I live just outside of LA they don't want a team unless it's the Raiders. No one will support a team the seats will be empty.
jaykay - 13 years ago
Don't want ' em here.
Good for corporate types and wealthy.
Not good for average Joe.
Johnny - Chico - 13 years ago
I'm a Raiders fan in Northern California and I remember well the days when the Raiders were steady but not so great in Los Angeles. The Raiders were constantly having to tarp off sections of the stadium due to attendance problems. Each of those games was blacked out. The fans in LA are too fickle. I do not see how planting a team there will help with the revenues when the likelihood is that the locals will stop attending as soon as the novelty wears off and games will be blacked out once again. Wait until the city begs for a team, not just a developer.
Bender - 13 years ago
I'm in favor of a team moving to LA in large part because I would like to see the league realign in a much more complete way than they did in 2002. If, for example, Buffalo were to move after Wilson passes, then the league would almost have to aviod a situation of Los Angeles being in the AFC East. I know that the old NFC West was a mess of that sort before, but I would hope that they would want to aviod that this time. Keeping the teams that play in the Mounatin an West together seems to be a big deal with competative balance these days, and Im in favor of it.
DB Cooper - 13 years ago
How many times does a team need to fail in LA before the NFL fucking gets it? LA is a basketball/baseball town, they just don't care about football.
Bobby G - 13 years ago
What most "analysts" don't account for is that Los Angeles is, more than most cities, a migratory destination. Many (most) of the NFL fans here come from other places, such as New England, Ohio, Michigan and other cold-weather places. They live in LA, but they bring their NFL allegiances with them. Walk into any bar in LA on a Sunday morning during football season, and there will be a gaggle of Browns fans off in one corner, some Steelers fans in the other corner, and probably a Cowboys fan or two.
Many (most) bars hang banners out front that say they are not showing Raiders games to prevent Raiders fans from showing up.
No one I've talked to here wants an existing team to come, because they're fans of other teams.
An expansion team may be able to gain some traction, because there are no existing prejudices yet.
pj - 13 years ago
This poll question should really be for the people out in LA and surrounding area. They are the ones who would or would not support a team. There are many options for people in LA who knows if they even care if they get a team. I don't care either way.
tard - 13 years ago
L.A. is just loaded with a bunch of criminals and thugs. Why anyone would want to go there and get kicked in the head until brain dead is beyond me. That city doesn't need to build a football stadium, they need to build a prison beside the staples center to lock up all the so called "gangsters" and the rest of the heathens that infest L.A.
Fabio - 13 years ago
only as an expansion team.
Add FOUR new teams, one in LA, one in Portland, one in London and one in San Antonio. make 6 divisions, one with SF, OAK, SEA, SD, LA, POR. one with ARI,STL, KC, DEN, SAN,HOU. put LON in the AFC E. this by 2015 or 2016. then you will have 6 divisions of 6 teams each, the west coast teams will not be penalized so much by frequent travels, big rivalries will be mantained. black & blue will return to be the NFC central, NFC E will include the usual teams, the AFC central will include IND,BAL and so on...
Monster 93 - 13 years ago
The threat of moving a team, for stadium leverage, is good for the sport. It encourages competition between cities and franchises. It may get a few stadiums built, which will provide some sorely needed jobs in metro areas. It will divert fan's money in LA from buying drugs, lottery tickets, and ski boats into the pockets of millionaire players, who will buy gold chains and sports bars, and billionaire owners who will invest the money wisely in capitalistic enterprises that will stimulate the economy and provide jobs and money to the fans who will need the money to pay for their season tickets. Finally, how long can you expect 8 million Angelinos to go on rooting for the mighty Raiders and the pathetic Lambs?
Boog Powell - 13 years ago
LA gets to see better games on TV if they are not "contractually obligated" to watch a home team.
greg - 13 years ago
The only team that should be moved to L.A. is James Caan's team from Rollerball, only sport that will survive there for obvious reasons!
