Skip to content

L.A. could be giving up on getting an NFL team

LA

As Bills fans fret about a potential relocation of the franchise to Southern California, Tim Graham of the Buffalo News has good tidings.

In a lengthy and excellent look at the lack of NFL football in Los Angeles, Graham paints a picture of pessimism that the league will return to L.A. any time soon.

Nearly 20 years after the Rams and Raiders vamoosed to St. Louis and Oakland, respectively, the NFL is no closer to coming back, and proponents of the NFL in L.A. could be giving up.

“I’ve finally, personally come to a conclusion,” Los Angeles City Councilman Bernard Parks told Graham. “I have to resign myself to the fact the NFL is not coming. . . .  After you put 10 years into something with nothing in return. . . .  If this was a marriage, you’d be divorced.”

Even if a viable stadium solution existed, the Bills could the wrong team to move, for a variety of reasons.  As Graham points out, the Bills are the only NFL team based in New York.  (The Jets and Giants play in New Jersey.)  Buffalo also has considerable political clout; Graham notes that veteran Senator Chuck Schumer could decide to attack the NFL’s critical broadcast antitrust exemption, if the NFL lets the Bills leave Buffalo.

“The NFL doesn’t want to risk upsetting the political structure,” Parks told Graham.  “The league is facing critical issues. They don’t want to litigate these things.

“In many ways, they’re like the old Mafia. They just want to make money and don’t want to do anything that will disrupt that.”

And so it appears that nothing will disrupt the ongoing use of L.A. as leverage for the construction of stadiums elsewhere with public money.

“I just think we’ve been used as a pawn,” Parks told Graham. “I just don’t know if we were ever seriously considered.”

Serious consideration remains possible, but a lot needs to happen.

“It’s a Rubik’s Cube,” Rose Bowl G.M. Darryl Dunn told Graham.  “You need all sides. It is complicated, and it is difficult.  It still can be done, though.  The potential has always been there.  But L.A. will not do this at any price.  It’s going to have to make sense.”

What makes sense would be a relocation to a place like the Rose Bowl while a new stadium is built.  But the NFL has shown no serious interest in the available options for a state-of-the-art venue.  Ed Roski has had a shovel-ready location in the City of Industry for several years.  AEG had hoped to build a downtown stadium near Staples Center, but that has gone nowhere.

Rams owner Stan Kroenke has purchased land near Hollywood Park, at a time when his team has become a year-to-year tenant in L.A.  The ideal location could be at Chavez Ravine, but former Dodgers owner Frank McCourt’s lingering interests in the land could be a major impediment.

Moving forward, optimistic comments and reports periodically will bubble up, presumably to retain L.A.’s viability as leverage for teams in other cities.  But nothing has happened for 20 years, and it would be foolish to assume that anything will happen for 20 more.

Ultimately, that’s great news for folks in Buffalo.  Even if someone wants to overpay the Wilson family for the ability to buy the team and ship it to Los Angeles, that possibility seems to be remote, to say the least.

Permalink 121 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Buffalo Bills, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers, St. Louis Rams, Top Stories
121 Responses to “L.A. could be giving up on getting an NFL team”
  1. icewalker946 says: May 25, 2014 1:36 PM

    “I’ve finally, personally come to a conclusion,” Los Angeles City Councilman Bernard Parks told Graham. “I have to resign myself to the fact the NFL is not coming. . . . After you put 10 years into something with nothing in return. . . . If this was a marriage, you’d be divorced.”
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    I’ve been going thru 5 years of nothing in return, lies, etc. I know what he means.

    Soon I’ll be hitting the road, onto something better.

    I wish you luck, L.A. it’s hell living like this.

  2. binkystevens says: May 25, 2014 1:39 PM

    Good. LA has already proved that they don’t deserve a team (twice)

  3. oldcracker says: May 25, 2014 1:40 PM

    L.A., don’t give up! The vans in Jacksonville are nearly loaded, and the tarps are already in place.

  4. buckybadger says: May 25, 2014 1:40 PM

    They will never give up on this. It is too big of a market not to have a team there.

  5. kd75 says: May 25, 2014 1:43 PM

    Put a NFL team in L.A. and it will be gone in 10 years.

  6. reptar310 says: May 25, 2014 1:44 PM

    The ideal location is at Hollywood Park in Inglewood. 4 freeways, a train, LAX airport, and a major trauma hospital nearby. The Rams owner bought the land and now should move the Rams back here when he can.

  7. nomoreseasontix says: May 25, 2014 1:50 PM

    Well… The Raiders have to play somewhere. Nothing’s going to get done in Oakland.
    I can’t see them in a perpetual short term lease in the coliseum.

  8. 12444uggg says: May 25, 2014 1:51 PM

    If LA wanted one (or two) they’d still have one.

  9. SparkyGump says: May 25, 2014 1:52 PM

    If there was a viable potential fan base in LA, there would be a team there but there isn’t. I’m surprised the NFL has done so little to cultivate interest there. They play games in London, Mexico City and even one in Scandinavia but not even one exhibition game in Los Angeles. IMHO, the blame is with the NFL.

  10. kwjsb says: May 25, 2014 1:54 PM

    L.A. fans are the NBA’s Miami Fans, there to be seen, but could care less about the team, they have proven this with the Rams and Raiders. Football is not a social event.

  11. krebsy34 says: May 25, 2014 1:57 PM

    Good! The fans have always been there for the Bills and the Bills have been there for the fans. If L.A. really wanted a squad they would have kept one of the 2 they actually had. I don’t care if it’s a different time. Just because it says “Diet” doesn’t make it healthy for you, just becuase “LA is the 2nd most populous city” doesn’t mean they deserve an NFL team…again.

