, getting stiffed on his money might be all that it takes to get him to affix a "For Sale" sign on the fleur-de-lis -- raking in a cool billion or so from an L.A. ownership group that would bring not only pro football back to L.A. but also, more importantly, Reggie Bush.

Here's the article that has generated the controversy (http://www.nola.com/sports/t-p/index.ssf?/base/sports-24/1151647260226310.xml&coll=1)

hollywood_texan
06-30-2006, 02:01 PM
I live in LA and really don't see how an NFL team is going to work if it is going to require an investment of a cool billion.

The weather is too nice, too much to do everyday all over the place, and where ever they put (Coliseum, Rose Bowl, or Anahiem) it is going to be horrible getting to and from the game. In my estimation most people will have to travel similar to how people from Austin travel to Houston for home games. It will be an all day affair.

I really don't see anyone getting that interested in it here in Hollywood.

LA is a big market and that doesn't mean people will buy it. Besides, whenever this team plays Oakland, it will basically be a neutral site or maybe worse.

One exception might be the Chargers since they are already in the Regional area. That might work.

BSL63087
06-30-2006, 02:11 PM
I like the idea. LA needs a team and unfortunately the Saints are probably not going to do very well anymore in NO.

Blake
06-30-2006, 02:20 PM
They should move the Saints team/players to LA, and then LA should just steal the USC Trojans name/colors to the NFL.

Double Barrel
06-30-2006, 02:20 PM
LA is a big market and that doesn't mean people will buy it.

You are failing to comprehend how bad the NFL wants a team in L.A., regardless if the people of L.A. want one or not. :hmmm:

If someone in L.A. had even a shred of a plan when the NFL was deciding on the 32nd franchise, Houston would have been out of luck. Fortunately, Mr. McNair had everything in place and infinite patience, and L.A. offered nothing. The NFL was forced to show it's hand and Houston won out in spite of it all. :yahoo:

It's a weird situation, and one that I still don't quite comprehend. But apparently market share is more important than hometown support, as far as the NFL is concerned.

As far as this story, I honestly think it's only a matter of time before the Saints move to L.A. Give it a couple of seasons, but NOLA simply won't be able to financially support an NFL team in this day and age.

hollywood_texan
06-30-2006, 02:32 PM
You are failing to comprehend how bad the NFL wants a team in L.A., regardless if the people of L.A. want one or not. :hmmm:

If someone in L.A. had even a shred of a plan when the NFL was deciding on the 32nd franchise, Houston would have been out of luck. Fortunately, Mr. McNair had everything in place and infinite patience, and L.A. offered nothing. The NFL was forced to show it's hand and Houston won out in spite of it all. :yahoo:

It's a weird situation, and one that I still don't quite comprehend. But apparently market share is more important than hometown support, as far as the NFL is concerned.

As far as this story, I honestly think it's only a matter of time before the Saints move to L.A. Give it a couple of seasons, but NOLA simply won't be able to financially support an NFL team in this day and age.

I do comprehend how bad they want it, they want it so badly they are not looking at the market place.

Totally correct on the Texans franchise. That was awesome. McNair had his act together, that is for sure.

I go to several sports bars in Hollywood on Sundays, and I don't get the feeling or hear anyone talking about how they want a team here. Everyone already has their team. I see a lot of Steelers, Bears, and Packers fans out in force. I am basically the only Texans fan in a huge sports bar/billards place. That Steelers game was embarrassing but they went easy on me.

This is my call, it isn't going to work unless they get really good, really fast. If they do their first 4 years like Texans, it will be ugly.

It's just been too long without an NFL team and no one really cares this except for some community leaders and business people, zero fan base for this. Example, no one brings up the point about the lost franchise to Houston, it isn't even discussed as a possible regret. No one cares.

TwinSisters
06-30-2006, 03:27 PM
That city has far more trouble then the Saints playing football. They are trying to build in a sinking swamp. If I was the NFL, I would give L.A. a new team with the Saints' slot. Promise New Orleans the 33rd and LA their 2nd, the 34th.

