The NFL in LA.

Originally posted by JerryRice1848:
Rams are not moving to LA, their owner Stan Kroenke is from like some suburb of St. Louis, it's either the Super Chargers or the Raiders

Raiders would be number choice. Have the LA market all to themselves. Already have a fan base there. They have done it once before.

As long is it isnt the SAN FRANSISCO 49ers playing there for a home game.........

Originally posted by 80849er4life:
As long is it isnt the SAN FRANSISCO 49ers playing there for a home game.........

where did you hear that?

Originally posted by global_nomad:

Originally posted by 80849er4life:
As long is it isnt the SAN FRANSISCO 49ers playing there for a home game.........

where did you hear that?

Someplace........Im just saying I dont care if L.A. gets a team........I just dont want the 49ers moving there for that to happen......IMO they should move the Lambs back.

Originally posted by jacklegniner:
I think LA would be a good footbal city. I live in San Diego and if the chargers put out a good team than the fans show up, but if they suck, they don't. The Lakers do quite well because they put out a good product.

You're making a strong point; that point is- LA fans only support successful teams. That is the antithesis of "a good football city."

The issue with NFL in LA has always been the stadium. The Coliseum was a s**thole 15 years ago, and it's even less suited to host NFL football today. And every effort to try to finance a new stadium has been rejected by voters, and rightfully so.

If AEG, whose developments almost single-handedly revitalized Downtown LA in the last 10 years, go forward with their plans to build and privately finance a stadium, I have no doubt that an NFL team would follow.

And the Rams were as much of an "LA" team as the Sacramento Kings are a San Francisco team.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:
The issue with NFL in LA has always been the stadium. The Coliseum was a s**thole 15 years ago, and it's even less suited to host NFL football today. And every effort to try to finance a new stadium has been rejected by voters, and rightfully so.

If AEG, whose developments almost single-handedly revitalized Downtown LA in the last 10 years, go forward with their plans to build and privately finance a stadium, I have no doubt that an NFL team would follow.

And the Rams were as much of an "LA" team as the Sacramento Kings are a San Francisco team.

While agree with you about the stadium (with regards to the NFL dynamic), why is it that the Trojans had that place rocking when they were highly ranked National Championship contenders? People may have complained about it (the stadium), but it still was packed, nonetheless.

[ Edited by IWASATTHECATCH on Jun 30, 2011 at 11:10:06 ]

Originally posted by IWASATTHECATCH:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:
The issue with NFL in LA has always been the stadium. The Coliseum was a s**thole 15 years ago, and it's even less suited to host NFL football today. And every effort to try to finance a new stadium has been rejected by voters, and rightfully so.

If AEG, whose developments almost single-handedly revitalized Downtown LA in the last 10 years, go forward with their plans to build and privately finance a stadium, I have no doubt that an NFL team would follow.

And the Rams were as much of an "LA" team as the Sacramento Kings are a San Francisco team.

While agree with you about the stadium (with regards to the NFL dynamic), why is it that the Trojans had that place rocking when they were highly ranked National Championship contenders? People may have complained about it (the stadium), but it still was packed, nonetheless.

Despite the narrative that's developed over the years, drawing fans to the Coliseum has never been the problem. The Raiders drew pretty well when they were in LA. The problem with the stadium is that is has no luxury boxes, which generate a ton of revenue, and that's the primary reason why the Raiders left.

There were (heck, ARE) a lot of Raider fans in LA, but the taxpayers as a whole wouldn't approve tax increases to fund the renovations for the luxury boxes. Here is an SF Gate article from 1995 about the situation and emphasizes the importance of those LB's.

At some point that story turned into "LA fans don't support their teams", but that's not what actually happened.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by IWASATTHECATCH:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:
The issue with NFL in LA has always been the stadium. The Coliseum was a s**thole 15 years ago, and it's even less suited to host NFL football today. And every effort to try to finance a new stadium has been rejected by voters, and rightfully so.

If AEG, whose developments almost single-handedly revitalized Downtown LA in the last 10 years, go forward with their plans to build and privately finance a stadium, I have no doubt that an NFL team would follow.

And the Rams were as much of an "LA" team as the Sacramento Kings are a San Francisco team.

While agree with you about the stadium (with regards to the NFL dynamic), why is it that the Trojans had that place rocking when they were highly ranked National Championship contenders? People may have complained about it (the stadium), but it still was packed, nonetheless.

Despite the narrative that's developed over the years, drawing fans to the Coliseum has never been the problem. The Raiders drew pretty well when they were in LA. The problem with the stadium is that is has no luxury boxes, which generate a ton of revenue, and that's the primary reason why the Raiders left.

There were (heck, ARE) a lot of Raider fans in LA, but the taxpayers as a whole wouldn't approve tax increases to fund the renovations for the luxury boxes. Here is an SF Gate article from 1995 about the situation and emphasizes the importance of those LB's.

At some point that story turned into "LA fans don't support their teams", but that's not what actually happened.

luxury boxes... ah that's right!