What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Chargers or Jags to LA? (1 Viewer)

Errr... were the owners of those two rumored teams even looking to move? If so, that's news to me...

 
I don't know, first I've heard. I think it shows some seriousness though on the NFLs part. Will they hit up all 32 teams see who bites at the offer?

 
I think it shows some seriousness though on the NFLs part.
Why?This story resurfaces every offseason when the NFL wants to extort..... or rather give incentives to communities to help pay for new stadiums that aren't really needed. I can't think of a single year the idea of moving a team to LA hasn't come up.

 
San Diego needs a new stadium, from what I've read it's the worst in the league.
Really depends on what you mean by the term; "needs".SD(and every other team in the NFL) makes a healthy profit right now. Could they make an even higher profit if they got the public to help fund a sparkly new stadium? Probably. Not sure if that means they "need" a new stadium.

 
I thought it was N.O. moveing! I can tell you Albuquerque has been doing a lot of discussion with the NFL too. Richardson leads the charge! Though with no suitable stadium New Mexico is years away from obtaining a franchise. (It's on the local news often in Albuquerque.)

 
I thought it was N.O. moveing! I can tell you Albuquerque has been doing a lot of discussion with the NFL too. Richardson leads the charge! Though with no suitable stadium New Mexico is years away from obtaining a franchise. (It's on the local news often in Albuquerque.)
There are only two cities with a smaller population than Albuquerque that are currently home to NFL cities - Jacksonville and Green Bay. Albuquerque doesn't have the tourism that Jacksonville attracts nor the pro football history that Green Bay possesses. Los Angeles has almost TEN TIMES the population of the Albuquerque/Santa Fe area. I don't think a move to New Mexico is even a remote possibility.
 
Well, nobody thought Houston would beat out L.A. either :) Didn't the Jaguars go through basically a complete renovation (essentially rebuilding) of the Gator Bowl not that long ago (hence the reason they got a Super Bowl). I'd be really surprised if they were in play. The Chargers are another matter, I think, given that they haven't gotten a stadium situation worked out and can even boast Los Angeles roots. A segment of the fanbase living north of San Diego might stick with 'em through the move even*.

The Saints are such a high profile case that an L.A. scenario for them actually might be a surprise at this point. Benson's total P.R. gaffes have made a Cleveland Browns-type promise to New Orleans much more difficult. I really think that's a scenario that will playout as the city rebuilds and isn't a year or two from being final, regardless of how it ultimately plays out.

Seriously on the point of Albuquerque. I think it's Albuquixotic at this point. The market size just isn't there, for TV or in terms of physical population.

-QG

* - or not. I'm a Nets fan but there is ZERO chance I'll go to Brooklyn if they leave.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Bills are in the equation as well. They probably do not have enough corporate money in upstate new york to fill luxury boxes and club seats even if they got a modern stadium that had those things. I don't think Ralph Wilson would do it, but who knows how much longer he will run things.

 
SD is third to last in the league in revenue.

Their stadium is horrible.

They have been trying to negotiate with the city. Talks always go nowhere.

After next season (2007) they are free to discuss leaving SD city limits, and I think they will.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SD is third to last in the league in revenue.
You know it's funny, whenever Forbes comes out with their richest 100 people in america I've never shed a tear for that poor S.O.B. that finishes 100th. Not once.
 
The Bills are in the equation as well. They probably do not have enough corporate money in upstate new york to fill luxury boxes and club seats even if they got a modern stadium that had those things. I don't think Ralph Wilson would do it, but who knows how much longer he will run things.
I don't think so.They're a small market team. A trip to the buffalo area on any Sunday will tell ya they have the whole community's support.

 
SD is third to last in the league in revenue.
You know it's funny, whenever Forbes comes out with their richest 100 people in america I've never shed a tear for that poor S.O.B. that finishes 100th. Not once.
No doubt Spanos still makes alot of money, but Minnesota and one other team are under SD.Seriously Bolt backer you know if the Chargers dont get a stadium in SD, they are going to LA.

