Skip to content

Los Angeles reminds NFL that it wants a team or two

u-haul Getty Images

Whenever the NFL prepares to stage a game in London, plenty of chatter emerges regarding the possibility of a team moving there.

With the first of two 2013 London games about to be played there, the folks in Los Angeles apparently hope to disrupt that talk.

Via CBSLA.com, the Los Angeles City Council’s Economic Development Committee has issued a resolution urging the NFL to return to Los Angeles, a market that was deserted by the Rams and Raiders after the 1994 season.

Said Councilman Tom LaBonge, “[It] puzzles me why, out of 32 teams, one doesn’t want to come here to sunny Southern California.”

LaBonge, who advocates expansion to 34 teams if necessary (the league has said there won’t be expansion) also wrote a letter to Commissioner Roger Goodell and all owners.

“A metropolitan area of our size can support two teams,” LaBonge wrote, per the Los Angeles Daily News. “We can all agree that the NFL must return to this city.”

AEG has one more year to try to lure a team to the only stadium with a naming rights deal but no firm plan to build it.  For now, there’s little momentum toward getting a deal done to construct Farmers Field, in large part because there’s no urgency from the NFL to do a deal with AEG.

Cowboys owner Jerry Jones nevertheless said in July that one or two teams could move to L.A. soon.  His comments could be interpreted as a message to AEG owner Phil Anschutz to continue to be patient.

Still, the league has been even more patient, refusing to do a deal to return to Los Angeles unless it’s the right deal.  And by “right deal,” we mean the deal pursuant to which the NFL makes a gigantic pile of money, far bigger than one that would be hidden by a meth kingpin in an storage shed.  To do that, the NFL needs a partner who is willing to cobble together an offer that would guarantee that kind of revenue for the league.

And the NFL, which has seen unprecedented financial growth and success in the generation since leaving Los Angeles, has no reason to do anything other than wait for that right deal to come.

Permalink 116 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Buffalo Bills, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers, St. Louis Rams, Top Stories
116 Responses to “Los Angeles reminds NFL that it wants a team or two”
  1. raiderlyfe510 says: Sep 25, 2013 9:34 AM

    The NFL should move the Rams there so the NFC can have that NorCal/SoCal rivalry again.

  2. steelerben says: Sep 25, 2013 9:35 AM

    There already is a team in sunny Southern California. The San Diego Chargers.

    ….I know, I don’t watch them either.

  3. harrisonhits2 says: Sep 25, 2013 9:38 AM

    Don’t be puzzled Tom the answer is easy. LA has the worst fans in the country. Their only concern going to a game is to be seen posing, get their photo taken doing so and then get out of the stadium by halftime.

  4. zoxitic says: Sep 25, 2013 9:40 AM

    I love how they keep saying they can support a team when history has shown they cant.

  5. i10east says: Sep 25, 2013 9:41 AM

    LOL “No team in sunny SoCal”.

  6. getthegleam says: Sep 25, 2013 9:43 AM

    The Raiders, even though I love my Raiders in Oakland, their stadium has got to be the worst professional stadium in the NFL. I’ve seen high school teams that don’t play their team on dirt, not to mention the sewage issues…

  7. demolition510 says: Sep 25, 2013 9:45 AM

    Raiders and A’s deserve their own stadiums in Oakland!!!

  8. pcoisma says: Sep 25, 2013 9:47 AM

    There is also another easy explanation. The current owners that don’t have shiny new stadiums would lose all their leverage. Let the LA stadium Boogeyman scare current cities into paying the bill for a new stadium that will be FULLY owned by the current owner.

  9. filthymcnasty1 says: Sep 25, 2013 9:48 AM

    harrisonhits2 says:
    Sep 25, 2013 9:38 AM
    Don’t be puzzled Tom the answer is easy. LA has the worst fans in the country.

    ********************************************

    Don’t forget, MN is technically in the country too.

  10. logast says: Sep 25, 2013 9:49 AM

    La la land couldn’t support teams then, and they won’t support them now. If the NFL wanted this that badly, there would be a team there already. Although I would rather see a team in LA than in London, which to me is beyond stupid.

  11. conormacleod says: Sep 25, 2013 9:50 AM

    How many chances should one city get? They’ve proven many times the people in that area simply don’t care to support an NFL team. It’s no big deal. But stop asking for another team.

  12. schmitty2 says: Sep 25, 2013 9:50 AM

    There are 2 types of football fans in L.A- the ones who are wannabe gang members or the fans that show up at the end of the first quarter and leave at the start of the 4th.

  13. 6250claimer says: Sep 25, 2013 9:51 AM

    “[It] puzzles me why, out of 32 teams, one doesn’t want to come here to sunny Southern California.” Gee, this isn’t too complicated. California has become about as business-friendly as Jesse Jackson, and the NFL is a business first.

  14. 12444uggg says: Sep 25, 2013 9:51 AM

    The balance of the league is as such that why give a LA a team or two when they’ve lost a team or two.

  15. waussau says: Sep 25, 2013 9:52 AM

    So does DC…

  16. bbb82 says: Sep 25, 2013 9:53 AM

    LA had multiple chances before and couldn’t keep a team. Now they want two? Yes, the TV market is huge. But it doesn’t change the fact that the fan base just won’t support NFL teams. Couldn’t before, why would it now?

