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.
Los Angeles (NFL) no question the #1 need in sports today.
Seattle (NBA and NHL) no question the the #2 need in sports today.
Please someone argue these two.
I'd almost argue Seattle as number one. No, it's not as large as LA. However, Seattle is missing both an NHL and NBA franchise.
LA isn't really hurting too badly on the football front. They have USC and UCLA which are big draws. San Deigo isn't too far away and the NFL is a sport that's regionalized more than any of the other big 4 since it's a major and more sporadic event and a larger venue instead of a smaller venue with far more games (there are 8 NFL home games each season vs 41 in the NBA or NHL and 81 in MLB). The 49ers, Patriots, Packers, and Cowboys all play a good distance from the core of their principal population centers (Milwaukee in the case of the Packers and Boston in the case of the Patriots). San Diego is a good deal further away from LA, but not an unreasonable distance for big NFL fans. Especially considering the magnitude of each NFL game vs. the other sports.
Seattle is a major metro area without not one, but two major sports. While it's under three hours from Seattle to Portland and Vancouver, the NBA and NHL aren't the regional draw that the NFL is. It's a lot harder to justify a 6 hour r/t drive for a hockey game or basketball game than it is for a football game.
Moreover, the NFL doesn't have a great history in LA. The Raiders and Rams didn't fare well in LA and left after 94. There hasn't been a team there in over 20 years. In the meantime, the Texans, Jaguars, Ravens and Panthers have entered the league. Tennessee also got a franchise and the Browns reestablished themselves in Cleveland. I know LA could support a team, but nothing about the recent history says that the lack of an NFL franchise there is a gaping hole there like the Sonics left behind in Seattle.
Finally, I think that the NHL is league of extremes. There are a lot more franchises in the NHL that are either struggling or lacking deep roots in their current locations than there are NFL franchises. It's not unrealistic to think that the Arizona Coyotes, Florida Panthers, Carolina Hurricanes, NY Islanders, NJ Devils, Columbus Blue Jackets, or even the Colorado Avalanche could be moved if the circumstances were right. Jax seems the most likely candidate to me, but the rest of the potential candidates (Chargers, Rams, Raiders, Bills) don't seem desperate to uproot and move to LA.
I do think LA should end up with and will end up with an NFL franchise. But I have a hard time seeing a city (even one as big as LA) as desperate for an NFL franchise when they haven't had one for 20+ years, they have one nearby, they have adequate college alternatives (USC and UCLA). On the other hand, I think Seattle is in more of a desperate mode to fill at least one of the professional sports voids in town than LA.
I wish Houston had a hockey team again...even though the Aeros were not NHL, they were fun to watch. I was mad that they got rid of the team. I would rather watch Hockey than any other sport personally! Though I do love watching pretty much all professional sports.
I'd almost argue Seattle as number one. No, it's not as large as LA. However, Seattle is missing both an NHL and NBA franchise.
LA isn't really hurting too badly on the football front. They have USC and UCLA which are big draws. San Deigo isn't too far away and the NFL is a sport that's regionalized more than any of the other big 4 since it's a major and more sporadic event and a larger venue instead of a smaller venue with far more games (there are 8 NFL home games each season vs 41 in the NBA or NHL and 81 in MLB). The 49ers, Patriots, Packers, and Cowboys all play a good distance from the core of their principal population centers (Milwaukee in the case of the Packers and Boston in the case of the Patriots). San Diego is a good deal further away from LA, but not an unreasonable distance for big NFL fans. Especially considering the magnitude of each NFL game vs. the other sports.
Seattle is a major metro area without not one, but two major sports. While it's under three hours from Seattle to Portland and Vancouver, the NBA and NHL aren't the regional draw that the NFL is. It's a lot harder to justify a 6 hour r/t drive for a hockey game or basketball game than it is for a football game.