 
SD is third to last in the league in revenue.
You know it's funny, whenever Forbes comes out with their richest 100 people in america I've never shed a tear for that poor S.O.B. that finishes 100th. Not once.
No doubt Spanos still makes alot of money, but Minnesota and one other team are under SD.Seriously Bolt backer you know if the Chargers dont get a stadium in SD, they are going to LA.
I know that at least half a dozen teams will be using the vacant LA market to blackmail voters into buying them new stadiums. Given the size of the market in SD and the fact they only have one other major league team I'd guess SD voters will do the wrong thing and approve a new stadium being built. And given the current climate of major league sports I'm sure that it won't be a multi-purpose stadium for both baseball and football(heaven forbid they share.... tax payers should spring for both to be sure).In a way I don't think the NFL even wants a team in LA. Once a team does move to LA how much more difficult is it going to be to get these boondoggles built? I can kind of understand downtown baseball parks being built because it has an economic ripple effect for almost 1/3rd the year in the local economy but these stadiums make no sense for football when they are only going to be used by the nfl a dozen or so dates a year.

I've never understood why multi-billionaires need a hand-out to build a place to employ their multi-millionaire employees.

 
I'd suggest Tampa.  Just load all the crap on that ship and sail off.
I would suggest Carolina. Just load that Super Bowl troph...oh wait. :own3d:
If :own3d: = another unhumorous remark by Cappy, then you are correct.Just remember, we're well ahead of the pace your franchise set.

 
I'd suggest Tampa.  Just load all the crap on that ship and sail off.
I would suggest Carolina. Just load that Super Bowl troph...oh wait. :own3d:
If :own3d: = another unhumorous remark by Cappy, then you are correct.Just remember, we're well ahead of the pace your franchise set.
Congrats on getting close a few times and then always losing. I bet it's a real source of pride for all the hicks down at the Piggly Wiggly. :thumbup:
 
SD is third to last in the league in revenue.
You know it's funny, whenever Forbes comes out with their richest 100 people in america I've never shed a tear for that poor S.O.B. that finishes 100th. Not once.
No doubt Spanos still makes alot of money, but Minnesota and one other team are under SD.Seriously Bolt backer you know if the Chargers dont get a stadium in SD, they are going to LA.
I know that at least half a dozen teams will be using the vacant LA market to blackmail voters into buying them new stadiums. Given the size of the market in SD and the fact they only have one other major league team I'd guess SD voters will do the wrong thing and approve a new stadium being built. And given the current climate of major league sports I'm sure that it won't be a multi-purpose stadium for both baseball and football(heaven forbid they share.... tax payers should spring for both to be sure).In a way I don't think the NFL even wants a team in LA. Once a team does move to LA how much more difficult is it going to be to get these boondoggles built? I can kind of understand downtown baseball parks being built because it has an economic ripple effect for almost 1/3rd the year in the local economy but these stadiums make no sense for football when they are only going to be used by the nfl a dozen or so dates a year.

I've never understood why multi-billionaires need a hand-out to build a place to employ their multi-millionaire employees.
SD already built the Padres a stadium.The Superbowl will NOT come back to SD if a new stadium is not build. Plus the Aztec's and Chargers would share the building. Not to mention a college bowl game as well.

Not sure I understand your stance there "Boltbacker"

 
The LA situation is all about leverage. A vacant LA is much more valuable to the NFL owners at this time. This group of owners loves to blackmail cities into funding state of the art stadiums. Once the #2 media market in the US is filled, where are they going to threaten to move an existing team. Portland? Vegas? Those threats ring hollow.