  17. MyTeamsAllStink says: Sep 25, 2013 9:54 AM

    Sunny LA?how would you know the smog covers the city all the time!

  18. captainspangled says: Sep 25, 2013 9:55 AM

    The NFL isn’t a social event. LAers would never understand this. Their market can’t support it because their city is too full of people doing drugs to bother to show up in time for kickoff.

    Not to mention the amount of gang violence that would happen around the stadium. LA is a joke. Leave it out of the NFL.

  19. ezmoover says: Sep 25, 2013 9:56 AM

    The NFL reminds L.A. that they were already given “a team or two” and pissed them away…

  20. brassknuckles47 says: Sep 25, 2013 9:58 AM

    The only reason SoCal fans go to any game is to throw people off of the upper decks!

  21. muskyhunter2542 says: Sep 25, 2013 9:59 AM

    The NFL fans in the LA area are all Green Bay Packer fans because if the “G” logo.
    It fits right in with the Gangsta lifestyle.

    Then you have the treehugging celeberties that like The Packers because they like the fact that there is no true owner and yada yada yada.

  22. vegasgreek says: Sep 25, 2013 10:02 AM

    RAIDERS SHOULD MOVE BACK TO LA .BUILD A JERRY JONES TYPE PALACE AND STRIKE FEAR INTO THE ENTIRE AFC. IF YOU BUILD IT THE FA’s WILL COME TO LA .

  23. ampats says: Sep 25, 2013 10:07 AM

    Easy, the Rams & Chargers. Neither city is willing to support either of these teams with the renovations to make them a legitimate NFL stadium.

    And you would not have to realign the divisions

  24. runmarshawnrun says: Sep 25, 2013 10:08 AM

    With the first pick in the 2015 draft, the Los Angeles Jaguars select…

  25. ravensrooster94 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:08 AM

    “Los Angeles reminds NFL that it wants a team or two.”

    Or two? They haven’t shown that they can consistently support one team.

    Los Angeles is already providing a very useful service to NFL owners…they are using the threat of moving there as a club to browbeat the municipalities they currently reside in to build them brand new facilities.

    Why would they go and blow that leverage? Where are they then going to threaten to move to? London? Gimme a break.

  26. grandmachine says: Sep 25, 2013 10:10 AM

    To the people saying that LA fans won’t show up to games. The Dodgers have the highest attendance rate in the MLB, and the Lakers, Clippers, and Kings are doing well.

    LA can support an NFL team, I wouldn’t go as far as bringing in 2 teams, but Los Angeles has changed alot in the past 20 years and I think an NFL team will eventually bite. The only think I kinda hoped for is that the stadium would be located in the city of industry, instead of adding another stadium in DTLA where there’s a s***storm of traffic.

  27. seatownballers says: Sep 25, 2013 10:11 AM

    Let’s just say the jags moved to LA next year. Fans wouldn’t be thrilled with a 2-14 record, jersey sales would suck, and after 2 seasons no one would be paying money to watch them. Blackouts would be regular.

  28. joshh967 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:14 AM

    I don’t get it. People act like this hasn’t failed for LA more than once in the past…

  29. puntonfirstdown says: Sep 25, 2013 10:18 AM

    “With the first pick in the 2015 draft, the Los Angeles Jaguars select…”
    ——————————————————————
    Amen. The NFL should never have placed a team in that city in the first place.

  30. weepingjebus says: Sep 25, 2013 10:19 AM

    No legit stadium or even stadium site, multiple would-be ownership groups that immediately go at each other’s throats like Tom and Jerry whenever the NFL looks at the city, and regional politics that make the Politburo look like a group of sedate free market capitalists.

    So yeah, Jets!

  31. giantrobot666 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:20 AM

    LA supported the rams for nearly 50 years. At least know what you’re talking about before you start rehashing all the claims levied against people here in Southern California. Keep in mind we also support two MLB teams, two NHL teams, two NBA teams, two MLS teams, two major college programs, and although I’m not sure how popular their respective sports are, WNBA and AFL teams, too.

  32. completefan says: Sep 25, 2013 10:20 AM

    If the LA KISS average 10,000 fans next season, THEN I’ll respect any argument that L.A. should have an NFL team.

  33. Patriot42 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:23 AM

    I personally don’t care how much if this liberal state who is in so much debt wants a team in LA. There are three in the state already.

  34. tincansailor981 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:24 AM

    Please don’t. Not LA, not London, not Timbukutu. Leave it alone and LA, go sit down. No one wants to come to a place that had and lost two NFL franchises already. Can you imagine trying to get to the stadium for a Monday or Thursday night game, not to mention a Sunday game.

  35. williamwallacewouldhavebeenaraider says: Sep 25, 2013 10:24 AM

    vegasgreek says:
    Sep 25, 2013 10:02 AM
    RAIDERS SHOULD MOVE BACK TO LA .BUILD A JERRY JONES TYPE PALACE AND STRIKE FEAR INTO THE ENTIRE AFC. IF YOU BUILD IT THE FA’s WILL COME TO LA .
    /////////:::://////::::://:/::::/:::
    I couldn’t agree more but hey I don’t live in Oakland. The bottom line is that the RAIDERS play in quite possibly the WORST STADIUM IN ALL SPORTS!!!!! They actually NEED a new stadium unlike the countless other NFL teams who have gotten new stadiums built in the last 15 yrs. Time to pony up NFL and get this done for the silver and black like you have for all other nfl teams who got new stadiums

  36. ott2win says: Sep 25, 2013 10:25 AM

    Have you seen the stands at a Jacksonville home game…pitiful…L.A. could do better. Jacksonville is bad for the NFL…Kahn will move them there, you watch. He’s got hollywood written all over him.