  12. michaelamericano says: May 25, 2014 1:58 PM

    I’ve felt for a while that the NFL realized long ago that LA ‘ strongest value for the league (owners) is as a negotiating point to secure taxpayer dollars to pay the owner’s share for new stadiums.

  13. thenewguy12 says: May 25, 2014 2:02 PM

    L.A. won’t get a team. The city works too well as a threat in order to get their way in stadium negotiations. Anytime a team needs a new stadium, rumors conveniently link them with L.A. and all of a sudden a stadium deal is reached.

  14. bigdawg24 says: May 25, 2014 2:03 PM

    Once again, the Rams are the logical fit for Los Angeles. St Louis is a BASEBALL town, plain and simple, and their dome really sucks. All of the resources of St Louis goto the Cardinals.

  15. 4buckiz says: May 25, 2014 2:06 PM

    I don’t know why any business would voluntarily relocate to California.

  16. thegregwitul says: May 25, 2014 2:07 PM

    This story makes perfect sense. Forget about the Buffalo Bills or Jacksonville Jags being moved to LA, it’s not happening. Let’s be realistic here; there are only three teams that could make the move: San Diego Chargers, Oakland Raiders or St. Louis Rams, and I’d say it’s even a bit of a stretch to include the Rams on this list.

  17. elliottcovert says: May 25, 2014 2:08 PM

    I just think it’s messed up that L.A. has two baseball teams, two basketball teams, and essentially two hockey teams, but no football teams.

    Adding another team or two would mess up the conference alignments that the league has had in place since 2002. Of course if that meant more revenue, I’m sure the NFL owners wouldn’t mind.

    Although a Bill’s relocation seems out of the question at this point, but the Jaguars are a possibility. The AFC South is already the least geographically coherent division in the league. Jacksonville, Houston, Nashville, and Indy are all pretty far apart (and Indy wouldn’t be defined by any sane person as a “Southern” city anyway). Why not just make it as geographically unbalanced as the old NFC West (which featured New Orleans and Atlanta competing with LA, San Francisco) by moving the Jags to LA?

  18. darknessspreads says: May 25, 2014 2:09 PM

    As a former Sonics fan that doesn’t watch the NBA anymore, but that has followed all the Seattle arena stuff with the Kings and Bucks, I can assure L.A. NFL fans that they are being used as pawns to leverage new arena deals in otherwise broke cities. The same thing is going on with Seattle and the NBA.

    Eventually, some city will go bankrupt trying to fund an expensive arena or stadium deal. Sacramento in the NBA and Buffalo in Western New York have lots of the same financial issues, so they could be the first to do it. However, L.A. NFL fans are going to have to wait for a city to either a) bankrupt itself with a deal and have the team split or b) have a city just realize that they don’t have the money for such a project before the NFL relocates back there.

  19. mogogo1 says: May 25, 2014 2:10 PM

    I don’t live in LA so I don’t know all the backstory but what exactly have all the issues been? The councilman talks about working at this for a decade yet there’s still no solid stadium plan in place? Can’t fault the NFL for that. It’s not like they’re purposefully ignoring the second largest market in the country. But you have to at least act like you want a team.

  20. 407magic says: May 25, 2014 2:10 PM

    LA already failed twice why bother going back.

    If the jaguars move, it’s to Orlando. It only makes sense, they keep the Jacksonville fan base plus you add Orlando which is a bigger market than jax, their future QB is from Oviedo/Orlando and went to UCF in Orlando, the citrus bowl is getting an 80% renovation and will hold around 65,000 and it will be sold out no matter how bad the jags are AND you won’t have to mess with changing around the NFL divisions.

  21. rhob60 says: May 25, 2014 2:11 PM

    LA has actually lost three teams. In their original first year, the AFL chargers were in LA before moving to San Diego.

  22. rhob60 says: May 25, 2014 2:13 PM

    And if you count the USFLs LA Express, they lost four.

  23. mrwalterisgod says: May 25, 2014 2:14 PM

    Good. They don’t deserve one. LA is not a sports town, it’s an ENTERTAINMENT town.

    They’d be getting one for all the wrong reasons.

  24. pop562 says: May 25, 2014 2:19 PM

    LA has plenty of sports that are still popular to many fans. But LA is not in a rush for a football team just yet.

  25. sourdoughsam says: May 25, 2014 2:21 PM

    |“In many ways, they’re like the old Mafia. They just want to make money and don’t want to do anything that will disrupt that.”|

    No, they’re like any good business. L.A. had two teams at one point and couldn’t keep either. Not to disrespect any individual from L.A., but, as a whole, the culture there is too superficial to support an NFL team. The L.A. fan base only shows up when their team is winning, and there is too much parity in the NFL to keep the seats filled on a consistent basis there. I don’t see why the NFL would move a team from a city with such a loyal fan base like Buffalo.

  26. usmutts says: May 25, 2014 2:23 PM

    L.A. is where NFL teams go to die.

  27. catfanatic1979v1 says: May 25, 2014 2:26 PM

    St. Louis seems the most reasonable. The population of the city is about half what it was in the 50′s or 60′s. The population will continue to recede over the next few decades with no hope of a recovery. Why stick around in a dying city when you can jump ship? Go back to LA.

  28. thefox61 says: May 25, 2014 2:27 PM

    Ken Bering did move the Seahawks operations and tried to move the entire team to L.A. (Anaheim) in early 1996 before finally selling to Paul Allen. That would make 5 they lost.

  29. uglydingo says: May 25, 2014 2:30 PM

    I think that it may be the Raiders that moves back to LA. Their current crappy old stadium is one of the worst in the NFL and it is significant that the Raiders have not successfully negotiated a long term stadium agreement. The Raiders also have history in Los Angeles.

