Report: Chargers may rebrand in L.A.

Getty Images

Fifty-seven years ago, the Chargers launched in Los Angeles. They’re reportedly returning. (Unless they aren’t.)

They’re also reportedly considering rebranding the team. Which would mean shedding one of the iconic names and uniforms and adopting something new.

Vincent Bonsignore of the Los Angeles Daily News reports that the Chargers are considering the adoption of a new name in L.A. It wouldn’t happen in 2017, but it will be a consideration for future years.

The Houston Oilers became the Tennessee Oilers before becoming the Tennessee Titans, in a move that plenty of old-school fans still lament. The extinction of the Chargers would be met with even greater dismay.

Offsetting the angst could be a new nickname and color scheme and logo and uniforms that inspire and fascinate. I currently have no ideas. But I’ve got no qualms about treating any of the ideas that you may drop in the comments as my own.

227 responses to “Report: Chargers may rebrand in L.A.

  1. However they do rebrand – I would bet the farm that the uniforms, logos and nickname will seem very cartoonish and arena football/WNBA in style.

    They’ll also be incredibly PC.

    LA Shock
    LA Quake

    Garbage like that.

  2. The only time the Rams were above 90 percent capacity this season was for the first preseason game. Now LA is going to house 2 mediocre franchises. The league is probably pushing for the rebrand so they can use San Diego as a possible relocation site for existing teams that want new stadiums.

    Kudos to the citizens of San Diego for telling Spanos to go fly a kite on the stadium proposal.

  3. Or how bout the LA Santayana’s

    Named after George Santayana for his famous quote…

    ‘Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.’

  4. You could take a page out of Houston’s book and go with the LA Californians. Or you could go with something that is quintessential CA, like the LA Known to Cause Cancers, or the LA Lowered CO2 Emissions.

  5. Well, since everyone that sets foot in California is required by law to adopt near-Marxist level liberalism in order to live there, why not the LA Democrats? Or the LA Actors, a nod to the fact that if it weren’t for Hollywood actors, there would be no Los Angeles.

    Or, the most radical idea of them all, we could leave them alone and call them the Chargers? Yeah, there’s no history with the LA Chargers, but at least the LA Chargers have been in existence before. That’s good enough.

  6. Big mistake. The powder blue uniforms with the white helmets are awesome. Changing the franchise ownership is all that’s really needed here. The rest will take care of itself on its own shortly thereafter.

    As they say, the fish stinks from the head down.

  7. …….Spanos SHOULD be required to rebrand…..that way when the NFL expands ONCE AGAIN, San Diego gets to keep the name, the colors and those awesome uni’s……at this point it doesnt matter because the NFL has become, within the last 20 years the laughing stock of the sports world……..

  8. In an attempt to draw fans from greater California: The Los Angeles Equals. Their uniforms will have no dominant color and their mascot will be an amoeba as to not offend anyone. No gender, no race, no sexual preference. Absolutely no distinguishing characteristics at all. Millenials shall rejoice

  9. Fail…
    Failure to the people of San Diego.
    Failure to even think about tossing out the Chargers name.

    Buffalo Supports San Diego.

  10. Tenn isn’t exactly famous for being built on oil is it? As for LA, it’s only famous for those looking for fame – so how about The Seekers?

  11. Bills fans dreaded this for year. Very sorry for Charger fans. This is a terrible mistake. The NFL will undoubtedly pay a long-term price to satiate short-term greed.

    All fans should oppose this move. It’s not just bad for Charger fans and San Diego; it’s bad for the NFL. And it will ultimately be bad for the greedy wankers who are pushing for this to happen.

  12. Wouldn’t work.

    One of the reasons every new league fails, albeit a minor reason compared to the more obvious reasons, is the branding always stinks. The uniforms never have a classic look, the color schemes are always horrendous and loud, and they try too hard to be avant-garde but usually end up looking childish. Like color rush uniforms. they look like kids playing in their superhero pajamas.

    L.A. is not a football-first town as it is, and if you bring a new team and erase all familiarity with it, it will fail.

    If they really wanna do a European league what they should do is this: Make that league the NFL minor league, and use the real NFL teams, they’re real current or classic (classic being 60s-70s, not the stupid throwback from the silent film era) uniforms. That way you automatically have NFL brand affiliation, and begin immediately out of the gate having a sister American city.