  37. bballnut50 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:27 AM

    filthymcnasty1- I think you meant what a joke it is that Green Bay has a team and LA does not, correct? SKOL!!

  38. wilsonwillbreaku says: Sep 25, 2013 10:28 AM

    The Los Angeles Pollos Hermanos…I love it!

  39. hitdog042 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:29 AM

    They support an afl team? They haven’t even started playing yet. It’s a new franchise. Smh. As for the angels they really don’t support them either and it’s also not in LA technically. Get YOUR facts straight haha.

  40. giantrobot666 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:29 AM

    The Raiders and Rams left Los Angeles because because of stadium issues, not because of fan support. Rams games were consistently sold out for years and finally tanked when it relocation became a real possibility. Why support a team that doesn’t want to be here? Frontiere wanted the rams back in St. Louis, so she got what she wanted. Treat your fan base poorly and you can spin the story in your favor.

  41. hitdog042 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:30 AM

    The la kiss will do well. There’s also a crap ton of kiss fans in Los Angeles. Not sure it translates to NFL success. Unless gene and Paul own the NFL team. Which prob isnt out of the question.

  42. dogman9 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:33 AM

    Dear L.A.,

    You can’t have one.
    You can’t have one.
    You can’t have one.

    Fool us once, shame on me. Fool us twice, shame on YOU.

    Signed, NJ football fans.

  43. i10east says: Sep 25, 2013 10:34 AM

    Don’t you think that’s putting the cart before the horse with this whole ‘LA two team’ thing? They have their work cut out for them getting ONE team there in LA, nevertheless freaking TWO!

  44. metalhead65 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:35 AM

    everybody wants a team in lal la land except the people who matter and that is the fans. they have have had 2 teams there and did not support either one of them or they would not have moved. despite what some people might think it is not your god given right to have a team. and as smug as the people are out there nothing less than the having the patriots or a winning franchise move there will do.

  45. jvillenole says: Sep 25, 2013 10:41 AM

    @0ttwin2

    “Have you seen the stands at a Jacksonville home game”

    You obviously haven’t seen the stands in Jacksonville. They average over 60k attendance. Not bad for a team without a winning season in five years.

    Look it up.

  46. mogogo1 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:43 AM

    Gotta work on the English accent, LA. That will endear you to Goodell.

  47. giantrobot666 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:46 AM

    Hitdog042: my mistake on the AFL team. But if people are going to claim that Los Angeles could not support the Rams, then you have to include the Angels as a team supported by Southern California. Both the Angels and Rams played in the same stadium.

  48. athwartships says: Sep 25, 2013 10:48 AM

    Has the NFL already tried having teams in LA before? Check

    Were they monumental failures? Chck

    Does California already have 2 teams representing SoCal and NorCal? Check

    Does the rest of the country completely not care what LA wants? Check

  49. andreweac says: Sep 25, 2013 10:48 AM

    I guess Angelenos are the only people in the country who don’t believe in giving billionaires even more billions in corporate subsidies and welfare. Stay strong LA! Stay strong.

  50. dublindemonszfl says: Sep 25, 2013 10:49 AM

    CA is bankrupt, and no one cares

  51. mannyicey says: Sep 25, 2013 10:50 AM

    The Los Angeles Jaguars will happen. The owner isn’t married to the city. He has money, but isn’t spending it. The product is bad and he didn’t make any moves to improve it. The Jaguars have no identity to tether the team to the city.

    I mean, the moving van is there. I know that it’s not popular, but I’ve seen this move for 2 years now.

  52. gergie1957 says: Sep 25, 2013 10:54 AM

    First of all LA had the Rams and Oakland/LA Raiders and couldn’t keep them, The next team there will pack up and leave also. And on another subject, Quit wasting our games in London, we ain’t going there, so just stop. I would have loved to drive the 200 miles to see the Viking/Steeler match up. But no, what a waste of good football.

  53. whatjusthapped says: Sep 25, 2013 10:58 AM

    Wilf’s might move the Vikings there, rumor has it that they are looking for some cash right now to pay off their $84 million settlement.

  54. 87hollywoodhorn says: Sep 25, 2013 11:03 AM

    move ALL 32 teams to LA!!! WHAT MORE COULD THEY WANT!!!

  55. Forsbergler is literally too stupid to insult says: Sep 25, 2013 11:07 AM

    giantrobot666 says:
    Sep 25, 2013 10:20 AM
    LA supported the rams for nearly 50 years. At least know what you’re talking about before you start rehashing all the claims levied against people here in Southern California. Keep in mind we also support two MLB teams, two NHL teams, two NBA teams, two MLS teams, two major college programs, and although I’m not sure how popular their respective sports are, WNBA and AFL teams, too.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++

    In other words, you have enough teams, and dont need any more. THere are plenty of places that dont have any professional teams. I have never understood why New York, and LA feel like they need to have multiple professional teams in every sport. Get over yourselves

  56. doctorart2013 says: Sep 25, 2013 11:20 AM

    As soon as 100 thousand seat stadium is built in LA a bunch of teams will line up to bolt to California, Bills, Jaguars, Rams, Vikings.

