Skip to content

Republican tidal wave could carry Vikings to L.A.

The success of GOP candidates in Tuesday’s election could have a major impact on the NFL, and not just from the standpoint of washing out of the U.S. House of Representatives folks who would be inclined to pressure the NFL about matters like concussions, steroids, and labor issues.

In Minnesota, Republicans have seized control of the Legislature for the first time in 38 years.

Generally speaking, Republicans favor limited government and low taxes.  One of the ways to keep taxes low is to avoid undertaking significant spending programs that in the view of some constitute a handout for private enterprise.

“The two biggest issues obviously were the economy and our state
budget
,” Republican Sen.-elect Roger Chamberlain told the Duluth News Tribune.  “The state budget
here is simply busted, and people understood that.”

If balancing the budget will be job No. 1, finding ways to provide money to build a football stadium for the Vikings will represent a lower priority, which could mean that the Vikings will enter the final year of their Metrodome lease with no arrangements for a new home.

With multiple projects in L.A. unfolding and London now on the map to get a team, the Vikings will migrate to the top of the to-move list if they don’t get a new stadium in Minnesota.

Permalink 230 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Minnesota Vikings, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
230 Responses to “Republican tidal wave could carry Vikings to L.A.”
  1. Happy Gilmore says: Nov 3, 2010 12:25 PM

    Good as gone…
    What a terribly managed franchise.

  2. Osterhouse says: Nov 3, 2010 12:26 PM

    Where are Amurikans so retarded

  3. btg19 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:26 PM

    This is a stretch. The stadium deal will be done this coming session.

  4. purplescar says: Nov 3, 2010 12:27 PM

    I don’t live in MN anymore but I don’t think the Dems would have gotten behind a stadium either. If the Vikes move to LA, well-so long Vikes and so long NFL.

  5. ray finkle says: Nov 3, 2010 12:28 PM

    trying to fulfill your daily article quota for nbc, huh florio? pointless article based on speculation. i can see the comments coming now coming from the dems on this site:
    “florio, you forgot to mention that republicans are all racist warmongers as well”

  6. norseman jeff says: Nov 3, 2010 12:28 PM

    I’ve been a viking fan for years. If this is what it takes to get the budgets balanced, then I’m fine with it. Move. But I doubt this will happen. So lets keep your liberal bias out of sports

  7. cs_foodie says: Nov 3, 2010 12:28 PM

    a team in London is a bad idea, that’s half way around the world from the west coast….the best coast.

  8. Shredder says: Nov 3, 2010 12:28 PM

    Perfect place for the Queens.
    Hang out in West Hollyweird and Laguna with all the other queens.

  9. LowVoltage says: Nov 3, 2010 12:29 PM

    This type of speculation makes sense. The Vikings are in the midst of a meltdown, so popular support for the team will wane. The whole Vikings org would probably prefer beach homes to igloos. The other 31 owners would probably prefer an NFL team in the #2 media market as well. An LA move by the Vikings must be something that is being investigated back channel. Of course, they may need to get in line behind the Jaguars.

  10. Olbermanisadouche says: Nov 3, 2010 12:29 PM

    And what have the Democrats in MN done over the years to build a new stadium?

  11. Common Sense says: Nov 3, 2010 12:29 PM

    This talk of moving a team to London needs to be squashed, it has to be the dumbest idea the NFL has ever come up with. Teams have a hard enough time going on coast to coast trips.

  12. KnuckleBucket says: Nov 3, 2010 12:29 PM

    Bye Bye Vikes? That’s a tough bid.

  13. pfii63 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:29 PM

    Ahhh, but republicans also love love big business, and there are fewer big businesses than the NFL. Watch for the Repugs to get the taxpayers to pay for a new stadium whether they want it or not.

  14. FinFan6886 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:30 PM

    Stay out of politics. Why would the NFL move a team to Los Angeles in the first place? How many times does it need to be proven that the 2nd largest U.S. market has no desire to support football on a consistent basis? Sure, there will be a few sell-outs initially but the novelty will wear off very quickly. It is not like California is exactly business friendly of late either. Moving a team to LA makes very little sense.

  15. FREE PALESTINE says: Nov 3, 2010 12:30 PM

    G.O.P. baby!! I’m so glad this country will get back on track with fiscal responsibility and not all the hand-outs, welfare, and ridiculous 99 week unemployment garbage!
    As for the Vikes new stadium, tough! do it withOUT taxpayer money! The S.F. Giants built their own stadium!
    It’s too bad W. Virginia didn’t go red too..

  16. thecuz says: Nov 3, 2010 12:31 PM

    Florio where did you get your economics lesson from? Oh thats right your from West Va. with a population of 3. Gimme a break. If the deal is done right and there sia good mix of funding from the private sector and gov’t, the new stadium can jump start the economy by bringing in more jobs to the state for at least 1-3 years. Why can’t they upgrade the Metrodome? Im sure that will be a large effort and create hundreds of jobs. After all, the hot topic for this election was/is the economy. Why not leverage it and go from there to job creation? Im sure with a new stadium or refacing the metrodome, the surrounding communities will propsper due to increased jobs which in turn workers spend $$$ and the cycle continues. Dude, London? Really?

  17. joelvis72 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:31 PM

    Um, I don’t see an ounce of evidence that a new stadium will be a lower priority (though that may be the case), or that Republicans dont’ care about concussions and steroid abuse.
    As for the last item, “labor issues,” the most-pay-and-benfits-for-least-amount-of-work unions have been an unyielding Democratic bloc for well over a century.

  18. Chiefs2010 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:31 PM

    LA does not support professional football well…
    and England? Ha! (though I realize the importance of the global market)
    /just saying..

  19. fortysixand2 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:32 PM

    I’m all for the NFL in London, but only if the team name is Werewolves.

  20. awdlmd says: Nov 3, 2010 12:32 PM

    You seem to have a basic misunderstanding of Republican “values”. Generally speaking, they never met a piece of corporate welfare they didn’t like.

  21. kweg says: Nov 3, 2010 12:32 PM

    Good or bad, I can’t imagine life without the Vikings. I hope the bums figure out a way to get a new stadium, and I believe they will. For all the money the Wilfs have spent on this team, I wouldn’t blame them for moving.
    PS…FIRE CHILLY NOW!!!

  22. pacificamike says: Nov 3, 2010 12:32 PM

    enough with the vikes. nobody cares

  23. Magnus the 1st says: Nov 3, 2010 12:32 PM

    Good! We don’t need any more half billion dollar stadiums on the taxpayer dollar. It’s about damn time they say no.
    Don’t get me wrong. I don’t want to see them go because I love the border rivalry with the Packers, but why should the citizens be on the hook for a 3rd brand new stadium in 5 years??
    If the Vikings want a new home so bad, let them pay for it themselves. Zigi can blow it out is a$$.

  24. 34Trap says: Nov 3, 2010 12:32 PM

    I really hope no NFL team moves to London. Just curious, does anyone know if Wembley Stadium sold out when the 49ers and Broncos played there?

  25. Chester Copperpot says: Nov 3, 2010 12:33 PM

    You are reaching hard here Florio. Very hard.

  26. slizz says: Nov 3, 2010 12:33 PM

    Tailgating, Sacks, and Salary Caps.
    After reading how the Metrodome shafted taxpayers before…what would a multi-billion dollar stadium do now?!?!?
    If Wilf wants a stadium so bad, go do it like Daniel Snyder or Robert Kraft did…privately finance it.

  27. hineswardcriesafterfumbling says: Nov 3, 2010 12:33 PM

    Damn those priorities!

  28. kweg says: Nov 3, 2010 12:33 PM

    Good or bad, I can’t imagine life without the Vikings. I hope the bums figure out a way to get a new stadium, and I believe they will. For all the money the Wilfs have spent on this team, I wouldn’t blame them for moving.
    PS…FIRE CHILLY NOW!!!

  29. STLCover2 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:35 PM

    “Generally speaking, Republicans favor limited government and low taxes. ”
    I just spit coffee all over my computer screen. Thanks, PFT.

  30. Arctic Edge says: Nov 3, 2010 12:36 PM

    The people of MN have spoken. And they don’t want a new stadium. I am deeply saddened by the lack of support MN residence have for the Vikings. Bears, Packers and Lions fans would never allow this to happen. Bye Bye Vikings. See you in LA LA land.

  31. chc4 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:36 PM

    An owner has got to be an idiot to ask taxpayers to fund a new stadium in this economy. Not exactly a priority.
    And why exactly should be getting involved in labor issues? Florio… you’re a douche.

  32. AttackPack213 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:37 PM

    Way to elect a guy who uses the (non)word “busted.” I believe the word you were looking for was “broken.” What’s intelligence or even a basic grasp of the English language have to do with running a government, right?

  33. King10 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:38 PM

    Good. Time to rid the United States of two evils:
    1. Democrats
    2. A team with purple uniforms

  34. jimmySee says: Nov 3, 2010 12:38 PM

    The Vikings could become a tenant of the Gophers.

  35. H4X0R says: Nov 3, 2010 12:38 PM

    Watching the wheels come off this team and knowing the pain it brings to every viking fan bring me great pleasure.
    HOWEVER, moving the vikes would be bad for the NFC North. I would miss that yearly rivalry. It makes football fun.
    Kinda like brothers that wrestle and fight. It ok until someone esle tries to get in on it.

  36. SoCalViking says: Nov 3, 2010 12:39 PM

    I look forward to it. I am tired of all of the people writing on this post, many of them “so called” Vikings fans who were even ripping them last year on a 12-4 run. I bleed purple and gold and have since I was four years old, and I have never lived a day in Minnesota. Can’t wait to get them here and turn them into a Superbowl powerhouse and championship dynasty, like we did with your Lakers……I will think of you often as I sit with my season tickets, in my new open air stadium, watching a team that is finally appreciated by its fan base. At least it’s warm inside for all of you, because that is where you will be watching the game. Maybe you can invest in some new Green and Gold outfits or maybe even Honolulu Blue and Silver.

  37. burntorangehorn says: Nov 3, 2010 12:40 PM

    Generally speaking, Republicans favor limited government and low taxes. One of the ways to keep taxes low is to avoid undertaking significant spending programs that in the view of some constitute a handout for private enterprise.
    ==================================
    Shall we start the discussion of the difference between puported platform vs. reality?

  38. NFLFAN12 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:40 PM

    Can it get any worse for Viking Fan? I mean really…. what next?

  39. pkrjones says: Nov 3, 2010 12:40 PM

    The Vikings will move from one liberal state where the fans don’t give a rats a$$ about the team to another where nobody will care.
    At least they’ll have a brand new stadium to play in, where the weather will be above freezing and the stands will still be empty IF they ever make the playoffs.
    What a dysfunctional franchise, keep up the good work Zyggi and Chilly.

  40. onlineinsite says: Nov 3, 2010 12:40 PM

    The Vikes have been asking for a stadium for years now and the current legislature has shot down everything. How on earth can you suggest that with a Republican majority the legislature will do less? What’s less than nothing?!
    London? I still don’t get this. It’s a novelty with no fan base. Soccer will always be king there. And if you’re a player for the London team, you gotta love games with West Coast teams and that 11 hour ride home – sweet!

