Skip to content

L.A. moves closer to downtown stadium, NFL team(s)

LA_stadium_Gensler_02

The folks at AEG wanted to reach a so-called “Memorandum of Understanding” with the Los Angeles City Council by July 31.

They got it done with five days to spare.

Per the Los Angeles Times, an agreement on a document that keeps the downtown stadium project on track for 2016 has been reached.

“[A]pproval of this MOU will represent a critical milestone in our efforts to break ground on this project within the next year,” AEG said in a statement.  “We look forward to continuing to work with the City to take this project to the next step at the same time that we also increase our focus on other key objectives, including progressing design of the project and securing the commitments necessary to bring the NFL back to Los Angeles.”

Potential candidates for a move to L.A. include the Chargers, Bills, Vikings, and Rams.  The Raiders and 49ers also could be in play, based on the manner in which stadium efforts unfold in the Bay Area.  The Jaguars also could be in the mix, despite consistent denials from owner Wayne Weaver of any interest in moving the team or selling it.

The Vikings could move to Los Angeles — or anywhere else — after the 2011 season.  It’s the last year of their Metrodome lease.

It is believed that, eventually, two teams could land in L.A.

Permalink 67 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Buffalo Bills, Jacksonville Jaguars, Minnesota Vikings, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers, San Francisco 49ers, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, St. Louis Rams, Top Stories
67 Responses to “L.A. moves closer to downtown stadium, NFL team(s)”
  1. feldman9000 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:21 AM

    I sure will miss Jacksonville

  2. kingmj4891 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:22 AM

    You have nothing better to report than more LA garbage talk. Come on football is back we want this year news not potential maybe talk.

  3. feldman9000 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:22 AM

    If the Vikings move, fans will blow up that town.

  4. gfan8611 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:22 AM

    So when they move the Jags out there will they also require them to change the ugliest team colors in the league?

  5. brettfavrecellphone says: Jul 26, 2011 11:22 AM

    Isn’t Ari Gold working on this?

  6. thephantomstranger says: Jul 26, 2011 11:23 AM

    Let me pre-emptively say that the Vikings will not move to LA. They already have two cities that are dying to have them: Minneapolis and Arden Hills.

  7. seabreezes51 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:23 AM

    L.A. is a way station.
    No team can survive where the fans don’t care.

  8. bdawk20 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:24 AM

    LA is a big market- I am guessing they would have kept both the Rams and the Raiders if they built proper facilities?

    I don’t know enough about why both teams left LA, but giving them 2 teams seems a bit shortsighted at the moment…

  9. jsbrasha says: Jul 26, 2011 11:25 AM

    You guys are way behind ESPM on this and where are those rapid-fire posts you promised on free-agent moves? Are we experiencing some post-lockout rust?

  10. uclabruininstlouis says: Jul 26, 2011 11:25 AM

    I still don’t see how a city which already has lost two football teams could attract a new team or two, especially for the long run and especially if the team(s) aren’t doing well. I’m a native son of the golden west so I do have a little insight of how the fair-weather fans are. I’m afraid that the Los Angeles “aura” will be like a Siren’s call (with different results, of course). There’s just too much other stuff to do in SoCal to develop a long-term fan base. FWIW.

  11. trbowman says: Jul 26, 2011 11:26 AM

    LA is an awful sports city.

  12. broncotis3000 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:26 AM

    Why should I care???

  13. berniemadoffsides says: Jul 26, 2011 11:28 AM

    LA always has been and always will be a baseball and basketball town.

  14. minormillikin says: Jul 26, 2011 11:29 AM

    The idea that the Bills would move to Los Angeles makes me sad/annoyed — and not a Bills fan in the slightest.

    Moving the Raiders back to LA, on the other hand, makes sense to me. For one, it will give Oakland an excuse to finally demolish that eyesore of a stadium (A’s don’t like it either). And, most importantly, Dodgers fans are very similar to Raiders fans (in attitude, angst, violence).