Moreover, the NFL doesn't have a great history in LA. The Raiders and Rams didn't fare well in LA and left after 94. There hasn't been a team there in over 20 years. In the meantime, the Texans, Jaguars, Ravens and Panthers have entered the league. Tennessee also got a franchise and the Browns reestablished themselves in Cleveland. I know LA could support a team, but nothing about the recent history says that the lack of an NFL franchise there is a gaping hole there like the Sonics left behind in Seattle.
Finally, I think that the NHL is league of extremes. There are a lot more franchises in the NHL that are either struggling or lacking deep roots in their current locations than there are NFL franchises. It's not unrealistic to think that the Arizona Coyotes, Florida Panthers, Carolina Hurricanes, NY Islanders, NJ Devils, Columbus Blue Jackets, or even the Colorado Avalanche could be moved if the circumstances were right. Jax seems the most likely candidate to me, but the rest of the potential candidates (Chargers, Rams, Raiders, Bills) don't seem desperate to uproot and move to LA.
I do think LA should end up with and will end up with an NFL franchise. But I have a hard time seeing a city (even one as big as LA) as desperate for an NFL franchise when they haven't had one for 20+ years, they have one nearby, they have adequate college alternatives (USC and UCLA). On the other hand, I think Seattle is in more of a desperate mode to fill at least one of the professional sports voids in town than LA.
I agree and think it would be a good idea to move the Seahawks to LA
Not a fan of the NFL in Los Angeles because they already had two NFL teams they cannot support. I think that the NFL should stay in St Louis, San Diego, and Oakland because of the hardore fans that support the team, especially Oakland fans.
With the NBA, I would like to bring the Buffalo Braves back although I may be a little biased.
The NHL should move back to Hartford. Despite being in between NYC and Boston, the Whalers did get good attendance while they were there. Better than the teams in the south.
Like the NFL in LA, I don't like the MLB in Vegas. Why? Because who is going to see a game at 7:05 when most people are going to the strip. I think Portland is the front runner for the MLB.
Not a fan of the NFL in Los Angeles because they already had two NFL teams they cannot support. I think that the NFL should stay in St Louis, San Diego, and Oakland because of the hardore fans that support the team, especially Oakland fans.
With the NBA, I would like to bring the Buffalo Braves back although I may be a little biased.
The NHL should move back to Hartford. Despite being in between NYC and Boston, the Whalers did get good attendance while they were there. Better than the teams in the south.
Like the NFL in LA, I don't like the MLB in Vegas. Why? Because who is going to see a game at 7:05 when most people are going to the strip. I think Portland is the front runner for the MLB.
Maybe at one time. Not really anymore. Portland at one time had plans for a MLB park, but it fell through and nobody is talking about it right now. One of the biggest obstacles is RootSportsNW, which has Portland in its territory, invested heavily in a tv contract with the Seattle Mariners. Any upstart in Portland would not be up against future MLB competition, as much as TV competition. Plus, if you know Portland politics, a new stadium would have to be completely privately financed, quite an undertaking not only from a financial standpoint, but as to where it would go in PC-correct Portland. Those bike lanes tend to get in the way, in a good way, of course.
Jax seems the most likely candidate to me, but the rest of the potential candidates (Chargers, Rams, Raiders, Bills) don't seem desperate to uproot and move to LA.
Umm, the national media has finally moved on from the tired Jaguars narrative. I won't say that it's definitely going to happen, but if it does you're looking at the Rams, Chargers or Raiders most likely. Jags are 100% safe in Jax for the next 5 years...probably at least the next 10. My only concern is London if the league finds a way to make Europe work, but we're at least a decade away from that.
Jax seems the most likely candidate to me, but the rest of the potential candidates (Chargers, Rams, Raiders, Bills) don't seem desperate to uproot and move to LA.
The owner of the Rams is planning on building a stadium in Inglewood, and there's been whispers that he just might try and move the team without the NFL's approval if it comes down to that.
There's also still hurdles standing in the way of a new staidum in St. Louis, and even the Governor has talked about getting a different team to come to St. Louis if the city ends up losing the Rams in the long run. The city and the state's goal is keeping the Rams if they can, but Kroenke does not want to be in STL 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.
although I may be a little biased.
