Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Move the Jaguars to Los Angeles and call it a day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainrock
Jaguars to London
That's cray-cray talk since that train has long left the station. The Jaguars new owner is heavily committed to Jacksonville and has a virtually unbreakable lease with the city/stadium which would be a financial disaster to get out of. Furthermore despite the Jags team over the past few years they still continue to outperform a dozen or so other NFL cities in terms of attendance.
BTW to answer the OP's question, other than L.A. and maybe San Antonio, I can't see the NFL moving to any other US market, at least for now.
I think the NFL has to be asking itself if Los Angeles is more valuable to the league as an NFL market that can be in the future Super Bowl rotation, or as a place for most of the owners to influence building new stadiums in other markets. I think if it wasn't for Stan Kroenke the status quo would have continued indefinitely.
I remember when the Packers used to play a couple games a year in Milwaukee. More recently the Bills would play one game a year in Toronto. How come the Chargers (or Raiders or Rams) never tried to play a game or two in L.A. over the past few years? They could have used it to gage potential support if they decided to move to L.A. full time.
Logistics would be tough, but doable. I think the London team would establish a US "base" and that they would do their games in clusters of four (four games in London, fly to the US and do four games in the states, then four games in London, then four in the US).
Yeah, this is the plan I've heard before and it makes a lot of sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle19125
That's cray-cray talk since that train has long left the station. The Jaguars new owner is heavily committed to Jacksonville and has a virtually unbreakable lease with the city/stadium which would be a financial disaster to get out of. Furthermore despite the Jags team over the past few years they still continue to outperform a dozen or so other NFL cities in terms of attendance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by orlando-calrissian
Jags actually have decent support now, and Khan is committed to Jacksonville.
Sorry Los Angeles Raider fans: unless Mark Davis sells the team or brings in a partner (though there's a "Mystery Billionaire" out there who's gonna partner with him, but that hasn't been named yet), it's not gonna happen.
I understand why the NFL wouldn't want teams here - I mean getting free stadiums off taxpayer dollars is pretty awesome - but there'll be a point where it becomes nonsensical. Kroenke is basically PAYING his way to come here. Spanos (SD's owner) and his bloc of owners are the only ones vetoing it, but since Al Davis moved here in 1983 without anyone's approval, I think Kroenke will get what he wants.
However, I do think that at some point, the Chargers and Rams are gonna come to a compromise.
It's insane that a city like San Diego cannot host a Super Bowl because the NFL has deemed their stadium outdated, yet cities like Indianapolis, Detroit and Minneapolis can host the game. Personally, anytime of the year I would rather go to San Diego than any of those 3, especially the first week of February.
Well like you said, it's about the stadiums, not the weather. Ford Field is a enclosed dome anyway so the weather is irrelevant in that situation.
The alignment is perfect with each division having four teams. The NFL isn't adding a 33nd franchise and I don't see them adding a 33rd team for a unproven medium market city. I can only see the NFL adding another team if London is awarded. Los Angeles will either get the Rams or Chargers.
Why doesn't LA have a football team anyway? It is kinda weird for such a big city to not have one. I hear Oakland is moving there but I don't know if it's true or not.
Because no team wants to play in a 100K plus seating dump that's located in one of the worst neighborhoods of the Los Angeles area.
Getting back to the London argument for a moment about being to far. The old NFC West had the 49ers traveling to these cities for divisional games:
St. Louis
Charlotte
New Orleans
Atlanta
So it can be done. An East Coast to UK flight is what 5 hours?
Last edited by Fastphilly; 10-17-2015 at 05:32 PM..
Because no team wants to play in a 100K plus seating dump that's located in one of the worst neighborhoods of the Los Angeles area.
Getting back to the London argument for a moment about being to far. The old NFC West had the 49ers traveling to these cities for divisional games:
St. Louis
Charlotte
New Orleans
Atlanta
So it can be done. An East Coast to UK flight is what 5 hours?
And west coast flights to London? How much time and how much jetlag? I can't see it as the traveling team is always the disadvantaged one. Either they add two abroad or none.
What are the owners saying and thinking currently?
NFL has hit peak popularity. A team may move to LA, but that's about it.
Portland...the NFL would second fiddle to the timbers. I don't the NFL and Portland mesh at all
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