 
San Diego needs a new stadium, from what I've read it's the worst in the league.
Really depends on what you mean by the term; "needs".SD(and every other team in the NFL) makes a healthy profit right now. Could they make an even higher profit if they got the public to help fund a sparkly new stadium? Probably. Not sure if that means they "need" a new stadium.
Sure Spanos can make money with the Q, but a new stadium would allow him to make money AND sign maybe the occasional free agent.
 
how many times has la failed as an nfl city...
Hmm, failed..maybe you should read the history.The Rams were successful here since 1946. They were hurt by Rozelle's blackout rule, which was unfair to a team that played in the NFL largest stadium (100K). Because of that they had to move to Anaheim which isn't that far from LA but still a pretty long drive with all the traffic. However, they were successful there too until they started losing and a recession hit. Then Georgia Frontiere got a good deal from St. Louis and made a business decision to move the team.

The Raiders never had a chance to stay in LA since Al Davis only moved here because Oakland wouldn't build him a new stadium. When they finally decided to improve the stadium he moved the team back.

 
Seriously Bolt backer you know if the Chargers dont get a stadium in SD, they are going to LA.
One of the problems with that is there is no suitable stadium here in LA. Successful LA franchises need lots of luxury box suites to protect their fans from the harsh local weather. It rained here once during a Rams home game and half the "fans" failed to show. The Rose Bowl, Coliseum, and Antheim stadium do not have adequote facilities. Every article I have read on bringing a new or existing franchise to LA mentions the problem of upgrading or building a new facility. That requires a lot of $$$ and the general public does not want to pay for a corporate playground.
 
Seriously Bolt backer you know if the Chargers dont get a stadium in SD, they are going to LA.
One of the problems with that is there is no suitable stadium here in LA. Successful LA franchises need lots of luxury box suites to protect their fans from the harsh local weather. It rained here once during a Rams home game and half the "fans" failed to show. The Rose Bowl, Coliseum, and Antheim stadium do not have adequote facilities. Every article I have read on bringing a new or existing franchise to LA mentions the problem of upgrading or building a new facility. That requires a lot of $$$ and the general public does not want to pay for a corporate playground.
Are you not looking outside??? It's a MONSOON!!I'm not sure what it is with NFL fans, but the Bruins and Trojans don't have trouble filling the stands when the weather is "bad".

Tags has a deal in place with the city to bring a team here so it's a matter of time now. LA mayor Villaraigosa seems to realize the amount of money that the city is losing out on by not having an NFL team and I think there will be a team here in the next couple years. They'll probably have to play at the Coliseum while a new stadium is built but it should get done.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here in KC they have a long awaited vote today to approve a rolling roof over Kaufmann stadium (Royals) as well as Arrowhead stadium. This also includes renovations to both stadiums. The bill is for approx $750 - 850 million dollars. The owners have already threatened to move if it isn't passed and ofcourse LA was mentioned as one of the landing sites. So according to the Hunt family (Lamar), if this bill doesn't get passed...they are the ones that will be moving to LA. Good riddance.

 
la doesn't support a team if they aren't winning every year...

that is your history...

blame anything else you want, but reality is, la fans suck...

 
Good riddance.
For once you and I agree Warpigs.I'm just nearly as frightened by the "well if I don't get my way I'll pack up my toys and play with them in LA!" as some fans seem to be. Let them. Every offseason 4-5 teams are mentioned going to LA. If they all want to go to LA so badly so what?

Maybe my memory is a little fuzzy but were the Los Angeles Rams a revenue generating machine back in the day? I don't remember that being the case. Would Al Davis have moved away from LA if he was making $ hand over fist in that market?