    That’s how a European League would work.

    So if the Chargers are gonna no longer be the Chargers in a city that already has a team and isn’t an NFL-first city anyway, bye-bye-Chargers. Oakland? There’s your new team after the Raiders leave.

  13. shout out to Carson, CA (home of stub hub). not a big venue but conveniently located off of the freeway–but what the heck are the chargers doing? this is like moving from an old rickety mansion (in an beautiful location) into a studio apartment ( in a decent neighborhood)–where the rent is too high and the amenities are too few.

  14. If the name change takes effect, it wouldn’t be the first time for an AFCW team.

    The Raiders originally were called the “Senors” based on a naming contest but that was quickly dropped so they’ve played all their games as the Raiders. The Chiefs were the original “Texans” in their first 3 years in Dallas before moving to K.C. and changing to the current name.

    Also, the Jets were the original “Titans” in their first 3 years before adapting their current name.

  15. How about the L.A. Carpetbaggers??? I mean they move from town to town sucking the locals for money until they wise up and cut them off then the team moves on to the next town……

  16. They probably should because the Chargers of old will have very few fans remaining after the way their loyalty was rewarded by ownership. Not that Spanos will find many new fans in LA.

    This whole thing is a disaster.

  17. I hate to see rebranding of teams, but if it has to happen, PLEASE don’t be all 21st century-y and make the name some abstract or intangible concept, i.e. the Rush, or the Sting, or something similarly Arena League-ish. Keep it to a classic mascot: ferocious animals or warlike cultures ONLY.

  18. Let’s go back to square one. Did anyone in LA care about the Rams during the first season? It seems like LA is just about having a stadium and Superbowls in the city, not about fans

  19. Given what has been come up with the last few years in the ugly color rush and ugly throwback uniforms i would expect anything they come up with to induce nausea and vomiting not the nspire and fascinate

    Its also a blatant money grab to try and get fans to replace their Chargers jerseys with the new ones.

    Greed and corruption, the signatures of Roger Goodell’s National Integrity League

  20. Don’t forget the Cleveland Browns became the Baltimore Ravens.
    The Cleveland Browns 2 are about as big of a hit as Coke 2 was back in 1985.

    Perhaps LA Kardashians? It would fit because despite the fact that nobody wants them they simply will not go away.

  21. So, if they ever expand again, they can create a new team in SD (like the Browns in Cleveland)…they can even have it publicly held like the Packers, then nobody can complain about the owner.

  22. Shouldn’t all teams – like the Ravens and Titans – re-brand after moving? The Colts’ “iconic names” probably still mean a lot more in Baltimore than in Indianapolis.

    Congratulations to the good people of San Diego – they’ll survive just fine.

  23. LA Hey Dudes

    -Tie Dye Helmets with a hand on each side making the hang ten sign.

    -Tie Dye Home Jersey’s, White Away Jersey’s with Tie Dye Numbers.

    -Pants that resemble cargo shorts.

    -I’d say shoes that resemble flip flops but thats going to far.

  24. I also hear the Redskins name may be available shortly. And then the media will have to use it because they couldn’t just say LA; because people would t know which LA team they were talking about.

  25. Makes sense. You wouldn’t want to have two nfl teams in the LA market, both with the blue and gold color scheme.

    Marketing would be confused, for one thing

  26. I have a suspicion that the rebranding is a condition of using the stadium by the Rams. After all, the Rams and Chargers currently use almost identical color schemes. The Rams didn’t want to share the stadium but was ordered to by the league. They’ll want to drive a hard bargain, including setting conditions that the Chargers would not want to agree with, and setting the two teams apart by forcing the Chargers to change colors makes sense to me as one of those conditions.

  27. i dont get the moves to LA. most people who live in LA arent from LA and will probably not change their favorite team to either the Rams or the Chargers, or whatever they will be. and how many Charger fans just gave up on the team?

  28. Free market capitalism at its very best.
    LA gave the Chargers a better deal than San Diego did. If, by moving, there is an opportunity to re-brand and make more money, do it.

    The Chargers are a private sector business, San Diego does not “own” them nor do the Chargers “owe” San Diego anything. The populace in San Diego was not supportive, so it makes sense to move. Yes there is/was a SMALL segment of the population that are die-hard Charger fans but do they come to every game? No.