  15. pympdaddi says: Jul 26, 2011 11:31 AM

    Three teams have come and gone from the L.A. area (Raiders, Rams and Chargers albeit they’re not far but NOT in L.A.). The reason an NFL team can’t survive the ebb and flow of “fandom” in L.A. is because they will ONLY support a team if they’re winning and I mean ALWAYS! Take a look back at how all the stars slid on over to the Clippers when the Lakers had a bit of a drought. The fans in L.A. are just LIKE that! Another (4th or 5th) team will again be a failure. It’s a college football town at best and will NEVER be able to consistently support an NFL team long term!

  16. p01ntman says: Jul 26, 2011 11:31 AM

    PLEASE take the Washington Red Skins so we can start over again!

  17. b7p19 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:31 AM

    That looks like a beautiful stadium. Almost looks like Wembley or one of the other major soccer stadiums.

    Isn’t it funny how those computerized pictures always seem to be at sunset?

  18. karlpilkington says: Jul 26, 2011 11:33 AM

    Jul 26, 2011 11:22 AM
    Isn’t Ari Gold working on this?

    74 i
    Rate This

    Um, Can you get some new material, I and many others said this joke 6 months ago.

    Except that I added Mr. Plastic Face Jones was involved.

  19. bender4700 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:33 AM

    People, this isn’t “Will Favre come bacl”. This is talks of one or two teams leaving for LA.

    Some might say that’s a big deal.

    Do you HONESTLY want to read “Joe Blow cut, John Doe signed” articles?!

    THIS IS CONTENT FOLKS. Stop crying about no football talk then slam them when they talk about a potential huge change. Is it expansion? Teams moving? Realignment could happen as a result!

  20. jmikeh73 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:35 AM

    think they might be interested in the Bengals? please?

  21. pistolsmoke says: Jul 26, 2011 11:35 AM

    How many teams have gone through LA? It won’t work in the long run….again. Just cause it’s a “big market” doesn’t mean anything if people won’t show up. Ask Miami Heat (true) fans how it is down there. They have one of the best rosters in basketball, full of stars, and they can’t sell out any of their games. And they only need like 18,000 people to fill their place up.

  22. Keyser Söze says: Jul 26, 2011 11:37 AM

    This will give San Diego and the Bay Area teams
    some leverage. I’m anxious to see how this plays out….

  23. bender4700 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:38 AM

    Living in the LA area now, it’d be the talk of the town for a few years.

    but

    if the team starts to stink, LA will lose interest. Hell, I don’t hear squat about the Lakers right now.

    If LA can get one team, an owner like Mark Cuban, or Mark Cuban himself, they could keep it going. There are enough people around here that would go.

    Miami is still doing ok in a city that is notoriously bandwaggon. I love my Dolphins, but I’m always embarrassed when their games come on and half the stadium is empty.

    LA needs an expansion team. Not some team moving in. One team created for them, good ownership, and it’d be good for awhile.

  24. southpaw2k says: Jul 26, 2011 11:41 AM

    The problem is the NFL won’t go without a team in the second largest media town in the country. There’s too much money to be made in Los Angeles, so despite the city being a melting pot of transients from across the country (and bringing their hometown fandoms with them), the NFL will continue trying to make it work in LA. It failed before and it will likely fail again, but the league won’t give it up.

  25. tomsd1 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:41 AM

    Despite playing in the old, poorly located Colesium (with no seatbacks) – the LA fans supported the Rams and then the Raiders fairly well, and with a new, luxury stadium – in a great downtown location – they will be very successful.

    What – is that not the second largest TV audience in the nation?

    And here in San Diego – the story makes the 3rd page of sports – when the hugely beloved Chargers – and our “Strong Mayor” – are making zero, zilch, nada – progress toward a new stadium.

    It just don’t seem right.

  26. jimmysee says: Jul 26, 2011 11:41 AM

    trbowman says:
    Jul 26, 2011 11:26 AM

    LA is an awful sports city.

    ———————————————————-

    That may be the dumbest cliche’ ever.

    Just ’cause you say it over and over doesn’t make it true.