  30. afcdomination says: May 25, 2014 2:32 PM

    as someone who hates demolishing the classics before their time, Chavez Ravine is NOT the ideal spot

    Chargers are the ideal team. they won’t admit it for whatever reason, but its true. if you spend any time in so cal you will get it rather quickly. they don’t even guarentee to sell out when the team is in a year where they won a playoff game the previous.

    it will happen eventually. Qualcomm is a terrible venue, frankly its just a step above the Colosseum

  31. akboot says: May 25, 2014 2:32 PM

    They will never give up on this. It is too big of a market not to have a team there.

    Then could you please explain to me why they left in the first place. Was it too much of a good thing? Or what.

  32. harrisonhits2 says: May 25, 2014 2:33 PM

    Any plan that requires the taxpayers to buy the billionaires a new stadium does not make sense.

  33. afcdomination says: May 25, 2014 2:34 PM

    lot of environmental and money issues. but mostly dealing with environmentalists. it was near impossible to get Petco Park downtown in San Diego. really was a nightmare for that City. LA faces a similar situation.

  34. ravensbob says: May 25, 2014 2:34 PM

    Baltimore, maybe the best football city in the United States, went 13 years without a team while the NFL used the city with teams threatening to move there to better deals in their current cities. L.A. is that city now, allowing the NFL to force Buff, St Lou, Jax to upgrade/build new stadiums or else. someone mentioned Mafia, totally correct.

  35. muathjam21 says: May 25, 2014 2:34 PM

    Ahhh, the land of part-time waiters and smog. You are so cute.

  36. johnnyjagfan says: May 25, 2014 2:35 PM

    We’re not building khanstruction all you jack legs that have been harping on LA Jaguars on PFT for years!!!

  37. ezmoover says: May 25, 2014 2:37 PM

    Well… It wouldn’t be the first time that L.A. gave up on an NFL franchise. Not exactly a shocker.

  38. 3yardsndust says: May 25, 2014 2:43 PM

    When I think of the NFL’s great teams and cities, I think of Chicago, Pittsburgh, Philly, Boston, Buffalo, Cleveland, Green Bay, etc. – places where the tradition and the hunger for football coalesce. Los Angeles does not have that. People there have the beach and the film industry and whatever else it is, and that’s fine. But there’s no hard-core fan base for football of any kind. It’s a different kind of city in a different part of the country, and frankly the league shouldn’t expand.

  39. cags777 says: May 25, 2014 2:49 PM

    I’m not keen on the NFL sending another team (or two) back to L.A. after their success of hosting three NFL teams. However, given the choice between L.A. and London, I’ll gladly support L.A. in a heartbeat.

  40. shackdelrio says: May 25, 2014 2:58 PM

    Herp

    LA Jags

    Derp

  41. stoneygroove says: May 25, 2014 3:07 PM

    The NFL and it’s owners love having the L.A. threat to hold over other cities that won’t give them new stadiums and other things they want. That red herring has been very lucrative for years so I can’t see any motivation to change things.

  42. jagsandliquor says: May 25, 2014 3:12 PM

    In the words of the great Jerry Seinfeld, “That’s a shame.”

  43. seahawkfanfrom1970s says: May 25, 2014 3:18 PM

    Hey L.A., quit trying to poach our teams!

  44. toooverbearing says: May 25, 2014 3:37 PM

    I’m a complete outsider to the LA issues, but could Pasadena or Anaheim handle an NFL franchise for LA (like NJ does for the NY teams)? It seems like the fan base is there… what are the holdups?

  45. dcapettini says: May 25, 2014 3:37 PM

    The NFL did everything they could to keep Baltimore from getting a team and no one thought they would until they did. If Jacksonville, Tampa and Denver can have teams, Los Angeles certainly can. Their market is so much larger that the multitude of Soccer fans doesn’t mean squat. They support the Dodgers and Angels. They glory in the Lakers and Clippers. They even support hockey. It’s stupid to claim that they can’t/won’t support an NFL team.

    Soon they will decide they want another Olympics or they want the World Cup and they will build a stadium. That is all they need.

  46. robf2010 says: May 25, 2014 3:39 PM

    The truth of the matter is that no team is ever going to be relocated to L.A. In that respect, L.A. has always been the pawn to get other NFL owners what they want in their own city. No, what the NFL wants is two expansion teams in L.A. with expansion fees at $1 billion plus each to be split amongst existing teams in their new stadiums. It’s all a game to those guys.

  47. sylvester000001 says: May 25, 2014 3:53 PM

    The best answer is this:

    Place no team in L.A. and have it instead be the permanant Super Bowl site.

    You could build a 100k seat stadium, the celebrity factor would be out of control therefore drawing in the entertainment magazine type crowd for a day and skyrocketing the ratings even more (which would be annoying but it would work) in addition have celebrities doing almost a red carpet-esque thing have a 6 hr pregame, and all that L.A. money would be a tsunami for the league.

  48. nelly837 says: May 25, 2014 3:57 PM

    Great just what we need more politicians meddling with private business.

  49. southernmaster says: May 25, 2014 3:57 PM

    “In many ways, they’re like the old Mafia. They just want to make money and don’t want to do anything that will disrupt that.”

    Uh, that’s the free market enterprise.

  50. mackcarrington says: May 25, 2014 4:01 PM

    Bernard Parks is one of the main clowns involved in screwing up LA getting a team. He kept pushing for a team to return to the Coliseum despite the NFL saying that it was no longer viable. His interest was purely selfish because the Coliseum is in his council district. He prevented LA from having a unified bid for a new stadium when Houston won the bid.

  51. GenXJay says: May 25, 2014 4:03 PM

    Minnesota hates you, Ca.

