Chiefs oppose a Raiders-Chargers move to L.A. without realignment

AP

When the Raiders and Chargers first proposed a dogs-and-cats-living-together arrangement in Los Angeles, it was assumed that one of the two teams would exit the AFC West.

Absent such an adjustment, at least one of the other teams in the division is strongly opposed to the move.

Per a source with knowledge of the situation, the Chiefs believe it would be an unfair advantage for both the Chargers and Raiders to have what amounts to an extra home game every year in the form of a road game. And it would be; both teams would have one less travel obligation per year, and that could indeed create a competitive advantage for those teams — along with a competitive disadvantage for the other two in the division.

The easy fix would be to move the Chargers or Raiders to the NFC West. But another team would need to be willing to move. As the source said, that’s hardly a given.

The Rams undoubtedly would decline to move to a new conference if they aren’t permitted to move to a new city. The Cardinals already have moved from the NFC East to the NFC West. The Seahawks have gone from the NFC (in 1976) to the AFC (in 1977) back to the NFC (in 2002). While on one hand the 49ers possibly would consider a shift if it meant getting the Raiders out of the Bay Area, the 49ers are a fixture in the NFC. It’s hard to imagine them moving to the AFC, and essentially taking the Raiders’ place in the AFC West while yielding their own spot in the NFC West to the Raiders.

The complication further fuels the notion that, in the end, it could be the Chargers — and only the Chargers — moving to Los Angeles.

30 responses to “Chiefs oppose a Raiders-Chargers move to L.A. without realignment

  1. Chargers to the NFC, Seahawks back to the AFC….. I still hate the Broncos more than any other team in the league

    I’d much rather they leave it alone, but since when does the league care what fans think?

  2. Let’s see what makes sense in terms of moving teams and conferences. NFCWest teams:

    SF -west coast
    Arizona – West coast’ish
    Seattle – West coast
    St. Louis- Let’s see, it’s 900 miles to NYC and 2000 miles to SF. You can call that Midwest I guess but it’s still a lot closer to the East then the West.

    What team would make the most sense to move to the West coast?

  3. 4evrnyt says:
    Nov 22, 2015 12:33 PM

    Yea two teams in the same stadium works so well that’s why the Giants and Jets still play in the same place right?
    —————————————————-
    Different conferences there bud. BIG difference.

  4. When the Rams moved to St. Louis in 1995 they agreed to waive their right to refuse to switch conferences if the NFL required it. That is still in place today. It would make all the sense in the world for a Rams team in St. Louis to be in the AFC West, both KC and Denver are much, much closer to the city than any current NFC West team.

  5. As a Seahawks fan, I could live with a move back to the AFC West. Grew up with it, rivalries with Broncos, Chiefs, Raiders, Chargers.

    Woulda missed our newfound rivalry with 49ers, but Jed York already ruined that by getting rid of Harbaugh and moving team to Santa Clara.

    With today’s game, it’s really sinking in how much I’m gomna miss Jim 🙁

  6. Perfect. LA area barely cares about getting a team to begin with. Now send us the one of three that has lowest current fan loyalty. For as much cash as these owners/commish make, they sure are oblivious quite often

  7. “LA area barely cares about getting a team to begin with”

    So don’t move a team there. Problem solved

  8. “Yea two teams in the same stadium works so well that’s why the Giants and Jets still play in the same place right?”

    Reading comprehension problem. The issue is both Raiders and Chargers are in the same division and would be sharing a stadium, not two teams from different conferences doing so.

  9. NFL is so based on rivalries this would be terrible for the league. You have to keep these divisons together regardless of where the teams are situated.
    That’s why I hope either only the Rams or Chargers move to LA or both move there in order to keep the alignment as is.
    I’m hoping the Raiders-Chargers plan is nixed.

  10. imodan says:
    Nov 22, 2015 12:40 PM
    4evrnyt says:
    Nov 22, 2015 12:33 PM

    Yea two teams in the same stadium works so well that’s why the Giants and Jets still play in the same place right?
    —————————————————-
    Different conferences there bud. BIG difference.
    ——————-
    Not sure how that makes a difference. Even teams in the same conference could end up with a home playoff game against another team.

  11. The current 4 AFCW teams are all from the original AFL and have been grouped together since the beginning of that great league. Anyone who reveres the heritage of the AFL would view it as disgraceful if either the Raiders or Chargers are forced to move to the NFC.

    Of course, if Son-of-Al doesn’t repeat is father’s horrible decision to move the Raiders to Los Angeles then it’s a moot point.

  12. raidadon says:
    Nov 22, 2015 1:01 PM

    Sad lil franchise. Just doin enough.

    Every team in the Div has won it twice since the last time your “sad lil franchise” did it. So there is that.

  13. The Rams don’t need any financial assistance to move back to LA.

    Neither SD or Oakland can say the same.

    No way there should be 2 teams in LA, and the Rams are the most natural fit by far, having spent nearly 50 years in LA.

    Kroenky should just make the move and if the NFL hassles them the Rams should head right to the Courts like Al Davis did. The precedent is already set, and the NFL has no right to claim they ‘own’ the Los Angeles market. They will lose big in court.

    Raiders and Chargers need to stay where they’re at.

  14. Period, point blank, and cut & dry. The notion of the Charger & Raiders sharing a stadium is goofy and stupid. Which the NFL should only consider as a last resort to put a football team in the front running fairweather Los Angeles.

    The Rams moving to Los Angeles makes all the sense in the world. The Ownership is strong and needs zero outside help moving there. It restores the Los Angeles and San Fransico rivalry with a decades old 49ers vs Rams rivalry, and it improves the NFC West by decreasing the travel mileage, and the Rams and 49er fans can travel to each other stadium without the threat of violence….why is this even a dilemma?

  15. people dont get it, Kroneke had a chance to move to LA in JAN 14 and Jan 15 and did not, because the league controls the process point blank, so please stop with the Al davis reference this is not 1982 its 2015 and the league is more powerful than it was.

  16. pillaging4fun says:
    Nov 23, 2015 6:48 PM

    people dont get it, Kroenke had a chance to move to LA in JAN 14 and Jan 15 and did not, because the league controls the process point blank, so please stop with the Al Davis reference this is not 1982 its 2015 and the league is more powerful than it was.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    “The NFL is more powerful than it was”?

    Really? Sounds like you’re the one who isn’t getting it. If that’s the case and the mighty NFL is more powerful than ever, how come they keep losing when going to the courts? Their legal record is pitiful.

  17. Teams should not share stadiums IMO. It was a major mistake for NYC not to build the JETS that stadium on the West Side of Manhattan. Teams need their own identity.

    The ‘Oakland’ Raiders playing in Santa Clara? That would have been like the Brooklyn Dodgers playing in Queens, that’s why they moved to LA. Robert Moses wouldn’t give O’Malley the land he sought he Brooklyn by the old meat-market which was right beside the Long Island RR.

  18. “competitive disadvantage” cancelled out – because home game becomes not like a home game, when half of the stadium is not your home fan since ‘away’ fans can VERY easily travel to this game.

  19. It hasn’t even happened yet and already another excuse for a team losing is already starting.
    What do they have to be afraid of? What do they have to lose? They already all play each other. If you want to beat all the teams in your division no matter who plays where, then just be better than they are.

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.