CloakNNNdagger
06-30-2006, 03:47 PM
Many of you may not have caught USA Today's report back in May, where Gov. Schwarzenegger met with the NFL insisting that TWO teams should be appropriated to L.A.............one in Anaheim and another in L.A. proper. I guess this would make it more appealing.........like having two big L.A. rival street gangs............and can you imagine what it would be like when the Raider's gang entered the city?:shoot:

gwallaia
06-30-2006, 03:48 PM
The NFL does not need a 33rd or 34th team. 32 is the right amount of teams. LA does not need a team. Either let the Saints stay in New Orleans are find another city that could support them.

Double Barrel
06-30-2006, 03:51 PM
I do comprehend how bad they want it, they want it so badly they are not looking at the market place.

Totally correct on the Texans franchise. That was awesome. McNair had his act together, that is for sure.

I go to several sports bars in Hollywood on Sundays, and I don't get the feeling or hear anyone talking about how they want a team here. Everyone already has their team. I see a lot of Steelers, Bears, and Packers fans out in force. I am basically the only Texans fan in a huge sports bar/billards place. That Steelers game was embarrassing but they went easy on me.

This is my call, it isn't going to work unless they get really good, really fast. If they do their first 4 years like Texans, it will be ugly.

It's just been too long without an NFL team and no one really cares this except for some community leaders and business people, zero fan base for this. Example, no one brings up the point about the lost franchise to Houston, it isn't even discussed as a possible regret. No one cares.

yep, good take. (Didn't mean to infer that you did not comprehend it. It was a bit of sarcasm on my part about the NFL's position on this. Sorry about that.)

Good point about the fate of a team if they struggle. Which is why now would be the best time to move the Saints, because Reggie is still young. He'd sell some seats just because of the USC connection.

What is L.A. going to do about a stadium, though?

TwinSisters
06-30-2006, 04:32 PM
What is L.A. going to do about a stadium, though?

USC.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-sp-coliseum14jun14,1,7752088,full.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage

TheOgre
06-30-2006, 04:55 PM
That Steelers game was embarrassing but they went easy on me.

It cannot be any worse that losing 24-6 at home despite holding the opposition to 47 yards.

CloakNNNdagger
06-30-2006, 05:49 PM
USC.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-sp-coliseum14jun14,1,7752088,full.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage

***************************
For those who could not enter the link above, here is another direct linkhttp://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-nfl-losangeles&prov=ap&type=lgns

TwinSisters
06-30-2006, 05:59 PM
Ahh dammit the LATIMES....

let me look for something... that yahoo story is missing a critical piece of information.

Because very few major football schools play their home games in off-campus public stadiums, and fewer are private institutions as prominent and wealthy as USC, analogous arrangements elsewhere in the country are difficult to find.

A Times comparison found USC's lease is more generous to the school than UCLA's lease at the Rose Bowl or the University of Miami's at the Orange Bowl.

Last year, UCLA's home attendance at the Pasadena stadium averaged 64,217 and the school paid 8% of gross ticket sales. The lease fee is not subject to a cap. UCLA also pays 8% of all television revenue, turns over 40% to 60% of game-day advertising revenue and pays for its own ushers and ticket-takers.

Miami pays 10% of gross ticket sales, with no cap. The university keeps its television revenue and pays the city 15% of its advertising revenue.

By comparison, USC keeps all TV revenue as long as it exceeds a 70,000 ticket-per-game cap. The Trojan program also keeps all game-day ad revenue. USC splits the cost of ushers and ticket-takers with the Coliseum.

USC receives no income from food and beverage sales at the Coliseum, while UCLA receives half of all net game-day concession income from the Rose Bowl, but that's not enough to make up for UCLA's other expenses.

Experts familiar with both arrangements estimate USC might have paid 20% to 30% more in rent and revenue splits at the Coliseum last year if it were subject to UCLA's lease terms.

Among other private universities playing in public facilities, the University of Pittsburgh is a subtenant of the NFL's Steelers at Heinz Field. Tulane University plays at the state-owned Louisiana Superdome in New Orleans for a flat-rate rent established in 1975. Neither school would disclose further details.