  41. ClayMath52 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:41 PM

    Just build it yourself Wilf. Pretty Target Field has turned out to be profitable and no Vikings would eliminate some of the best bantor in the league.

  42. BigB says: Nov 3, 2010 12:41 PM

    I hate to see the Vikings leave, but this year has been a complete debacle, couldn’t happen at a better time. I don’t think many hearts will be broke unfortunately. I guess all of us purple and gold fans will have to switch to green and gold. At least we can then brag about all the titles we have!!!

  43. Dalirahma says: Nov 3, 2010 12:42 PM

    As a MN State Employee, I don’t buy this theory. I won’t get into political theories and debates, but I hear from all over around here a stadium will get done…eventually. There’s too much money at stake here, especially if you buy into the positive economic impact sports teams ‘supposedly’ bring in.
    Personally, I’d love to see the Vikings go Westward. That way I’d get to see the Packers games week in and week out on network TV. NLF ticket is a bank buster.

  44. ceetown22 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:43 PM

    This is pretty much bs…. wtf… I would not want to see any team move to london… LA I have no problem but the UK…. just great so every time this “london” team plays it will either have an advantage or disadvantage from the travel.
    HAIL SKINS!

  45. MightyMightyLAFootball says: Nov 3, 2010 12:43 PM

    Take it from someone who’s seen it first hand:
    If the Vikes are looking to move to a city where they can count on government freebees and hand outs, L.A. shouldn’t be on the short list…
    (I could go on to list the gazillion reasons why LA/CA won’t give the Vikes anything for free, but I thinks it’s fairly damned obvious)

  46. luderiffic says: Nov 3, 2010 12:45 PM

    So Sad…it can’t possibily be California, they are about to become a total welfare state thanks to the idiots who kept the liberals in charge out there.

  47. Draft King says: Nov 3, 2010 12:45 PM

    I agree with the thought that the Vikings are the top prospect to move to Los Angeles, though I’ve believed that well before last night’s election. The collapse of the I-35W Mississippi River bridge in Minneapolis in 2007 changed the priorities for many in the state of Minnesota.

  48. AttackPack213 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:45 PM

    Funny, this guy is from the same political party whose leaders have suggested that naturalized citizens take a literacy test before being allowed to vote… and this is within the past year.

  49. permissions denied - eat me! says: Nov 3, 2010 12:46 PM

    Just like the Lakers!! Bye bye!
    Really the first order of business for Ziggy should be to fire col clink, ASAP!!!!!!!

  50. FTHEACLU says: Nov 3, 2010 12:47 PM

    Wow. Already starting the 2012 campaign?

  51. mbbrazi says: Nov 3, 2010 12:47 PM

    As the biggest Viking fan ever and let me clarify that unfortunately I am a glutton for punisment-may the Vikings do for L.A. what they have done for Minnesota………………..total ineptitude!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! P.S. The reason Professional Wrestling is so big in Minnesota is because of the Minnesota Vikings…….just one step ahead of the Minnesota Gophers in deplorable :-(

  52. pfii63 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:48 PM

    # FREE PALESTINE says: November 3, 2010 12:30 PM
    G.O.P. baby!! I’m so glad this country will get back on track with fiscal responsibility and not all the hand-outs, welfare, and ridiculous 99 week unemployment garbage!
    As for the Vikes new stadium, tough! do it withOUT taxpayer money! The S.F. Giants built their own stadium!
    It’s too bad W. Virginia didn’t go red too..
    —————————————————-
    Let’s make sure of how well the Repugs “govern” – just saying “no” doesn’t work when you are responsible for the end product. I am amazed by all the Repugs on air who talk about slashing spending without being able to name a single program. The fact is both sides of the aisle are right — spending must decrease, revenues must come up, and entitlements must be dealt with. Now… who truly has the intestinal fortitude to get this done? I didn’t see Repugs do squat for eight years other than start wars and finish deregulating people who screwed the American taxpayer. Boehner’s reign may last all of two years.

  53. AlCortez says: Nov 3, 2010 12:49 PM

    Neither party represents less spending, at least not on a federal level.
    And it’s also notable that while the MN legislature was Democrat, the gov’s office was GOP. Those roles have switched, but I don’t recall either side pushing for this as a bloc.
    If anybody has access to a study showing party in control at the time when stadium bills pass, that would be interesting to see.
    To be honest, Repub or Dem, the thought that we need to subsidize more than a small portion of the construction of facilities for an already highly profitable private enterprise should be equally distasteful to both sides.

  54. AttackPack213 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:51 PM

    FREE PALESTINE says:
    November 3, 2010 12:30 PM
    G.O.P. baby!! I’m so glad this country will get back on track with fiscal responsibility and not all the hand-outs, welfare, and ridiculous 99 week unemployment garbage!
    As for the Vikes new stadium, tough! do it withOUT taxpayer money! The S.F. Giants built their own stadium!
    It’s too bad W. Virginia didn’t go red too..
    —————————————–
    What a joke… the R (is for retard) party controls one body out of the three (four if you count the judiciary, although it cannot make or pass laws) So all that garbage about repeal and replace, or taking your country back, or whatever crap they fed you to make you vote against your own economic interests, none of it will happen. None. Hello gridlock. Which is all the R(etard) party wanted in the first place.

  55. manderson says: Nov 3, 2010 12:52 PM

    This makes perfect sense. I mean there aren’t any NFL teams in any of the Red States with the exception of Florida, Carolina, Georgia, Lousiana, Texas, Missouri, Arizona, etc. etc.

  56. jamesz23 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:52 PM

    Bye Favre lovers

  57. paoconno says: Nov 3, 2010 12:53 PM

    As an L.A. resident…our “stadium plans” are blueprints and/or ideas at this stage. Nothing is happening here. Earliest you could see a stadium in So.Cal is 2014…and I doubt the Vikes want to play at the Colisseum for at least two years.
    I think the success of Target Field as a revenue steam and the jobs it created will help sway legislators into getting a stadium deal done, especially with Minnesota’s new Democratic Governor.
    Plus, it’s not like the Vikes aren’t selling out the Dome (as outdated as it may be.)
    You are more likely to see the L.A. or London Jaguars.

  58. TheCityThatReeds says: Nov 3, 2010 12:53 PM

    If any team should be doomed LA it’s the Jags

  59. dachshund says: Nov 3, 2010 12:55 PM

    How about living within means? What is wrong with the current stadium? The stadium is not what’s wrong with the Vikings or Minnesota’s upside down budget. Gotta love the classic liberal spin though.

  60. georgeanderson says: Nov 3, 2010 12:55 PM

    The owner needs to pony up the funding. Or sell to a local investment group who will pay for the stadium. The NFL is a for profit business. If they leave, MN will find other ways to spend their dollars on their local teams. Twins and Wolves can have a truck to their HQ asap.
    Just let the greed continue amongst the owners and watch folks find other ways to spend their dollars. Fans become fans of other sports and stop being fans of the sport when their is no team.
    Minnesota will be apart of the leagues expansion plans in about 10 -12 years. They will have their “tradition” restored and MN residents will be flocking to dump bails of money on the new ownership group with PSL’s and new merchandise. Oh yeah and the state will have spent millions upon millions of dollars on trying to get a team back to MN and eventually pay for the entire new state of the art stadium.
    If Zygi wants to be a legend in MN history ,build the stadium and then sell the team. There are so many billionaires who want in on the NFL, they will pay for everything, so look at it as an investment for such a huge return. You don’t want to be an Irsay, Bidwell or Modell amongst others.

  61. Lott42 says: Nov 3, 2010 12:56 PM

    It would fitting seeing that LA Lakers were originally the Minnesota Lakers – as in the state with 10,000 lakes. So sure they’re are Vikings in LA but usually in the movies or during Halloween. So it seems it would be a perfect fit for LA and the “Vikes” – at least on paper.
    Oh wait. You mean it will be the same players, owners and coaches? Well changing the scenery only counts for so much. See the St. Louis, er, I mean Arizona Cardinals. And Manny sure didn’t “man up” in LA. Didn’t Gretzky play for LA Kings too? True he got a movie actress wife. But rings?
    Good luck with that NFL.

  62. Phil Wright says: Nov 3, 2010 12:57 PM

    LA won’t happen. Al will sue the NFL to block anyone else moving into what he considers Raiders domain.

  63. CowboysFansAreAllBandwagonFans says: Nov 3, 2010 1:00 PM

    slizz says: “If Wilf wants a stadium so bad, go do it like Daniel Snyder or Robert Kraft did…privately finance it.”
    —-
    Snyder didn’t build it… Jack Kent Cooke did..

  64. Marvin49 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:00 PM

    OK…I’m a Democrat and I don’t see this logic.
    Yes, Republicans RUN on fiscal responsibility, but they never GOVERN that way…lol. A big expensive handout for Billionaires? Sounds right up the Republicans alley. ;-) J/K…sort of….
    I all seriousness tho, Dems would want to spend the money on social programs while the Republicans would look for an investment.
    I live in CA…the bluest state in the country (esspecially after last night) and this is the HARDEST place to get a stadium built. Having the Republicans take over there probably makes a stadium EASIER to build, not harder.

  65. jj jones says: Nov 3, 2010 1:00 PM

    “LowVoltage says:
    November 3, 2010 12:29 PM
    Of course, they may need to get in line behind the Jaguars. ”
    Why? The Jaguars have had four home games this year and zero blackouts. They need to sell 3k tickets to get their next home game televised. Expect that to happen.

  66. dabears2485 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:00 PM

    The Vikings need to sit back, shut up, and wait for Minnesota to kindly come up with a suitable arrangement. That team hasn’t delivered a championship since….what? The 70’s? Clearly they aren’t profitable enough to help pay for the stadium themselves (see: Cowboys, Giants/Jets). Everyone thinks they need a billion dollar stadium to compete these days. Take a look at Lambeau Field. Great stadium. Didn’t cost the world to build.
    Let them move. In 10 years, another owner will come in and tap the Minnesota market (example: Houston, Cleveland). London is a terrible idea! The logistics alone would be a nightmare. Imagine a three-game road schedule of San Diego, New England, and Oakland, then back home to London. When would they practice or even just rest for a day?

  67. ChillyP says: Nov 3, 2010 1:01 PM

    Good luck in L.A. Vikings.
    ~L.A. Raiders, L.A. Rams, L.A. Chargers.

  68. Basshorns says: Nov 3, 2010 1:02 PM

    The dems didn’t get anything done for the team when they had a surplus in the budget.

  69. It'sJustAGame612 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:02 PM

    This articles is a little bit of a reach, even for Florio.. Neither the Dems or Republicans in MN were going to back a stadium paid by taxpayers..
    @FREE PALESTINE
    I’m not trying to start a political battle, but please pick up a college level economic text book when you get a chance..

  70. Profanity in ALL CAPS says: Nov 3, 2010 1:02 PM

    Vikings fan for 20 years:
    Actually, not anymore. not after this fiasco, and all their previous ones. They can leave, and I will be happy they are gone. The young players want the move to happen to LA. Bigger celebrity status out there. good riddance.

  71. Rex Grossman says: Nov 3, 2010 1:02 PM

    West Virginia is a blue state.

