NFL apparently having trouble finding temporary venues in L.A.

Getty Images

The NFL has asked venues in Los Angeles to let them know by tomorrow if they’re interested in being temporary hosts of a professional football team.

And mostly, what they’re hearing is “No, thanks.”

According to Nathan Fenno and Sam Farmer of the Los Angeles Times, there isn’t a land rush to offer the Chargers, and/or Raiders and/or Rams a place to play before a new stadium can be built in Carson and/or Inglewood.

The Coliseum is the only venue to publicly admit interest.

The 27,000-seat StubHub Center, home of the MLS L.A. Galaxy, is the latest venue to pull out of the running, joining the Rose Bowl as expressing no interest.

We’ve really just begun,” NFL L.A. point man Eric Grubman said. “Aug. 5 was a date that helped us know what venues might be available in a traditional sense and I think that has sorted itself out. . . . Other, more complex opportunities could very well present themselves as the picture becomes clearer.”

That seems to point to the baseball stadiums of the Angels and Dodgers, and those facilities aren’t expected to submit proposals on the NFL’s timeline, on account of the whole maybe hosting playoff games of their own thing.

But Grubman remains confident, saying: “In any event, I think this works itself out by the end of this year.”

Of course, the NFL has been expressing that kind of optimism throughout. Whether the buildings of Los Angeles have any more interest than the citizenry remains to be seen.

19 responses to “NFL apparently having trouble finding temporary venues in L.A.

  1. The NFL as a league does not gain much from teams in LA, as the primary income source – TV money – is a national deal that accounts for the LA market as it is. The LA market has actually been more valuable to the league as a chip to play against other markets to leverage stadium deals. With the way the LA market is set up, it probably makes sense to have 1 team max in LA, as the market is already diluted and adjusted to being an agnostic NFL area. If the league tries to force multiple teams in LA, and they cannot tap enough of a market concentration, you might find the move to LA being much less of a success than anticipated.

  2. Well, of course, Stub Hub Center is going to turn down the NFL – it’s owned by AEG, who were railroaded out of the running for stadium deal in downtown LA.

  3. My neighbor and i will knock down a fence and the NFL is free to use our back yards combined

  4. The league is just using Los Angeles to force Oak, SD, and STL to pony up cash for new stadiums – period. I don’t believe we are anywhere close to having an NFL team in LA.

  5. I don’t understand the logic behind trying to force a team, or teams, down the throat of a city that doesn’t want one when there are cities all over the country that would give sweetheart deals to the NFL to get one.

    Yes, LA is a major market. And yes there are tons of potential fans. But if only a small percentage turn into actual fans, what is the point? San Antonio, Oklahoma City, Birmingham, Santa Fe, Portland (OR), or even Salt Lake City would provide a much more enthusiastic market and generate the same type of revenues, seeing as how the TV money is split equally among teams regardless of where they are based.

  6. 1) NFL builds stadium in LA at their leisure and their cost.

    2) Change to a 17 game season – 8 home/away 1 neutral

    3) Profit. NFL rakes it in from a bunch of those neutral games in LA where everyone is a transplant, and would love to go see their team play once every year or two.

  7. Stillers213-You make it sound like this is manipulative by the NFL. I’m shocked you or anyone else could possibly think about the league that way.

  8. Goodell will force them to host one just like the London b/s!!! Why should ANY team lose a home game??? Fans want their home games to stay at home!!! Hopefully Goodell will be FIRED & Kraft should be leading the FIRE brigade after the patsies got caught cheating AGAIN!!!

  9. @cuttyplease – Brilliant insight. As intelligent a comment as I’ve ever read on here.

    @gromit45 – Now THAT’S funny!

    If STL builds a stadium and Kroenke builds HIS stadium in LA for HIS Rams team, will the Raiders move to STL? Will SD then feel like the ugly stepchild (which they should in LA) and come crawling back to SD with their tail between their legs? Hmm…

  10. If the Raiders can’t go back to Oakland but are L.A. bound, they should be allowed to play at Levi’s Stadium until they can go down more south.

    The Chargers can stay in San Diego or go to the Coliseum until they move up.

    The Rams are in the most trouble.

    Then again, it’s looks more like “bye bye L.A.” … again!

  11. The Coliseum and Rose Bowl are the only viable football venues. Angel Stadium reverted to a baseball only facility, Dodgers Stadium can’t fit a football field and after the way the NFL ignored AEG no way they let them play at the Home Depot Center.

  12. Spanos thinks his Chargers could be the Clippers of the NFL and get 2 billion selling the Team for the move to LA. Bad owner whose kids are clueless running the business.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.