Truth & Rumors > NFL

Two teams in L.A., one beginning in '13?

Views
22518
Comments
457

08:05 AM ET 07.10 | Unofficially, the countdown is on, and most believe the NFL will return to Los Angeles. Attention is now focused on taking over the last top American metropolitan market without a team, and then, ultimately, developing strategies for expanding the brand globally. ... Of course by that time, L.A. will already have two teams. To many high-ranking team officials I spoke to, it's a foregone conclusion that once whatever new L.A. football facility is built, it will surely end up housing more than one team. But first things first. Who moves there initially, and how quickly? Well, as commissioner Roger Goodell spelled out in his recent letter to owners, nothing will happen until after the 2012 season, and we'll know by Feb. 15 if a team is planning on moving to L.A. for the 2013 season.

CBS Sports

Roger Goodell, Getty Images Roger Goodell, Getty Images
July 10, 2012  08:22 AM ET

So, this is going to be Meadowlands West? So, we need both an AFC and NFC team with one being perennially disappointing and the other being mediocre until the playoffs.

I think we can count on the Vikings to be the perennially bad team and since LA took the Lakers from MN it would only make sense that they pull the Vikes as well; same color scheme, too.

Identifying the AFC team may be a bit more challenging. Only current AFC option I see is Jax.

July 10, 2012  08:28 AM ET

No, the Vikes have their stadium deal. Their feet are set in cement, (which will not help their running game.) Jax and Lambs would be my guess.

But didn't they try this before with the Rams and the Raiders? LA doesn't have enough interest to support 1 team, let alone 2. Maybe this time they could build up to 2 teams, but if you start with 2 they'll have to share a small fanbase, and neither team will be happy.

July 10, 2012  08:32 AM ET

It's too late for that, they will lose billions, kind of like my doctor who makes a very comfortable living, he complains about all the money he has lost in his properties in Boca, Las Vegas, Phoenix,
Charleston, etc,etc, my response is stay in the area of business you make money in!!!

July 10, 2012  08:36 AM ET

This may be hubris on Goodell's part. LA has never seemed like a football town - not blue collar enough. LA is like the ACC of cities - it's a basketball town.

Comment #5 has been removed
July 10, 2012  08:36 AM ET

St. Loo has already committed to playing one of their home games in 2012, 2013 and 2014 in London, so they're already down to 7 regular-season games at home for those years. The jet lag from LA to London would be even worse than Missouri to London.

July 10, 2012  08:37 AM ET
QUOTE(#5):

Buffalo, if there really is no chance of them heading north.

Not while Ralph is alive, and I think Al Davis bit him a few times.

July 10, 2012  08:38 AM ET
QUOTE(#2):

No, the Vikes have their stadium deal. Their feet are set in cement, (which will not help their running game.) Jax and Lambs would be my guess.But didn't they try this before with the Rams and the Raiders? LA doesn't have enough interest to support 1 team, let alone 2. Maybe this time they could build up to 2 teams, but if you start with 2 they'll have to share a small fanbase, and neither team will be happy.

I know that but here's a couple of ideas to kick around. The stadium deal was approved and construction is anticipated to begin this year, not scheduled. What if Wilf got a great offer from the LA group? One, funds could be redistributed in MN as needed since they're no longer needed for the stadium.

Or,

A 3-way deal? Vikes to LA and the Rams to MN when the new stadium is complete?

Just creating controversy.

Comment #9 has been removed
July 10, 2012  08:50 AM ET
QUOTE(#9):

Truth. But when he does finally bite it in 2030, I expect the immediate presence of moving vans at the crypt that bears his name

And that would be a sad day for football. That's one that I could see reach national-level involvement even from those outside the fanbase. The Bills are an institution that warrants a certain level of protection based on their history, to the point that if the NFL didn't block a move, it would get congressional involvement.

July 10, 2012  08:50 AM ET
QUOTE(#4):

This may be hubris on Goodell's part. LA has never seemed like a football town - not blue collar enough. LA is like the ACC of cities - it's a basketball town.