  72. protectthishouse54 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:03 PM

    The Vikings are soooo annoying! All we hear about is Favre, then Moss, now this crap. If you’re going to be an awful team, do so quietly.

  73. K-FIZZLE says: Nov 3, 2010 1:03 PM

    Don’t sponsors basically pay for a Stadium to be built? I thought that when the Redskins built FedEx Field, the sponsorship money from FedEx basically paid for the cost of the Stadium. I would think that having a brand new stadium would actually help boost the economy. I’m not a Viking fan, but it would suck to see a team move to LA… Unless it were the Ravens…

  74. TorVikeFan says: Nov 3, 2010 1:03 PM

    Generally speaking, Republicans favour (i) lining their own pockets by taking money without strings attached, (ii) selling-out on any issue so long as someone shows them enough cash, (iii) keeping laws on the books which allow the rich and powerful to buy politicians and decide elections, (iv) the interests of big business over small business and working folks, and (v) the cause of every right-winger, gun-nut or other wacko out there. Of course, Democrats aren’t much better, except that they don’t do (v).

  75. Bri715 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:03 PM

    Florio,
    Republicans have supported more than a few of their own stadium projects. Tell me you knew?

  76. roadkill says: Nov 3, 2010 1:03 PM

    If the Vikings move to LA, then I’m done with the NFL. And I’m a Steeler fan.
    The answer isn’t for every team to have to build a new stadium every ten years. The answer is for the league to prevent idiots like Jerry Jones from building the Death Star.

  77. eck says: Nov 3, 2010 1:04 PM

    “the party shift in the Legislature clears the way for bills long bottled up, such as racetrack gambling”
    Sweet this seem like the easiest way to get a stadium. If the rep. hammer the racetrack gambling through, no taxes needed to support the stadium just gambling.

  78. btg19 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:04 PM

    Deny it all you want, justify it any way you can, but the bottom line is we’re all football fans and anyone who cheers for an area to lose their team is just an awful person.
    Anyone who mocks another fanbase about the possibilty of the loss of their team is scum, pure and simple.

  79. cusoman says: Nov 3, 2010 1:05 PM

    Pssst, the taxes that were imposed in 1977 to get the Metrodome built were done so under a very conservative DFL party in Minnesota at the time.
    Hope is not lost on a new stadium, and a lot of that is going to depend on who wins the governor’s seat. Unfortunately we might not know who what is until well into next year with the race being so close and the recount coming :\

  80. TheWien says: Nov 3, 2010 1:05 PM

    Dear Mike Florio,
    The football fans that post comment on ProFootballTalk.com are not smart enough or well educated enough people to talk or debate about politics in any coherent way. Please refrain from posting blogs that directly injects political philosophy and ideology into sports discussion. Thanks.
    -Mgmt.

  81. erapptor says: Nov 3, 2010 1:06 PM

    GOP control will change the calculus, but what you forget is that they are in bed with big business. They will handout a sweet deal to the Wilfs because they believe in corporate welfare.
    The modern GOP is anything but fiscally responsible.

  82. Infidel says: Nov 3, 2010 1:06 PM

    Last night was just the beginning.

  83. Truth Hurts says: Nov 3, 2010 1:07 PM

    …and the Dems would have used the same money to provide “Stimulus” to homeless crack addicts.
    ELECTION VICTORY!

  84. GoVikes84 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:08 PM

    Jags, Bills, Chargers, Lions.
    The fan base here is better than all those teams, turmoil and drama aside.
    This team can pull up its boot straps and still make a playoff run!!
    I truly believe that. If Chilly can galvonize this locker room he deserves his job.

  85. superfluousK says: Nov 3, 2010 1:09 PM

    You forget that republicans also like to stick it to poor people and what sticks it to the poor like diverting funding away from education and social assistance programs like building a $750 million stadium that none of them can afford tickets to enter?

  86. FireJerryJones says: Nov 3, 2010 1:09 PM

    Gus Tinucci has more to worry about than whether Moss likes his food or not.

  87. Panda_Claus says: Nov 3, 2010 1:11 PM

    Love the conjecture Mike. Stranger things have happened in the NFL than what you’re supposing, that’s for certain. It never hurts to speculate a little. Some team is eventually going back to LA, that’s almost a guarantee.
    I don’t think it would happen yet–the Vikings move. It seems more plausible the Jaguars would be on the top of that list, although I don’t know how well having LA in the AFC South would work out.
    Logistically, moving the Vikings might work for league alignment better, just put them in the NFC West and move St. Louis to the NFC North.

  88. Jeff Harper says: Nov 3, 2010 1:12 PM

    If a Vikings move to LA means no more idiotic posts from PervyHarvin I’m all for it. Which team would Pervy bitch about then? The Twins? They suck too.

  89. Old School says: Nov 3, 2010 1:12 PM

    Move them to London. The Brittish are comfortable with Queens. Once there, we can forget about them as they play in ….. are you ready? …..a league of their own.

  90. airmoss18 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:12 PM

    Based on the fact that NINE of the top-10 most commented posts on this site are Vikings-related, none of us should be surprised when Florio makes a ridiculous post like this about the possibility of the Vikings moving to LA based on nothing but idle conjecture.
    I live in Minneapolis, and the reality of the matter is that the Vikings are as well supported here as almost any franchise in the NFL. We don’t ever have home game blackouts, unlike the Jaguars, Bills, Raiders, and Chargers – the four teams that are FAR more likely to move to LA than the Vikings.
    Additionally, the Vikings WILL get a new stadium. The Twins got one and the Gophers football team got one. The Wilfs recognize that the timing of their request to get public financing to help pay for the $1billion+ price tag will take some time and will also require the general economic environment to improve in order to finally get the deal done with the MN legislature. There have also been a flurry of creative financing options introduced in the past year that are only now starting to be seriously considered by various key members of the MN government. The Wilfs also recognize that a new stadium will generate profits for them from a variety of new revenue streams not currently available with the Dome; they will be very willing to increase their contribution to the new stadium project when push comes to shove.

  91. frank booth says: Nov 3, 2010 1:14 PM

    Olbermanisadouche says:
    November 3, 2010 12:29 PM
    And what have the Democrats in MN done over the years to build a new stadium?
    ===================================
    The Metrodome, the Twins new stadium, U of M’s new football venue, Xcel Energy Center.

  92. Mooch says: Nov 3, 2010 1:14 PM

    Too bad our tax dollars were used to build a state-of-the-art 80,000 seat stadium complete with luxury boxes in Iraq.

  93. mikemcsaint says: Nov 3, 2010 1:15 PM

    that teamed with a lack of support from the fan base.

  94. CHIEF ZEE says: Nov 3, 2010 1:17 PM

    This will be a good thing for the Vikings…Free agents will no longer be turned off by the city of Minnesota when it comes to chosing time.

  95. Kerg01 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:18 PM

    How I do love mixing sports and politics. Any way we could involve religion and race too?

  96. airmoss18 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:20 PM

    Based on the fact that nine of the top-10 most commented posts on this site are Vikings-related, none of us should be surprised when Florio makes a ridiculous post like this about the possibility of the Vikings moving to LA based on nothing but idle conjecture.
    I live in Minneapolis, and the reality of the matter is that the Vikings are as well supported here as almost any franchise in the NFL. We don’t ever have home game blackouts, unlike the Jaguars, Bills, Raiders, and Chargers – the four teams that are FAR more likely to move to LA than the Vikings.
    Additionally, the Vikings WILL get a new stadium. Nobody in power in the MN government has bought into he artificial urgency that the team has tried to create with letting their lease with the Dome expire after the 2011 season. The Twins recently got a new stadium and the Gophers football team did as well. The Wilfs recognize that the timing of their request to get public financing to help pay for the $1billion+ price tag will take some time and will also require the general economic environment to improve in order to finally get the deal done with the MN legislature. There have also been a flurry of creative financing options introduced in the past year that are only now starting to be seriously considered by various key members of the MN government. The Wilfs also recognize that a new stadium will generate profits for them from a variety of new revenue streams not currently available with the Dome; they will be very willing to increase their contribution to the new stadium project when push comes to shove.

  97. AttackPack213 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:20 PM

    If they do move to L.A. I hope they change the name (see Baltimore Ravens). No more nonsense like the L.A. Lakers, Utah Jazz… team names shoud only be kept if they make a little sense.

  98. Jack Acid says: Nov 3, 2010 1:22 PM

    I love Europe for travel, but I am NOT in favor of a UK team. Just WAY too hard on the travel schedule to be feasible.
    LA makes sense, but let’s face it — the NFL needs LA a lot more than LA needs the NFL.

  99. Duan says: Nov 3, 2010 1:23 PM

    @ Chilly P – excellent point
    Moving teams to L.A. will not equal franchise success – the only way a franchise will survive in Los Angeles is if it originally starts there or is created for there! Period!
    The Vikings sell out every game, don’t move’em – even though the Jaguars are having turbulant times, don’t move’em.
    Award two franchises or four franchises to possible cities and expand the pool, it will throw the format off a little – but they have made it in the past with lopsided numbers. If they go with four they can add two to the AFC and two to the NFC.
    Hell they plan on adding two games anyway. But don’t move the Vikings out of their home state

  100. BleedPurpler says: Nov 3, 2010 1:23 PM

    Why would the NFL purposely lose its bargaining chip for the whole league to obtain a new stadium. Does anyone realize how often the “I am going to move my team to LA” threat has been used by each team looking for a new home? It is quite comical that every single fan base falls for this crap. By the way, why would the NFL purposely lose its revenue by having to risk blackouts in the #2 market? Makes no sense. It is much more likely that the existing California teams still looking for new digs are going for the bargaining chip as hard as ever. What news about San Diego making a new stadium? What about Oakland? Then there is the thought that the Jaguars are still looking to move.
    I find it much more likely that the Vikings will have a new home centered around the Dome, with temporary usage at the new Gophers stadium while the whole Dome is re-configured for the “ideal” professional football environment. Of course this assumes that in the end Clueless Klink is truly out and a real proven winner is driving the sinking ship up from the depths. If not, then Zygi Wilf has to be prepared for the loud chorus of fans aka ticket buyers aka tax payers to scream, “NO!!!!”

  101. MuskyHunter2542 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:26 PM

    Done Deal!!!
    LA Vikings

  102. poonhok says: Nov 3, 2010 1:28 PM

    Why would anyone move anything to California?
    That state is dying and the reason is: too many Californians…
    Socialism is the flypaper that draws in the lazy and the cowardly….

  103. Murphspeak says: Nov 3, 2010 1:29 PM

    Come to CA where no one can afford to buy tickets to an NFL game. Don’t worry, it’ll get much worse thanks to the genius of our CA electorate.

  104. Mr. Cowpatty says: Nov 3, 2010 1:29 PM

    Dallas is looking for a football team.

  105. Jack1 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:29 PM

    Queens fans are scratching/clawing their way off the ship and Chilly’s not going to let them, cause he finally grew a pair.
    But we’re all forgetting one thing…Favre has to approve this move to LA first.