  57. lagg1 says: Sep 25, 2013 11:22 AM

    I WOULD RATHER SEE A TEAM IN LOS ANGELES THAN A TEAM IN LONDON. A TEAM IN LONDON WOULD BE A FINANCIAL DISASTER FOR THE LEAGUE.

  58. granadafan says: Sep 25, 2013 11:29 AM

    As one who has experienced, not one but TWO teams ripped from the community by the greediest people on earth, I would hate for others to go through this painful experience. As an LA resident, I would love a team or two, but it should be an expansion so we can start off fresh from our OWN team.

    Oh, and many of you who have never been to LA or California, let alone your own flyover state, confuse football fans with Dodger fans.

  59. rickochey says: Sep 25, 2013 11:30 AM

    Why not make LA/Hollywood the place for the Super Bowl. It is the best place on earth for glitz, glammer, red carpet, bright lights. etc.

  60. athwartships says: Sep 25, 2013 11:35 AM

    LA footbal fans with regards to NFL teams always reminds me of the bratty kid who cries and cries about the toy he desperatly wants then never plays with it once the parents cave in and give it to him.

  61. imageflood says: Sep 25, 2013 11:40 AM

    The reason LA didn’t work out for the Rams and Raiders was not lack of fan interest, but the stadiums they were playing in. The Rams were playing out in Anaheim, not LA, in the crap-alicious Big A, a place that wasn’t even marginally serviceable as a baseball stadium. The Raiders were in the vacuous Colosseum, again not a football stadium, that even when full places fans far far away from the action, and reduces crowd noise. Incredibly unexciting by design. Both those stadiums require an extra amount of driving for a lot of fans, too. LA fans didn’t leave early because they’re flakes — it’s because they don’t want to get stuck in traffic for 5 hours on the way home. A downtown stadium would alleviate a lot of these problems. The only thing holding it back is $$$$. And last, the Bills are NEVER moving to LA, get that through your heads folks. Jaguars, Rams, or Chargers maybe. More likely an expansion team I think, when the $$$$ is right.

  62. cacheesehead1237 says: Sep 25, 2013 11:44 AM

    The NFL has no interest in putting a team in LA until they have successfully extorted new stadiums for all current teams in need of a new venue. The NFL uses LA as a wedge to threaten to move teams to unless local municipalities fork over the dough for a new stadium.

  63. r8dernation says: Sep 25, 2013 11:45 AM

    Instead of playing in the UK once a year, how bout playing in the Rose Bowl Stadium once a year. That would be more prestigious.

  64. ronin36 says: Sep 25, 2013 11:51 AM

    Jacksonville looks like the best candidate for a move..

    The team sucks, their attendance is bad.. (because the teams sucks) and let’s be honest, the Florida market is already saturated with 2 other teams.

    If Jacksonville were to move.. I think one thing they should insist upon is a 3-5 year black-out exemption. It would help build the fan-base while the team is rebuilding.

  65. twilson962 says: Sep 25, 2013 11:51 AM

    Said Councilman Tom LaBonge, “[It] puzzles me why, out of 32 teams, one doesn’t want to come here to sunny Southern California.”

    Hmmm. Isn’t San Diego in Southern California?

    Derp

  66. dcapettini says: Sep 25, 2013 11:52 AM

    If you ever watched a football game in the circular Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, you would know why the fans did not show up. If you have seats at the 50 yard line you are a mile away from the game. It was built in 1921! College fans don’t seem to mind, but for what pro tickets cost, you need a football stadium.

    They won’t build a stadium until they get a team and they can’t get a team without a new stadium. The city and state are pretty much broke and can’t do it on the come. Baltimore at least had Memorial Stadium, built in 1954, to lure the Browns. The Jags will move. Jacksonville cannot support a team; too small and no suburbs, almost no TV audience. San Diego isn’t interested in football. One of them will go.

  67. t8ertot says: Sep 25, 2013 11:53 AM

    Jags or Raiders

  68. warjag55 says: Sep 25, 2013 11:56 AM

    runmarshawnrun says: Sep 25, 2013 10:08 AM

    With the first pick in the 2015 draft, the Los Angeles Jaguars select…

    Oh how cute and so original. You have to be the most intelligent 9 year old on this board

  69. ronin36 says: Sep 25, 2013 11:58 AM

    Another option is expansion of the league.

    What has historically happened is expansion of the schedule is loosely tied to expansion of teams.

    Right now there’s a perfect balance of teams. 2 conferences, 4 divisions per converence, 4 teams per division.

    If franchises were awarded, realignment would be required. 1 new team per conference.. they’d have to add a couple games to schedule for the new team..

    And viola! a need for 18 game schedule… And maybe an extra couple wild card team per conf.

    Hear the cash registers at NFL HQ ringing!

  70. dtownsportslions says: Sep 25, 2013 11:59 AM

    LA has the worst fans. They’re the type of fans of who order sushi and a margarita at a football game.