Totally true. How many times will they (LA) get a chance to fail again. I thought TPTB (Goodell) was smarter than a fifth grader

July 10, 2012  08:55 AM ET
QUOTE(#11):

Totally true. How many times will they (LA) get a chance to fail again. I thought TPTB (Goodell) was smarter than a fifth grader

NFL HQ has lost sight of all things that aren't revenue generators. It just takes a group such as that in LA to flash enough cash in front of Goodell to make him think everything will work out. And, in reality, I don't think that it hurts the NFL as much as we might believe. There's always going to be a demand out there so when this fails again, there'll be another city waiting (maybe Toronto) that will be pushed and backed by the NFL.

Then another decade or so down the road when everyone in LA thinks it would be really trendy to have a team again, they'll make another push.

Comment #13 has been removed
July 10, 2012  09:24 AM ET
QUOTE(#13):

But this team's continued existence makes less and less sense each day

This team's fan base is loyal and enthusiastic. They support a team that, as we have to admit, goes nowhere year after year. But isn't that exactly what sports should be? When you look at the fans in the stands, wouldn't you rather see folks bundled up in down jackets and wool hats, screaming their lungs out so you can see their breath? That has to be better than a bunch of city clones with perfect hair in Izod shirts sitting in a dome where it never snows.

The NFL needs these outdoor fields in cold, unforgiving places.

Comment #15 has been removed
July 10, 2012  09:32 AM ET
QUOTE(#5):

Buffalo, if there really is no chance of them heading north.

Not on Ralph's watch and word is that Jim Kelly is putting together a syndicate to take over at that point. Don't count on the Bills going anywhere

July 10, 2012  09:35 AM ET

Once upon a time the LA Rams used to pack the Coliseum, now they show up to see the Trojans. If you have never been to the LA Coliseum for a game, there is no parking, only about 30% of the seats are between the goal posts, and the closest seats are a long way from the field.

I don't live there anymore, but if I believe if they built a real football stadium they could fill it. Afterall, the East coast bias says no one cares about Hockey out there and they sold out the Staples center for nearly every game.

July 10, 2012  09:36 AM ET

Every been to see a game in LA? No parking at the LA Coliseum - attendees walk through the hood. 30% of the seats are betweend the goal lines. The closest seats were 30 yards+ from the field. I would guess if you dropped the Coliseum in any other city and you might see similar issues.

(Above describes what it was like up until the Raiders left) The Raiders did not leave for attendance reasons - they drew better in LA than in Oakland.

July 10, 2012  09:38 AM ET

Sorry about the semi-double post -- the first one was from an hour ago and I assumed it got lost - the second one had a quote attached that evidently got dropped - see quote 11

 
July 10, 2012  09:42 AM ET
QUOTE(#17):

Once upon a time the LA Rams used to pack the Coliseum, now they show up to see the Trojans. If you have never been to the LA Coliseum for a game, there is no parking, only about 30% of the seats are between the goal posts, and the closest seats are a long way from the field.I don't live there anymore, but if I believe if they built a real football stadium they could fill it. Afterall, the East coast bias says no one cares about Hockey out there and they sold out the Staples center for nearly every game.

You've got it exactly right. Those who say "L.A. can never support football" don't know why football actually left Los Angeles. The Rams were consistently in the top five teams in the league in attendance for most of their run in L.A. (they did trail off at the end when they were in Anaheim). Teams left L.A. for the same reasons teams have left any other city: greedy owners seeking better stadium deals.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Bryant headed back to Germany
    Views
    3900
    Comments
    929
  2. 2
    Shakeup looms for White Sox
    Views
    5672
    Comments
    336
  3. 3
    Kerr 'absolutely expects' Knicks offer
    Views
    726
    Comments
    249
  4. 4
    Lightning may be swept aside
    Views
    1252
    Comments
    96
  5. 5
    Leonsis leaves coach, GM twisting
    Views
    2152
    Comments
    80

SI.com

SI Photos