  106. Greenman says: Nov 3, 2010 1:29 PM

    Osterhouse says:
    November 3, 2010 12:26 PM
    Where are Amurikans so retarded
    ===================================
    Yeah, we didn’t vote the Socialists out of the control of the Senate. Don’t worry, their’s always 2012.

  107. MACHINE GUN IBIZA says: Nov 3, 2010 1:30 PM

    “Generally speaking, Republicans favor limited government and low taxes. ”
    —————–
    Thats half right. What it means is that they favor low taxes ON THE RICH and limited government FOR AREAS THEY DON’T LIKE (ie social programs)
    The tea bagger rhetoric would demand that no taxpayer money go to a stadium project. Numerous academic studies have shown these projects NEVER return to the community the monies they promise in terms of hotel revenue, tourism taxes, etc.
    Its amazing that a State that could produce such talented and fine folks as Warren Burger, Bob Dylan, Sinclair Lewis, and Hubert Humphrey would elect such neanderthals as Bachmann and Jesse Ventura. Must be something in the water….

  108. skimbell says: Nov 3, 2010 1:31 PM

    London! Never even thought about that one.
    I can see it now. Chilly and the rest of the morons head east and become the….
    London Lunatics!
    Love it!

  109. longestlegs says: Nov 3, 2010 1:31 PM

    How did I not realize how right leaning football fans are? Good to know!

  110. thebassman says: Nov 3, 2010 1:31 PM

    Last time I checked, the Jags have won more games than the Vikes. All of you yayhoos who have never spent a minute in Jacksonville don’t have a clue what even goes on here.

  111. Zaggs says: Nov 3, 2010 1:38 PM

    Here is a novel thought so crazy it just might work. Why not have the Vikings pay for their own stadium? What is it going to cost? 800 mil? They’ll get 150 from the league so that leaves the Vikes with 650 million to come up with. I mean they can’t come up with that on their own?

  112. maxwellsmart says: Nov 3, 2010 1:38 PM

    Ziggy is a little Chilly!…..go London Vikes!

  113. Real Football Fan says: Nov 3, 2010 1:39 PM

    Some of you people are sensitive dummies. he’s simply stating the idealogical positions of the two parties.
    If you’d take your head out of your butts sometime, you’d notice that neither of the parties get anything done because they’re one big circle of hypocrites who laugh and youck it up together in private before they come out to play fight in front of you morons every election cycle.
    Republicans stand for lower taxes while Democrats love to spend money to control your life (or so they say but seems like the spending and deficit rise just as much under both, but I digress). I think a stadium project represents significant spending, in direct conflict with the Republican ideaology, don’t you think?
    But you’re right, by stating the obvious, Florio is “pushing the liberal agenda” because this site is partnered with NBC. I guess Fox Sports and Fox Sports Radio pushes the “conservative agenda,” too because they’re partnered with Fox and Rupert Murdoch.
    Are you people as dumb as you sound on your comments? No wonder this country is dropping like an anvil.

  114. Bordner says: Nov 3, 2010 1:40 PM

    Just a suggestion here… WI residents may be willing to chip in on the new stadium if you can promise Chilly will be the Queen’s coach for the next couple of decades.

  115. jj jones says: Nov 3, 2010 1:42 PM

    “GoVikes84 says:
    November 3, 2010 1:08 PM
    Jags, Bills, Chargers, Lions.
    The fan base here is better than all those teams, turmoil and drama aside.”
    Do you really think the “fan base” has anything to do with a team moving. If that were true, Modell would have never moved the Browns to Baltimore. It’s all about money. The Vikings play in a severely outdated stadium. Without a new one, they will have to move.

  116. Mr. Cowpatty says: Nov 3, 2010 1:44 PM

    Cowboy stadium was built with the help of a bond from the city of Arlington, Tx. That’s tax payers money.

  117. Truth Hurts says: Nov 3, 2010 1:44 PM

    “Mooch said: Too bad our tax dollars were used to build a state-of-the-art 80,000 seat stadium complete with luxury boxes in Iraq.”
    Sadly, Obama threw out the first pitch (like a girl) while wearing mom jeans. He then retreated to HIS luxury box in the 80,000 seat stadium but claimed Bush caused him to throw like a girl.

  118. Ilovefoolsball says: Nov 3, 2010 1:45 PM

    well I feel sorry for the true viking fans who grew up their whole life following and rooting for the team..but for the likes of Pervy Harvin, Robert Ethen, Paulitik, Viking Princess, good riddance!

  119. CaptainMarvel says: Nov 3, 2010 1:49 PM

    Trying to stir-up trouble, ‘ey Florio? You must be mad that the Dem’s lost or something. Living in MN, I’ve never heard anything partisan about the stadium situation. It will get done.

  120. kravon says: Nov 3, 2010 1:51 PM

    Salt Lake City would love to have a professional football team!
    Think of how much more fun Sundays would be in Salt Lake.
    Kravon
    Chairman of Salt Lake City needs the NFL

  121. mrlaloosh says: Nov 3, 2010 1:51 PM

    The L.A. Vikings will move to the NFC West division with the 49er’s, Cardinals & Seahawks.
    Then the St. Louis Rams will go to the NFC North with the Packers, Bears & Lions.
    Makes sense to me.

  122. Greenman says: Nov 3, 2010 1:54 PM

    frank booth says:
    November 3, 2010 1:14 PM
    The Metrodome, the Twins new stadium, U of M’s new football venue, Xcel Energy Center.
    ====================================
    They don’t like the Metrodome, and which of the others is for the Vikings? Go drink some-more of the the Libtard Kool-Aid.

  123. ALLDAY3421 says: Nov 3, 2010 1:55 PM

    Love the site, Florio, but couldn’t disagree more on this one. I’m a Vikes season ticket holder (I know, I know, I should get my sanity checked), & I am now MORE confident of a Vikes stadium being done. Republicans will know what the restaurants/bars/businesses would stand to lose if Vikes left, & how this would affect the states overall economy. They will look at the numbers & the “Big Picture” of why this needs to get done, & will be done this year. No more of the typical “Why should I pay for a millionaire’s stadium” argument, w/ absolutely no numbers/reason to back up this lazy response.

  124. rarson says: Nov 3, 2010 1:55 PM

    Everyone that thinks the GOP is all about limited government and fiscal responsibility is a moron and hasn’t been paying a damn bit of attention for the last 20 years.

  125. FavresWaffleOutlet says: Nov 3, 2010 1:57 PM

    Too bad SF already has a team…this dark pink team would’ve fit there perfectly.
    In all seriousness, this would be a huge blow to the NFL and as a Packer fan…would be a terrible idea.
    I have said this for years and it’s been down the same path that my own local school board has gone with a few of our local school buildings. Ignore the problem for decades until the point that it becomes an absolute necessity, then turn around and force a huge tax issue on the people who are now in power, when the people who could have and should have done something to get the ball rolling are now gone. Either way, Rep or Dem, someone has got to take the bullet if this team is going to remain in MN. Problem is, there’s a new baseball park….I don’t see a new football stadium making it at this point.
    I live in the stadium tax district North of Milwaukee and favored the move here to keep the Brewers and get them a stadium. The 1/2 percent sales tax was virtually unnoticed by most…the kicker is that now the government doesn’t want to repeal the tax since the stadium is paid for, or close.
    London has a better chance of keeping an NFL team afloat than L.A. How many strikes are they going to get?

  126. Jeff Harper says: Nov 3, 2010 1:59 PM

    “Pushing the liberal agenda?” Real Football Fan is right. This is site is sponsored by NBC. Florio must have gotten canned this morning and the site is now being run by Keith Olbermann/Rachel Maddow. They don’t know any more about politics than they do about football.

  127. midwest says: Nov 3, 2010 2:01 PM

    Why do people continually bring up the Jaguars as a team possibly headed for LA? I can answer that….because they are idiots!
    The Jaguars had one bad year of attendance. I repeat, one bad year in the worst economy since the Great Depression.
    What about the Bucs? They had less than 36k people at their last home game, and they are teid for the division lead.
    What about the Chargers? They have had all home games this year blacked out, except for the one in which Patriot fans bought up all remaining tickets. And they are a perennial playoff team.
    What about the Raiders? Over 50% of their home games have been blacked out since they returned to Oakland from LA. This in a city with 4X the population of Jacksonville.
    Look, idiots….teams move because of stadium issues. Attendance will rise and fall, but historically, it is stadium issues that cause teams to relocate. The Jaguars DO NOT have a stadium issue, and attendance is going good. Further, they just found a stadium sponsor, and are under lease at Everbank Field until 2030. Further, the owner has stated NUMEROUS times that the Jaguars are not going anywhere. What else is it going to take to get it through some thick skulls that Jacksonville is not going to relocate?
    Just because Florio, a true idiot, bashed the Jags like no other team last year (do we see him bashing the Bucs, Charges or Raiders this year…no), and perpetuated this myth that Jacksonville will relocate does make it fact.
    Can you uniformed idiots PLEASE stop putting Jacksonville in every single relocation thread? If you did a little research, you would see that there are EASILY a half a dozen or so teams more likely for relocation that Jacksonville.

  128. astrozombies says: Nov 3, 2010 2:01 PM

    They can buy my house. I’m leaving! Jerry Brown? Barbara Boxer? After living in this once great state for 46 years I’m done! Democrats “Stupid is as Stupid does” Farewell Idiots of California

  129. Deb says: Nov 3, 2010 2:07 PM

    pacificamike says:
    enough with the vikes. nobody cares
    ————————————————-
    Clearly not true since 9 of the 10 most-commented articles are about the Vikes. The hysterical thing is they’re so incestuous that if fans of teams other than the Packers comment on their articles–even to support their team–some of them totally freak out over the intrusion.
    @Florio …
    London? You think Goodell is going to move the Vikes to London? Hey … maybe he should. When the idea crashes and burns, we’d finally be rid of him.

  130. Dragonfly9 says: Nov 3, 2010 2:08 PM

    If the Vikings want a new stadium they should pay for it. Zygi has no problem handing out millions to give to his 41 year old ineffective quarterback, giving a new extension to his bumbling head coach, paying Randy Moss big bucks to catch 13 passes, etc., etc. If they expect the taxpayers to support a new stadium they need a new owner, new GM, new head coach, and a new QB, then maybe.

  131. FireChildress says: Nov 3, 2010 2:10 PM

    STFU! the Vikings aren’t going anywhere. Why would the NFL take the Vikes away from here when you got all of the California teams there are now not selling out! The Vikes sell out every game.

  132. somesome says: Nov 3, 2010 2:15 PM

    Murphspeak says:
    November 3, 2010 1:29 PM
    Come to CA where no one can afford to buy tickets to an NFL game. Don’t worry, it’ll get much worse thanks to the genius of our CA electorate.
    ————————————
    they just fill the seats with extras and the stadium speakers with fake laughter … welcome to Bollywood

  133. savagenation says: Nov 3, 2010 2:21 PM

    # Olbermanisadouche says: November 3, 2010 12:29 PM
    And what have the Democrats in MN done over the years to build a new stadium?
    Great post!!!
    Florio, you’re an a-hole. Punk-ass whining bitch democrat.
    Why don’t you blame George Bush for the move now like the other bitch Obama does every day?