  52. edwicy says: May 25, 2014 4:06 PM

    No team want to play in LA with a 100k stadium, which every game makes the stadium half empty. Plus, unless the team is undefeated 11-12 games in, every game will be blacked out.What fans like going to a game if the stadium almost always half empty?
    For LA to get a long term team, they need a stadium that holds 60000 (70000 max)

  53. thetooloftools says: May 25, 2014 4:13 PM

    L.A. is just not a football town. Arrive in the second qtr leave at the end of the third. L.A. is a great sports town but I look at Mexico City getting a team before they do….. wait … L.A. is Mexico City hahahaha never mind.

  54. sambradfordismyhomeboy says: May 25, 2014 4:15 PM

    Very revealing article… It should come as no surprise that GOD-dell is using the LA market almost as some sort of financial hostage directed to the “nare-do-well” franchises (e.g. Jax, Buf, StL, SD) to clean up their house of business. Out of those 4 listed, only JAX and STL should pack up the “Mayflowers” and go to the left coast. I reside in the STL market and even with Jeff Fisher (coaching career 154-136 record, I think) and Les Snead not withstanding, to think that the Rams demand (based on their current lease) that the leaky cave that they play in be one of the “top” 5 (?) facilities in the NFL is almost financial ransom in itself. It opened in 1995 paid with tax paying funds at a cost of $280M and last year didn’t even pull in 390K fans, but the improvements will cost tax payers another quarter of a BILLION just to get it “up with the Jones’” of the league… Again at tax payer’s expense. What a rip-off.
    The Rams haven’t pulled 500K in attendance since 2009 where as the CLE Browns have done that every single year since WELL DESERVINGLY getting their franchise back in 1999. With that lack of fan-base, STL doesn’t deserve a franchise even with a home run draft they had this year (minus that 7th rd Sam pick)…
    I want to be part of a fan base for a real rebuilding success story… That will be the CLE BROWNS. Us fans take the dedication to our team seriously so switching teams is a big deal… I hope Kroenke takes this team out of STL and hopefully to a better fan-base… I think the St. Louis “SAMs” will be more at home in LA.
    Ray Farmer is building us a winner… BO BROWNS!

  55. bearshaterseverywhere says: May 25, 2014 4:19 PM

    May 25, 2014 2:34 PM
    Baltimore, maybe the best football city in the United States, went 13 years without a team while the NFL used the city with teams threatening to move there to better deals in their current cities. L.A. is that city now, allowing the NFL to force Buff, St Lou, Jax to upgrade/build new stadiums or else. someone mentioned Mafia, totally correct.

    _________________________________

    Biggest Wagon Jumper Team in the history of sports>>>>Ravens! Heavily Overrated criminal team.

    Best football city in the US, wow I can’t stop laughing……….

  56. milkcan44 says: May 25, 2014 4:32 PM

    Donald Sterling soon to have over $1 Billion to invest.
    Sterling + Trump in the league (yikes)! Would make Jerrah and Snyder choirboys.

  57. nld33 says: May 25, 2014 4:32 PM

    Chuck Shumer why am I not surprised!

  58. vincentbojackson says: May 25, 2014 4:39 PM

    Sounds like LA law-makers are just throwing a hissy fit because they can’t control the timeline.

    The NFL will return when LA gets serious. You don’t get to call the shots when you’ve crapped the bed with your previous two NFL teams.

  59. koolrepetoire says: May 25, 2014 4:40 PM

    Good. 32 teams is a perfect number. The NFL would gave to expand evenly, like 8 new cities, which is 1 per division, and that isn’t happening. Now with the Bills in Ralph Wilson’s will to stay in Buffalo for many more years, and the Vikings getting a new stadium and the twin cities getting a Superbowl it’s over L.A. The Rams and Raiders aren’t coming back.

  60. fordmandalay says: May 25, 2014 4:41 PM

    All these people who say ‘Los Angeles doesn’t deserve a team because the fans didn’t support the ones they had’ don’t know anything about what they’re talking about. The Rams and Raiders had good fan support for years, especially the Rams – and this was even with having to see the games in the Colisseum, a huge and horrible venue with almost no parking, in the middle of one of the worst crime-ridden areas of the city. You literally took your life in your hands going to see a game. The Rams and Raiders left for the exact same reason the Browns left Cleveland and the Colts left Baltimore – greedy owners got offered better deals, not because the fans there sucked. Learn some actual facts before you just repeat what you hear as ‘common knowledge’.

  61. councilofargos says: May 25, 2014 4:42 PM

    Look I can see an NFL team moving to LA, absolutely huge market, TV money would be off the charts. However, I cannot see an NFL owner playing in someone elses stadium in today’s day and age of the NFL Yes, I could see a Jacksonville go there if there home games continued to get blackedout. But no way does an NFL owner pay someone else so his team can do the practices and all the off season activities that NFL teams do

  62. emma333 says: May 25, 2014 4:43 PM

    Jacksonville is doing major renovations of the stadium this year. Plus, the rebuilding of the team, while not yet finished is creating a buzz that will continue. The wins will come. The fans are fed up with the national perception, and abuse. Ticket sales are up as well…The Jaguars will not be the team to move to LA. By the time London is ready for a team….if ever… it also won’t be the much improved, hometown team–The Jacksonville Jaguars.

  63. 4grammarpolice says: May 25, 2014 4:49 PM

    Los Angeles Raiders. As if it wasn’t obvious.

  64. raiderrob21 says: May 25, 2014 4:51 PM

    LA has no heart. The passion of sports fans in CA reside in NORTHERN CALIFORNIA!!!!

    RAIDER NATION!!!

  65. bobnelsonjr says: May 25, 2014 4:53 PM

    The vikngs were the ideal team to move at the right time and ownership really blew the golden opportunity.