    It makes sense. If the local government attacks the Chargers by taxing them into oblivion and forcing needless regulations onto them, and the populace is fine with it because they KEEP re-electing these liberal fools, then the logical end result is that businesses react negatively when their profit margin is adversely affected, and ultimately move somehow where there is better potential for profit.

  29. They might as well change it to the Los Angeles Birds because they’re giving a big middle finger to the fans who supported them for nearly 60 years. But who cares about them, right?

  30. The Houston Oilers became the Tennessee Oilers before becoming the Tennessee Titans, in a move that plenty of old-school fans still lament.

    Haven’t met anybody that gives a R@T$ A$$ that the Oiler name is gone……..

  31. They might as well change it to the Los Angeles Birds because they’re giving a big middle finger to the fans who supported them for nearly 60 years. But who cares about them, right?

    Really? These same “fans” probably went to 1 game per year, if that. Cry me a river. California, especially San Diego, is as anti-private business as it can get. If California, LA, SF could find a legal way to seize a team using eminent domain, declare the team as “city property”, and sqaunder all the profits, then they would do it.

  32. Since Rams and Chargers are both Chrysler products they should play in Dodge stadium. Then in 25 years when they skip town for more accepting markets we can say that they “Got the F out of Dodge.”

  33. I don’t know if it’s the best long-term move to rebrand, but it could help them sell some more merchandise and/or tickets at first. The team would feel new and fresh, as opposed to the St. Louis Rams coming in with 7-9 BS Jeff Fisher and Case Keenum, changing nothing but the city name and adding a few more losses.

    If I lived in L.A., I would be more excited for a new team if they had a new name, colors, and jerseys. It would feel more like the team belongs to my city instead of it feeling like some other city’s failed team.

  34. This is the kind of cronyism the most recent Election was a rebuke against. If you want a stadium, pay with it using your own money rather than taking more and more from taxpayers.

    San Diego will survive and thrive. Bet the NFL hopes it does not after the Chargers leave.

  35. So the NFL ratings were WAY down this year in Los Angeles. And you decide you want to move your team there. And rebrand.

    Dean Spanos is an idiot.

  36. Ironically enough, the ORIGINAL name of the team was the “Los Angeles Chargers.” Why in the hell would you screw with the name to have some goofy name, that assuredly won’t end in an “s?” (unless it’s to move more product and/or a [transparent] attempt to distance the team from the unpopular move out of San Diego?)

  37. First, the required attempt at narcissitic lame cheeky humor favored by this site’s masters: The LA Facelifts, in homage to the area’s leading industry, as well as to the team rebranding.

    The serious comment is that, as other have noted, it’s hard to see how the area will support two teams when it hasn’t supported one. Unfortunately for Spanos all of the glamorous markets are full up, and none of the likely attendance-generating alternatives are compelling places to live compared to SD.

  38. I’ve always been a fan of using names that are specific to the location.
    Miami has the Dolphins
    Houston has the Texans
    Cowboys are found in Dallas
    Pirates have been known to dock in the Tampa Bay
    Jets are often seen flying over the NY skyline
    And LA has the Kardashians

    Just makes sense

  39. LA Smog……foggy colored Helmet

    LA Quake…..Helmet with cracks showing.

    LA Jam…….Helmet with 20 cars piled up on each other.

    LA Hair……DO NOTHING with the helmet but EVERY player has to have hair extentions.

    LA Kiss……Just let Gene Simmons OWN the team !!!!

  40. They want a SuperBowl title, so they are going to change their name to the L.A. Raiders and hope to fool everyong into believing they won the SuperBowl in 1983.

  41. No matter what they rename them, it will leave people shaking their heads.

    Please do NOT let NIKE come up with some gawd awful ideas like their last 2 products. The Jags & Bucs uni’s are just awful to look at. The Dolphins (idk who came up with that change) isn’t as bad, but they should go back to the old classic logo. Jags, lose the 2 tone helmet. Bucs, simplify the color scheme…. it’s too busy and ugly as my ex mother in law.

    Keep it simple and classy.

  42. Will San Diego keep the rights to the Chargers name and records like the city of Cleveland did? You never know what’ll happen in 25 years.

  43. This is awesome……watching the trainwreck unfold

    and yet the echo of Mark Cuban can be heard…..

