Which team gets left out?

[patdog]

The Chargers, Raiders and Rams have all filed their applications to relocate to Los Angeles. One team is going to be pissed when they don't get approved. I'm guessing the Rams since the Chargers and Raiders are proposing one stadium for both teams.

 

[thekimmer]

Interesting....

The Chargers, Raiders and Rams have all filed their applications to relocate to Los Angeles. One team is going to be pissed when they don't get approved. I'm guessing the Rams since the Chargers and Raiders are proposing one stadium for both teams.

The LA area has gone from a megacity that couldn't keep a team and couldn't get a team for the past 20 years to having three that want to go there.

Seems to me that california doesn't seem to be that interested in pro football. They have 37 million people and just one stable franchise. Maybe they suffer from having so many transplants out there that its hard to build a fan base. I know the atlanta pro franchises (minus the braves) suffer from that.

 

[patdog]

The other interesting angle to this is, the three franchises that want to move to LA are the three franchises that used to play there and left (the Chargers were the LA Chargers for their first season or two before moving to San Diego).

 

[engie]

The way it's been presented seems mostly about the stadium(s) and the financing help on the front end these franchises are/are not getting. I've long thought that LA was the trump card to get stuff done in current cities -- but apparently these 3 bluffs were called. Once you actively try to leave, I don't see how you can ever stay, so it's going to be really interesting for one or two of these teams in the future.

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

If two teams go I expect at least one to fail

 

[RocketDawg]

I think it'll be the Rams moving back to LA. But the Raiders are located in one of the most dangerous cities in the country (not sure where the stadium is though) so getting out of there might be a good thing. Plus, the '49ers are basically in the same city as Oakland. San Diego really needs to keep the Chargers in my opinion.

 

[ronpolk]

I think the Rams get left out. I read where St. Louis presented a billion dollar stadium to the NFL to keep the Rams there. Oakland makes sense to move and I think the Chargers hate San Diego for some reason.

 

[thekimmer]

From a pure geographic coverage perspective, it would make sense to keep the chargers where they are and move the raiders since there is another team in the bay area. But I don't think oakland would ever embrace the 49ers and the whole raiders culture just never fit in LA. Another thought is to move a team to mission viejo or oceanside and name them the SoCal whatevers. Then they could draw fans from the entire region.

 

[coachnorm]

Stan Kronkie, the Rams owner, has bought his parcel of land in Inglewood and demolished the Hollywood Park racetrack stands to make room for his stadium. Kronkie has finished the preconstruction land work. Kronkie has submitted building permits to Los Angeles and is in construction currently. Kronkie has emphatically stated that the stadium will be built irregardless of the owners vote result.

Spanos and Davis for the Carson projection have not even finalized escrow. They have escape clauses for their affiliation with the land parcel? The land parcel is a previous landfill and is very toxic. That is the reason why it has not been developed in the greater Los Angeles area. There is no guarantee that the State will allow a local city council authorize a 60 Million Dollar burden to accommodate the toxic clean up?

Spanos and Davis are not liquid and they would need to sell off assets to build a stadium if the Los Angeles public stays true to not building a stadium for Billionaires. Kronkie does not have that problem.

The owners vote is not binding because the Federal Appeals Court and California Supreme Court have already established the law on franchise relocation. Al Davis crucified the NFL in court and the NFL had to pay him Tens of millions dollars in the 1980s. The money was directed as punitive damages. Kronkie knows this and is unstoppable if he chooses to move to Los Angeles.

The Los Angeles Coliseum is the only available temporary venue while a stadium is being built. Who is going to pay USC to share the venue? The Rose Bowl is disinterested.

 

[Palos verdes]

It should be St. Louis. It has the franchise that would be missed the least. There's enough people in Southern California to support 3 NFL teams.

 

[esplanade91]

None of the teams have the votes to move. What a cluster 17.

And like Bill Simmons pointed out, LA couldn't care less to get an NFL steam. Especially one in Carson.

 

[coachnorm]

None of the teams have the votes to move. What a cluster 17.

And like Bill Simmons pointed out, LA couldn't care less to get an NFL steam. Especially one in Carson.

Silent Sam Kronkie does not need One owners vote to relocate because the Federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and the California Supreme Court says so. Any owner or the NFL that tries to impede Kronkie will be subject to punishment due to contempt of court. The Courts have the final jurisdiction on this manner and not the owners. The 24 vote benchmark is simply applicable to owners who choose to observe it. The legal benchmark for team movements has been established in the 1980s

When Kronkie builds his stadium, the public will fill it up. The public will not build a stadium and are willing to go without NFL football if a public funded stadium is required.