    LA could have at least 25% of all Super Bowls.
    Signing free agents would be easy given the market opportunities plus television and movie deals.

    Now they are stuck in a small market and are building a small arena of only 65,000 capacity which is 26th or 27th in size within the NFL.

    LA can support a stadium the size of the NFL’s big 4 of over 80K capacity (Redskins, Giants/Jets, Packers, and Cowboys)

    LA now has to try and get the Raiders. The Raiders need a new stadium, soon.

  66. deezenucks says: May 25, 2014 4:54 PM

    What a surprise, it only took 2 comments to see an LA Jags one. Kahn isn’t moving the team, he’s in a locked lease as well and he’s dropped millions in upgrades recently.
    Good try though, it never gets old….

  67. truths4all says: May 25, 2014 4:54 PM

    I am just waiting for TMZ to surface a recording of the owner of the Rams (or any other NFL team owner) where the owner is voicing his displeasure over his people associating with sheep, specifically Rams. Then the uproar from PETA and other PC nutjobs coupled with the LameStream Media (can’t always keep covering the non-talented Kardashian train-wrecks as real news while ignoring avoidable deaths of US Vets as in Bengazi, deliberate neglect at the VA leading to Vets’ deaths, or jailed US Marine with PTSD as those are non-news and not friendly to Obama) will be orchestrated by the NFL and the LA money power structure to move that NFL franchise to Earthquake-Smog City.

  68. fordmandalay says: May 25, 2014 4:55 PM

    And to all the dimwits who keep saying Los Angeles fans wouldn’t support another NFL team because they’re not sports fans, explain why the Dodgers and Lakers have been two of the most successful franchises in sports history for decades?

  69. godofpft says: May 25, 2014 5:17 PM

    The Rams will be going back to LA at the end of the 2014 season. That’s what the owner wants and that’s what the NFL wants. The Rams have 50 years of history in LA and the fanbase is still there. Plus St. Louis is pretty much broke, they can’t fork over the cash to update the dome the Rams play in.

    the Los Angeles Rams will return in the year 2015.

  70. vikingspride says: May 25, 2014 5:19 PM

    The Bills would be the wrong team to go to L.A. While they aren’t consistent contenders, they are a storied NFL franchise. Maybe I am to much into tradition but I like the idea of the older teams staying where they belong. I think L.A.’s best chance at getting a team is in Jacksonville but, it seams that the Kahn is committed to building in Jacksonville so that will probably not happen. Face it L.A. its just not going to happen, California has enough teams to pick from anyway.

  71. oliverduckhunt says: May 25, 2014 5:42 PM

    Also if the Bills are moving anywhere it should be to Toronto, so it doesn’t decimate the entire fan base.

    The Rams & The Jags should be the only 2 teams viable for relocating to LA.

    I’m glad the Chargers are staying put & I’m hoping to hear some good news for Oakland moving forward with Coliseum City!

  72. guiness17 says: May 25, 2014 5:55 PM

    Not sure I’d say LA lost 2 NFL teams, giving them a pass on Al Davis’ craziness. The LA Express did fold however, and would not have played if the USFL had lasted another season.

  73. hawks1are1thebest says: May 25, 2014 6:04 PM

    Rams are the only team that could possibly make sense. Stan Kroenke is a pure business man and will do anything for business-L.A. would mean huge business. Plus everyone else in their division is on the west coast. The Los Angeles Rams make a lot of sense for many reasons.

  74. jrosenbaum says: May 25, 2014 6:13 PM

    <>

    Uh, this is not even close to being true. Detroit, on the other hand, literally declared bankruptcy. But nobody is talking about taking the Lions, Tigers, Red Wings or Pistons from them.

    If the Rams do move to LA, it will because the taxpayers of STL City and STL County don’t want to pay anymore money to keep them here. It has nothing to do with the financial health of the city.

  75. labucs says: May 25, 2014 6:16 PM

    LA gets a bad rap. The real reason there is not a team here is because the 32 owners get to split all of the revenue from the 2nd largest market of football fans. We buy their jerseys and watch their teams.

  76. clemenza58 says: May 25, 2014 6:17 PM

    If the Rams, Raiders and Chargers all get new stadiums in their current markets, the NFL will never return to L.A.

  77. themagicfanguy says: May 25, 2014 6:25 PM

    “You trash talked the greatest *flopper* in the game today and said he is weak.”

    There you go, fixed that for you.

  78. wolverine307 says: May 25, 2014 6:51 PM

    When I think of the NFL’s great teams and cities, I think of Chicago, Pittsburgh, Philly, Boston, Buffalo, Cleveland, Green Bay, etc. – places where the tradition and the hunger for football coalesce

    Umm, you ARE aware that the Boston Redskins moved to Washington in 1937 and Boston was without a team until the AFL formed in 1960. Somehow THAT qualifies as a “great” NFL city. Gotcha.

    Detroit fits the bill much better than Boston. Granted, no titles sine 1957, but the Lions have been in Detroit since 1934. Only hard-core football-loving fans would tolerate such an uninterrupted string of ineptitude as we have here in MI.

  79. fearthehoody says: May 25, 2014 6:55 PM

    Im born, raised, live in LA and the reason for no team is LA and especially California are run by idiots! Look at all the businesses leaving because they tax the crap out of everybody for everything.

  80. raidernation37 says: May 25, 2014 8:00 PM

    L.A. residents care more about USC football than they do about the NFL.

  81. jville808 says: May 25, 2014 8:04 PM

    It’s funny how clueless some of you are mentioning the Jags as a potential LA team. At least PFT finally gets it (notice no mention or link to the Jags in the article). Even funnier though..the Jags to Orlando? Because our new QB played college ball there?