  44. “Don’t forget the Cleveland Browns became the Baltimore Ravens.”

    And many years ago the Cleveland Rams became the Los Angeles Rams.

  45. The Los Angeles Ewes (a female ram/sheep.) Mainly because Spanos will be Kroenke’s b*tch due to the fact he will be playing in Kroenke’s new stadium and couldn’t get a stadium deal himself.

    ewe (pronounced yo͞o)
    noun –
    a female sheep.

    In all seriousness though, if Spanos is half as smart as he thinks he is he should take a page from the NBA basketball team in the vicinity and try to pull in fans from all over the state; the Golden State Chargers or Golden State

  46. If they have to, LA Barrons after Barron Hilton who originally owned them and actually did great things for them. Or Foolish Club.

  47. This move of the NFL back to LA is going to be a disaster at this rate. They overlooked the team with by far the best young talent and largest existing fanbase in LA, the Raiders. Instead they move one of the worst teams in the league, the Rams and now a team in need of rebuilding, the Chargers. Now the plan is to change the team name and make them even less of a recognizable brand?? NFL has been making the wrong move at every turn if their goal was to establish a foothold in the LA market.

  48. Report: 1/12/2027, Spanos says “I’m moving my LA Conquistadors to St. Louis, will rebrand them the St. Louis Chargers.”

  49. Well, at least long-suffering Chargers fans will finally be out of their misery.

    As for rebranding, they should save themselves the hassle and just name the team for the next city they that they think they’ll end up in. It’t will take 2-3 years to rebrand anyway and by then they should be in their next stop.

  50. streetyson says:
    Jan 12, 2017 8:06 AM
    Tenn isn’t exactly famous for being built on oil is it? As for LA, it’s only famous for those looking for fame – so how about The Seekers?

    Is LA famous for its lakes? The basketball team seemed to do alright even though they didn’t change their name.

  51. I’ve always wondered about team names representing their cities and areas.
    The Detroit Lions?
    Perhaps they should call themselves the LA Pornographers.
    Crazy color scheme! Weird press!
    Instant international fanbase!
    Holy Crap!

  52. L.A. Raiders – With Silver and Black uni’s. Since it won’t be until after 2017 then the Oakland Raiders will be the Las Vegas Whatevers and Spanos will have a built in fan base.

  53. L.A. Rivers – so when they soon end up on a Browns-like franchise QB drought, they can be reminded of all the years they squandered by putting a garbage team around the one they did have.

  54. Tennessee could rebrand to the name they should have taken, the Tuxedos. Then the Chargers can rebrand to the “LA Chumley’s ”
    Next if they have to move somewhere, the Raiders should move to San Diego. There’s already a nice stadium the city will rent you for $1 a year, a strong fan base, and beautiful weather. (Can you imagine two a days in Vegas at 120 degrees?)

  55. The Los Angeles Lebowskis works fine by me, Dude. El Duderino too if you’re into that whole brevity thing.

  56. @luther6 says – “All fans should oppose this move”.

    No, they shouldn’t. It means nothing to any fan of the other 31 teams. If whatever iteration of the Chargers plays your favorite team do you care if they are located in San Diego, LA, or any other location? Of course you don’t.

  57. I will be 70 next week and an NFL fan since 1956 and have never seen such a colossal and complete lack of judgement by two NFL Owners, to turn away from their established fan bases and move to where they have no fan base…all because of GREED and, the grass looking greener on the other side ! LA will not support either team and the San Diego fans certainly will NOT support any LA franchise.It is very clear to see that both of these teams are going to end up on the scape heap or relocating again…yes again…to who knows where and, in the end, costing these owners tens of millions of dollars. It was predicted by many and did not have to happen !You reap what you sow and they are about to reap the whirlwind !

  58. 2mccloud says:
    Jan 12, 2017 9:17 AM
    “Don’t forget the Cleveland Browns became the Baltimore Ravens.”

    And many years ago the Cleveland Rams became the Los Angeles Rams.

    And the Chicago Cardinals became the St. Louis Cardinals.
    And the St. Louis Cardinals became the Phoenix Cardinals.
    And the Phoenix Cardinals became the Arizona Cardinals.
    They never had to call themselves the River or the Blaze and wear tacky Nicki Minaj looking uniforms.