Mike - 13 years ago
I believe if you take one of the franchises' that are struggling to sellout every year and put them in L.A. it would be good not only for the franchise, but like pft mentioned, it could excel. There is too many people and corporate money available there for it not to. Plus, I live in southern Nevada and hate going to the university of Phoenix stadium to watch games, so it's a win win for me.
I live just outside of LA they don't want a team unless it's the Raiders. No one will support a team the seats will be empty.
Don't want ' em here.
Good for corporate types and wealthy.
Not good for average Joe.
I'm a Raiders fan in Northern California and I remember well the days when the Raiders were steady but not so great in Los Angeles. The Raiders were constantly having to tarp off sections of the stadium due to attendance problems. Each of those games was blacked out. The fans in LA are too fickle. I do not see how planting a team there will help with the revenues when the likelihood is that the locals will stop attending as soon as the novelty wears off and games will be blacked out once again. Wait until the city begs for a team, not just a developer.
I'm in favor of a team moving to LA in large part because I would like to see the league realign in a much more complete way than they did in 2002. If, for example, Buffalo were to move after Wilson passes, then the league would almost have to aviod a situation of Los Angeles being in the AFC East. I know that the old NFC West was a mess of that sort before, but I would hope that they would want to aviod that this time. Keeping the teams that play in the Mounatin an West together seems to be a big deal with competative balance these days, and Im in favor of it.
How many times does a team need to fail in LA before the NFL fucking gets it? LA is a basketball/baseball town, they just don't care about football.
What most "analysts" don't account for is that Los Angeles is, more than most cities, a migratory destination. Many (most) of the NFL fans here come from other places, such as New England, Ohio, Michigan and other cold-weather places. They live in LA, but they bring their NFL allegiances with them. Walk into any bar in LA on a Sunday morning during football season, and there will be a gaggle of Browns fans off in one corner, some Steelers fans in the other corner, and probably a Cowboys fan or two.
Many (most) bars hang banners out front that say they are not showing Raiders games to prevent Raiders fans from showing up.
No one I've talked to here wants an existing team to come, because they're fans of other teams.
An expansion team may be able to gain some traction, because there are no existing prejudices yet.
This poll question should really be for the people out in LA and surrounding area. They are the ones who would or would not support a team. There are many options for people in LA who knows if they even care if they get a team. I don't care either way.
L.A. is just loaded with a bunch of criminals and thugs. Why anyone would want to go there and get kicked in the head until brain dead is beyond me. That city doesn't need to build a football stadium, they need to build a prison beside the staples center to lock up all the so called "gangsters" and the rest of the heathens that infest L.A.
only as an expansion team.
Add FOUR new teams, one in LA, one in Portland, one in London and one in San Antonio. make 6 divisions, one with SF, OAK, SEA, SD, LA, POR. one with ARI,STL, KC, DEN, SAN,HOU. put LON in the AFC E. this by 2015 or 2016. then you will have 6 divisions of 6 teams each, the west coast teams will not be penalized so much by frequent travels, big rivalries will be mantained. black & blue will return to be the NFC central, NFC E will include the usual teams, the AFC central will include IND,BAL and so on...
The threat of moving a team, for stadium leverage, is good for the sport. It encourages competition between cities and franchises. It may get a few stadiums built, which will provide some sorely needed jobs in metro areas. It will divert fan's money in LA from buying drugs, lottery tickets, and ski boats into the pockets of millionaire players, who will buy gold chains and sports bars, and billionaire owners who will invest the money wisely in capitalistic enterprises that will stimulate the economy and provide jobs and money to the fans who will need the money to pay for their season tickets. Finally, how long can you expect 8 million Angelinos to go on rooting for the mighty Raiders and the pathetic Lambs?
LA gets to see better games on TV if they are not "contractually obligated" to watch a home team.
The only team that should be moved to L.A. is James Caan's team from Rollerball, only sport that will survive there for obvious reasons!
I believe if you take one of the franchises' that are struggling to sellout every year and put them in L.A. it would be good not only for the franchise, but like pft mentioned, it could excel. There is too many people and corporate money available there for it not to. Plus, I live in southern Nevada and hate going to the university of Phoenix stadium to watch games, so it's a win win for me.