There are 138 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Looks like L.A. won't have an NFL franchise for awhile

Originally posted by niners4lyfe:
Can someone answer this for me? Why did the raiders and rams move out there 17 years ago? isn't la an attractive market? Why wouldn't a team like the raiders or jaguars move to LA in a heartbeat?

So, with the Raiders... All the gang thugs in LA would wear Raiders gear. It got so bad that ammusment parks, schools, movie theaters, etc... wouldn't let people wear their gear at their establishment. People were told to wear their shirts inside out and take off hats or just turned away completly... Then, at the games, there was always some sort of gang violence. So, most folks that could afford their gear or season passes didn't want to.
Originally posted by GhostofJimmyDean:
Originally posted by okdkid:
LA and AEG are in no position of leverage. The NFL has the leverage here.

LA has tried and failed at NFL football on several occasions. The NFL is doing amazingly well without having a team in LA. The NFL is not in need of a team there. LA needs the NFL, not the other way around.

Lulz. Not even close to being true. The NFL doesn't NEED a team in L.A., it WANTS a team in L.A.

Los Angeles does just fine without the NFL.

haha evidently not.
The NFL is popular in LA and SoCal it's just the fan base is all over the place. You have a strong segment of Raider fans, Rams fans, Charger fans, 49er fans, and the wannabe East Coasters who like the east coast teams.

The NFL is fine without a team in LA but they would be even finer with a team there. The NFL does want a team in LA but it does have the luxury of being picky on how they go about it.

I believe the ideal situation for the NFL is for both the Rams and Raiders to go back to LA since it would solve their stadium issues and there is already a fan base in place.

Any other team it would take years to build a strong fanbase for. You typically need a generation of kids born and raised with a team in place and for them to have kids themselves before a team develops a healthy and strong following. I mean even if they put a team a block over from my house it's not like it's going to make me suddenly start being a 9ers fan.
  • mike
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,827
Originally posted by D_Niner:
So, with the Raiders... All the gang thugs in LA would wear Raiders gear. It got so bad that ammusment parks, schools, movie theaters, etc... wouldn't let people wear their gear at their establishment. People were told to wear their shirts inside out and take off hats or just turned away completly... Then, at the games, there was always some sort of gang violence. So, most folks that could afford their gear or season passes didn't want to.

All the "red" gangs in SF wear Niners gear. What does that have to do with ticket sales?
Originally posted by okdkid:
haha evidently not.

Originally posted by mike:
Originally posted by D_Niner:
So, with the Raiders... All the gang thugs in LA would wear Raiders gear. It got so bad that ammusment parks, schools, movie theaters, etc... wouldn't let people wear their gear at their establishment. People were told to wear their shirts inside out and take off hats or just turned away completly... Then, at the games, there was always some sort of gang violence. So, most folks that could afford their gear or season passes didn't want to.

All the "red" gangs in SF wear Niners gear. What does that have to do with ticket sales?

There are gangs in SF?
Originally posted by KowboyKiller:
So basically Goodell wants AEG to finance and build the downtown LA stadium for a team, and AEG wants a minority stake in an NFL at a discounted rate as compensation, to which Goodell said "No way". AEG hasn't backed off their terms and now political support for the stadium is starting to fall behind other projects for the site.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sources-downtown-los-angeles-stadium-232200970--nfl.html;_ylt=Ag4wj7Yz7yg0sEcrLLg.i.dDubYF

f**k LA

f**k you
Originally posted by okdkid:
LA and AEG are in no position of leverage. The NFL has the leverage here.

LA has tried and failed at NFL football on several occasions. The NFL is doing amazingly well without having a team in LA. The NFL is not in need of a team there. LA needs the NFL, not the other way around.

You got it backwards bro. The NFL needs a team in the second largest TV market more than LA needs the NFL.

Every year that goes by with no NFL team in LA, is lost profits for the NFL. Meanwhile, there are plenty of other games in town to take up the sports/entertainment bandwidth available in LA.
Originally posted by kray28:
Originally posted by okdkid:
LA and AEG are in no position of leverage. The NFL has the leverage here.

LA has tried and failed at NFL football on several occasions. The NFL is doing amazingly well without having a team in LA. The NFL is not in need of a team there. LA needs the NFL, not the other way around.

You got it backwards bro. The NFL needs a team in the second largest TV market more than LA needs the NFL.

Every year that goes by with no NFL team in LA, is lost profits for the NFL. Meanwhile, there are plenty of other games in town to take up the sports/entertainment bandwidth available in LA.