It is likely that the terms of USC's lease will become stiffer, no matter how the NFL talks turn out. The commission's new 49-year lease of the Coliseum and adjacent Sports Arena from the state requires a renegotiation of its rent, currently $80,000 a year. The rent could rise to as much as $2.5 million under a contract formula.

Any increase of more than 10% would, in turn, trigger a reopening of USC's lease for 2007 in which all terms would be on the table.

"If there's no NFL deal going forward," Israel says, "it will be much more expensive for them to play in the Coliseum."

CloakNNNdagger
06-30-2006, 07:35 PM
Ahh dammit the LATIMES....

let me look for something... that yahoo story is missing a critical piece of information.

A critical missing piece, indeed. Without state subsidy for USC and/or NFL subsidy for a new L.A. team owner, the Coliseum is not going to be "rebuilt" and will be more and more resembling its crumbling counterpart namesake in Greece.

srstex
06-30-2006, 08:07 PM
Arnold and the Commish want a team in LA but has anyone come up the cash to put a new team there? San Antonio wants a team and has a fair stadium that would probably sell out every game, but the NO owner thought the stadium was too small. Although it would still have more fans in the seats.
And everyone knows we Texans love our Football.

The San Antonio Saintstexanpride

texanmojo
06-30-2006, 08:33 PM
Texas does not need another NFL team. Another team will only water down support for the teams already here...especially the Texans. I would bet that Jerry Jones and McNair would do everything they can to prevent another team moving into their markets.

Besides...you need alot of big business to support an NFL franchise. I don't believe SA has enough to effectively support an NFL team.

sonof504
06-30-2006, 09:49 PM
You guys do know we have supported a team that never wins for over 40 years right? WE also have had record ticket sales DESPITE getting hit by a hurricane.

gwallaia
06-30-2006, 10:43 PM
You guys do know we have supported a team that never wins for over 40 years right? WE also have had record ticket sales DESPITE getting hit by a hurricane.

To stick with a team that long means true fans. I hope the Saints stay in New Orleans. The Saints need to be in New Orleans.

TwinSisters
07-01-2006, 04:47 AM
You guys do know we have supported a team that never wins for over 40 years right? WE also have had record ticket sales DESPITE getting hit by a hurricane.

You have record ticket sales at rock bottom prices, that doesn't take anything away from the folks that sit with the Saints though. In spite of what Lombardi says winning ain't everything, playing is.

I never saw the actual numbers, but I heard some chatter that the idea was to inflate the excitement from the cheap seats in hopes of selling the more important luxury boxes that are vacant. I believe you could get Saints season tickets at less then 10$ a game ( back when the draft was going down ).
---


Gwallaia. Mister Cougar. It would be a crime to remove the Saints from Louisiana. Not just for the city or state, but for the whole nation. If the Dutch can build dikes, then we should be able to figure out how to tame a swamp.

There is however nothing unamerican about taking a nap to think about it, to draw inspiration from dreams so to speak. That's what moving Reggie Bush to L.A. would be like. Letting New Orleans take a nap, not be put down forever like a lame horse.

mancunian
07-01-2006, 06:21 AM
Many of you may not have caught USA Today's report back in May, where Gov. Schwarzenegger met with the NFL insisting that TWO teams should be appropriated to L.A.............one in Anaheim and another in L.A. proper. I guess this would make it more appealing.........like having two big L.A. rival street gangs............and can you imagine what it would be like when the Raider's gang entered the city?:shoot:

But dont most of the fans in LA still follow the Raiders? I reckon it would be hard going for a new team(s) to compete against that.

CloakNNNdagger
07-01-2006, 11:32 AM
But dont most of the fans in LA still follow the Raiders? I reckon it would be hard going for a new team(s) to compete against that.


Here's an excellent article reviewing why no matter how much the NFL wants to ram it down our throats, L.A. hasn't in ages and will probably never in the future consistently support a professional football team again.:

As Tom Mack, (Hall of Fame guard for the Los Angeles Rams) put it, "People expect a winner. If you're not a winner, then they're not inclined to support your team. I think the Lakers and the Clippers [in the NBA] are the best examples of that."

True fair weather fans (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCL/is_4_33/ai_110312192)

TwinSisters
07-02-2006, 06:38 AM
I want to add something about the sheer numbers of the L.A. market compared to others, because it makes a difference when talking about percentages of people.