    LA provides massive and passionate support for the Dodgers (with all their ownership problems), Lakers, Angeles, even the Clippers, USC and UCLA football, UCLA basketball, and several soccer teams down at the Home Depot Center in Carson!

    The LA Vikings would fit right into the mix.

  27. weswelkerspornstash says: Jul 26, 2011 11:42 AM

    As a fan of a team that hopefully is out of the running to be moved to LA, I would never had as a visiting fan. Between fans rioting and getting their a** kicked by other fans. I’m out

  28. packhawk04 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:44 AM

    “the vikings have two cities dying.to.have them, minneapolis and arden hills.”

    So THATS why theyve wanted to secure, and failed to secure a stadium for a decade. Because they want them so bad!! And, the fact that the vikings were ignored in a special session and told they wouldnt get their own special session makes sense to me now- because not one, but 2 cities are dying to have them!!!

  29. mightymightylafootball says: Jul 26, 2011 11:45 AM

    L.A. is a fine sports town – when owners aren’t asking for public money. That don’t fly here, folks.

    We support 6 professional sports franchises in one metro area, and none of them are going anywhere.

    We don’t have football because we wont spread eagle for the NFL on a stadium ‘deal’. The Rams and Raiders left, but not because they were unpopular.

    Before you comment, it may be best to have a *slight* understanding of the scene.

  30. JSpicoli says: Jul 26, 2011 11:45 AM

    49ers/in play/told you so/ 2 years ago.

  31. notredameirish605 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:49 AM

    L.A. has the most fairweather fans in the nation. Look at the Dodgers! They can’t fill the stadium half way up unless they play the Giants! USC couldn’t sell out their biggest rivalry against Notre Dame last year. I just don’t see how they’ll support another NFL team.

  32. blaz0037 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:49 AM

    California has 15 professional sports franchises.

    L.A. has failed twice to sustain a NFL team.

    I rest my case.

  33. pigskin28 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:56 AM

    I say move the Rams and Raiders. Get rod of Al first though. St Louis is a baseball town.
    Please leave the Bills, Vikings and Chargers where they are. Jags are a possibility but Raiders make more sense.

  34. jersey73 says: Jul 26, 2011 11:58 AM

    Come on, the Vikings in Los Angeles???

    No way the people of L.A. would ever welcome a team from Minnesota especially with the colors yellow & purple…whoops…strike that.

  35. SmackSaw says: Jul 26, 2011 12:00 PM

    Bring back the Rams!!

  36. notredameirish605 says: Jul 26, 2011 12:01 PM

    If anything move one the other california teams, so they will remain basically in the same west coast market.

  37. smoothjimmyapollo says: Jul 26, 2011 12:02 PM

    “How many teams have gone through LA? It won’t work in the long run….again. Just cause it’s a “big market” doesn’t mean anything if people won’t show up. Ask Miami Heat (true) fans how it is down there. They have one of the best rosters in basketball, full of stars, and they can’t sell out any of their games. And they only need like 18,000 people to fill their place up.”

    Apples to oranges on the NBA comparison. The NFL is more popular by a landslide. Just because the Heat gets the biggest stars isn’t going to make people like basketball if they don’t like basketball. Football, with fantasy football, office pools, and only a once-per-week commitment is much easier for the casual sports fan to get into.

    As far as the failure of previous LA teams, think about what has happened since the last teams moved out of there. The previous facilities didn’t have the emphasis on PSLs or luxury boxes or the types of revenue drivers that are such a huge part of today’s game. There was no NFL Sunday Ticket. There were Madden video games, but they didn’t have the features and popularity that they do now. Fantasy football was a cult thing rather than something that millions of people play. As popular as football was then, it’s much more popular now. Plus, let’s not rule out that the reason the Raiders and Rams may not have had as much financial success in LA could have had something to do with ownership being inept.

    Also, being in LA allows them to charge more for things. Depending on their pricing schemes, they could still make more money for a 90 percent full stadium in LA vs. a 100% full stadium in Minnesota or Buffalo.