  134. Gergie says: Nov 3, 2010 2:22 PM

    I’m confused, Where was the article two years ago,
    “Democratic Title wave Could Build a New Stadium in Minnesota”
    Odd very odd?

  135. Art Van Delay's brother says: Nov 3, 2010 2:23 PM

    The most idiotic post ever. The Vikings are going to California with the most debt of any state because the state legislature changed parties?
    California is going to make hard choices on an array of things in order to bring the budget under control. Last on the list is a stadium for a bunch of rich athletes and owners.
    You have been beaten on the stupidity scale by a landslide by FREE PALESTINE who celebrates the GOP taking the US House of Reps.
    The only thing this will lead to is more settlements on the West Bank and further isolation of Gaza you moron.

  136. savagenation says: Nov 3, 2010 2:24 PM

    # pfii63 says: November 3, 2010 12:29 PM
    Ahhh, but republicans also love love big business, and there are fewer big businesses than the NFL. Watch for the Repugs to get the taxpayers to pay for a new stadium whether they want it or not.
    Hey MORON kool-aid drinker. Republicans love small business , not big business you retard. Who got bailed out by democrats? BIG BUSINESS banks, wall street firms, auto companies, union. Get your head out of your ass and stop drinking the kool aid

  137. savagenation says: Nov 3, 2010 2:27 PM

    # Truth Hurts says: November 3, 2010 1:07 PM
    …and the Dems would have used the same money to provide “Stimulus” to homeless crack addicts.
    ELECTION VICTORY!
    True!!!!

  138. savagenation says: Nov 3, 2010 2:31 PM

    # rarson says: November 3, 2010 1:55 PM
    Everyone that thinks the GOP is all about limited government and fiscal responsibility is a moron and hasn’t been paying a damn bit of attention for the last 20 years.
    We have moron. The Democrats are responsible for the welfare, entitilement state we live in. no one else
    democrats = welfare abuse, lazy asses, corrupt Chicago politics, corrupt unions destroying business, homos, abortion lovers, atheists, illegal aliens

  139. noah says: Nov 3, 2010 2:44 PM

    What is wrong with the current stadium?????????????????
    Lost in this entire discussion is the absurdity that any pro sports team ” needs ” a new stadium.
    Everything that’s wring with America…can never be thankful for something perfectly good and let it become a legend like the superdome or Fenway or wrigley, we just have to build some new toy that sucks like jerryworld

  140. Skol Favre says: Nov 3, 2010 2:45 PM

    Minnesota is one of the largest markets in the US, there is NO CHANCE the team moves, ZERO. The NFL is not going to move one of their top 10 market franchises and have a black hole in the midwest while markets like Jacksonville, Buffalo, and Charlotte have franchises….I know you all love hating MN teams and I am sorry it is constantly voted tops in terms of places to live, etc. So try to keep your bitterness under control….

  141. petro says: Nov 3, 2010 2:49 PM

    As a Republican, I have to say that they aren’t above making big business deals regardless. A stadium can be built but just with different sources of funds and tax breaks.

  142. vikes says: Nov 3, 2010 2:52 PM

    Enslave Palestine

  143. Jag4Life says: Nov 3, 2010 2:57 PM

    savagenation says:
    November 3, 2010 2:31 PM
    # rarson says: November 3, 2010 1:55 PM
    Everyone that thinks the GOP is all about limited government and fiscal responsibility is a moron and hasn’t been paying a damn bit of attention for the last 20 years.
    We have moron. The Democrats are responsible for the welfare, entitilement state we live in. no one else
    democrats = welfare abuse, lazy asses, corrupt Chicago politics, corrupt unions destroying business, homos, abortion lovers, atheists, illegal aliens
    ————————————————-
    Dude, you gotta get more news sources than Fox News. That channel is single handedly poisoning the brains of you one sided unable to think for yourselfs conservatives. It’s not that serious. Get a life.

  144. rarson says: Nov 3, 2010 3:05 PM

    “The Democrats are responsible for the welfare, entitilement state we live in. no one else”
    Actually, it was Lincoln, a Republican, who pioneered the use of force to exert federal power over states’ rights. The growing centralized government and it’s lust for power is what is responsible for the socialized nanny state we live in. Don’t kid yourself, the differences between Democrats and Republicans are skin deep. They only exist to fool chumps like you into thinking that they are different. They all want the same thing: more power.

  145. longestlegs says: Nov 3, 2010 3:05 PM

    Savagenation is truly a man of the people.
    One can only hope that this beautiful country continues to grow and support a class of Americans that show unabashed enthusiasm for browbeating their fellow citizens they deem to be subhuman scum. Such as he.
    I appreciate the opportunity this place gives free speech…but come on. Homos? Abortion lovers?
    Criminy.

  146. fortzj says: Nov 3, 2010 3:07 PM

    Please refrain from mentioniong the Jaguars in the same sentence as L.A.. You people have no idea what is going on. The Jags are alive and well here in Jacksonville. How about taking a team from the state of California and moving them there? Sounds like a smart idea. You guys do know there is a franchise in that state that can’t draw over 35,000 people……thats right, the Raiders.

  147. rarson says: Nov 3, 2010 3:16 PM

    “Who got bailed out by democrats? BIG BUSINESS banks, wall street firms, auto companies, union. Get your head out of your ass and stop drinking the kool aid”
    Airline industry – $18.6 billion
    Bear Stearns – $30 billion
    Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac – $400 billion
    AIG – $180 billion
    Auto industry – $25 billion
    TARP – $700 billion
    Citigroup – $280 billion
    All of these bailouts (over $1.6 trillion) occurred during Bush’s tenure. As I said before, don’t kid yourself, Republicans and Democrats are the same thing. They both love big businesses.

  148. Magnus the 1st says: Nov 3, 2010 3:16 PM

    I keep seeing people questioning why the Vikings would be even consider possiblity of moving because they sell out all their home games. Allow me to explain.
    While that may be technically true, it definitely should be accompanied by an asterisk. The last year and a half have been pretty good, but the year before Favre arrived, they constantly had trouble selling all the tickets to avoid a blackout. It seemed like every week, a 3rd party would swoop in and buy up the rest of the tickets just so they’d be televised. A few times, it was the local Fox or CBS affiliate. So it’s not as if there’s a waiting list for every home game. If I wanted, I could easily go to the box office and get tickets for just about any game I wanted right before the game.
    Clearly ticket sales are a huge part of owning a successful football team. But a new stadium in a different market that offers greater capacity, better amenities, and higher return on investment is what the owner is looking for on top of selling tickets.

  149. MNSUX says: Nov 3, 2010 3:17 PM

    # Arctic Edge says: November 3, 2010 12:36 PM
    The people of MN have spoken. And they don’t want a new stadium. I am deeply saddened by the lack of support MN residence have for the Vikings. Bears, Packers and Lions fans would never allow this to happen. Bye Bye Vikings. See you in LA LA land.
    ____________
    Exactly…..Your fans are the worst in all of sports!!!! BEAT LA BEAT LA!!!!!
    SkolFavre: You are a major POWER TOOL!

  150. rarson says: Nov 3, 2010 3:19 PM

    @longestlegs
    “One can only hope that this beautiful country continues to grow and support a class of Americans that show unabashed enthusiasm for browbeating their fellow citizens they deem to be subhuman scum.”
    In a supreme display of self-projection, he labels other people as “MORON kool-aid drinkers”, as evidenced by the fact that he clearly swallows anything his party spits into his mouth, such as the hatred of gays and non-Christians. Kool-aid drinker indeed!

  151. LA.NFL.fan says: Nov 3, 2010 4:13 PM

    Speaking as one L.A. NFL fan, I don’t want the Vikings right now. Maybe in 2 or 3 years, after they dump the dead weight, drama queens and morons from the staff and roster. Maybe then.

  152. SteveO says: Nov 3, 2010 4:22 PM

    Hey, Fools Who Think The Vikes Will Get A New Stadium:
    Got news for you, it’s not going to happen in MN. Maybe LA?
    How can you possibly think they’ll get a new stadium in MN with the Light Rail expansion to pay for, etc. C’mon, don’t be so naive.

  153. Jimee Johnson says: Nov 3, 2010 4:24 PM

    Sports brings a lot of money into the local economy. Minnesota is not about to let the Vikings get away, no matter which political party is in control. You people seem to ferget that the Democrats are Republicans in sheep’s clothing. Both parties serve corporate masters, including the National Football League. Wake up and go to sleep.

  154. Theo07 says: Nov 3, 2010 4:28 PM

    This might be a good thing.
    Send a busted ass franchise out and in a few years (no longer then 10), build a team from the ground up through expansion, I am sure Favre will still be playing then as well. Out goes the horrible coach, the nincompoop owner, the idiotic management group, and the overpriced players that cannot beat any good teams or even get a sack. This team is nothing but an embarrassment and as much as I want to cheer for them I simply cannot anymore, without being letdown or depressed over this group of far-gin jack wagons.

  155. Theo07 says: Nov 3, 2010 4:30 PM

    This might be a good thing.
    Send a busted ass franchise out and in a few years (no longer then 10), build a team from the ground up through expansion, I am sure Favre will still be playing then as well. Out goes the horrible coach, the nincompoop owner, the idiotic management group, and the overpriced players that cannot beat any good teams or even get a sack. This team is nothing but an embarrassment and as much as I want to cheer for them I simply cannot anymore, not without being letdown or depressed over this group of far-gin jack wagons.

  156. th56 says: Nov 3, 2010 4:52 PM

    This is baloney. Look at how the Texas Rangers stadium was built. The Republicans raped the state and made George Bush a multi millionaire in the process. As long as they get a slice, the Republicans will get it built.

  157. funi says: Nov 3, 2010 4:53 PM

    L.A.Vikes should go to NFC West and Rams to the NFC North…………

  158. Arctic Edge says: Nov 3, 2010 4:58 PM

    It is true that a new stadium would bring a lot of new revenue to the twin cities, but MN residence are not intelligent enough to realize this. After all, they elect pro wrestlers and comedians to office. Wilf needs to sell the team to a man rich enough to buy his own stadium. Mark Cuban where you at!!!!!

  159. Pack4GOP says: Nov 3, 2010 5:43 PM

    Just another “lib” in the media trying to sway the opinion of the people that Republicans are bad. News for you, we have common sense and are smarter than that.
    I love this website as I check it numerous times throughout the day, but this might go down as the dumbest post of all time. Stick to what your good at and quit crying like all the rest of your “lib” friends. Crap, your even starting to sound like a queens fan.

  160. Deb says: Nov 3, 2010 6:07 PM

    @Pack4GOP …
    Did you just say something about liberals crying? ROFL Are you serious? The whole Tea Party movement is nothing but a mass tantrum being thrown by a bunch of thumb-suckers who can’t cope with the 2008 election results. Kudos for making the most of their big Wahhh for the moment. But good grief, don’t talk about anyone else whining. LOL
    @Savagenation …
    You may think it makes you a Big Man to refer to the President of the United States as “bitch.” But all it means is that good soldiers have given their lives to protect the free speech of sick wastrels like you.