LA itself is around 3.7 million people and in reality around 12 million people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population

NO itself is around 700,000 ( maybe 1,000,000 with a little more time ).

So when you say 75% of the people in L.A. do not care about football, that 25% is still a large hefty number in comparison to other teams/markets.

If the NFL bottles up the New Orleans history and records like they did with Browns/Ravens, it would solve the hand me down stigma that Mack is complaining about. ( the NFL has actually made that a point... that they want the new LA franchise to be locally owned )
---

The Houston Texans have done a great job beating down all the Cowboy infestation in the Houston area, so I imagine some type of similiar strategy would work in LA for the Raider campers.

mapleleaf
07-02-2006, 09:04 AM
To stick with a team that long means true fans. I hope the Saints stay in New Orleans. The Saints need to be in New Orleans.
In my opinion I think they should'nt. Well the city of New Orleans is still spending alot of money on rebuilding efforts, and that big pocket of cash thats being spent could be used for a brand new stadium for the Saints. Also that cash of money could be spent on the Saints and Hornets organizations as well. I just think by 2008 both teams will announce they'll move, the Saints will move to LA and the Hornets will move surpisingly to St. Louis. Well as for the LA getting a team I just think that they should move the Saints, it's NFL's decision no the LA resident's (if ti was then we could've gotten Reggie Bush by now). I also don't think we sohuld have an expansion, because I've heard somewhere that if another team is added to the NFL, then the number of games will have to increase.

mapleleaf
07-02-2006, 09:05 AM
But dont most of the fans in LA still follow the Raiders?
Not all. One of my friends from LA follow the Chargers.

gwallaia
07-02-2006, 09:52 AM
In my opinion I think they should'nt. Well the city of New Orleans is still spending alot of money on rebuilding efforts, and that big pocket of cash thats being spent could be used for a brand new stadium for the Saints. Also that cash of money could be spent on the Saints and Hornets organizations as well. I just think by 2008 both teams will announce they'll move, the Saints will move to LA and the Hornets will move surpisingly to St. Louis. Well as for the LA getting a team I just think that they should move the Saints, it's NFL's decision no the LA resident's (if ti was then we could've gotten Reggie Bush by now). I also don't think we sohuld have an expansion, because I've heard somewhere that if another team is added to the NFL, then the number of games will have to increase.

I understand your point of view Mapleleaf. But from a fan's perspective, I know the pain and anger of having your team taken away from you. The Saints fans do not deserve this.

Now if the Jaguars or Titans moved to LA, I would rejoice in the misery of those "fans." :francis:

TwinSisters
07-02-2006, 10:12 AM
I also don't think we sohuld have an expansion, because I've heard somewhere that if another team is added to the NFL, then the number of games will have to increase.

Good point.

Not sure how that would even work out.

---

Okay that is not a problem. Just shorten the freakin pre-season.

cuppacoffee
07-02-2006, 10:58 PM
"..................
The Houston Texans have done a great job beating down all the Cowboy infestation in the Houston area, so I imagine some type of similiar strategy would work in LA for the Raider campers.


Great way to describe it. Kinda like cockroaches.:D


:coffee:

texanmojo
07-03-2006, 05:45 PM
Now if the Jaguars or Titans moved to LA, I would rejoice in the misery of those "fans." :francis:

I understand your feelings on the Titans. Why don't you like the Jags?:confused:

HOOK'EM
07-04-2006, 05:56 AM
Jags suck thats all there is too it.............so move the Chargers or Jags to LA, then the Saints could come to SA. That just has a good ring to it "San Antonio Saints" & that would give a few people a Texas NFC team worthy of following. Also if the Saints came to SA then maybe they could get the Cowpies to move out of dallas.:yahoo:

texanmojo
07-04-2006, 07:31 AM
Jags suck thats all there is too it.............so move the Chargers or Jags to LA, then the Saints could come to SA. That just has a good ring to it "San Antonio Saints" & that would give a few people a Texas NFC team worthy of following. Also if the Saints came to SA then maybe they could get the Cowpies to move out of dallas.:yahoo:

With the Oilers leaving Houston and becoming the Titans, I can understand the desire for them to move somewhere. I was just curious as to what gwallaia's comment about the Jags. If gwallaia thinks they just suck...that fine.