  71. radrntn says: Sep 25, 2013 11:59 AM

    Just wondering if the City of LA, or County, etc…. is willing to use public money to build a state of the art facilty to lure a team….or are they just saying we want somebody to come spend all their money to add even more concrete in a smog filled city…….I am sure if the city is willing to pay for it, there are a few teams that were consider it, but if the other deal is hey we got a guy willing to build a new place here all on his dime, but you have to sell him the team, i am sure the owners are laughing at LA.

    In other words money talks.

  72. hehateme2 says: Sep 25, 2013 12:05 PM

    vegasgreek says: Sep 25, 2013 10:02 AM

    RAIDERS SHOULD MOVE BACK TO LA .BUILD A JERRY JONES TYPE PALACE AND STRIKE FEAR INTO THE ENTIRE AFC. ? ROFL

    Dude, really? the Faiders haven’t struck fear in anyone for like 30 years!

    Dream on… Halloween is just around the corner.

  73. 80sbroncofan says: Sep 25, 2013 12:05 PM

    Funny how nobody in L.A cared about the Rams or the Raiders when they were there.

  74. titan1971 says: Sep 25, 2013 12:16 PM

    Hey…..all of you slamming SoCal lifestyle and/or their fans………just look out your window and tell me what you see? Is it snow? possibly rain? Don’t tell me you’re being evacuated because of a flood!
    Well today, I’m going to the beach!

  75. dspyank2k11 says: Sep 25, 2013 12:17 PM

    Good for LA. They dont need a team. They have Riots and other fun stuff to keep them busy.

    Any NFL team that moves there even if its the Raiders I will feel terrible for.

  76. itguy76 says: Sep 25, 2013 12:28 PM

    exactly titan1971, you go to the beach or whatever you want, but for a place like Detroit, far fewer options, might as well go to a Football game.

  77. upperdecker19 says: Sep 25, 2013 12:33 PM

    LA can’t support a team??? Are you posters nuts? With the adjacent suburbs, LA is one of the most populous areas in the entire USA. In reality, we choose NOT to support a team. As 90%+ of us can care less whether we get a team.

  78. mannyicey says: Sep 25, 2013 12:35 PM

    ronin36 says:
    Sep 25, 2013 11:51 AM
    Jacksonville looks like the best candidate for a move..

    The team sucks, their attendance is bad.. (because the teams sucks) and let’s be honest, the Florida market is already saturated with 2 other teams.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Even though I agree that Jacksonville will more than likely lose the team to LA, it’s not because of the fans. Actually, the fans in Jacksonville is the most attractive thing about the Jaguars. Let me tell you why:

    1. Jacksonville’s attendance is ranked #20 in the NFL. That’s not very good, but is strong- given how bad the product has been on the field.

    2. Jacksonville’s attendance is the best in the state of Florida. Jacksonville beats Tampa Bay and Miami in attendance in 2012 and 2011. It beats Tampa Bay in 2010. If you look at the numbers, the attendance is strong!

    3. The Jaguars fans are rabid. I mean, not only are they attending games, but they are loyal. And besides MJD, they have 0 marquee players. So they draw well with no one to root for. Imagine if they actually put a team out on the field?

    4. Jacksonville is a football town! They are not baseball fans because their affiliations are split between the Marlins and the Braves. But football is what they root for!

    I mean, the main reason why the Jaguars will move is because of a national draw, not local. And the only way it would work is if LA can provide a better stadium AND provide a backstop for Khan to payoff Jacksonville for that stadium deal- which is a lot of money.

    Oh, and then you have to prove that the franchise has been losing money for 3 years- which is the threshold to build a case for the move. (That’s why, people, you’re not going to see a quality product on the field- or even a sideshow, like Tebow. That would create money, not lose money.)

    So it’s a lot. You would have to put the time and effort in to be this terrible.

  79. musician0785 says: Sep 25, 2013 12:37 PM

    i can guarantee you half the ppl on this board Have never been within 300 miles of the city, good luck with your terrible weather, and unimpressive nightlife

  80. kelshannon19 says: Sep 25, 2013 12:38 PM

    LA, you lost your chance to have a team in 1997 or whatever year that was to Houston. Forget about it and move on.

  81. MyTeamsAllStink says: Sep 25, 2013 12:49 PM

    The Raiders will be in LA next season.The lease is up after this season,Mark Davis doesn’t want to renew unless there is a solid stadium plan in place.The plumbing at the o.co or whatever they call it now is falling apart the structure is cracking the city of Oakland is about to file bankruptcy and the Raiders have to tarp off 10,000 seats just to avoid blackouts.Plus they are an afterthought in the Bay Area.Its Niners and Giants talk if you listen to Bay Area sports talk and the Raiders get maybe a 4 minute mention.Oh and not to mention the Davis family will not be able to run this team in a couple years due to lack of a strong income.The Raiders are their investment they have no other outside money sources like Jerry Jones Dan Snyder Robert Kraft etc.AEG wants to build in LA and they want to own a portion of the team.This works out great for Davis as he can still own the team get a new stadium and be in the second largest market in the US.The 53,000 stadium proposal sounds more like a smokescreen knowing full well the county wouldn’t approve of a new venue that small and ponying up 300 million for it.

    The Raiders can play at the Rose Bowl or the Coliseum until the new stadium is ready.Personally I wish they’d stay in Oakland but money talks.

  82. chiadam says: Sep 25, 2013 1:01 PM

    125th time is the charm!