  161. treeman says: Nov 3, 2010 6:29 PM

    Deb says:
    November 3, 2010 6:07 PM
    @Pack4GOP …
    Did you just say something about liberals crying? ROFL Are you serious? The whole Tea Party movement is nothing but a mass tantrum being thrown by a bunch of thumb-suckers who can’t cope with the 2008 election results. Kudos for making the most of their big Wahhh for the moment. But good grief, don’t talk about anyone else whining. LOL
    @Savagenation …
    You may think it makes you a Big Man to refer to the President of the United States as “bitch.” But all it means is that good soldiers have given their lives to protect the free speech of sick wastrels like you.
    —————————————-
    Boom.

  162. TheWizard says: Nov 3, 2010 7:06 PM

    whole Tea Party movement is nothing but a mass tantrum being thrown by a bunch of thumb-suckers
    Oh come now.
    Name calling?
    And, whenever Republicans win it’s “anger” and a “tantrum” and “fit throwing”.
    How cliche’.

  163. TheWizard says: Nov 3, 2010 7:10 PM

    Republicans and Democrats are the same thing. They both love big businesses
    They love their own power even more unfortunately.

  164. Pack4GOP says: Nov 3, 2010 7:36 PM

    Who’s crying about the Tea Party Deb? Quit your whining………………………….
    That’s right, the Tea Party is a bunch of racists. Hey, not sure if you are paying attention, but the tea party candidates overall wiped the libs off the map.
    Get a clue and please get some common sense. Maybe then you will start to enjoy life, but until then please don’t think my hard earned money will be going to bail you off your couch while you’re collecting food stamps.

  165. footballrulz says: Nov 3, 2010 7:55 PM

    fortysixand2 says:
    November 3, 2010 12:32 PM
    I’m all for the NFL in London, but only if the team name is Werewolves
    ——————————————–”
    aah–ooooh

  166. Mr. Cowpatty says: Nov 3, 2010 8:13 PM

    The Vikings won’t move until hell freezes over. That should be about January in the Land of Lakes.

  167. It'sJustAGame612 says: Nov 3, 2010 8:19 PM

    @Pack4GOP
    Wow.. Ever been to college dude?? Please take a history and macro-economics class before you fire off all that gibberish.. Pick one.. Corporate welfare or social welfare.. That’s the two choices in America..

  168. PierreTheLion says: Nov 3, 2010 8:35 PM

    A post about my beloved hometown Vikings possibly leaving for L.A. that also encourages Republican trolls to gloat about election results? Looks like someone got vomit in my turd sandwich…sorry to burst your bubble, but politicos talk a good game about standing up to stadium taxes but they WILL cave. Two words seem apropos here: Target Field. The Twins are no more beloved in this state than the Vikings and were facing contraction, yet they slipped the noose. The state gov knows if they refuse to pass another small sales tax increase which makes the Vikings leave town none of them will ever work in this state again.

  169. Mooch says: Nov 3, 2010 8:39 PM

    Wow, Rarson, we found something we agree on.
    Lookit, MN – you want the team then buck up. Or maybe do what everyone else does and slap a hotel / taxi / airport tax that has a greater impact on non-residents.
    It’s the aversion to ANY tax that has MN in touble. And all of this so that Pawlenty can fininsh in 4th place.
    It’s ideology over practicality. And guess what? The team generates tax revenue. So if they leave you’re going to have to cover that somehow, with higher taxes or usage fees you are not paying now.
    Either way, you pay.
    In any case, you are building that stadium – either for the team you have now, or the team your going to try to get after the Vikings leave. And you’ll be paying retail if it comes to the latter.

  170. Pack4GOP says: Nov 3, 2010 8:47 PM

    Absolutely I’ve been to college and I will say that I have learned more about life and business by living it than what I was ever taught by a professor.
    I don’t need to be taught by some lib professor from Harvard on macro-economics to understand how simple this is. Libs want government handouts and larger government. I want to keep more of my money because I am smarter with it than government.
    Anyway, the Queens still have the worst fans in the world.

  171. JohnnySkamps says: Nov 3, 2010 10:41 PM

    First of all, the London nonsense needs to stop. How many English folks play in the NFL? What’s after that? Tokoyo or Cairo?
    I hope the vikings stay in Minnesota. I’d be crushed if my Lions were moved. Having grown up seeing Green Bay, Chicago and Minnesota on a regular basis I don’t ever want to see any of those teams moved, PERIOD. Don’t mess with our division you LA phonies!
    I think i there should be a rule that any team that moves away from a city MUST leave the nickname behind. (Cleveland Browns). Never know when a team may return. Should be the St. Louis Cardinals, Phoenix ?????? and maybe one day the L.A Rams

  172. PackerFansAreInbred says: Nov 3, 2010 11:36 PM

    Stirring the pot again, Florio? I still think they’ll get it done in the 2011 session. 2010 being an election year was the reason it wasn’t done last spring. The Vikings don’t belong in LA, they belong in Minnesota. Los Angeles is the worst sports town in America, their teams don’t even get supported when they’re winning. And if the Vikings did leave I would never be a Packer fan because my parents are not brother & sister.

  173. Deb says: Nov 4, 2010 12:15 AM

    TheWizard says:
    “whole Tea Party movement is nothing but a mass tantrum being thrown by a bunch of thumb-suckers”
    Oh come now. Name calling?
    And, whenever Republicans win it’s “anger” and a “tantrum” and “fit throwing”. How cliche’.
    ————————————————-
    Umm … where did I mention Republicans? I don’t use Tea Partiers and Republicans interchangeably. I know the Republican party was once the liberal party of Abraham Lincoln and abolitionists, of Teddy Roosevelt and the environmental movement, and the first party to endorse the Equal Rights Amendment. It’s only in the last few years that a large portion of the Republican party has gone to right-wing extremes. A large segment of Republicans want nothing to do with Tea Partiers–and those are the ones I described as a mass tantrum being thrown by thumb-suckers.
    @Pack4GOP …
    Before you go to college, you have to learn to read. I didn’t say anything about Tea Partiers being racist. Your comment about food stamps was silly … as was your oversimplification about large government and government handouts. Any intellectual conservative will tell you Bush grew the government–and government debt–to alarming levels. You apparently didn’t even understand It’sJustaGame612’s comment about corporate welfare. Are you smart enough to invest your money in a retirement plan that will ensure you have something to live on in your old age? You willing to stake your social security on it?

  174. gdeli says: Nov 4, 2010 12:16 AM

    Real men can wear purple. We have awesome jerseys. Why wear red? I don’t think I could go over to the dark side(packers). Not gonna do it. Jets, Steelers, Patriots, Colts I might do. NFC has nothing really now. The Giants are good. I will keep my eyes open and learn from what goes down this season. Too much drama!

  175. Mike Daly says: Nov 4, 2010 12:50 AM

    While it may be the case that Republicans won’t want to build a new Minnesota stadium, that kind of spending is not what needs to be stopped – it’s the entitlement programs and unionocracy subsidies today known as Obamanomics that need to be stopped. Building a new stadium is mere chicken feed.

  176. radioboy20010 says: Nov 4, 2010 7:56 AM

    Funny, but aside from the usual stupid comments concerning political nonsense(media generated generalities which the uninformed think are real), the one component missing from the comments: does Wulf want to move the team?
    The NFL doesn’t own the team, Wulf does. He makes the decision to move, or not. A new stadium is probably not in the offing, but he seems to be spending money on free agents like the MetroDump is just a fine money-generator. Could the Vikings move? Sure. But the NFL doesn’t seem to be in any hurry to move a franchise there. With the “fans” in Jacksonville so unconcerned, my bet is if a team were to move it would first be the Jags. The Vikings fans still follow the team, as totally insane as that is to ponder.
    One other point: where’s Wulf’s money to build a new football stadium?

  177. slegeir says: Nov 4, 2010 9:14 AM

    How stupid are those people in Mn? When they built that new stadium for their beloved Twins, why didn’t they incorporate the Vikings in it? Just goes to show you they care more about their baseball team and could care less about the Vikes. Serve them all right if the Vikings move somewhere else.

  178. slegeir says: Nov 4, 2010 9:20 AM

    Why does another country have to get involved with our sport??? I hate the thought of having an NFL team in London. And then what other country will want in. Suppose it’s all about how much money it will generate. And then they can pay the players billions instead of millions. Hate it!!!!

  179. Mooch says: Nov 4, 2010 9:36 AM

    Here is my experience as a resident of NJ. When you give Republicans the kind of gov’t they want – which means taxes get slightly lower for most (as they did with Obama’s cut) and their schools and police / fire dept’s get gutted…they cannot live with it.
    They want the social programs and services of Vermont, with the tax rate of Mississippi. It’s not their fault, as a people we’ve become soft.
    I support Christie because he is the only politician asking us to make tough choices – and live with the consequences.
    I am not sure he will get re-elected. Because people can’t handle that the “waste in state gov’t” turned out to be their kid’s favorite teaching assistance or their brother Billy the Cop’s job or the men’s baseball team.
    So stand by your principles about taxes and spending, just don’t cry when your team goes to LA. And make a pledge not to go after a new team…because that would be selling out.
    Because if you lose that team, you are gonna spend the next decade spending money to get one back. And then you’ll have the terms of the deal dictated to you – the luxury boxes, share of concessions, etc. It’ll cost you three times as much.
    PS – the owner should absolutely build the stadium themselves, but the point is they don’t have to.

  180. Mike Rendahl says: Nov 4, 2010 10:14 AM

    I’m pleased to see that there are a lot of people disagreeing with this article. It shouldn’t matter who’s in control of whatever, either way something needs to be done to ensure that the Vikings stay in Minnesota. Fans of Minnesota have done a lot for the game, that ought to count for something. I still feel bad for fans in Cleveland, L.A., St. Louis, Baltimore, who lost their teams, getting a replacement team just isn’t the same and it’s bad for the history of the game

  181. Ruvell200 says: Nov 4, 2010 10:26 AM

    With one of the highest corporate tax rates, it could be suicide for Minnesota if Wilf gets state money to finance that stadium.
    What would stop Best Buy, Target, Honeywell, 3M, etc from saying, “Give us state money, or we’re packing up and moving to Sioux Falls?” Hell, they employ alot more Minnesotans than the Vikings do. It’s already happening on a small level, considering they would pay NO state tax for the first 5 years of their operations.

  182. Mooch says: Nov 4, 2010 11:39 AM

    Ruvell.
    Nothing is stopping them, they probably benefit from generous tax breaks already.
    I remember Boeing doing what you describe between Seattle and Wichita…and that was around 1990 (I think). They just played one off another to see who would give them the best tax breaks. This probably became the new model for every company.
    So I’d be shocked if Target in MN and Comcast in Philly pay much in the way of taxes. That’s why some businesses like a recession every now and then – it lets workers and gov’t know who’s boss.
    The only issue is this – the cheaper, desperate states are those where no one wants to live. They also don’t have skilled labor. So that makes it tough to attract the quality they’d need (if they need it). Much was made of N Dakota’s need for labor, and their inability to find people willing to move there. But that’s about the only thing that would spot a company from moving as you describe.