  38. centexhorn says: Jul 26, 2011 12:13 PM

    I say the Raiders. The Bay Area doesn’t need two teams and the Raiders have the most fans in L.A. Plus, they just fit with L.A.’s hard-nosed, gritty fan base. Ice Cube would be happy.

    If they build that football stadium RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF DOWNTOWN Los Angeles next to the Staples Center, there’s no telling how popular and profitable they can be. It would be an amazing venue. You’d also see all kinds of college bowl games be played there.

  39. dan7800 says: Jul 26, 2011 12:14 PM

    Why do the Bills keep getting tagged in these articles? They are not going anywhere. There are already a list of billionaires who have stated they want to keep the Bills in Buffalo when RW passes.

  40. johnnyjagfan says: Jul 26, 2011 12:17 PM

    Weaver won’t move the Jags as long as he’s alive unless the surge in ticket sales last year dips back to 08-09 levels and he loses money. The CBA helps him, here, too.

    Whomever takes over after Weaver passes? Open book to move to L.A.

    Write that down.

  41. catman72 says: Jul 26, 2011 12:18 PM

    Any team besides the Raiders will fail in LA…

  42. bobnelsonjr says: Jul 26, 2011 12:21 PM

    The problem has been that the Rose Bowl and the Colesium are too big (90,000+ capacity).
    A 75,000 capacity stadium is much better for the fans.

    There is only one NFC team that moving makes a lot of sense. The vikings who can’t sell 50,000 season tickets, are the lowest revenue team in the NFL (by their own testimony), have a lousy arena, no hope of a replacement stadium, poor fanbase (40% of Minnesota NFL fans are Packers fans), and a poor business climate. Having the vikings in Los Angeles is great for the NFL, great for the vikings, great for Los Angeles, great for Minnesota. Everybody wins.

    For the AFC team, San Diego makes sense. The San Diego area has shafted the Chargers in every attempt to get a stadium deal done. Like the vikings they can only be told no so many times before they are forced to move.

    Two teams sharing the cost of one stadium makes sense. Once the vikings get there then Los Angeles can start hosting Super Bowls again.

    Los Angeles is great for Super Bowls.

  43. thephantomstranger says: Jul 26, 2011 12:29 PM

    packhawk04 says:
    Jul 26, 2011 11:44 AM
    “the vikings have two cities dying.to.have them, minneapolis and arden hills.”

    So THATS why theyve wanted to secure, and failed to secure a stadium for a decade. Because they want them so bad!! And, the fact that the vikings were ignored in a special session and told they wouldnt get their own special session makes sense to me now- because not one, but 2 cities are dying to have them!!!
    __________

    Just watch, smart guy. They were not told they wouldn’t get their own special session. Either there will be one this fall and they’ll start building in Arden Hills, or it will wait until February and they’ll start building in Minneapolis.

    By the way, it’s called an apostrophe. Look into it.

  44. antoniograc1 says: Jul 26, 2011 12:38 PM

    If Los Angeles does indeed land two NFL franchises and the Buffalo Bills are one of them, can the NFL justify having 5 NFL teams in the State of California and 0 teams in New York State?

  45. firerosenthalthebastard says: Jul 26, 2011 12:44 PM

    I wonder if they would totally rebrand their team like the Oklahoma City Thunder did… or take the old team name and attach “L.A.” in front… if they are going for the former then the NFL needs to decide if they can live without the existence of that team’s name and logo, which in itself are profitable.

  46. pistolsmoke says: Jul 26, 2011 12:45 PM

    “[Vikings] have a lousy arena, no hope of a replacement stadium, poor fanbase (40% of Minnesota NFL fans are Packers fans), and a poor business climate. Having the vikings in Los Angeles is great for the NFL, great for the vikings, great for Los Angeles, great for Minnesota. Everybody wins.”

    Wow, get your facts straight. Only thing accurate here is a lousy stadium (not arena; this isn’t basketball). Vikings have sold out every game since 1998 (even the non Packers games). Try again….

