NFL Eyes Los Angeles for 2008

[Vinny]

NFL.com wire reports
AP NEWS
The Associated Press News Service

AMELIA ISLAND, Fla. (May 25, 2004) -- The National Football League would like to have a team back in Los Angeles by 2008, Commissioner Paul Tagliabue said.

Tagliabue said league owners were pushing for a decision on a stadium site by next spring, giving the NFL the time it needs to return a franchise to the country's second largest television market by 2008. "We're hopeful we can stick to a timeline that would have us make some decisions on a stadium project maybe a year from now in May of '05," he said.

The league, which has not had a team in the Los Angeles area since the Rams departed for St. Louis 10 years ago, has been working with groups representing sites at Carson, the Coliseum and the Rose Bowl in Pasadena. "Everyone has been working at this," Tagliabue said. "At some point decisions need to be made."

League owners have made no decision about expanding to a 33rd team or moving a troubled franchise to Los Angeles when and if they come to an agreement on a stadium there.

Indianapolis owner Jim Irsay, who is involved in discussions with community and state leaders about improvements in the Colts' situation, said he was confident of working out a new deal to remain in Indiana. "This is clearly on the frontburner," he said. "More and more we're trying to get people behind this thing. "I'm 44 years old, I'm not signing until I'm 74 years ... unless I know we have a strong, long-term plan," Irsay said.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7359847

[rittenhouserobz]

I was reading about this. I would hate to see a 33rd team. I would hose up the divisions, and I also think LA is a terrible football town. Did the Rams start in LA or were they a transplant team? Remember the Oilers and Browns did not move, because the fans were no longer interested. The owners were greedy. In LA's case I remember watching some games on tv and seeing the stadium empty. What if this franchise starts up and moves in 10 years also? I think LA has had enough chances to succeed in the NFL market.

[edo783]

Second largest TV market, but some of the worst fans for supporting a football team. Very much a front runner type of group.

[TheOgre]

The Rams were in Cleveland before LA.

http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nfl.../clevrams.html

[V Man]

Originally Posted by edo783

Second largest TV market, but some of the worst fans for supporting a football team. Very much a front runner type of group.

Agreed, if they aren't winning then the Stars don't want to come to the game. Look at the other LA teams, if they aren't winning no one shows up.

[J-Man]

LA is a pretty fair weather market to say the least. The ideal thing is to move an existing franchise there...but I don't see that happening. NO is the only candidate I can think of and I don't believe they will let the Saints slip away.

Frankly, for a team to suceed in LA they will need a Steinbrenner type guy as the owner...otherwise the city will eat the front office alive. The thing is (as we see everyday with the Texans) you can't just go out and buy the best talent and be immediately successful anymore with the salary cap. I think that the fan base in Houston is incredibly patient with the the Texans, which is a sign of our realistic attitude. If the Texans were the LA'ans the fans would already be calling for Carr to be sent to Europe and Dom would have been tarred and feathered.

[Nawzer]

The market is too lucrative for the league to not have a team in L.A.

[Blake]

SI's Take on L.A.

Funny stuff.

[Playmaker]

Seem to me the NFL needs LA more then LA needs the NFL. And I believe the NFL won't ever host a Super Bowl on a city that doesn't have a franchise, so the Saints will be tough one to move since NO is a favorite SB site.

[Mistril48]

I love the idea (not mine) of putting two new teams in LA, one in the AFC and one in the NFC. Pay for the new stadium with two sets of PSLs. Each team in each conference (17 teams) plays every other team in the conference once (16 games). You eliminate the easy schedules and unfair situations where a team with a better record doesn't get in the playoffs over a division winner has less wins.

Do divisions make any sense when you only play 6 out of 16 games against divisional opponents?

Play Pre-season games against the other conference to add interest.

The Superbowl would really be conference against conference.

Competition would really force the 2 L.A. teams to develop strong franchises in the L. A. market (don't move a weak owner there).

[ledzeppelin229]

Did anyone else catch this:

Why can't the NFL be satisfied with the 31 cities that currently are perfectly happy to host franchises? Why this inferiority complex?

Am I missing something or did a team fall off the map? And I was kind of hoping he would mention Houston in there somewhere when he was talking about Baltimore and Cleveland considering we ARE the last city to get a team.

[Fiddy]

Originally Posted by __V__

New York has two teams. I presume that is what is meant. "cities".

Why dont they take one of the teams form NY and put them in LA??? I understand why they have 2 teams in NY, it is the biggest market and both teams have a lot of tradition, but if the NFL really wants a team in LA, why not???

I understand that there is more $$$ when they move a team from a smaller market to a bigger market then when they move a team from about the same market, but still, if Tags is desperate.

[Blake]

I think it would be cool if the Cards, or the Chargers moved to LA.

[BuffSoldier]

Originally Posted by Fiddy

Why dont they take one of the teams form NY and put them in LA??? I understand why they have 2 teams in NY, it is the biggest market and both teams have a lot of tradition, but if the NFL really wants a team in LA, why not???

I understand that there is more $$$ when they move a team from a smaller market to a bigger market then when they move a team from about the same market, but still, if Tags is desperate.

In one of the New York teams really set in New Jersey? I thought they were at least.

But about the 2 LA teams , I would rather have one frachise in LA and one somewhere else, because Id like an even # so we can keep afc and nfc equal.

[edo783]

Add two teams and expand the schedule to 18 games.

[ledzeppelin229]

Ah..thats right Vinny. I dont know why I didn't think of it, but that makes sense.

The thing with the LA fans is they will want to win immediately and eternally. And they won't accept anything else for any length of time, so if they received an expansion team I would be surprised if it lasted too long unless it became successful very quickly. Just look at the Lakers-Clippers. Lakers get all the hype while the only Clippers fans in LA are usually the ones out to spite the Lakers. I cant wait until the day the Lakers annually suck so I can see the reaction of all the Hollywood "fans".

[WWJD]

In this day of pro sports every team, every fan wants to win now. Look no further than this board! I've seen everything from 15-1 predicted to 11-5.

The time table to win is so narrow. I wouldn't fault LA fans if that's the way they felt. IF they had a team that is.

I think they will get a team only because it seems to be something the NFL wants done.

It does look a bit odd for the 2nd largest city not to have a pro football team.

[profan]

I could see the raiders or 49'ers looking to move to LA. Both are in need of new stadiums. Dallas is not to fired up to pay for a new stadium. How about the L.A. Cowboys? If Jerry does not get his way in Big D. this will eventually come up as a negotiating ploy. If Cleveland lost a team, anything can happen. If L.A. get's an expansion team, you will see many empty seats the when the record is at or below .500.

[HardCoreTxn]

Originally Posted by __V__

New York has two teams. I presume that is what is meant. "cities".

I thought NY had 3 teams?
They should send the Bills to Canada!!

[rittenhouserobz]

Originally Posted by DC_ROCK

I think it would be cool if the Cards, or the Chargers moved to LA.

Both of those teams have new stadiums I thought.