Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

NFL Eyes Los Angeles for 2008

Vinny

Vinny

shiny happy fan
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.
Click to expand...
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7359847
 
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.
 
Second largest TV market, but some of the worst fans for supporting a football team. Very much a front runner type of group.
 
edo783 said:
Second largest TV market, but some of the worst fans for supporting a football team. Very much a front runner type of group.
Click to expand...

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. :bag:
 
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.
 
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.
 
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).
 
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
__V__ said:
New York has two teams. I presume that is what is meant. "cities". ;)
Click to expand...
:idea: 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.
 
Fiddy said:
:idea: 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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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".
 
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.
 
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.
 
Personally I'd like to see them ship the Rams back to LA. Then they could put the Cardinals back in St Louis where they belong and Make the Colts go back to Baltimore where THEY belong. The Ravens could go fill the void left in Indy and the people in Arizona could go back to watching college football like they'd apparently rather do anyway.

The movement of franchises has really been disconcerting to me. I hate it and I've hated it since the day the Colts set all of this (the modern version, I know franchises moved in the past) in motion.

Baltimore without the Colts is just plain wrong. LA without the Rams is wrong. St Louis without the Cardinals may not be wrong (After all who really wants Bidwell in their town) but it sure isn't right. Cleveland without the Browns was wrong and so was Oakland without the Raiders.

The only good thing to come out of franchise free agency is that Nashville has Bud. I'd have waited ten years (instead of 6) if that's what it took to replace Bud Adams with Bob McNair.

They finally have things back in order (somewhat) and the conferences/divisions make as much sense as they're realistically going to. What are they going to do now? Start messing it all up again probably.
 
cool thakx for the info. But I have a question will they make two more new team? That way it'll be even. Where should the other NLF team be Texans fan?
 
777texans said:
cool thakx for the info. But I have a question will they make two more new team? That way it'll be even. Where should the other NLF team be Texans fan?
Click to expand...


That's a good question actually

Hypothetical Question for Everyone:

Assuming that LA got an expansion team AND the NFL decided to keep the conferences even by adding one more expansion team for balance then...

If it was all up to each of you where would the other team go?

I'm going to think on if before I answer. About the only thing I am positive of is that I wouldn't put the other team anywhere in California and New York City is out. In fact existing towns with teams are all out.
 
777texans said:
cool thakx for the info. But I have a question will they make two more new team? That way it'll be even. Where should the other NLF team be Texans fan?
Click to expand...


Portland or maybe Las Vegas (I know that would be dificult because of the gambling),
 
Portland is a good choice.
I remember reading once that Las Vegas would never get a team because of the gambling. But they would be an excellent choice. Large, growing population and I'm sure they'd do a stadium up right.

Maybe that's wrong. I'm sitting here thinking that didn't that dumb XFL have a team in Las Vegas..
 
I don't see a problem with Vegas. I know there is a lot of gambling, but if there was going to be any game tampering, they don't have to be in Vegas to do that. Look the point shaving scandals in College basketball. Not all of them ever took place in Vegas. :bag:
 
IMO, Vegas shouldn't be an issue. Gambling goes on whether a team is there or not. Only should be a concern if there are not good controlls on how its handled. The mob days of running the cassinos of Vegas are gone, but that's not to say there isn't a certain amount of organized crime there, just like there is in NY city and they have two teams. In fact, if there was a real good study done, I bet the mob influence in NY would be higher than in Vegas. Just a hunch. I think Vegas would be a pretty good spot for a team. It would allow me to kill two birds with one stone on my yearly trip.
 
I don't know where I read or heard this but I have a vague memory of somebody asking NFL brass once about a team there and they said there was no way because of the gambling, etc.

I'm guessing it's never even going to be a possibility.
 
No teams from any of the major sports leagues have been in the Sin City, I just don't think that's an image any of the leagues are going for.

Donald Trump could have easily bought a team for Vegas all these years, but he seems more interested in beauty pageants and firing people.
 
Trump also likes to brag about how rich he is and how you aren't and how much he has and you don't.

Oh yea. Don't forget he also likes his women young and of the "supermodel" variety.

Like most rich old men! :disco:
 
What lucrative market does OK or NB have? You have to have companies that can buy those suites and seats. Not to mention, would the Huskers or Sooners like a pro team taking a portion of their revenue? I would see Portland getting a team.
 
Another possible city is Albuquerque. It has been growing by leaps and bounds in the last decade or so. :twocents:
 
Austin, TX
Columbus, OH
Boston, MA

.... just some cities that popped in.

Oh, just move the Chargers.
 
A4toZ said:
Austin, TX
Columbus, OH
Boston, MA

.... just some cities that popped in.

Oh, just move the Chargers.
Click to expand...


If Austin, then why not San Antonio, wait...............Never mind, most people here are mindless front running, band wagon cowgirl fans. :bag:
 
just starting a new team in LA won't work unless you have a dan snyder-like owner...then you would also have to have a coach who is already headed to the hall of fame and doesn't care what the media or fans think of him...honestly the best thing for the nfl to do here is move a team...let's look at the front runners for a team to be moved:

colts-just signed a new deal with indy
cards-nope sorry just got a deal ready to go for their new stadium
viks-just don't see it happening
chargers-the team is in shambles...a new coach...new owner...new admin...new city is needed
titans-bud's done it once he'll do it again

those are about all the teams i've heard mentioned for a move...san diego could easily lose out on having the chargers but i doubt it will happen...anyways...LA isn't a football town...it's just a city to host the superbowl every once in awhile...that's all
 
I'm not so sure that LA won't be a good city this time around. They've had years without NFL football and I would think there are enough rich folks there to support any professional sport.

If they support NHL hockey they'll support NFL football.
 
L.A. expects too much from a team...if they don't have winning records tickets will be really low. Their expectancy level has always shown to be too high.
 
Folks...if you think the Texans don't get enough pub in the local media try being a NFL team in town with the Lakers. LA is just not a football town...it has the NBA personality and the NBA caters to it. I think you could find some smaller markets that would bend over backwards trying to support a franchise.
Let me throw this out there on the table...Birmingham, AL. Right smack between Tenn, ATL, and NO. I lived there for a year and let me tell you, being from South Texas and being an Aggie I thought I knew what a strong football region was until I saw more fights break out over Auburn vs Alabama than you would see in a minor league hockey game.
 
In that case J-Man...maybe a team for all of Alabama with the stadium in Birmingham. Sounds good...Alabama Warrior.....yeah, Alabama Warriors....ehh, I don't know. :dontknowa
 
SBTexans08 said:
In that case J-Man...maybe a team for all of Alabama with the stadium in Birmingham. Sounds good...Alabama Warrior.....yeah, Alabama Warriors....ehh, I don't know. :dontknowa
Click to expand...


All I know is that one night I got hemmed up in a bar after saying something remotely positive about Auburn by an angry mob wearing maroon and sporting elephants on their clothes...I had never said Roll Tide in my life, but I was damn sure Roll Tidin' right then!! :rofl:
 
You know it amazed me to watch "The day after". As I watched the show I noticed that the only two cites that were shown happened to be LA and New York. So there is this global catastrophe, but the only important cities in the northern hemisphere are New York and LA. No mention of Tokyo, Moscow, or London to mention a few. I just goes to show how important everyone else is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top