  47. firerosenthalthebastard says: Jul 26, 2011 12:54 PM

    If the Raiders move to L.A. I really don’t think Al will be involved. Why would they want to deal with him? And I’m a Raider fan… he asked the NFL if he could move to LA, they said no. And he did it anyway. Then moved them back up here. Unprecedented.
    If I were the LA planning committee I wouldn’t want to deal with him either. Also they would seriously need to decide if they wanted to invite the “Raiders” into town or convince ownership to recreate a new team name/logo… because while the Raiders do have a lot of fans in LA, being a Raider fan I see how polarizing the team is, even when we’re bad, so if you’re a fan of the team you really like them and if you don’t then you reaaaaallllllllyyyyy don’t like them. So I could see part of LA thinking, damm_it, the Raiders again.
    The LA committee has stuff to think about.

  48. fancycash34 says: Jul 26, 2011 1:02 PM

    “There is only one NFC team that moving makes a lot of sense. The vikings who can’t sell 50,000 season tickets, are the lowest revenue team in the NFL (by their own testimony), have a lousy arena, no hope of a replacement stadium, poor fanbase (40% of Minnesota NFL fans are Packers fans), and a poor business climate.”

    1. Like pistolsmoke said – we’ve sold out every game dating back to 1998.
    2. Lowest Revenue – who can actually comment on this since its all word of mouth and no-one actually knows.
    3. Lousy Arena – True, definitely no argument there
    4. No Replacement Stadium – There are two potential places for a new stadium in MN with Arden Hills having the best shot (10 miles N of mpls)
    5. Poor Fanbase -haha 40% of Minnesotans are definitely NOT Packer fans. Yes, there are some Packer fans because Wisconsin is our neighboring state you moron. Its like saying 40% of Jets fans are also Giants fans…haha not true!
    5. Poor Business Climate – haha wtf. no comment on this idiotic point

  49. ticewasbetter says: Jul 26, 2011 1:04 PM

    It’s not going to be the Vikings, they’re either moving to Arden Hills or the farmers market behind Target Field. All the non-sense will be resolved in 5 months. Until Feb 1st, 2012 the Vikings have no reason to consider L.A. other than leverage.

    It’s interesting that they open in San Diego, very interesting as the Chargers are a team that as soon as Minnesota resolves it’s issue in Minnesota the San Diego Chargers move to the front of the list. Why? They’ve had maybe three meetings the last year and a half to keep the team in San Diego with goverment and team officials. Compare that to the countless dozens of meetings, proposals, bill, stadium artist renderings for the Vikings and you can see the danger Charger fans have themselves in.

    And what’s the biggest fear for fans of the Chargers, who I hope remain in San Diego and LA go you know what themselves, the biggest fear is the biggest problem. There is No Where to build a stadium in San Diego.

  50. kali222 says: Jul 26, 2011 1:05 PM

    Bob Nelson where did you get your facts from? 40% of Minnesotians aren’t Packer fans. As for Minnesota and bad Business sorry to inform you Minnesota has one of the country’s strongest economy’s. As a season ticket holder for 50 years I find your information factually wrong.
    As far as LA a great place for a Super Bowl that’s about it. LA has had teams in the past why did they leave? No fan base. the people of LA have one Minnesota team and that’s more then enough. What LA is doing is called carpet bagging

    P.s tell the lakers to change there name god knows there aren’t any lakes in LA.

  51. ticewasbetter says: Jul 26, 2011 1:08 PM

    Not to mention if the Rams’ stadium is not up to the top 15 in NFL revenue generating by 2015 they can opt out of their lease early… just sayin. As well have read it would take about $500 million in renovations to the Rams’ current stadium in order to meet that standard. And that was on a report almost three years, I’m sure that dollar amount has risen a few $50 mil. Or two.