  83. mullman76 says: Sep 25, 2013 1:20 PM

    As a 4th generation Californian, I think it’s hilarious that you folks who live across this great nation know what it’s like in “sunny SoCal”.

    Some of you simpletons need to stop watching cartoons and go outside, read a book or just gain some perspective.

    True, LA traffic is a nightmare, but California is the best, especially SoCal.

    If you dont’t think so then, STAY HOME!! The saturation of transplants is never ending.

    The thing about California these days is that it’s rare to find a native.

    It’s tragic.
    Stay home.

  84. vikingfan1971 says: Sep 25, 2013 1:21 PM

    the vikings are staying where they are somehow they will figure it out, doesnt CA already have 3 teams 49ers, raiders and chargers you are a greedy state dont need another football team there.
    MN needs the Vikings here as they would lose out during the football season no revenue so they are going to stay here, will never be a packer fan here.

  85. nflfan1326 says: Sep 25, 2013 1:29 PM

    @mannyicey

    Shad Khan spent millions on locker renovations to EverBank Field and will spend millions on the biggest scoreboard in the league next year with swimming pools. Not married to city? Think again.

  86. SkepticalRaptor says: Sep 25, 2013 1:29 PM

    USC is our pro team. Well, once they toss out Lame Kiffin.

  87. mannyicey says: Sep 25, 2013 1:41 PM

    nflfan1326 says: Sep 25, 2013 1:29 PM

    @mannyicey

    Shad Khan spent millions on locker renovations to EverBank Field and will spend millions on the biggest scoreboard in the league next year with swimming pools. Not married to city? Think again.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    $63 Million is a lot of money, but not enough to stop or hinder his move. Remember, Khan got the team at a discount. And he’s putting the money in real estate, not the talent.

    So spending that money doesn’t make it impossible. If he moves, he’ll make that money back with interest in less than 3 years.

  88. skolvike says: Sep 25, 2013 1:42 PM

    I am a Viking fan but I remember when Khan bought the jags he signed an agreement to NEVER move the team. has everyone forgotten that fact? Especially you jags fans>

  89. hurk71 says: Sep 25, 2013 1:52 PM

    California already has 3 teams, why in god’s name do they need 1 or 2 in L.A.?!

  90. athwartships says: Sep 25, 2013 1:52 PM

    omg, a fourth generation Californian….well I retract everything I said. I had no idea we were among such long time natives going all the way back to……what, the 40s? 30s at best? I am sure the Serrano and Patayan tribes are thankful for your representation on this important matter.

  91. flexx91 says: Sep 25, 2013 2:00 PM

    They could have had the last expansion team (the Texans) but didn’t have their act together.

  92. thermanmerman99 says: Sep 25, 2013 2:05 PM

    this is superbowl week in jacksonville. the only game those fans care about every year is beating the colts, even if the colts go 2-14 like 2 years ago, their fans celebrate it like a superbowl win. that midget MJD rises up for the colts and thats it. that fanbase is as lame as it gets. maybe somebody should remind them that beating the colts doesnt raise a banner because they sure act like it does

  93. razzzmajazzz says: Sep 25, 2013 2:12 PM

    These guys make me laugh. They sound like girls crying about not being able to get their boyfriends back.

  94. kingcasper says: Sep 25, 2013 2:17 PM

    mullman76 says:

    “True, LA traffic is a nightmare, but California is the best, especially SoCal.”

    SoCal is actually filthy….escpecially San Diego. The only part of California that is palatable in Northern California. It is FAR from the best state mullman…..and Cali certainly doesn’t deserve another football team because they cannot support the ones they already have. Too many sun bleached morons….

  95. jvillenole says: Sep 25, 2013 2:22 PM

    @mannyicey

    Khan is not moving the team. Period.

    The fan base is actually growing, and you don’t invest millions in locker room/weight room and general stadium renovations to turn around and lose that investment.

    Further, look at who he hired for his Marketing/Business manager – Mark Lamping, an executive who has experience and knowledge on how to build and expand a sports team’s footprint in a smaller market.

    Finally, to say that he is doing nothing to put a better product on the field is completely false. He just completely gutted the entire staff from the management down because the product they put on the field was crap. He hired a new GM, a new coaching staff, new scouts, and a new Director of Player Personnel.

    The new management is starting this build as an expansion team. The have played more rookies than any other team in the league. They have stated that they will build through the draft and when appropriate, will spend in free-agency. They are simply following a plan. It has nothing to do with wanting to put a bad team on the field in order to justify a move. That thought is complete ridiculous.

    Further, there is no way possible that Jacksonville, with plenty of room in the cap, no attendance issues, and one of the youngest teams in the league, could possibly be losing money for three years in a row. It is fiscally impossible, especially with the television contract in place.

    I don’t know why people insist on saying the Jaguars are going to move. There is absolutely no factual basis at all to claiming that the Jaguars will move.

  96. jvillenole says: Sep 25, 2013 2:25 PM

    @thermanmerman99

    It is a division game, dude. They act the same way when the Texans and Titans come to town.

    In fact, the Titans are a bigger rival than the Colts.

  97. thestrategyexpert says: Sep 25, 2013 2:28 PM

    I’ll take a couple teams if there’s any leftover as well. Put me on the list please.

  98. jeffreyshulenburg says: Sep 25, 2013 2:52 PM

    Why do they continue to insist on tagging Buffalo in these stories?

    The team has a new 10 year lease and stadium renovation plan. There is a county committee looking into a new stadium 10 years before they need one. And the first 7 years of the lease make it so expensive to move the team that Warren Buffet would have to look twice at the numbers. I did the math when the deal was done. Until 2021, it would cost around 2 BILLION to buy and move the team WITHOUT a stadium. If you want a new stadium where you are going, expect upwards of 2.5 BILLION to move the Bills.

    Oh…and Rodger Goodell backs the Bills. He grew up rooting for them 20 mins south of Buffalo.

  99. screechdaddy says: Sep 25, 2013 2:55 PM

    Been a Seahawks fan for 30 years, and a Seattle resident for five. Prior to that, spent my entire adult life in Los Angeles, so I’ve seen the difference now between a “football town” and a city that’s anything but.

    L.A. can definitely support an NFL franchise. It has the population to sell out games, even for a mediocre team. Problem was the city insisted that teams play in the nearly century-old Colliseum, which seated 100K, but was built for track and field Olympic events. Was VERY annoying wondering each week if the Rams/Raiders were going to be blacked out or not because not enough fans were willing to commute on gridlocked freeways to park their cars in the middle of Gangland, USA to fill up a stadium where watching pro football was a mediocre experience at best.

    For an NFL franchise to be successful in L.A., it is imperative that a brand-new, state-of-the-art stadium be built in one of two locations: either way out in the suburbs where several freeways along with MetroRail meet (Irwindale, north SFV), or pure downtown as part of the Staples Center complex where fans can skip freeways altogether and use the subway/light rail system via park-n-ride lots.

    The Jaguars would be a perfect fit, too, as the ugly sprawl of the L.A. megalopolis is a perfect match for their current helmet design. GO HAWKS!!

  100. sneezl says: Sep 25, 2013 2:58 PM

    The problem in LA wasn’t fan support. The Raiders were in the Coliseum, which is owned by a committee. A committee made up of the state, the county, the city, and USC. Davis wanted stadium updates, the committee wouldn’t give them to him, so Al ran to the cash that Oakland was offering him to come back. That’s another reason no team has since moved into the Coliseum – it’s a nightmare dealing with the Coliseum Commission, since it’s near-impossible to satisfy 3 levels of government AND a major university. No NFL owner wants any part of that after seeing how the Rams (the original Coliseum NFL tenant) and the Raiders were treated by the Commission.

    The Rams were basically in a baseball stadium in Anaheim, and then-owner Georgia Frontiere (who was mismanaging the team into unprofitability) wanted a football stadium and to go home to her hometown of St. Louis.

  101. Mr. Wright 212 says: Sep 25, 2013 2:59 PM

    Pretty sure the Jags’ possessions can all fit in that UHaul in the inset.

  102. smokim says: Sep 25, 2013 3:10 PM

    Now why would an NFL team such as the Jags leave an upcoming, gorgeous city like Jacksonville when other NFL teams are based in dying cities that are dumps.
    Shad Khan has more money than Trump and he is already investing his money in Jax properties and other business ventures. Zero chance the team will go to LA before at least 7 other teams.

  103. jwcarlson says: Sep 25, 2013 3:23 PM

    titan1971 says:
    Sep 25, 2013 12:16 PM
    Hey…..all of you slamming SoCal lifestyle and/or their fans………just look out your window and tell me what you see? Is it snow? possibly rain? Don’t tell me you’re being evacuated because of a flood!
    Well today, I’m going to the beach!

    —————————————-

    75* and Sunny here today. Looking out the window I see: houses I can afford, a state and local government that isn’t inches from falling off a financial cliff, and one of the lowest unemployment rates in the entire country.

    Enjoy your beach.

  104. trollaikman8 says: Sep 25, 2013 3:36 PM

    LA doesn’t need a team and can’t afford it.
    The traffic infrastructure is abysmal as it is.
    LA sports fans don’t care.
    Hell, San Diego barely wants the Chargers….good luck selling LA fan on the Jaguars.

  105. yanksbills says: Sep 25, 2013 3:47 PM

    If I want to be assaulted by an opposing fan I’ll just go to Dodger stadium, thank you very much.

  106. jpaq68 says: Sep 25, 2013 3:55 PM

    jeffreyshulenburg says:
    Sep 25, 2013 2:52 PM
    Why do they continue to insist on tagging Buffalo in these stories?

    The team has a new 10 year lease and stadium renovation plan. There is a county committee looking into a new stadium 10 years before they need one. And the first 7 years of the lease make it so expensive to move the team that Warren Buffet would have to look twice at the numbers. I did the math when the deal was done. Until 2021, it would cost around 2 BILLION to buy and move the team WITHOUT a stadium. If you want a new stadium where you are going, expect upwards of 2.5 BILLION to move the Bills.

    Oh…and Rodger Goodell backs the Bills. He grew up rooting for them 20 mins south of Buffalo.

