Is L.A. getting an NFL team? (Ontario, Pomona: condos, live)

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by bhcompy

as a venue, the coliseum sucks. its old and needs a lot of renovation to be brought up to current nfl standards. the idea has been floated, both as a superbowl and probowl location(the hawaiian probowl facilities arent great, but it is a free trip to hawaii). dont know if we'll ever see anything of it

Not to mention the neighborhood sucks.

[bhcompy]

Originally Posted by EscapeCalifornia

Not to mention the neighborhood sucks.

just makes me wish more that the nfl would have entertained anaheims offer instead of dismissing it outright

[Mr. Mysterious]

They can't afford it, due to tax purposes...

[Island_OnThe_Land]

Originally Posted by Educatorspeakingtruth

When will L.A. get an NFL team? How does the nations second most populated city not have an NFL team?

I certainly hope NOT. The NFL is the biggest blood sucking machine this side of the Wall Street bailouts. The NFL always looks to steal from the public purse to build hulking stadiums that get used 8 times a year and employ minimum wage workers and a few millionaires....the public gets the shaft.

Granted the current LA proposal does not include a DIRECT public subsidy, but it does CUT CORNERS that any small time developer or business would not be allowed to get away with. Absolutely criminal......

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by EscapeCalifornia

Not to mention the neighborhood sucks.

the area was very iffy back in the 70s, I wouldn't want to go anywhere near there now.. But it is hard for me to imagine a city the size of Los Angeles with the TV draw that doesn't have an NFL team.

NIta

[drunk on kool aid]

Originally Posted by bhcompy

as a venue, the coliseum sucks. its old and needs a lot of renovation to be brought up to current nfl standards. the idea has been floated, both as a superbowl and probowl location(the hawaiian probowl facilities arent great, but it is a free trip to hawaii). dont know if we'll ever see anything of it

I often hear that the L.A. Coliseum is unsuitable, but what are the specific reasons why this is so? I listened to parts of the ESPN stream that "BRinSM" and "pbergen" posted earlier and I don't recall any specifics cited. The only negatives I've been able to glean are bad sight-lines and lack of luxury boxes.

According to Wikipedia, the Coliseum was renovated around 1993 to address many of the issues to make the venue football friendly. I went to the "Monsters of Rock" event in 1988, before the changes, and even though I had cruddy nosebleed seats, perpendicular to the stage, I had no problem seeing the Scorpions.

Are luxury boxes necessary? Does their higher cost subsidize the ticket prices for the hoi polloi? Anything wrong with celebrities having to rub elbows with the common folk? Even if the seating isn't plush and perfect, can't you sell out a venue by pricing the cheap seats for five bucks (and make money on concessions)?

The Coliseum is already paid for. If there is going to be massive investment in a stadium, I'd rather see it spent in the local infrastructure. It's location cannot be more central--the 10/110 interchange and close to the 101 (5 & 105 not too far off). Due to having the Convention Center nearby, there are gobs of hotel rooms. There's a reasonable amount of public transportation available. Maybe a deal can be struck with USC which has built some massive parking structures within walking/shuttle bus distance. As noted by "Lake County IN" the Coliseum has hosted two Olympics--a heritage that money can't buy. I personally think the architecture is iconic and good-looking.

I just don't see the logic of building a new, massive venue which only gets 30 days usage out of the year when a perfectly serviceable one is already here. Is the Coliseum overused?

Not being a football fan, the lack of an NFL presence hasn't been felt by me but if a team is what Angelenos want and it will add revenue to the area, I'm all for it, even if it means increased traffic.

While fact-checking, I ran across the Hampton Coliseum in Virginia--wow, that is a cool looking structure.

[bhcompy]

Luxury boxes make a great deal of the money for the stadium. The quality of amenities in the venue are another big point, and the Coliseum has very little in terms of amenities, which means little chance of a Super Bowl. The Coliseum sustained some pretty solid damage from the Northridge quake and they find new cracks all the time, not to mention they had to tear out the press box because it was condemned after the earthquake. Also is the size problem: it's a serviceable stadium for USC because it seats so many(college has larger stadiums), but during the NFL days they tarped off around 30,000 seats for each game.

In the end, the city of Los Angeles doesn't have a location for a team so it's a moot point as far as LA is concerned. Industry is one of the worst places it could go, though, but the developers decided to go there. Carson, Irwindale, or Anaheim would have been better choices.

[drunk on kool aid]

Originally Posted by bhcompy

Luxury boxes make a great deal of the money for the stadium. The quality of amenities in the venue are another big point, and the Coliseum has very little in terms of amenities, which means little chance of a Super Bowl. The Coliseum sustained some pretty solid damage from the Northridge quake and they find new cracks all the time, not to mention they had to tear out the press box because it was condemned after the earthquake. Also is the size problem: it's a serviceable stadium for USC because it seats so many(college has larger stadiums), but during the NFL days they tarped off around 30,000 seats for each game.

But isn't the need to generate so much money from luxury boxes partly due to having to pay off the enormous cost of construction? I have a figure of $1-1.5 billion stuck in my mind for the City of Industry development. I can't imagine the cost of seismic retrofitting the Coliseum would cost anywhere near that amount so there wouldn't be a need to raise so much revenue to pay off the construction. Plus, if the seismic work needs to be done anyway so that an L.A. landmark can be safely used by USC football as well as other events, why not get it done and make it available for pro football?

I don't understand what is meant by "amenities" in the context of stadiums. Are you talking about souvenir stands, restrooms and food vendors?

As I mentioned previously, would it be impossible to fill the stadium if the prices of the less desirable seats were lowered to $5? If a family of four could go to an NFL game for $20, wouldn't there be some takers?

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by amc760

What!?!?!

As much as it pains me to say this,
I hope Oakland loses interest in the Raiders so they can come back to LA. They'll still have the Niners.

Don't hold your breath on that one. Oakland will never lose interest in the Raiders, precisely because of the 49er's

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by BayAreaHillbilly

LA may end up with both the Raiders and the 49ers.

Both are making noises about leaving the Bay Area.

While we have slightly fewer that prefer futbol over football, we have an increasing number who prefer cricket or basketball over both (I'll let you guess the countries of origin). And our NIMBYism is even worse than LA's. Therefore, no new stadiums and bye bye teams.

LA has lots of choices then because the Chargers have been threatening to leave San Diego as well. The Chargers want a new stadium among other things and one of the only ways the city of SD has kept them here was through the ticket guarantees.