Moving the Saints to San Antonio is a bad idea. Why? Texas does not need another team to dilute the fan pool here. Let's play this out:

1.) The Saints move to SA based on promises made by the city to improve the Alamo Dome(more suites, seats, etc). In addition, the city agrees to a guaranteed sellout for all home games for the 1st 20 years of the lease.
2.) Initially, fans line up to get tickets. Lots of interest exists. The Saints continue their mediocre at best play in SA and fans begin to lose interest.
3.) Several years into the lease, the Saints still are not winning. Fans don't fill up the stadium. The city is on the hook for the bill.
4.) City begins to strain under the cost of having to pay for the extra seats. There was little wiggle room in the city budget for such expenses.
5.) The city defaults on making payments due to a lack of funds in the city account.
6.) The San Antonio Saints threaten to move to another city if not paid.
7.) Anaheim, still reeling over the loss of the MLB name 'Anaheim Angels', convinces the team to move where they will be renamed the 'Anaheim Angels'.

The bottom line is a move to SA would be a bad, bad, deal. As long as Tom Bensen is the owner, that team is not likely to amount to much. I don't want to see the fan base diluted here even more...we already have to compete with Dallas and Titan fans here. Why make it worse?

Brandon420tx
07-04-2006, 09:26 AM
That city has far more trouble then the Saints playing football. They are trying to build in a sinking swamp. If I was the NFL, I would give L.A. a new team with the Saints' slot. Promise New Orleans the 33rd and LA their 2nd, the 34th.
The thing is... people like how the NFL is all nice and organized... so if we add just 1 more brand spankin new team (Expansion)we would either have to remove one ... or add 7 more to make it pretty again. That would either create 5 team divisions or 5 divisions of 4 teams for both conferences.



Okay that is not a problem. Just shorten the freakin pre-season.

Are you INSANE?? Why shorten the Pre-Season? We would still have an exceptionally long Off-Season to contend with! I would be totally ok with extending the length of the regular season into early February.:ok: Think... Valentines game:love: :love: :mag:

TwinSisters
07-04-2006, 10:22 AM
No you got it all wrong.

The NFL moves the what are the Saints players to L.A. in 2007.
The Saints are shuddered.

Still 32 teams in 2007.

---

It would be a PR disaster to kill the Saints forever. I am not talking about just in New Orleans either. Katrina, whether you agree with it or not, hits a raw nerve in American culture. The wise old addage is that when you are dealing with stubborn mules or donkeys... a carrot on a stick can be quite effective.

The NFL can avoid complete disaster by waving a promise for a 2010 club ( when in fact you mean 2012 ). This works to their advantage in L.A. to also keep the USC Trojans in line. Because you are going to sell the NO re-stock ( expansion ) with a second L.A. team to keep the league at even numbers. USC would have to be a little more careful then they normally would if the NFL goes with Plan B.

Plan A: Split costs of L.A. stadium with USC
Plan B: Split costs of L.A. stadium with two NFL clubs.

So by the time 2010 comes around, you can roll out a 34 Team line-up.
---

Granted the easy fix seems to be that the Chargers just need to move into L.A., but that doesn't solve the New Orleans problem. They need a new stadium and the city is not stable enough to invest 1,000,000,000 dollars into a new one.
----

Shorten the pre-season fixes the 34 team problem. 3 preseason weeks 18 regular season weeks, with that extra week spent to clear up the schedule conflicts.

Currently we have 4 preseason weeks to 17 regular weeks.

2010 17 AFC teams with one L.A., 17 NFC teams with one L.A. ( Saints restored )

---

Los Angeles needs some football. Maybe that's why they are so screwed up as a culture?? They don't have enough football. :D

mapleleaf
07-04-2006, 12:57 PM
Los Angeles needs some football. Maybe that's why they are so screwed up as a culture?? They don't have enough football. :D
I don't see how football can improve culture? You might as well introduce American football to the Middle East so they can improve their culture.