    =================================
    Why? Because the Bills are LA’s best bet to getting another NFL team, that’s why.
    Look, Ralph Wilson is so old that he makes Anna Nicole Smith’s dead husband look like a teenager by comparison. That longevity deal he signed with Lucifer about 100 years back is set to expire at any time now and he has already stated that his estate will sell the team to the highest bidder. You think that seven years is a long time, but it’s not. Investors from LA can buy the team and then take their sweet time working out a great stadium deal just in time for the 2020 season. And, I’m sorry but there isn’t enough money floating around the Buffalo area to be able to pay for a new stadium in 100 years, let alone 10. It’s been shown time and time again that the league can’t stop an owner from moving thiet team if that;s what they really wanted to do – Goodell or no Goodell.

  107. roknsoul says: Sep 25, 2013 4:44 PM

    Bring back the Los Angeles Rams has over 13,400 fans and growing on Facebook!!! Also twitter @ #losangelesrams

  108. billsboy88 says: Sep 27, 2013 9:59 PM

    Pretty sick of the Bills getting tagged in these articles. Also sick of the speculation that Ralph’s estate are a bunch of soul-less money hungry creeps. People make it sound like the Bills are losing money in Buffalo, which couldn’t be farther from the truth. The team is still incredibly profitable.

    And whoever said their isn’t enough money to build the team a new stadium needs to put down the glue bottle. How do you think stadiums are funded? The team holds a bake sale?

  109. edman13 says: Sep 28, 2013 3:47 AM

    I live in London and am an avid NFL fan and have been to every games since 2009. All a SELLOUT at double the price for any ticket in any NFL city. Why do you think the NFL keeps adding more games? They’re making tons of money off of them. A £100 ticket in the UK is $160 US dollars at current exchange rates. Take into account all of the product sales, concessions etc. they are making a fortune off of these games. Lets see Jax can’t fill a 60,000 seat venue at $50 a ticket but they can fill 80,000 at Wembley for $160? Wake up its not about the fans this is strictly a smart business decision by really smart business people.

  110. warmachinex says: Sep 28, 2013 11:29 AM

    Jaguar need to move there really what could go wrong they couldn’t lose fans there’s no way

  111. kwickett85 says: Sep 29, 2013 9:58 PM

    It’s not really fair to attack the Jaguars for attendance. You have to look at the market size in relation to attendance. Obviously teams in smaller markets won’t have attendance like teams in bigger markets SHOULD have. The smallest market teams in the league are 28. Cincinnati Bengals, 29. Jacksonville Jaguars, 30. Buffalo Bills, 31. New Orleans Saints, 32. Green Bay Packers. However, NONE of those teams had the lowest attendance percentage. The attendance percentage for the lowest five teams last year was 28. St. Louis, 29. Oakland, 30. San Diego, 31. Tampa Bay, 32. Miami.

    Teams like Oakland, Miami, and the Chargers have larger markets than the Jaguars but all three are usually near the bottom in attendance percentage. So two teams in Cali already struggle with attendance but let’s add more.

  112. mikemcdorman says: Sep 30, 2013 9:00 AM

    LA sucks and everyone knows it.

    By far preferable:

    NYC, SF, London, Paris, Berlin

    Compared with other “world cities” it really is garbage, from a traffic, environment and culture perspective.

  113. Toad of the Short Forest says: Oct 1, 2013 6:50 PM

    First, as an Angelino, the LA-hate around here is getting a bit tiresome. Some people watch way too much television. If you hate Los Angeles, don’t come here. The twenty million or so of us who enjoy living in the Southland don’t need the extra traffic.

    Secondly, I’m seeing a lot of good arguments here for a team in LA and also one in London, but I’m seeing some great reasons for why four or five other cities don’t need their own teams. So in a perfect world, maybe the best alternative would be to get rid of two teams, move two to the aforementioned locations, and go back to having the slightly-less diluted talent pool that the NFL had prior to expanding to 32 teams. The NFL would make a ton of money in its new markets, and everyone else will enjoy watching at least slightly better football each week.

  114. bearlok1 says: Oct 19, 2013 4:33 AM

    It sucks that L.A. doesn’t have a football team considering we’ve had 3 different teams (Rams, Raiders, and Chargers)! However, I am a Chargers fan and I don’t want them to move back to L.A.. I would much rather the Rams come home. I like the Chargers where they are. I attend at least 2 home games a year.

    CBS shows all the Chargers games provided there’s no blackout. Also it would be better to have an AFC and an NFC team in California, rather than bringing the Raiders back and having two AFC West teams in So Cal. It just seems stupid to me to have division rivals that play an hour and a half away from one another.

    I have even heard talks of the Raiders and the Chargers coming back to L.A.. I hope it’s just nonsense because how stupid would it be to have 2 division rivals playing in the same city (possibly the same stadium). Every time the Lakers win downtown L.A. gets destroyed by mobs running riot. If the Dodgers win anytime soon I am sure you can expect the same. Imagine what the Raiders and Chargers fan bases would do?

    They already stab each other in SD and Oakland. Bring them both to L.A. and all hell would break lose!

  115. thermalito says: Oct 25, 2013 2:58 AM

    The Rams should move back to Los Angeles where they belong. They have 49 years of history there and it would make for a far better NFC West. St. Louis is probably the worst football market in the league and its sad to see the Rams wasting away in obscurity there.

  116. whitetailbuckhunter101095 says: Nov 7, 2013 1:01 PM

    Im from St.Louis and I love the rams. I go to every game I can and I can asure you that they have a very loyal happ fan base here in StL. In my opinion the Raiders or the Jaguars should be the ones to move their operation to LA.

Leave a Reply

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