    The Raiders went from Oakland to L.A. and then back to Oakland without being renamed the Off Ramps or the Vegans while losing one the best and most iconic uniforms in AFL/NFL history.

  59. jacoby66forhof says:
    Jan 12, 2017 8:39 AM
    Forgot to add with my previous post:

    -LA Hey Dudes mascot would be Jeff Spicoli, holding a pizza.

    Tap…. Tap…. Tap…. Tap… What’s that?
    That’s my skull, I’m so wasted.

  60. They should go with something generic, because in 5 years when they realize LA won’t support two teams, they will be on the move again.

    Unlike some of you, I don’t care if they rebrand or not, as any rebrand eventually becomes the new normal after a few years.

  61. cafetero1075 says:
    Jan 12, 2017 7:37 AM

    I think its a good idea. I don’t know why the Texans didn’t call themselves the Oilers?


    Bud Adams still held the trademark rights and would not relinquish them.

  62. Sorry Charger fans, you are the losers in this greed chase. I don’t blame you for rejecting bad stadium deals that further enrich the owner. Here in Minnesota we just got done getting fleeced for a new stadium that already is falling apart.

  63. The phrase “Mark Cuban was right” is right up there in the most annoying phrase list with “I know right” and “haters gonna hate” It has moved into the top 3 and if I see anyone else say that phrase I may punch a hole in my wall

  64. If the league waives the relocation fee, then I can see the move potentially being worth it, because of the PSL revenue.

    If the RAMS soak up fans first, then there will be fewer PSL buys for the Chargers games. Either the Chargers lower their PSL costs or have many unsold seats.
    I hope Spanos does poorly on this deal.

  65. All of this could have been avoided if the Mannings hadn’t been permitted to blow up Eli’s draft.

  66. Please change your name, I feel sorry for the fans of the San Diego Chargers. I grew up rooting for the St. Louis Cardinals, St. Louis should have kept the name and told Bill Bidwell not to let the door hit him in the a$$. He was a terrible owner (much like Dean Spanos), that franchise didn’t turn around until his son took over.

    I just don’t see how anyone with any common sense thinks two teams in the same location in LA is going to work. I think locating them on opposite sides might work as you would create a rivalry amongst fans to keep the interest going. Now for the foreseeable future you are going to have two mediocre teams & most likely two bands teams that nobody wants to pay to go see.

    I vote for the LA Equals. Great job uncommon1.

  67. I’ve got my grimy fingers crossed for rebranding as the Mes. Will pay homage to Spanos’ all about Me and $ attitude and the rest of us get the LAMEs. Win all around.

  68. To cafetero1075 who said he doesn’t know why the Houston Texans didn’t become the Houston Oilers. It is pretty simple. The Houston Oilers are the Tennessee Titans. They simply just moved. The oilers/titans franchise retained all team records/naming rights/etc, So, it is still the same team/organization. The Houston Texans isn’t simply the Oilers coming back. It is a completely different franchise.

    Now, when Cleveland Browns moved to Baltimore and became the Baltimore Raves, that is a completely different situation than the Houston Oilers. The browns agreed to leave all their records/History and naming rights in Cleveland and start over fresh as a new franchise in Baltimore. The Tennessee Titans still have the Houston Oilers wins and history since it is the same franchise.

  69. Rename the Titans the ‘Tennessee Tuxedo’s” and the Chargers can remake themselves into the “LA Chumley’s”. Then if they have to move somewhere, the Raiders should move to San Diego. They already have a fan base there and the SD fans deserve to keep a team, the city will rent them an already built nice stadium for $1 a year, and the weather is great. Can you imagine two a days in a Las Vegas 120 degree summer?

  70. anonymousnevermindfishdeath says:
    Jan 12, 2017 8:41 AM

    The Los Angeles football Lakers
    The lakers name doesn’t even make sense for LA, the same name was kept when the team moved from Minneapolis, MN to LA, ya know the city of lakes, there aren’t many lakes in LA.

    Report comment

  71. I dont disagree with the move but the reason why 2 teams work in NY, actually 3 if you count the bills, because in the winter its cold and there is not much to do. Not so far LA. I think Cali has too many NFL teams already and the Chargers couldve picked a better market where there is a college hotbed of football like Oklahoma or Oregon.