  52. sandiegobuffalo says: Jul 26, 2011 1:10 PM

    Im not sure how well Rams are supported in St Louis, but it seems stupid to move teams out of markets that support their franchise. Only reason Rams go to LA is that they are from there originally, otheriwse seems unfair. NOW ~The Jacksonville Jaguars are not well supported.Period. No tradition exists there, no Hall Of Famers, no championships. They cannot fill the stadium, and it is a college football town. They are the team that should move and the NFL made a mistake awarding them a franchise, next in line is Oakland-They were an LA team for years and have the fanbase. Their attendance is as bad as The Jags. You want to keep the dirtbags out-Raise tickets prices. San Diego, Minnesota and Buffalo belong in their respective cities. When people say Buffalo is a dying city, bad economy , population loss etc..Even if that is true (partially it is), it really doesnt matter in this modern era…People across the globe support them, fly to Buffalo for games every weekend, buy Direct TV, Bills gear etc….They definetely have a top 10 fanbase in this league…Look at half the posts on Bills articles-Most of them are coming from everywhere from coast to coast….You want to not upset the NFL fandom-Move The Jags, Raiders, or Rams….

  53. purpleisreallypinkyouknow says: Jul 26, 2011 1:34 PM

    pistolsmoke says:Jul 26, 2011 12:45 PM

    Wow, get your facts straight. Only thing accurate here is a lousy stadium (not arena; this isn’t basketball). Vikings have sold out every game since 1998 (even the non Packers games). Try again….

    __________________________________

    Unless you’ve been under a rock or overseas for the last 10 years, everyone knows that 3M and a few other major corporations in the Twin Cities buy up the seats to avoid a non-sellout and the blackout that would go along with it. You seriously think there are thousands of people with phones at the ready who scarf up the 4,200 seats they need to sell before Friday afternoon comes around each home game week when the season schedule comes out months in advance…? . And…I am at the Packer/Viking game every single year in the tuna can balloon you people call a stadium…it is usually at or above 35% of the fan base cheering for Green Bay. Quit embarrassing yourself

  54. indianheadmeatpackingcompany says: Jul 26, 2011 1:45 PM

    Fact is Minnesota doesn’t like to keep teams for too long. They also have a history with LA. They have shipped a team out of state in 2 of the 4 major sports and it appears that the state will be more than happy to send a third.

  55. cosanostra71 says: Jul 26, 2011 1:50 PM

    I hope the Vikings move here!

  56. nickp91 says: Jul 26, 2011 2:14 PM

    I’ll support any NFL team that goes to Los Angeles

  57. pistolsmoke says: Jul 26, 2011 3:06 PM

    Purpleisreallypink: Obviously you are a Packers fan. And let me ask you as a Packers fan: Do you want to see the Vikings go to LA?

    But as your point about getting business to buy tickets. Who cares!? They haven’t done it for 13 straight years. Plus, they are able to buy the last thousand instead of 10,000 tickets like other teams. So they still have a huge fan base. And who cares if Packers fill it up when they are there. Tons of Packers fans that live in MN and in a neighboring state, Wisconsin. I could same the exact same thing about Arizona Cardinals games. When Vikes play there, the fans fill up at least a third of that place.

  58. dogsweat1 says: Jul 26, 2011 4:37 PM

    Vikings and Raiders in Los Angeles– 2013…………

  59. dogsweat1 says: Jul 26, 2011 4:57 PM

    1. Like pistolsmoke said – we’ve sold out every game dating back to 1998.

    Lies ,Lies, Lies!!

    Vikings ranked 28th in attendance last season.

  60. momentumtech says: Jul 26, 2011 6:20 PM

    I wonder how much it will cost to build that monstrosity in LA? California is already on the brink of bankruptcy and it is never cheap to build anything in LA. The city paid $1.5 billion just to build 3 new high schools. It could easily cost $2-$3 billion to build this stadium and take about 3 years to do. Just double or triple the price and construction cost for your normal stadium. You dont realize how slow the regulatory process works in Cali. I dont know how much public support this will get if the bill lands at the feet of the local taxpayer. I assume an agreement would have to be reached with a team to move there before construction begins. Otherwise there is no way to justify the construction.

