Started By
Message

re: Which NFL Team Moves To Los Angeles?

Posted on 10/22/09 at 6:39 pm to
Posted by BayouBengals03
lsu14always
Member since Nov 2007
99999 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 6:39 pm to
It would sell out for at least 5 years. That is what I mean.
Posted by AlejandroInHouston
New Orleans
Member since Apr 2007
18776 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 6:42 pm to
quote:

It would sell out for at least 5 years. That is what I mean.


I agree with you. First off, this stadium will definitely be PSL's to help offset the dude's investment.

So people will be locked into their seats.

It will work - there is no doubt about it. The NFL is incredible at getting people hyped for new franchises.
Posted by usc6158
Member since Feb 2008
35333 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 6:45 pm to
Also, the NFL, even with losing LA as a barganing chip have to be excited with being able to put Super Bowls back in L.A.
Posted by EmperorGout
I hate all of you.
Member since Feb 2008
11266 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 6:58 pm to
There once was a good deal of love for the Rams, but that team was destroyed by Georgia Frontierie. I don't see any signs that the Rams ever even played here, to be honest. There are still a ton of Raiduh fans around L.A., though.
Posted by AlejandroInHouston
New Orleans
Member since Apr 2007
18776 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 7:01 pm to
quote:

Also, the NFL, even with losing LA as a barganing chip have to be excited with being able to put Super Bowls back in L.A.


Hey this is another interesting point I want to bring up.

The days of new stadiums are essentially over.

LA served its purpose beautifully as about 16 new stadiums were built since the Rams left Orange County. Only a handful of teams still need new stadiums and L.A. will likely help the 49ers and Vikings get new ones still before the Rams, Chargers, or Raiders move there.

But I genuinely feel like "LA as a bargaining chip" is nearing the end of the road anyway. Not many teams even need new stadiums anymore. It's perfect organic timing to move a franchise there (probably Rams).

The Rams make so much sense in every conceivable way that it's almost unfathomable to me that it WON'T be them.
This post was edited on 10/22/09 at 7:02 pm
Posted by THRILLHO
Metry, LA
Member since Apr 2006
49489 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 7:04 pm to
Under 40 miles difference between St. Louis to NY and Jacksonville to NY (871 vs. 835). The NFC West has no good rivalries, so I see no problem of doing St. Louis to the AFCEast and Jax to LA and putting them in the NFCW.
Posted by TexasTiger08
Member since Oct 2006
25521 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 7:09 pm to
People are forgetting...the NFL can do as they please. You saw how they dicked over Baltimore. The NFL wants the Bills in Buffalo.

If they move though, it will be to Toronto, so they can keep the same fan base basically. Also, the Bills could and should find a way to get several stockholders together for the team, like the way the Packers are in Green Bay. It would be great for the NFL and the city.

Jacksonville financially is the most screwed, and a move there to LA would make tons of sense.

But I think the NFL WANTS St. Louis. They quickly got Rush out of the deal for a reason...and it's more than just politics. The Rams are destined for LA, because it also makes sense for the realignment issue...or non-issue.

The Raiders and Niners are POSSIBILITIES...but doubtful. Who knows what the frick Al Davis is up to though.

San Diego is a definite possibility. They have been vying for a stadium for years, and haven't even gotten a sniff.

Minnesota will get a new deal done soon...book it.
Posted by AlejandroInHouston
New Orleans
Member since Apr 2007
18776 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 7:11 pm to
quote:

The Raiders and Niners are POSSIBILITIES...but doubtful. Who knows what the frick Al Davis is up to though.

San Diego is a definite possibility. They have been vying for a stadium for years, and haven't even gotten a sniff.

Minnesota will get a new deal done soon...book it.



Minny will definitely get a new deal. That's why they wanted Favre so bad in part. Plus Pawlenty is serious about running in 2012 and he wants a stadium.

SD/Oakland aren't for sale.

St. Louis works like a dream in every imaginable way. The owners don't even live in St Louis!
Posted by tiger band trumpet
Member since Sep 2008
5675 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 8:51 pm to
quote:

Also, the Bills could and should find a way to get several stockholders together for the team, like the way the Packers are in Green Bay. It would be great for the NFL and the city.

I'm not sure, but I think the NFL no longer allows this
Posted by teke184
Zachary, LA
Member since Jan 2007
94915 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 10:44 pm to
quote:

I'm not sure, but I think the NFL no longer allows this


The rule is that there must be a majority owner of the team with a certain amount of stock. I think that's about 30%.

There could be a bunch of locals owning pooling together to buy chunks of the team a la Green Bay, but the team can't be a full-on community-owned one like Green Bay.
Posted by BayouBengals03
lsu14always
Member since Nov 2007
99999 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 10:48 pm to
I agree. The Rams would be a perfect fit.
Posted by Flowbie
Minnesota
Member since Sep 2009
869 posts
Posted on 10/22/09 at 11:44 pm to
I'd like the Vikings to get a new stadium but people are already bitching because we just built the Gophers a new stadium and the Twins a new stadium

Don't think they'd leave anyways, though
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 4Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram