Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Celebrating Memorial Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-18-2012, 12:45 PM
 
Location: southwestern USA
1,823 posts, read 2,133,705 times
Reputation: 2440

Advertisements

Which current franchise is going to be the team to move to Los Angeles?

There certainly has been enough saber rattling by franchises angling for new stadiums or improvements.

Who leaves first-----San Diego, Minnesota, St. Louis, Buffalo, or the Raiders?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-18-2012, 12:59 PM
 
Location: Idaho
815 posts, read 740,817 times
Reputation: 1608
San Diego makes the most sense. I think Buffalo will end up in Toronto sometime in the next decade.

In my opinion, moving another team to Cali would be stupid, they already have three teams, they don't need four.

Minnesota would be the next most logical, but they seem to be gaining more support for a new stadium in Minnesota.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2012, 01:09 PM
JJG
 
Location: Fort Worth
13,612 posts, read 22,968,091 times
Reputation: 7643
You can take Buffalo out...

It was made clear this past summer that the Chargers and Raiders were front runners.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2012, 01:11 PM
 
25,894 posts, read 16,614,138 times
Reputation: 16089
I thought there was Jacksonville speculation as well?

Regarding the Vikings, I think there is more danger of them moving than many Minnesotans believe. If you're interested in this subject, pay attention to the legislative session set to start in the last week of January. The Vikings lease is up on Feb 1st. If something doesn't get done they will get a letter from the Vikings announcing their intent to relocate to LA. That is a guarantee. That won't be the end, I think there would still be a chance for a special session in the spring but the pressure and the headaches would intensify and that would bring the opponents out of the woodwork.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2012, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Iowa
14,336 posts, read 14,678,824 times
Reputation: 13773
I don't get a team going to LA, didn't they have a team, it left and now they want one back?

As much as I've heard the Vike talk, I would really hate to see them leave Minnesota. I know there has been some push back because of the economics of it, but overall big picture wouldn't the team going cause issues, too? I haven't read enough about both sides to form an educated opinion, but I think they should stay.

I don't understand teams moving but this comes from living in the midwest where everything has been solid for so long.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2012, 02:37 PM
 
Location: Bel Air, California
23,766 posts, read 29,184,450 times
Reputation: 37337
Quote:
Originally Posted by PullMyFinger View Post
I thought there was Jacksonville speculation as well?

Regarding the Vikings, I think there is more danger of them moving than many Minnesotans believe. If you're interested in this subject, pay attention to the legislative session set to start in the last week of January. The Vikings lease is up on Feb 1st. If something doesn't get done they will get a letter from the Vikings announcing their intent to relocate to LA. That is a guarantee. That won't be the end, I think there would still be a chance for a special session in the spring but the pressure and the headaches would intensify and that would bring the opponents out of the woodwork.
I think the Vikings will be forced to sit by to see what happens with the upcoming legislative session which will extend beyond the Feb 15th date that the team has to petition the league for a move. That assumes that the Vikings don't already know they are stuck with the Metrodome lease another year because of the stadium collapse during the 2010 season.

Meanwhile the Governor today picked his choice of the nine proposals that were introduced a week ago. Unfortunately the visionairy plan to use a giant pick-up truck topper did not make the final cut...

Roscoe said the stadium could be “built completely from materials available at Menards, fabricated by the box store’s night crew.†He said a Menard’s supervisor had estimated the cost at “three for $304,016.00, or one structure for $100,006.00.â€

He said the stadium’s design would recall Minnesota’s heritage of “pickup truck toppers propped up on sawhorses as seen in back yards and driveways in northern [Twin Cities] suburbs.â€

Attached Thumbnails
Which NFL franchise is going to move to L.A.?-topper.jpg  
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2012, 02:40 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
6,408 posts, read 9,027,330 times
Reputation: 8507
Quote:
Originally Posted by susancruzs View Post
I don't get a team going to LA, didn't they have a team, it left and now they want one back?
Chargers. Rams. Raiders.

LA cannot seem to keep teams.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2012, 02:48 PM
 
4,734 posts, read 4,346,422 times
Reputation: 3235
I think it's going to be either the Rams, Raiders, or Chargers. If they move, I hope they don't call them the L.A. (Rams, Raiders, or Chargers). Just call them the California Rams, Raiders, or Chargers, or invent a new name and be creative...call them something like the So-Cal Raiders/Rams/Chargers.

My guess would be that the Rams move might make more sense, at least in terms of the politics and the history of the NFL. The only reason the Rams were moved in the first place was because Georgia Frontiere was spiteful and wanted to punish L.A. for not building her a new stadium. Now that problem's solved - albeit 20 years later and after her death.

The Raiders and Chargers might be more desperate, though, and I'm inclined to say that the Raiders are the most desperate. The Chargers want a new stadium, but they still have a market even if they get passed over by the NFL in getting the L.A. media market. The Raiders, on the other hand, are fighting with the 49ers over a much smaller pie, and it's a pie that's dwindling thanks to years of bad management and also due to the fact that Oakland's fan base is poor. And the ugly truth is that a poorer, lower-income fan base in today's NFL just isn't a good thing. All pro sports teams are leaving the East Bay and trying to move to the South Bay, and if the South Bay won't take them, then they're left to find another home, with L.A. being an obvious first choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2012, 02:52 PM
 
4,734 posts, read 4,346,422 times
Reputation: 3235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondurant View Post
Chargers. Rams. Raiders.

LA cannot seem to keep teams.
I doubt they have any more success keeping LA's interest up this time either. L.A. doesn't seem to care about professional sports, but professional sports leagues are always going to be interested in L.A. It's the league that's driving this probably as much as the teams are. The franchises are interested when they get new stadium leases and television rights, but the love affairs fade over time. But the league always has an interest in seeing football/basketball/whatever played in L.A...and always will.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 06:57 AM
 
25,894 posts, read 16,614,138 times
Reputation: 16089
Quote:
Originally Posted by susancruzs View Post
I don't get a team going to LA, didn't they have a team, it left and now they want one back?

As much as I've heard the Vike talk, I would really hate to see them leave Minnesota. I know there has been some push back because of the economics of it, but overall big picture wouldn't the team going cause issues, too? I haven't read enough about both sides to form an educated opinion, but I think they should stay.

I don't understand teams moving but this comes from living in the midwest where everything has been solid for so long.
I think we have the best division in football and I'll bet Bears and Lions fans feel that way too. I'm sure there would be some kind of realignment and you would probably end up with the Rams instead of the Vikings in the NFC North.

I would be really weird to think of the Vikings in LA but I'm sure some thought that about the Lakers as well but that happened. Minneapolis is the City of Lakes--hence the Lakers name for the BB team. LA has one man-made Lake I believe. The name makes no sense at all down there but people forget pretty quick.

I think the stadium will happen but it won't be easy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:17 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top