  61. momentumtech says: Jul 26, 2011 6:30 PM

    The residents of the city of LA wont provide a lot of support for the team but the large metropolitan area should be able to provide enough of a fan base. The problem with LA itself is that most of the people are transplants from other parts of the country who follow other teams. Lots of lukewarm bandwagon types in a very self-centered culture of LA, i.e. you will see more people texting messages to their agent than people who are actually watching the Laker games. And lastly for the very large Hispanic community of LA, football is way down the list of sports after soccer, baseball and even basketball. Just based on what I have experienced after living there for 2 years recently, the passion for football in LA is a shadow of what it is in the midwest and east coast. It is difficult to even find a good sports bar there.

  62. paulharghis says: Jul 26, 2011 6:41 PM

    dogsweat1 says:
    Jul 26, 2011 4:57 PM
    1. Like pistolsmoke said – we’ve sold out every game dating back to 1998.

    Lies ,Lies, Lies!!

    Vikings ranked 28th in attendance last season.

    ==========================
    ballsweat1:

    Hmmm, I wonder why that is?

    Vikings played 1 game in Detriot, 1 game at a much smaller TCF.

    Thanks for showing your undying ignorance though.

  63. dogsweat1 says: Jul 26, 2011 7:22 PM

    Hmmm, I wonder why that is?

    Vikings played 1 game in Detriot, 1 game at a much smaller TCF.

    Thanks for showing your undying ignorance though.

    Pipesmoke………..

    The Vikings ranked 28th in attendance.

    Via NFL attendance stats which is the final authority.

    I understand —Viking slaves don’t read or know how to count.

    28th is 27 spots from first.

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance

    When Viking slaves are needed, Us Packer Fans will ring the bell.

  64. dogsweat1 says: Jul 26, 2011 7:26 PM

    Pipesmoke:

    The Vikings ranked 24th in attendance 2009.

    No bad weather. No hole in the roof.

    24th.

    A playoff season too.

    lol

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance/_/year/2009

  65. thephantomstranger says: Jul 26, 2011 8:03 PM

    dogsweat1 says:
    Jul 26, 2011 7:26 PM
    Pipesmoke:

    The Vikings ranked 24th in attendance 2009.

    No bad weather. No hole in the roof.

    24th.

    A playoff season too.

    lol

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance/_/year/2009

    ___________

    Every game was a sellout, moron. Seating capacity determines where you rank. This ain’t Lambeau, where they stick 20 people on an aluminum bench made for 12.

  66. paulharghis says: Jul 26, 2011 8:09 PM

    dogsweat1 says:
    Jul 26, 2011 7:26 PM
    Pipesmoke:

    The Vikings ranked 24th in attendance 2009.

    No bad weather. No hole in the roof.

    24th.

    A playoff season too.

    lol

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance/_/year/2009

    ====================================
    Ballsweat:

    What you fail to add, because it doesn’t fit your spin on things.(Typical M.O. of a Packer fan)
    Is the fact that the dome seats around 64000 people. According to your link the Vikes were at 99.5% of capacity. They can’t sell 90,000 seats to a 64,000 seat stadium. Do you get that? Or are you that mind numbingly ignorant?

    I’m curious why you felt the need to qualify one post with another? Is it because you knew you were wrong on the 1st one?

    I’ve never seen a more ignorant fanbase in all of sports. Do yourself a favor non Wisconsinites, take a trip to this backwater state I live in and take in the locals. You’ll feel so much better about your intelligence level.

    It’s full of a bunch of welfare/SSI people with the average IQ of 45. They love dem dere Green Bay Packers doh.

  67. keepyerstickontheice says: Jul 26, 2011 8:24 PM

    Hmm. Once again I see Buffalo on the list of teams moving to LA.

    Ralph dead?

    Nope.

    Team sold?

    Nope.

    Stadium contract about to expire?

    Nope.

    Cover seats with tarps?

    Nope.

    So whattya got?

    “Well, like, he’s all like, old, and stuff. So this one time, he said he’d leave the team to his family, and someone asked them once what they would do with the team, and they said something like “I don’t know” or something, so we extrapolated that to mean the Bills are going to LA tomorrow. That’s a factual, dude.”

Leave a Reply

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