 
Here in KC they have a long awaited vote today to approve a rolling roof over Kaufmann stadium (Royals) as well as Arrowhead stadium. This also includes renovations to both stadiums. The bill is for approx $750 - 850 million dollars. The owners have already threatened to move if it isn't passed and ofcourse LA was mentioned as one of the landing sites. So according to the Hunt family (Lamar), if this bill doesn't get passed...they are the ones that will be moving to LA. Good riddance.
something(can't recall what) was approved 2 months ago
 
Not sure I understand your stance there "Boltbacker"
My stance is billionaires don't need hand-outs from tax payers.
You dont understand the economic impact of having a superbowl in your city then.
Depends on how many SuperBowls are going to be played as a direct result of building a new stadium.I'm not sure how they decide anymore on a Superbowl site but I don't get the feeling they are going to stick with the NO/SoCal/FL rotation they had for so long. If you could guarantee the fans they'd get a superbowl every four years or so then you have a valid point. I just don't think a new stadium makes that a lock.

 
how many times has la failed as an nfl city...
Hmm, failed..maybe you should read the history.The Rams were successful here since 1946. They were hurt by Rozelle's blackout rule, which was unfair to a team that played in the NFL largest stadium (100K). Because of that they had to move to Anaheim which isn't that far from LA but still a pretty long drive with all the traffic. However, they were successful there too until they started losing and a recession hit. Then Georgia Frontiere got a good deal from St. Louis and made a business decision to move the team.

The Raiders never had a chance to stay in LA since Al Davis only moved here because Oakland wouldn't build him a new stadium. When they finally decided to improve the stadium he moved the team back.
And many football fans in LA don't want an NFL franchise there, because right now, none of the games are blacked out. Sunday Ticket, no blackouts, how cool is that?!?
 
Not sure I understand your stance there "Boltbacker"
My stance is billionaires don't need hand-outs from tax payers.
You dont understand the economic impact of having a superbowl in your city then.
Depends on how many SuperBowls are going to be played as a direct result of building a new stadium.I'm not sure how they decide anymore on a Superbowl site but I don't get the feeling they are going to stick with the NO/SoCal/FL rotation they had for so long. If you could guarantee the fans they'd get a superbowl every four years or so then you have a valid point. I just don't think a new stadium makes that a lock.
The NFL loves being in SD for the Superbowl. It would be in the rotation big time every 5 years for sure. Especially with New Orleans probably out of the rotation for awhile.Tags after the last Superbowl there - Tampa vs Oak I believe, said the NFL wont be back unless there is a new stadium, period.

 
I'd suggest Tampa.  Just load all the crap on that ship and sail off.
I would suggest Carolina. Just load that Super Bowl troph...oh wait. :own3d:
If :own3d: = another unhumorous remark by Cappy, then you are correct.Just remember, we're well ahead of the pace your franchise set.
Congrats on getting close a few times and then always losing. I bet it's a real source of pride for all the hicks down at the Piggly Wiggly. :thumbup:
WTF is a Piggy Wiggy? No need to bring your sex life into this.
 
Here in KC they have a long awaited vote today to approve a rolling roof over Kaufmann stadium (Royals) as well as Arrowhead stadium. This also includes renovations to both stadiums. The bill is for approx $750 - 850 million dollars. The owners have already threatened to move if it isn't passed and ofcourse LA was mentioned as one of the landing sites. So according to the Hunt family (Lamar), if this bill doesn't get passed...they are the ones that will be moving to LA. Good riddance.
Chiefs, Royals bring out big guns on eve of stadiums voteDOUG TUCKER

Associated Press

KANSAS CITY, Mo. - On the eve of a sales tax vote that could decide the fate of professional sports in Kansas City, George Brett and Buck O'Neil sat together under a tree and urged a crowd to vote yes.

Radio stations ran a taped message from NFL hall-of-famer Marcus Allen warning that the Chiefs could wind up in Los Angeles if the two proposals were not adopted.

Even Hollywood got into the act.

Shortly before the Detroit Tigers and Kansas City Royals opened their season Monday in a full, festive stadium, actor Chris Cooper, a Kansas City native and Academy Award winner, made his pitch for passage of the taxes.

In the meantime, a loosely organized cadre of opponents of the three-eighths of a cent sales tax and an accompanying use tax were feeling confident.