If most of the money comes from TV, then why have a blackout rule?
Originally posted by kray28:
Originally posted by okdkid:
LA and AEG are in no position of leverage. The NFL has the leverage here.

LA has tried and failed at NFL football on several occasions. The NFL is doing amazingly well without having a team in LA. The NFL is not in need of a team there. LA needs the NFL, not the other way around.

You got it backwards bro. The NFL needs a team in the second largest TV market more than LA needs the NFL.

Every year that goes by with no NFL team in LA, is lost profits for the NFL. Meanwhile, there are plenty of other games in town to take up the sports/entertainment bandwidth available in LA.

The NFL "needs" LA?! The NFL is more profitable than ever, without LA. It "needs" LA as much as it "needs" a team in London.
Originally posted by Joecool:
If most of the money comes from TV, then why have a blackout rule?

I didn't say anything about where most of the money comes from. If there were a team in LA, it would sell out...like USC sells out. If you want a good idea of what type of market for winning football there is in LA, watch SC pack the Coliseum on a fall Saturday. Heck, UCLA packs the Rose Bowl and the program is in shambles.
They don't seem to support an NFL franchise. That's why both teams wanted out.
Originally posted by okdkid:
The NFL "needs" LA?! The NFL is more profitable than ever, without LA. It "needs" LA as much as it "needs" a team in London.

No one in LA is sad there is no NFL....that's about all you need to know. We could take it or leave it, to be honest.

Fans like me (growing up in SoCal) long decided to move on from the Lambs. Some stuck with the Raiders, others went with the Chargers and quite a few like me in the early 90s went with the Niners.

So the primary beneficiary of a team in LA would be the NFL...because they would sell tickets, they'd sell merchandise, and they'd get TV money....huge amounts of it. The Lakers just signed a ridiculous $3 billion dollar TV deal. The NFL's deal is national, but the addition of the LA market to the TV deal would be increase the value of the deal by billions as well.
Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
They don't seem to support an NFL franchise. That's why both teams wanted out.

Those teams wanted out because they sucked, and didn't field a product that LA felt like overpaying to keep. In the short term their greedy owners got better freebie deals from cities more desperate for the supposed "economic benefits" of having an NFL team.

But a lot of those "economic benefits" are a huge freaking myth. All the franchises do is fleece the local taxpayers of whatever poor schmoe city they go to.

LA is just in a position where they can say "whatever". If you don't want to come, don't come.

1. We the taxpayers of LA aren't paying a red cent.
2. If you're AEG, and you are footing that cash (they built Staples), you need some guarantees on your investment from the NFL.
Originally posted by kray28:
Originally posted by okdkid:
The NFL "needs" LA?! The NFL is more profitable than ever, without LA. It "needs" LA as much as it "needs" a team in London.

No one in LA is sad there is no NFL....that's about all you need to know. We could take it or leave it, to be honest.

Fans like me (growing up in SoCal) long decided to move on from the Lambs. Some stuck with the Raiders, others went with the Chargers and quite a few like me in the early 90s went with the Niners.

So the primary beneficiary of a team in LA would be the NFL...because they would sell tickets, they'd sell merchandise, and they'd get TV money....huge amounts of it. The Lakers just signed a ridiculous $3 billion dollar TV deal. The NFL's deal is national, but the addition of the LA market to the TV deal would be increase the value of the deal by billions as well.

Your comment, combined with the fact that the NFL is more profitable than ever (without LA) and the fact that LA has failed in NFL endeavors on several occasions means the NFL has the leverage here.

The NFL is not dying to have a franchise in LA. If it was an necessity, then they would have made it happen long ago. Also, they would give in to the LA group's demands. Simply, the NFL knows they are amazingly well without LA. The LA ownership group needs an NFL team for an NFL stadium. The NFL does not need LA. LA is simply nothing more than a "nice to have".
Originally posted by LBCniner:
Originally posted by KowboyKiller:
So basically Goodell wants AEG to finance and build the downtown LA stadium for a team, and AEG wants a minority stake in an NFL at a discounted rate as compensation, to which Goodell said "No way". AEG hasn't backed off their terms and now political support for the stadium is starting to fall behind other projects for the site.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sources-downtown-los-angeles-stadium-232200970--nfl.html;_ylt=Ag4wj7Yz7yg0sEcrLLg.i.dDubYF

f**k LA

f**k you

I'm a diehard niner first and foremost; but i also am a big laker and dodger fan since I live out here in LA. Northern Cali also thinks of us southern californian's as 'superficial.' It's fun to have rivalries but I never got all the hate.