    The LA Hashtag

  72. L.A. Dead
    L.A. Smog
    L.A. Angels of Los Angeles
    L.A. Name Changers
    L.A. Woman
    L.A. Money grubbers
    L.A. Football team brought to you by Facebook
    L.A. Twerkers
    L.A. Paparazzis
    L.A. Porn Stars with a coke addiction

  73. Spanos is in a league of his own – he’s one of if not the poorest NFL team owner. He won’t be a billionaire until he sells the team.

    As for team name: LA Traffic

    Runner up: LA Span-O’s

  74. No one here in LA wants the Chargers. Spanos made a massive mistake. I can’t wait for this franchise to die off and Spanos goes down in shame.

  75. @veddermn8 says:
    Jan 12, 2017 11:11 AM

    or the L.A. Implants

    Great idea, but wrong angle, that name could be to honor the Kardashians and the cosmetic surgery industry.

    Or the LA Garcetti’s to honor one of the most incompetent mayors in America.

  76. Their new logo still has an electric theme, so sticking with that but making it a little new…

    LA Bolts
    LA Lightning
    LA Shock
    LA Volts
    LA Storm

    or on the funny side

    LA Riot
    LA Traffic
    LA Gear
    LA Football Galaxy

  77. As a fellow Achiever, I like the Lebowskis and El Duderinos. How about the L.A. Sobchaks?

    I humbly submit:

    L.A. Money$hots
    L.A. Hu$tler$
    L.A. Irelevant$
    L.A. Orphan$

  78. Did anyone really lament the changing of the Oilers name? Tennessee Oilers made about as much sense as Utah Jazz!

  79. Quite the scorched earth policy Spanos has going for him. As a San Diego Charger fan I support them rebranding. The Chargers belong in San Diego not Los Angeles. And it will make it much easier for me to emotionally separate from the team.

  80. cafetero1075 says:
    Jan 12, 2017 7:37 AM
    I think its a good idea. I don’t know why the Texans didn’t call themselves the Oilers?

    Because Bud Adams (clearly the most reviled man in Houston, even though he’s dead) wanted tens of millions of dollars to give up the rights to that name.

  81. anonymousnevermindfishdeath says:
    Jan 12, 2017 8:41 AM
    The Los Angeles football Lakers

    Of course, since LA is known for it’s lakes

  82. cardinealsfan20 says:
    Jan 12, 2017 10:09 AM
    @luther6 says – “All fans should oppose this move”.

    No, they shouldn’t. It means nothing to any fan of the other 31 teams. If whatever iteration of the Chargers plays your favorite team do you care if they are located in San Diego, LA, or any other location? Of course you don’t.

    You say that now. What if your team is next?

  83. When the City of Cleveland sued Modell for breach of contract as a result of the move to Baltimore, the terms of the settlement left the name “Cleveland Browns,” the non-logo color scheme and the franchise records with the City. The Ravens are a “new” NFL franchise; they are the most successful expansion team since the Cowboys.

    I doubt that anyone in SD cares enough to find legal standing to sue in order to keep the “San Diego Chargers,” their awesome uniforms, or their lousy records.

    I give LA-based NFL franchises +/- 8.25 years before they make noise about moving out.

    They don’t even go to the beach in LA, why would they go to lousy NFL games for 16 weeks???

  84. Probably been said already, but I think the name should always remain with the city when a team relocates. Many times the name is related to the original location but noot the new home. Look at some of the examples that we currently have: LA Lakers. Utah Jazz. We had the New Orleans Hornets. Each of those names was important to where the team came from, but not the new city. Can you imagine the St. Louis Steelers?? Minnesota Heat? And even if the name isn’t relevant to the original home, it is important to the fans, and the city may one day get a new franchise that they would like to adopt that name (such as we had with the Cleveland Browns when they left).

  85. Funny all the dolts who think they can understand politics and economics just because an orange idiot won. California is not against private enterprise; it is a huge economy in its own right and contributes billions to the same federal government that gives billions in aid/welfare/subsidies to you red state morons who refuse to learn anything new or realize that the world has changed and left you behind. Talk about makers and takers, look at the US welfare programs and where the money comes from, and where the money goes. Blue to red

  86. They can call themselves “The franchise formerly known as the Chargers.”

    Then after a while they can be called “The Franchise.”