  82. mustang6984 says: May 25, 2014 8:09 PM

    Let’s state the facts here. The ONLY entity that REALLY wants the NFL in Los Angeles is the NFL. The city has some fans, but to be honest…the locals are not screaming for a team.

    They don’t care. They didn’t care when they had two, then they didn’t care when ti was whittled down to one. When the Rams (the only TRUE L.A. team of the two left for St. Louis, there was hardly a whimper.

    I’m 61, figure to be around another 20-25 years…and I don’t think I’ll EVER see an NFL team in L.A. again. Unless they are on a bus passing through!

  83. jeffjones991 says: May 25, 2014 8:17 PM

    As a 50+ year fan of the Rams growing up in LA, it makes sense that the RAIDERS move back to LA. Here’s why: #1) The Rams lost the respect of LA when Georgia Fronteire took over for her late “drowned” husband Carroll Rosenbloom in the 80′s leading to a war with her step-son Steve and the drama and destruction of a great franchise. She was a nutcase. Then Al Davis moves the Raiders to LA to the dilapidated LA Coliseum and alienates the fanbase by not marketing the team correctly. Al being Al thinks the NFL and LA should pour millions into renovating the old, “no parking places” LA Coliseum with luxury boxes and angrily moves back to Oakland and a crappy stadium to become the “Turd Of The Decades.” #2) Mark Davis and the new culture ARE turning the tide and the 49ers haver a brand new “state-of-the-art” Super Bowl ready stadium in Santa Clara, and are the pride of the Bay Area thus pushing the Raiders further down the greased pole of crappiness. I say this: Allow Mark Davis ( who is getting NOWHERE in Oakland stadium wise) back into LA- Put a new stadium on the water in Long Beach (Queen Mary area) where OC and LA fans can support an NFL team. LA wants a team and can support the team so long as the owner is committed to being a steward of an NFL team and not a stinkin’ demi-god who thinks the world owes him a favor. It is a stinking blight on the NFL that they cannot put one of their most logical franchises in the second largest metropolitan areas of the entire US. Please listen Goodell, Davis, and NFL….pull your head out and pull the trigger. It’s not rocket science.

  84. jpaq68 says: May 25, 2014 8:30 PM

    Wishful thinking from a True Bills homer.

  85. bannedfromchoirpractice says: May 25, 2014 8:58 PM

    “Rams owner Stan Kroenke has purchased land near Hollywood Park, at a time when his team has become a year-to-year tenant in L.A.”

    I thought the Rams were in St. Louis.

  86. razzlejag says: May 25, 2014 9:10 PM

    The misinformation on Jacksonville continues. Here’s some facts: the Jaguars have outdrawn the Steelers for at least 2 years in a row; there has not been a blacked out game since 2008; season ticket sales are booming; Mr. Kahn is putting millions into the stadium; we have a wonderful relationship with our London brethren now and that one game creates a ton of revenue.

    It makes sense for only a California team to relocate to LA, it would be crazy for anyone else to move into CA from a tax standpoint.

  87. dallascowboysdishingthereal says: May 25, 2014 9:46 PM

    So is Jacksonville.

  88. chicagotomahawk says: May 25, 2014 10:05 PM

    La doesn’t deserve a team. Hell most of california don’t deserve any teams in any sport

  89. campcouch says: May 25, 2014 10:08 PM

    If there’s no stadium to play in or a place to build,how can they hold any team hostage in their own stadium issues. I’d call that bluff everytime. That’s two years of construction at least,so two years in a stadium that’s not viable according to the league,two years of bleeding money in a uncertain market. There’s a plenty of people who dump on a city like Cleveland,but the NFL thought enough of them that they put the franchise in a trust when the organization moved. No such thing happened in LA. No expansion,no relocation. The teams moved to St.Louis and Oakland,not media hubs,but places with strong fan bases. Maybe in 20 more years the NFL will find a team willing to move,but the best bet would be expansion. Let someone create a team that’s specifically LA oriented and not a rebrand of another franchise…wait,the Clippers,Lakers,Angels and Dodgers,don’t count.

  90. lagg1 says: May 25, 2014 10:31 PM

    I always thought that USC was the pro team in LA.

  91. raiderlyfe510 says: May 25, 2014 11:15 PM

    I don’t know why LA thinks the Raiders belong there. If the Raiders were in LA during this like 29-100 record stretch they would be lucky to draw 15 thousand fans for home games in LA. At least in Oakland they have 35 thousand hardcore fans that would come out and support no matter what. If they win with these new ticket price structure they sell out easily. Oakland/The Eastbay to Sacramento is where the Raiders belong…..period. Got love for the Raiders Nation from LA and across the globe though.

  92. simonator917 says: May 25, 2014 11:15 PM

    L.A. will never get an NFL team again, and it’s not because we don’t deserve one. The Dodgers annually lead the major leagues in attendance, the Lakers are almost always sold out, and even the Angels and Clippers do alright. The reason the NFL won’t be back is because we simply refuse to publicly finance a football palace for some-already wealthy owner. That being the case, the rest of the owners do not want one of the owners to build his own stadium because of the precedent it would set. Using us as a threat is a bonus but they ain’t coming here because they don’t want all the other cities getting the same idea.

  93. lerch77 says: May 25, 2014 11:25 PM

    The only scenario I can see at this point is either the Raiders, Chargers, or Jags. LA is the only place where the fans go to the games to be seen/watched rather than to watch whats on the field…

  94. Robert says: May 25, 2014 11:34 PM

    1. Rams 2. Raiders

    The Rams will be the first to return.

    Relax.

  95. roknsoul says: May 26, 2014 12:15 AM

    #LARAMS2015

  96. bittersportspills says: May 26, 2014 12:54 AM

    With Los Angeles missing an NFL team for 20 years, the NFL has dropped in popularity, right?
    With the NFL not in LA, the league can broadcast games people want to see instead of local teams.
    The league would rather sell eyeballs on LA TV screens than 70K tickets for ten games. LA fans do not cope with losing very well and the team to depart its current locale is most likely a loser.