  183. Ruvell200 says: Nov 4, 2010 12:15 PM

    Mooch-
    I agree 100% on the first part, but my opinion has changed of Sioux Falls after a few trips there. In reality, the city if growing by leaps and bounds since it’s as business friendly as a city can get. It ain’t Chicago, or even Madison, but it’s a more liveable city than most people would know.
    I know most of the credit card companies operate out of there now, and Target itself has moved some of it’s more basic operations there as well.
    Back to the issue at bar, I think you would see some legitimate fallout from the Vikings getting state money. The Twins…they are a well run organization and the city really benefits from 81 sellouts downtown every summer. The Gophers…the campus needs revenue and it benefits the university/state. The Vikes…hell, they start 1-3 in a new stadium and corporations will be buying up the remaining tickets guaranteed. They just have a pathetic fanbase.

  184. VikingMatador says: Nov 4, 2010 12:22 PM

    Oh please………Vikings are NOT moving anywhere

  185. GBfanForever says: Nov 4, 2010 12:29 PM

    Using large amounts of tax dollars to build stadiums is usually a scam. What’s utterly hilarious is republican politics coming home to roost. What’s more republican than an owner keeping his team in a city or moving to a new one based on which is more willing to give a tax payer funded subsidy to help them get richer? At the same time republicans say they don’t want those tax dollars spent. It truly is a nonsensical political ideology they subscribe to but one that makes sense when you grasp the fundamental underpinning of it which is unrestrained greed. I would appreciate if an honest republican could give me a counter argument on this one because usually, in this context, you guys really look like hypocritical crooks.

  186. In & Out Burger says: Nov 4, 2010 1:07 PM

    @Mike Rendahl
    “Fans of Minnesota have done a lot for the game, that ought to count for something.”
    Nope. If Roger Goodell has proved himself to be anything, it’s being unflinchingly destitute to the needs and wants of the average fan.

  187. Deb says: Nov 4, 2010 1:17 PM

    @Mike Daly …
    Interesting that entitlement programs and unionocracy subsidies, as you call them, are known as “Obamanomics.” Entitlement programs and unionocracy subsidies were associated with the Democratic party for at least 80 years before anyone ever heard of Barack Obama.
    So what is it about Obama that has people in two years crediting (blaming) the man for nearly a century of political history? I mean … what is there about THIS man that’s different … that makes him stand out from the rest … and causes people to become so venomous when speaking of him … to go so far as to insist he wasn’t even born in this country? Obamanomics? After decades of entitlement programs and union support? Hmmmm. Let’s look at the guy …. what do we see in HIM that has everyone so irrationally bent out of shape that they’d actually blame him for things that have been going on since before he was BORN (in the United States)???????

  188. thirdandgoal says: Nov 4, 2010 2:05 PM

    How does that work? If a team relocates, are the existing season ticketholders kicked out, or do they get the option to retain their seat(s)? Just curious.

  189. Mooch says: Nov 4, 2010 2:43 PM

    As with most extreme right-wing or left-wing concepts, they don’t mesh very well with reality.
    Don’t hate the player, hate the game. As long as one other city is willing to give in, you have to build him that stadium.
    Else, you risk losing the team. Can you live with that?
    Don’t believe that it can happen? Talk to a Sonics fan. And the NBA lost money on that one as the OKC media market is far smaller than SEA. That’s a chunk of TV money and less people to buy merchandise.
    Moving from MIN to LA…that’s a huge increase in TV money and merchandise. Which, since they share it among the owners, would be strong motivation to permit this move.
    Using tax payer $’s is a scam. But it’s the way it goes.

  190. Ruvell200 says: Nov 4, 2010 3:09 PM

    @GBFanForever-
    It’s a legitimate question you’ve asked, and I know where you are coming from. Let me try to explain.
    Outside of militia groups, I don’t think there are too many Republicans who think ALL government spending is bad. We have to have roads, schools, etc. Republicans are just against wasteful government spending. If responsibly spending taxpayer money to help finance a new stadium is for the overall benefit of the state financially, then it should be done. If it’s not, Zygi Wilf can go to hell, and hopefully get a better name along the way.
    If he goes to the next state and it benefits the state to make the investment, then they should make the deal. Smart investing is not hypocrisy.

  191. SSgtLMJ says: Nov 4, 2010 4:18 PM

    Great!! Anywhere but Whinyapolis!! Folks in LA are pretentious but at least they’re not sore losers and whine for months at a time about refs and hard hits, but rather blame all their short comings on anything but the team and pathetic organization that is the Whinyapolis Viqueens.

  192. Deb says: Nov 4, 2010 4:19 PM

    Well, Mooch, you and I agree on some things, but I think it’s evil to move sports teams like chess pieces. LA had and lost two franchises. They’ve already taken the Lakers from Minnesota. Good grief, wars have been started over less pillaging than this. If the taxpayers of Minnesota vote to allow their money to be used for a stadium, it’s not a scam. And there are other ways than public money to secure funding for a stadium.
    If the handful of owners who want teams only in large markets like New York, LA, Dallas, and London succeed in getting their way, they’ll make more money in the short run, but they’ll kill the league in the long run. It shouldn’t be allowed.

  193. SSgtLMJ says: Nov 4, 2010 4:19 PM

    If they move to LA, I think I’ll actually start calling them the Vikings again and not the Viqueens, which is what they are currently called.

  194. GBfanForever says: Nov 4, 2010 5:03 PM

    Thanks Ruvell,
    I honestly wasn’t trying to be inflammatory. I just think there becomes disagreement to what is wasteful and what isn’t at times I guess.

  195. Dan Mateus says: Nov 4, 2010 5:33 PM

    Some of these people on the right are are idiots.
    Republicans love giving handouts to big buisness.
    Dems like to spend the money on you but you rather give a massive tax break to Mobil.
    Bob Kraft threatened to move the Patriots to Hartford or Rhode Island in the late 90’s because Massachusetts a notoriously liberal state would NOT give him taxpayer money to build his new stadium.
    Ultimately Kraft had to build the stadium on his own dime.
    Jerry Jones who is from the “red” state of Texas the home of “real” americans gave a billionaire a communist style handout to build his monstrosity of a stadium.
    What benefit do the taxpayers get out of that GOP?
    Nothing!

  196. Dan Mateus says: Nov 4, 2010 5:33 PM

    Some of these people on the right are are idiots.
    Republicans love giving handouts to big buisness.
    Dems like to spend the money on you but you rather give a massive tax break to Mobil.
    Bob Kraft threatened to move the Patriots to Hartford or Rhode Island in the late 90’s because Massachusetts a notoriously liberal state would NOT give him taxpayer money to build his new stadium.
    Ultimately Kraft had to build the stadium on his own dime.
    Jerry Jones who is from the “red” state of Texas the home of “real” americans gave a billionaire a communist style handout to build his monstrosity of a stadium.
    What benefit do the taxpayers get out of that GOP?
    Nothing!

  197. airmoss18 says: Nov 4, 2010 5:48 PM

    slegier:
    The last stadium to be designed and used for this dual-purpose (MLB and NFL) was….. THE METRODOME.
    That model no longer works.

  198. PackerFansAreInbred says: Nov 4, 2010 6:30 PM

    What do Gilette Stadium, FedEx Field & Cowboys Stadium all have in common? They’re corporate Stadiums. Ticket prices are so high that true fans that are middle-class citizens can’t afford to buy a ticket. But those markets are big enough that it works over there. Minneapolis/St. Paul does not have the market size. There needs to be some public funding ideas and there are creative ones too. Personalized License Plates & tabs for vehicles for those Minnesota residents who want them, Racino & proceeds from the Vikings scratch-off game should be going towards the Stadium. Minnesota should legalize Sunday liquor sales, the biggest loser there would be Wisconsin. Clothing tax only on NFL apparel would only effect NFL fans, hotel/motel & rental car tax would effect very few locals. It would be the out-of-towners that get hit. Just find a way to get it done because I can’t afford Seat License fees. And leaving for Los Angeles would be a big mistake, the league will realized how embarassing it will be to see blackouts in the nation’s #2 TV market. If anybody goes to LA it should be the Raiders. The Bay Area is 49ers country, it’s been proven both attendance & TV wise.

  199. rarson says: Nov 4, 2010 6:35 PM

    “What would stop Best Buy, Target, Honeywell, 3M, etc from saying, ‘Give us state money, or we’re packing up and moving to Sioux Falls?'”
    They’re already getting state money in the form of subsidized transportation costs. One of the reasons why Walmart can sell things so cheaply is the abundance of public roads. If roads were privately owned, then they would actually have to pay their fair share for usage of them, and they wouldn’t be able to run locally-owned businesses out of town.

  200. Mooch says: Nov 4, 2010 7:28 PM

    “I think it’s evil to move sports teams like chess pieces.”
    Agreed.

  201. TheWizard says: Nov 4, 2010 8:26 PM

    I don’t use Tea Partiers and Republicans interchangeably
    Since I’m both, I believe most of the former are also of the latter, and I’m pretty sure I’m right.
    All I ask is debate us on the issues instead of liberal media talking points.

  202. HolyMoly says: Nov 4, 2010 9:51 PM

    Republicans do favor limited government.
    Except that they support wire tapping.
    Oh, and the restriction of a woman’s right to choose. On that, they want the government to decide.
    Oh wait, also they want the government to be in your home telling you what you can and can’t smoke.
    Oh and also they want the government in your bedroom telling you exactly what kind of sex you can have.
    Other than that, the Republicans are for a smaller, more limited government!!!!!

  203. Deb says: Nov 4, 2010 10:44 PM

    @The Wizard …
    A lot of Tea Partiers are Republicans, but some are also Independents and Libertarians. Many Republicans, however, are not Tea Partiers–which is why I don’t use the terms interchangeably.
    I’m an anomaly: registered Independent, conservative evangelical, and fiscally centrist, but socially liberal. It’s impossible for me to debate using “liberal media talking points” because I don’t watch the talking heads. If I want to understand a bill, I read it. If I want to know a candidate’s position, I listen to his or her debates and interviews. It’s a good strategy that allows for forming your own opinions.
    My comment didn’t have anything to do with Republicans or conservatism. I enjoy reading smart conservatives like David Brooks and David Frum. I simply had a visceral reaction to a simpleton talking about liberals whining since we’ve heard nothing but whining for two years. “I want my country back”–as though losing an election somehow means they’ve been robbed. So don’t take it personally. If you’re a Tea Partier who’s genuinely interested in tax issues, etc., as opposed to just ranting against the black guy in the White House, then I wasn’t referring to you.

  204. HolyMoly says: Nov 5, 2010 12:32 AM

    I think it’s really hilarious how insane, right-wing freaks like Tom Benson and Jerry Jones begged their respective red state governments to publicly fund their stadiums and yet in totally liberal Massachusetts the government denied the request.

  205. mattgso says: Nov 5, 2010 8:42 AM

    Setting aside on the field rivalries, the Vikings need to get innovative:
    1) Build a stadium that is friendly to the average fan. Have your luxury suites but pack the fans in near the field. Create a energy filled, loud, home field advantage. Your team wins, you’ll get more butts in seats (except in Florida).
    2) Revenues the city (cities) get from stadium need to be openly published. If the Vikings can show revenues that exceed the tax funding, everyone is happy.
    3) Here’s a crazy one: Vikings need to have an IPO. Yep, go publically owned. Sell stock in the team. Wilf can ensure he keeps 51% ownership. Keep each share somewhat high so shareholders can get perks such as reduced PSL or season ticket prices.
    It’s time to think outside the box/dome.

  206. thirdandgoal says: Nov 5, 2010 11:30 AM

    @mattgso wrote:
    “Yep, go publically owned. ”
    Sorry, the NFL by-laws now prohibit public ownership. GB was ‘grandfathered’ in, and is the only exception.

  207. Mooch says: Nov 5, 2010 11:51 AM

    Tea Party is a subset of the religious right. That’s been known for months now.

  208. Deb says: Nov 5, 2010 3:34 PM

    Well, Mooch, I thought so, too. But Palladino–the New York gubernatorial candidate who liked to forward bestiality porn–just doesn’t strike me as a “religious right” kind of dude ;)
    It’s true of the rank-and-file–and a lot of the movement is nothing more than disinterested voters who got interested when we elected an African-American president. But many candidates running as Tea Partiers are political opportunists who don’t care about religious-right issues and are taking on the mantle because fools will vote for anyone wearing the right hat. I was recently informed “Tea” is an acronym for “taxed enough already,” so some of these guys are genuine libertarians. And others are just wishy-washy people who voted Obama in 08 and can’t figure out why the “magic Negro” didn’t fix everything with a wave of the wand.
    It takes all kinds to create a wave like that. But like the Perot people and the 94 Contract with America people, they’ll all disappear when they realize they can’t get their way.

  209. Materialman says: Nov 5, 2010 3:36 PM

    why do the taxpayers have to continue to subsidize the richest people in America? Let the Vikings build their own stadium.

  210. Mooch says: Nov 5, 2010 6:10 PM

    Deb – I draw a distinction between the ‘actual’ Tea Party of years gone by and the one recently purchased by the GOP.
    The real Tea Party – the one in existence years ago – are legit libertarians. Think Ron Paul. Small, but poorly organized and funded.
    The fake Tea Party of today are Republicans who are just embarrassed to admit they voted for W twice. They embrace every core value of the GOP. They want big government so long as it is what they like – big military, lots of wars, farm subsidies, etc. They like spending when they are in power, don’t want to spend when they ain’t.
    The fake Tea Party leaders campaigned in many cases – as in NJ and also in NV primary – against the ACTUAL Tea Party candidate for fear they’d cost the GOP a seat.
    It was a “name change” marketing campaign. Almost half of Tea Partiers surveyed identified as members of the RR. And they always vote GOP.
    They aren’t swing / indy voters.
    You sound like you figured this out too, though.

  211. Bengals1622 says: Nov 5, 2010 6:23 PM

    Why does the NFL continue to think a team in London (or anywhere overseas) is a good idea? I don’t have a dog in the Viking’s fight… I don’t care if they move or stay… but PLEASE NOT LONDON!!

  212. FireChildress says: Nov 5, 2010 8:02 PM

    Well said airmoss. The most commented post on this site are always Viking related. We have a huge following, We sell out every game. There will be a stadium deal done. Racino bitches!

  213. In & Out Burger says: Nov 5, 2010 8:31 PM

    My political idea: just give each party total control every 8 years. We’ll start with my preferred party. If they do a good job, maybe after 7 years, we can go back to elections.

  214. Deb says: Nov 5, 2010 8:43 PM

    @Mooch …
    Yeah, there was a lot of bait-and-switch in this election. Unfortunately, many of my conservative friends were taken in. We may not agree politically, but they’re genuine people. The guy who executed the biggest corporate fraud in Florida history was just elected governor. Think Enron but within a healthcare company–except Rick Scott was smarter than Ken Lay. As CEO he walked away with millions while guys below him took the fall. He spent $73 million of his own money on his campaign, and it never seemed to occur to anyone that he must expect a big return on investment. Now he has the keys to the state treasury. He was endorsed by the new “Tea Party.” Most of the people I know said they voted for him as the lesser of two evils simply because the other candidate was a Democrat. Guess he was the “Christian” choice–heaven help us.

  215. thirdandgoal says: Nov 5, 2010 8:50 PM

    chance of vikings relocating: 1%

  216. theravenlives2 says: Nov 5, 2010 9:39 PM

    I think i there should be a rule that any team that moves away from a city MUST leave the nickname behind. (Cleveland Browns). Never know when a team may return. Should be the St. Louis Cardinals, Phoenix ?????? and maybe one day the L.A Rams
    ————————————————
    This is a rule now. They changed it after the Titans moved.

  217. eyefeeler says: Nov 5, 2010 10:29 PM

    You’re dumb. Any real professional coach could have and can win a chip with this Vikings squad with Randy Moss. In a very odd way I hope the Vikings travel the way of the Lakers and head west. Minnesota gets a new team via expansion and a new stadium on its own terms. Eff your political stance; it’s all BS anyway: hippies love the democratic party because they embrace the anti-establishment…on the other hand you have the establishment loving tax breaks for the owners who offer more people an opportunity at mediocrity. Eff them both; just play effing football quit bit*hing about everything. Figure the s!!t out if you want something. Shut up and play ball b!tches.

  218. PackerFansAreInbred says: Nov 5, 2010 11:15 PM

    Racino, License Plates, Scratch-off ticket proceeds going towards Stadium, Legalize Sunday Liquor sales, hotel/motel & rental-car tax with Minnesota residents exempt from those 2 & that’s all they need to get enough public money. None of those would require a referrendum. Nobody being held hostage or extorted there. If only the politicians had a brain and would take a look at this.

  219. Gravy says: Nov 6, 2010 2:51 AM

    Queens will wind up in Norway as last place soccer team.

  220. Greenman says: Nov 6, 2010 3:37 AM

    In & Out Burger says:
    November 5, 2010 8:31 PM
    My political idea: just give each party total control every 8 years. We’ll start with my preferred party. If they do a good job, maybe after 7 years, we can go back to elections.
    ====================================
    Or my Idea, let me personally run things for eight years, then go back to the elections and congress and stuff.

  221. 2Blackaces81 says: Nov 6, 2010 11:55 AM

    Idiots, including you Florio! The Vikings are not going to LA, it will be Jacksonville who is moved! Anyway how about this for a solution, take TCF Field away from the pathetic Gophers and give it to the Vikes. The Gophers have done nothing to warrant getting a new stadium expcept continue to be the laughing stock of the Big 10!

  222. MNSUX says: Nov 6, 2010 2:46 PM

    @Deb, WOW you are ignorant!

  223. slickzmoney says: Nov 6, 2010 4:09 PM

    I’m with Wein – lets leave the political stuff for other sites. It encourages even more mind-numbing posts than usual.

  224. usflguy says: Nov 6, 2010 4:14 PM

    I actually think the chances of a stadium resolution are helped immensely by the election results. Ironically this is especially the case if Mark Dayton wins the recount. He campaigned that he was in favor of a state run casino. Since Mystic Lake is a major funder of the DFL party here, such a scenario was impossible with a Democratic house or senate. I have to believe the Republicans will push through a bill that creates at a minimum racinos at Canterbury and Running Aces, perhaps the scope will be even bigger. Like most stadium votes it will probably pass by one vote, as the vulnerable and most ideologically pure Republicans are allowed to vote against it. I don’t think Dayton would dare veto such an attempt and then be villainized as the guy who booted the Vikings out of MN. The new stadium effort will also be aided by the huge success of Target Field. It obviously has been a tough year for the Vikings but they remain the most loved team in town. Fire Childress!!

  225. jimmySee says: Nov 6, 2010 6:28 PM

    cusoman says:
    November 3, 2010 1:05 PM
    Pssst, the taxes that were imposed in 1977 to get the Metrodome built were done so under a very conservative DFL party in Minnesota at the time.
    Hope is not lost on a new stadium, and a lot of that is going to depend on who wins the governor’s seat. Unfortunately we might not know who what is until well into next year with the race being so close and the recount coming :\
    ————————————————-
    Don’t really know if you’re right or wrong about that — but Republicans have so poisoned the well on any tax increases, starting from Reagan on — that it would be impossible for them to do that today.
    Vikings fans are the losers there.
    And all this blather about LA not supporting sports teams is misguided and misinformed. USC, UCLA, Dodgers, Lakers, and Kings all do just fine, thank you. Even the Clippers draw.

  226. jimmySee says: Nov 6, 2010 6:56 PM

    Mike Daly says:
    November 4, 2010 12:50 AM
    While it may be the case that Republicans won’t want to build a new Minnesota stadium, that kind of spending is not what needs to be stopped – it’s the entitlement programs and unionocracy subsidies today known as Obamanomics that need to be stopped. Building a new stadium is mere chicken feed.
    ————————————————-
    Really! How interesting! And of which “entitlement” programs do you speak? Medicare? Social security? Unemployment compensation? Maybe Workers Comp?
    On the subsidies front, do you favor abolishing foreign aid? Farm subsidies to help family farms? Student aid (Pell grants and loans?) Tell us.
    Sounds like your goal a fast trip backward to Dickens’ London.

  227. DaVikes says: Nov 6, 2010 11:56 PM

    If the NFL cut it’s salary cap in half, all the teams could afford to pay for their own stadiums. $50 mil a year is a nice mortgage payment. The taxpayer would be off the hook, and the players would still be a lot richer than most of us.
    State governments created this problem a long time ago by subsidizing stadiums. Back then, pro sports teams could legitimately claim that they couldn’t afford to build a stadium. Now they all can afford it, but they’re paying their players too much. Just another example of how government subsidies screw the taxpayer to benefit a privileged few.

  228. sjd1138 says: Nov 7, 2010 1:43 AM

    If the Vikings move, I hope they please change their name! Change your city? OK. Then change your name too!
    Maybe it’s just me, but I feel the team name should reflect some aspect of the local culture. I hate team names like the Utah… Jazz. The Baltimore Ravens are much more awesome than they would ever have been as the Baltimore Browns.
    “Vikings” is actually a cool football name, but it is so closely associated with Scandinavian culture, it clearly doesn’t belong in a city like LA.
    At least the Vikings colors would be a nice complement to the Lakers. Of course, the Lakers name also doesn’t reflect LA, but at least it has the advantage of alliteration and it happened so long ago they can be “grandfathered-in”.
    Tennessee Titans = good.
    Arizona Cardinals = not so much. Maybe they should have called themselves the Arizona Cactus Wrens. Haha.

  229. tatum32 says: Nov 7, 2010 3:29 AM

    # King10 says: November 3, 2010 12:38 PM
    Good. Time to rid the United States of two evils:
    1. Democrats
    2. A team with purple uniforms
    idiot
    1. Democrats brought you 22 million jobs and more homeowners under clinton
    2. Republicans brought you 9/11 two quagmire wars and a deficit the size of a blackhole.
    Go Vikings!

  230. jimmySee says: Nov 7, 2010 10:28 AM

    One thing that Fox News has done is give people courage to stand up for hare-brained ideas.
    There were more private market jobs created last month than in 8 years of Bush.
    Bush tax cuts resulted in huge deficits. Under Clinton, the budget showed a surplus, not deficits.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!