    Then eventually go back to being the Chargers.

  87. if i lived in LA i would be thrilled about two teams in opposing conferences. chances are my team comes to town every 2~4 years depending on finishing records and all of that noise

  88. Why even think about his considering the team started out as the Los Angeles Chargers to begin with? About the only thing interesting about the team is their name and logo and uniform. Maybe change it to L.A. Snowflakes to draw in the lib crowd.

  89. porkchopmoon says:
    Jan 13, 2017 11:27 AM
    shanghai, you have that backwards. The welfare money goes from RED to blue. Idiot.


    Shanghai actually stated it correctly.

    But don’t let facts get in the way of your good story 😉

  90. Great news! Then a reasonable owner can put an expansion team in San Diego within the next five years. It is too great a city to exclude from the league.

  91. The only good thing about possible re-branding is the idea that, if San Diego were to get an expansion team, the city could use the old name & logo, like the Browns did (though, those new Browns uniforms are pretty terrible).

    If they have to, DEFINITELY don’t name the team something short and lacking an “S”, like “Rush” or “Speed” or something. Some ideas…mainly because I’m a nerd:

    Los Angeles/California Dragons
    Los Angeles/California Barons
    Los Angeles/California Bandits
    California Rogues
    Los Angeles Sentinels
    California Cougars (another cat name…idk
    California Condors
    Los Angeles/California Stags
    California Oaks
    Los Angles/California Phantoms
    California Coyotes
    California Fury
    Los Angeles Ironmen
    California Griffins
    Los Angeles Dynamos
    California Vortex
    California/Los Angeles Crows

    Or better yet, put a team in one of the Dakotas, or in Portland, OR, or in Birmingham, Alabama. or Omaha, Nebraska. Make them all owned by the city.

  92. What’s funny is this will drive LA TV ratings to the floor with two mediocre teams that MUST be on the schedule instead of picking the bst games.

    maybe ike cleveland, in a couple years, SD’ll will get a new Chargers team ..

  93. Since the Rams have the much stronger history in LA, the rebrand of the Chargers doesn’t need to use Los Angeles in their title.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you, the Southern California Sun!

    The NFL should leave the Chargers name, logo, and history for a future expansion team.

  94. The L.A. Fail or no rebrand. Truth in advertising.

    This is the dumbest, most poorly planned move of all the moves ever. Including even the soon to occur, heartbreaking move of the Raiders to Las Vegas. That being said, there is literally zero – ZERO – demand for this team in Los Angeles. This is a business decision, akin to that of the baseball franchise in the movie Major League, and it very well may be the hole that sinks the damn boat.
    Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

    Loyal Raider fan for decades of dominance and decades of disaster – and I absolutely HATE the San Diego Chargers but… that’s why I love them. The unis, the history, even the song. What a shame. This is such a dud.

  95. thermanmerman99 says:
    Jan 12, 2017 10:22 AM
    The phrase “Mark Cuban was right” is right up there in the most annoying phrase list with “I know right” and “haters gonna hate” It has moved into the top 3 and if I see anyone else say that phrase I may punch a hole in my wall
    One that makes me want to hurt my hand punching someone’s face is, “I’m not sayin’, just sayin'”. Either you have the guts to say it, or you don’t.

  96. Of the original eight AFL teams, only two have never moved or changed names–Buffalo and Denver. That’s part of why they’re my two favorites among the eight.

    IMO the Chargers are making a big mistake, but hey, it’s the Spanos family, what else can we expect? They should have gotten out in front on the Las Vegas front but let Al Davis’ strange kid outflank them. They made a total mess out of trying to get a new stadium in San Diego, when all they had to do was follow the Padres’ game plan that got them the beautiful if often sparsely populated Petco Park.

  97. Bud Adams wouldn’t even let the city or the new owners make an offer for the Oilers name and history. It meant too much to the city of Houston and the fans, so he took it to third-rate Nashville and then retired it after a year so it could never be used again.

    On top of that, he left the taxpayers of Houston in the lurch for millions of dollars of upgrades to the Astrodome, and he was the only one to vote against Houston getting a new NFL franchise.

    There’s a special place in Hell for a man like that.

  98. Cancel the move and keep the Chargers.
    And while theyre at it, give Buffalo our Braves back.
    Los Angeles and the clipps both s u c k

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.