  97. rogerrodgers says: May 26, 2014 1:00 AM

    Jacksonville should move to LA

  98. rogerrodgers says: May 26, 2014 1:01 AM

    The california haters must live in Texas…

  99. greeneblitz says: May 26, 2014 1:02 AM

    I’m sorry but I don’t know a single Bills fan that worries the Bills are “leaving for LA”, that’s a national media myth, Toronto is our bitter enemy, not LA.

  100. shutupandfknlisten says: May 26, 2014 1:07 AM

    The LA Raiders were not unsuccessful at bringing people to the gate, the venue was just terrible for a pro team. As long as season tickets aren’t outrageously priced (ala SF’s new stadium), there’s already a large Raiders contigent in LA ready and willing to support the team. LA failed last time because of poor stadiums, not for a lack of a fan base.

    The notion that LA is a fair weather market is preposterous. Build a stadium in City of Industry or Ontario and watch the fans from LA, Orange and San Bernardino County flock to it.

  101. carlsbadboltfan says: May 26, 2014 1:55 AM

    Well, only a few ignorant responses about the Chargers moving to LA. Fact: Chargers could opt out their lease at Qualcomm ANY TIME they want, but haven’t.

    Mark Tommy Boy Davis wants a new stadium in Oakland, but has to use tarps and only sell 85% of the seats to lift blackouts there. That ain’t gonna happen.

    Hear that sound? That’s the Raider train leaving the station.

    Choo! Choo!

  102. coltzfan166 says: May 26, 2014 2:52 AM

    San Diego will be there. I give it 5 years.

  103. hodag54501 says: May 26, 2014 7:01 AM

    While many worship the NFL shrine each day, this glaring hole in their record is inexplicable. How can you claim to have it all together and not have a team in the nation’s second largest city?

    I suspect the Rams will end up there again. I’m one of the few who here who still remember a great franchise called the Los Angeles Rams.

  104. theageofquarrel says: May 26, 2014 7:55 AM

    razzlejag says:
    May 25, 2014 9:10 PM
    The misinformation on Jacksonville continues. Here’s some facts: the Jaguars have outdrawn the Steelers for at least 2 years in a row; there has not been a blacked out game since 2008; season ticket sales are booming.

    Yeah,ok

  105. 2manyconcussions says: May 26, 2014 8:11 AM

    As expensive as it is to build and upgrade stadiums to keep teams in a city, it is much cheaper and easier than trying to get a football team to move to your city from somewhere else. LA should have known better.

  106. i10east says: May 26, 2014 9:37 AM

    Enjoy all of those thumbs down delusional Jacksonville haters…

  107. jollyjoker2 says: May 26, 2014 9:42 AM

    what would you expect from a bunch of LA libs. they think that the owner is going to kick in a billion dollars and pay for everything.. don’t work that way in corporate America – and never will. You do this for the economic benefits of having a vibrant city with other business coming in for the attractions etc…these folks will never understand this.

  108. razzlejag says: May 26, 2014 9:42 AM

    Avg home attendance/game last year:
    – Jacksonville 59,940
    – Pittsburgh 57,311

    Add in the 100,00 who attended the game in London and the average Jaguar home attendance becomes 64,947, good for 21st in the NFL out of 32 while Pittsburgh was 30th.

    The Jaguars, with the increased ST sales, should move to around 17th this year while Pittsburgh, San Diego and Oakland will continue to hold onto the bottom 3 positions, 30,31, and 32.

    LA Steelers maybe?

  109. jpaq68 says: May 26, 2014 9:49 AM

    There is no loyalty to any one team in Los Angeles. If the NFL were smart, they would build themselves a stadium in Los Angeles and then mandate that that each team give up at least one home game every three years to play at that venue. They could showcase their “Game of the Week”, broadcast it on their own network and still overcharge the other netorks for a full package of games.
    They could also host the Combine, the Super Bowl and any other event they wanted whenever they felt like it.

  110. mrznyc says: May 26, 2014 9:54 AM

    People in LA suport football – USC & UCLA draw well – People get their football fix for something less than a mortgage payment.

  111. crystalcoastraider says: May 26, 2014 12:00 PM

    I’ve said it once, and I’ll say it again…It’s the Oakland Raiders, NOT the LA Raiders…LA has already shown they can’t keep an NFL franchise. LA is, and will ALWAYS be….Laker country! Period.

  112. writer0327 says: May 26, 2014 12:35 PM

    This is coming from an LA native who loves football. Would I like to see football return? Absolutely. But LA is not going to bow down to the NFL and support some bum team blindly. If an owner wants to bring in a team and make it a winner, LA will support them initially, but if you don’t keep winning, LA will turn back to the beaches, the mountains, the desert, the nightlife, and everything else there is to do in this city.

    The only team that has built equity in this town is the Lakers. Everyone else is fighting for fans. The NFL will be no different.

  113. wisconsinhillfolk says: May 26, 2014 12:40 PM

    They should just move all the Florida teams to California. Then we could sell Florida to Cuba.

  114. 1nationraidernation says: May 26, 2014 1:40 PM

    well I think all the Oakland Raiders fans should realize one thing. The Raiders are not staying in Oakland unless they get a new deal there. Plus if Oakland Raider fans really want the Raiders to stay in Oakland they should but tickets. Having only approx 20,000 season ticket holders makes it that much easier for the team to move.

    With that said the Raiders are going to need to win where ever they play. Nobody wants to pay to watch somebody lose….as the late great Al Davis said….”Just win Baby”, it cures everything.

    Personally if they did move out of Oakland/ Nor Cal, I would prefer Las Vegas over LA anyday. I would have no problem flying there for the weekend. LA, I would take a pass, or at the very least buy a smog mask.

    Sec 117….GO Raiders!

  115. djshnooks says: May 26, 2014 4:21 PM

    I truly don’t mean to be a jerk…but you have no idea how passionate and connected us Bills fans really are.

    Many players have come and gone, and still said Buffalo was like college for them. Many more made their permanent residence in Buffalo, NY, including Jim Kelly who hated the idea of going there.

    Scotty Bowman even has a house there.

    Terry Pegula, Tom Golisano, Danny Wegman, Jeremy Jacobs…even Kenny Chesney and John Travolta, all have houses in Western, NY…and they could afford to live anywhere in this world.

    They chose to make Upstate, NY, “home.”

    There is A LOT to offer in Buffalo and the surrounding areas. The Finger Lakes is gorgeous, and one of, if not the most, expensive lake front properties in the USA.

    The city of Buffalo is on the up-and-up…new hotels, restaurants, condos, transportation/transit lines…new waterfront developments near the Harbor. Pegula is building the HarborCenter across from First Niagara Center, where they will potentially hold the NHL scouting combine (taking it from Toronto), an NHL all-star game, NHL draft, possibly another winter classic in a new stadium. None of this was even a thought 5 years ago. It’s amazing to see.

    I mean, do you understand my point? I don’t even live in Buffalo…I grew up hating Western, NY…lived down south for 2 years and was devastated when I had to move back home…but now I appreciate it. I love it, and wouldn’t want to be anywhere else.

    Once one of the most prosperous cities in this country…Buffalo is coming back. The state of New York needs it to come back…and it all starts with keeping the state’s ONLY NFL team where it belongs.

    Jump on board with us. Support us as we would support you and your team if stuck in such a situation. The outpouring of support for Ralph and Jim were amazing…help us make sure their one and only wish and dream comes true…the Buffalo Bills belong in the NFL, and the NFL belongs in Buffalo.

    We deserve this. Jim and Ralph deserve this. The NFL deserves this. Get it right!

  116. capn0bvious says: May 26, 2014 4:57 PM

    And to think, at one time the Seahawks had moved all their equipment to LA and were even holding practices down there, then Paul Allen rescued them. Can’t dodge a bullet much closer than that.

  117. zgare says: May 27, 2014 10:28 AM

    The Rams are not a good match for LA. If the Rams move, St. Louis will instantly become the new largest metro area without an NFL team. And the NFL knows we are good at raiding teams from other cities. Comments about St. Louis declining shows how little you know — the CITY of St. Louis is 1/10th of the metro area. The Metro Area has never declined in popoulation. Nearly all the Rams fans come from the County and Illinois. In spite of the lease and self-serving comments by folks with a financial interest in a new St. Louis stadium, the Dome there is not half bad — seast are the closest in the NFL on average — not like the upper seats of the Jerry dome where you watch the game on that TV.

    The Rams are not moving anywhere. Stan grew up in Missouri, and he was 40% of the ownership team that brought them to St. Louis 20 years ago. And he has no interest in selling.

    St. Louis is more of a football town than LA, and sports in general. Rams sell out all games in spite of the 10 year losing season streak. We would do even better if the NFL had put us in the correct Midwest division with at least one nearby town like Chicago, Nashville, Indy, Cincy, Green Bay, KC, Dallas, Minneapolis, or Atlanta. We get no out of town visitors from SF, Seattle, or Arizona, but we have to have 3 home games every year with those cities.

    I don’t understand why you don’t go for expansion teams. Duh! Is it because you are afraid you would lose out to another Houston again? The NFL talks about wanting to expand to Mexico City, for goodness sakes.

  118. jimmyjames65 says: May 27, 2014 1:35 PM

    The Raiders aren’t exactly kickin’ it in Oakland.

  119. completefan says: May 27, 2014 1:36 PM

    L.A. does not deserve pro football because the fans will simply not support it.
    The place was less than half-full for the L.A. KISS game I went to on Sunday so that is proof enough.

  120. ivanpavlov0000 says: May 27, 2014 5:03 PM

    It’s true, LA is a fly-to city, not a fly-over city, and so it doesn’t need an NFL team to draw people into downtown. On a warm sunny Sunday in December, some people here may prefer to go to the park or the beach than to sit home watching football on tv.

    But refusing to buy a stadium for a billionaire team owner does not prove LA “doesn’t deserve” a team. Neither does people refusing to attend overpriced minor league games (the good seats for LA Kiss games are very pricey, especially for arena football).

    The requirement to make the NFL pay for its own stadium, and build it in such a way that it minimizes negative impacts on the City (traffic, environmental, and otherwise), is the big issue. The NFL is used to calling all the shots and extorting corporate welfare from local taxpayers. LA isn’t a small town that will allow the NFL to bully it.

    And this whole concept that a stadium “pays for itself” was birthed by politicians swimming in graft and corruption.

    And … we’re still playing NHL Hockey in LA! Unlike the vast majority of you, our season isn’t over yet! After we eliminate Chicago tomorrow night, we’re going to beat the NY Rangers and win another Stanley Cup!

  121. donnajag says: May 29, 2014 7:18 PM

    Posters on here thinking the Jags are ready to pack up and move to LA should go read Jaguars.com, so you can get some correct information for a change. We haven’t had a blackout in years, which your team down the road, the Chargers, can’t say. They can’t even have a playoff game without a threat for a blackout. No one wants to watch them, even if they were playing in Cincy. We have millions going into our stadium and the best attendance in the state of Fla. Do some research before you start typing. We aren’t moving…Go Jags!

Leave a Reply

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