"We are very encouraged that supporters of these taxes have been conducting polls," said Richard Tolbert, a Democratic politician and small-business man. "The fact they have not announced the results of those polls tells me their side is losing."

That the vote would be close was one thing they all agreed on.

The sales tax would raise $425 million over 25 years for renovating and refurbishing Arrowhead and Kauffman stadiums, which opened in 1972 and '73. An additional $50 million would come from the state. Royals owner David Glass would kick in $25 million, and Chiefs owner Lamar Hunt would put in $100 million.

An accompanying use tax would raise an additional $200 million for a rolling roof, which would make both stadiums climate-controlled and assure the city of the 2015 Super Bowl.

Baseball has promised an All-Star game if the stadiums are refurbished, and mayor Kay Barnes says she is optimistic the NCAA would grant a Final Four to its former host city if the rolling roof is fitted over Arrowhead.

If the measures do not pass, the Jackson County Sports Authority would be in violation of a lease agreement promising to maintain the stadiums "in state-of-the-art condition."

After Jan. 1, 2007, both teams would be able to leave.

But would they? Brett, sitting with O'Neil in a picnic area behind center field, said the clubs would "have to explore their options." He pointed out that Kansas City has already lost the NHL and the NBA.

"I used to go to hockey games and to NBA games, and that was fun," he told a small knot of people about two hours before Monday's baseball game. "I would hate for us to lose anything else."

Allen, who spent the last few years of his great career with the Chiefs, told listeners he lives in Los Angeles now and some people there would love to have the Chiefs. The NFL would like a franchise in Los Angeles.

The Royals also seem to have options.

Will Somerindyke of the Norfolk, Va., Baseball Co., said his group had received commitments for 10,000 season tickets in its drive to attract the Montreal Expos. Charlotte and Portland also are interested in gaining a major league team.

"We don't want to see any community lose its team," Somerindyke said. "But yes, we will be watching the developments in Kansas City very closely."

Supporters of the taxes have spent much more money and have been better organized than opponents. But a powerful and relentless voice against the taxes has been WHB, a popular sports talk radio station. WHB has been credited with helping win passage of a proposal to build a downtown arena,and tax supporters worry the station has split support among sports fans, the group they normally could count on most heavily.

However, some opponents acknowledge they are not sports fans at all.

"I have never been to a Chiefs or a Royals game," said Joe Gough, a Republican candidate for Jackson County executive.

Gough also dismisses claims that Kansas City benefits economically from the teams.

"The presence of a major league team has about the same economic impact for a community as a small department store," he said.

 
Good riddance.
For once you and I agree Warpigs.I'm just nearly as frightened by the "well if I don't get my way I'll pack up my toys and play with them in LA!" as some fans seem to be. Let them. Every offseason 4-5 teams are mentioned going to LA. If they all want to go to LA so badly so what?

Maybe my memory is a little fuzzy but were the Los Angeles Rams a revenue generating machine back in the day? I don't remember that being the case. Would Al Davis have moved away from LA if he was making $ hand over fist in that market?
And here's the funny thing. They just built the Sprint center in downtown KC. A huge multimillion dollar arena they suckered the tax payers into funding. They said if we approved that we would get a Final Four and the Big 12 championship...yada, yada. Now, with the stadiums, they are not only threatening to leave if not passed, but they are saying IF it does pass, we will get a Final Four, a Super Bowl, a MLB All-Star game..etc, etc. I thought we were supposed to get a Final Four if we agreed on the Sprint Center?!?! :confused: It's all just a bunch of BS to get the taxpayers to pay for more luxury boxes for the rich folks.
 