TwinSisters
07-04-2006, 02:47 PM
I don't see how football can improve culture? You might as well introduce American football to the Middle East so they can improve their culture.

Well it's stated a little tongue in cheek with the :D, but since I am still waiting on my barBcue and it is the 4th of July... why not expand a bit on it?

( caveat lector: 'improve' and 'culture' is rather subjective and will be stated as such before I start. A fundamental truth, so to speak )

I personally don't care about Middle East culture on the 4th of July, unless they are pining to join the Union. Rumour is though, that this is far from becoming a majority vote in the foreseeable future.

While football is not exactly a perfect cure all for everything, it doesn't do that bad of a job in the right hands. Sorta like a brush. In the right hands, it can enrich your life like Grant Wood. Or in the wrong, sap out the very essence of your soul like a skeksis Bob Ross.

L.A. could use a little more Grant Wood and lot less Bob Ross. Grant said no to the Europeans and soccer. He instead embraced America. I would consider that a subjective improvement in culture. With football in L.A., I would have said no to the pansie roller blading rock climbing hippie soccer loving crumpet dunking Red Coats on Sunday. I would have square tables, balls with two distinct pointed sides, and foul dispostion to prove my point. Not round tables, round balls, ties, "tourneys", and one big group hug about how we are all on the same team over tea.

No, no thank you.

I will take football. My team and America over theirs and soccer. Independence, as it has been called in the past.

gwallaia
07-04-2006, 10:21 PM
With the Oilers leaving Houston and becoming the Titans, I can understand the desire for them to move somewhere. I was just curious as to what gwallaia's comment about the Jags. If gwallaia thinks they just suck...that fine.

I can safely tell you that there are about 500 other people on this board who share the same opinion on Jags fans as myself. :howdy:

texanmojo
07-06-2006, 08:24 AM
I can safely tell you that there are about 500 other people on this board who share the same opinion on Jags fans as myself. :howdy:

Fair enough. I don't particularly care for them either, I just want the Texans to kick their a** twice a season.

HomeBred_Texan
07-06-2006, 09:12 AM
I would be totally ok with extending the length of the regular season into early February.:ok: Think... Valentines game:love: :love: :mag:
You must be a divorce lawyer that needs business in March. LOL.

You know how many divorces there would be if the NFL held a game on Valentine's Day? It would put a whole new meaning into the phrase, Valentine's Day Massacre...

WiiBrawler
07-06-2006, 09:19 AM
Me and My friends were joking about the NFL and how LA lost its teams, well one of guys is from LA, almost everybody bashes for talking smack about UT, anyway he was saying that in 4 years LA will take the Houston Texans, and rename them, the USC trojans! Thats how bad we sucked in people's eye's,
Anyway, a team in LA from this division would be perfect, we'd get to be on Primetime once a year

Blu
07-06-2006, 11:30 AM
:hunter: Move the Jags to L.A.
Their fans don't even show up for important games.

gwallaia
07-06-2006, 12:46 PM
You must be a divorce lawyer that needs business in March. LOL.

You know how many divorces there would be if the NFL held a game on Valentine's Day? It would put a whole new meaning into the phrase, Valentine's Day Massacre...

A football game on Valentine's 'aint nothing. A game on Christmas Eve, now that's a tough sell to my wife.

Double Barrel
07-06-2006, 01:02 PM
Me and My friends were joking about the NFL and how LA lost its teams, well one of guys is from LA, almost everybody bashes for talking smack about UT, anyway he was saying that in 4 years LA will take the Houston Texans, and rename them, the USC trojans! Thats how bad we sucked in people's eye's,

You forgot to mention that your buddy was smoking crack at the time, too.

Ain't nobody taking the Texans away from us. :shoot: A 30 year lease pretty much guarantees that fact.

El Tejano
07-06-2006, 02:55 PM
In my estimation most people will have to travel similar to how people from Austin travel to Houston for home games. It will be an all day affair.

I really don't see anyone getting that interested in it here in Hollywood.


I was thinking old LA Ram fans would dive into it.

I live in Austin and you are right. Its like go watch the game and get on the road as soon as it is done to beat traffic and make it home at a decent hour.