Now, with the stadiums, they are not only threatening to leave if not passed, but they are saying IF it does pass, we will get a Final Four, a Super Bowl, a MLB All-Star game..etc, etc. I thought we were supposed to get a Final Four if we agreed on the Sprint Center?!?! :confused: It's all just a bunch of BS to get the taxpayers to pay for more luxury boxes for the rich folks.
Even if they do deliver on THAT promise and give KC a superbowl..... would it ever go back to KC? No offense but KC in the middle of winter doesn't sound like a place the NFL will be re-visiting often. If they were willing to put the thing in DET just because they built a building I'm sure they'd go once but is it really worth the investment for one week. Not one week a season, or even every four seasons. One week EVER.When is DET scheduled to have their next superbowl?

 
Maybe they promised a regional final, but the NCAA no longer does final fours in arenas - it's domed stadiums from here on out (that's been the policy for a few years). Continental Airlines Arena in New Jersey was the last arena to host a Final Four and that was in 1996 (and was largely seen as a reward for many years of hosting successful regional finals and as a way to be in the New York market).

Anybody who sold that arena as a Final Four venue was straight up lying.

-QG

 
Now, with the stadiums, they are not only threatening to leave if not passed, but they are saying IF it does pass, we will get a Final Four, a Super Bowl, a MLB All-Star game..etc, etc.  I thought we were supposed to get a Final Four if we agreed on the Sprint Center?!?!   :confused:    It's all just a bunch of BS to get the taxpayers to pay for more luxury boxes for the rich folks.
Even if they do deliver on THAT promise and give KC a superbowl..... would it ever go back to KC? No offense but KC in the middle of winter doesn't sound like a place the NFL will be re-visiting often. If they were willing to put the thing in DET just because they built a building I'm sure they'd go once but is it really worth the investment for one week. Not one week a season, or even every four seasons. One week EVER.When is DET scheduled to have their next superbowl?
Actually from everything I've herd, Detroit has a real shot at another superbowl. Everything I've herd is that the city did a great job and I've venture to guess within 10 - 12 years, they will get another one.And the Final Four is comeing to Ford field in 2009 (i think, maybe 2010).

Plus they just had a MLB All-star game this past summer, at neighboring Comerica park.

IF KC get new stadiums, they will all come!

Build it and they will come!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now, with the stadiums, they are not only threatening to leave if not passed, but they are saying IF it does pass, we will get a Final Four, a Super Bowl, a MLB All-Star game..etc, etc. I thought we were supposed to get a Final Four if we agreed on the Sprint Center?!?! :confused: It's all just a bunch of BS to get the taxpayers to pay for more luxury boxes for the rich folks.
Even if they do deliver on THAT promise and give KC a superbowl..... would it ever go back to KC? No offense but KC in the middle of winter doesn't sound like a place the NFL will be re-visiting often. If they were willing to put the thing in DET just because they built a building I'm sure they'd go once but is it really worth the investment for one week. Not one week a season, or even every four seasons. One week EVER.When is DET scheduled to have their next superbowl?
Never, but don't discount the financial benefit to a city from just one Super Bowl. Hotels, restaurants, transportation, entertainment, etc., etc. - it's a huge boon to the economy even if it's a one time deal.
 
Now, with the stadiums, they are not only threatening to leave if not passed, but they are saying IF it does pass, we will get a Final Four, a Super Bowl, a MLB All-Star game..etc, etc.  I thought we were supposed to get a Final Four if we agreed on the Sprint Center?!?!  :confused:   It's all just a bunch of BS to get the taxpayers to pay for more luxury boxes for the rich folks.
Even if they do deliver on THAT promise and give KC a superbowl..... would it ever go back to KC? No offense but KC in the middle of winter doesn't sound like a place the NFL will be re-visiting often. If they were willing to put the thing in DET just because they built a building I'm sure they'd go once but is it really worth the investment for one week. Not one week a season, or even every four seasons. One week EVER.When is DET scheduled to have their next superbowl?
Never, but don't discount the financial benefit to a city from just one Super Bowl. Hotels, restaurants, transportation, entertainment, etc., etc. - it's a huge boon to the economy even if it's a one time deal.
Don't be so sure, Mr. Ford is a very powerful owner.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top