Los Angeles NFL Brands Discussion

[Gothamite]

Yeah, the pants need to be lightened a bit.  Compare them with the towel at his waist.

[Daredevil]

They look almost sand in color. 

[Bathysphere]

5 hours ago, Gothamite said:

Yeah, the pants need to be lightened a bit.  Compare them with the towel at his waist.

 

Checked it on my phone and you're right. Here's a better representation, though you get the point either way.

 

 

This is automatically a top 3 look in the league for me, ceteris paribus.

[LogoFan]

On 10/2/2017 at 12:35 PM, Gothamite said:

 

Do you really think the name is the problem here?  Or the uniforms?

 

The Chargers could become the Southern California Condors tomorrow, and they'd still have the exact same problem in LA; they're an unwanted franchise in a crowded marketplace run by clueless, scummy owners.  A rebrand wouldn't change any of those.

 

QFT.

 

You could come up with the most awesome name, logo and uniform design ever and no one in LA would give a crap.

 

The NFL LA fan base is Rams and Raiders (maybe not even in that order) with almost everyone else coming in 3rd ahead of the Chargers.  Look at their tv ratings...they tell the tail, where Rams, Raiders, MNF, SNF and the NBC or Fox national game ahead of the Chargers each week.  Or to put it even better: when the Rams and Raiders fled LA and a vacuum existed for 20 years, you'd think the nearest NFL city would've picked up all those abandoned fans.  It didn't happen.  NO ONE wanted them in LA except the greedy Spanos Clown Syndicate. 

 

I was a Charger fan for 37 years and after all the team has been through the move was it for me.  Rebranding won't make people like you, and the Chargers' front office/ownership has absolutely no clue how to be a winner. 

[duxrcool048]

Just a few mock-ups to show how beautiful the road version of the blue and yellow looks. I think it looks great.

 

 

[The_Admiral]

It's okay, and better than what they have now, but it's not better than the classic combination. 

[Mitch B]

4 hours ago, Gupti said:

 

Checked it on my phone and you're right. Here's a better representation, though you get the point either way.

 

 

This is automatically a top 3 look in the league for me, ceteris paribus.

 

I dig this look.  The away uniform should be white jerseys with gold sleeves over gold pants.  Add a blue jersey as an alternate.

[colortv]

5 hours ago, Gupti said:

 

Checked it on my phone and you're right. Here's a better representation, though you get the point either way.

 

 

This is automatically a top 3 look in the league for me, ceteris paribus.

 

Any chance we could see this with royal in place of the navy?

[Jungle Jim]

3 hours ago, the admiral said:

It's okay, and better than what they have now, but it's not better than the classic combination. 

 

I agree!

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

8 hours ago, LogoFan said:

 

QFT.

 

You could come up with the most awesome name, logo and uniform design ever and no one in LA would give a crap.

 

The NFL LA fan base is Rams and Raiders (maybe not even in that order) with almost everyone else coming in 3rd ahead of the Chargers.  Look at their tv ratings...they tell the tail, where Rams, Raiders, MNF, SNF and the NBC or Fox national game ahead of the Chargers each week.  Or to put it even better: when the Rams and Raiders fled LA and a vacuum existed for 20 years, you'd think the nearest NFL city would've picked up all those abandoned fans.  It didn't happen.  NO ONE wanted them in LA except the greedy Spanos Clown Syndicate. 

 

I was a Charger fan for 37 years and after all the team has been through the move was it for me.  Rebranding won't make people like you, and the Chargers' front office/ownership has absolutely no clue how to be a winner. 

 

You should hang in there, because the team will probably be back. I know that the league and the Chargers and the Rams right now all deny the possibility that a return to San Diego could ever happen. But this move to L.A. will be such a disaster that there's no way that the league will leave it unaddressed.

 

Spanos assumed that an L.A. team would be more valuable than a San Diego team. But the franchise's value is surely plummetting in L.A.; and the Chargers would have no value anywhere else outside of San Diego. The league will ultimately have to protect the value of that asset by placing it back in the only set of circumstances where its valuation can be within acceptable levels.

 

So Chargers fans should play the long game: just groove on the nice powder blue uniforms as you bide your time until the inevitable.

[colortv]

14 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

You should hang in there, because the team will probably be back. I know that the league and the Chargers and the Rams right now all deny the possibility that a return to San Diego could ever happen. But this move to L.A. will be such a disaster that there's no way that the league will leave it unaddressed.

 

Spanos assumed that an L.A. team would be more valuable than a San Diego team. But the franchise's value is surely plummetting in L.A.; and the Chargers would have no value anywhere else outside of San Diego. The league will ultimately have to protect the value of that asset by placing it back in the only set of circumstances where its valuation can be within acceptable levels.

 

So Chargers fans should play the long game: just groove on the nice powder blue uniforms as you bide your time until the inevitable.

 

Spanos isn't spending $650 million on relocation fees on top of everything else to go back to a smaller city that hates him and won't help him build an stadium.

 

The Clippers survived and eventually thrived for 35 years under Donald Sterling, arguably the worst owner in the history of professional sports. The Chargers will be fine.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

11 minutes ago, colortv said:

 

Spanos isn't spending $650 million on relocation fees on top of everything else to go back to a smaller city that hates him and won't help him build an stadium.

 

The Clippers survived and eventually thrived for 35 years under Donald Sterling, arguably the worst owner in the history of professional sports. The Chargers will be fine.

 

My speculation is that the league will force Spanos to sell; they'll find someone who will make him an offer, and then pressure Spanos into taking it.

That new owner will preferably be someone who can work a little real-estate magic in San Diego even without public subsidies.   And, who knows, maybe the city government will be so happy to have the team back without Spanos that it might be willing to do for the new owner a few things that it would not do for Spanos.
 

[colortv]

26 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

My speculation is that the league will force Spanos to sell; they'll find someone who will make him an offer, and then pressure Spanos into taking it.

That new owner will preferably be someone who can work a little real-estate magic in San Diego even without public subsidies.   And, who knows, maybe the city government will be so happy to have the team back without Spanos that it might be willing to do for the new owner a few things that it would not do for Spanos.
 

 

The league will never be able to force an owner to sell short of something absolutely catastrophic like the Donald Sterling debacle. Especially an owner like Spanos who's well-liked in ownership and league circles. 

 

The owners would never, ever let the league set that kind of precedent.

 

He'll be printing money once that new stadium opens just like Sterling did with the Clippers for decades.

 

Saying Spanos will move back to SD or be forced to sell the team so it can be moved back to SD is ignoring all economic and practical realities.

 

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

46 minutes ago, colortv said:

 

The league will never be able to force an owner to sell short of something absolutely catastrophic like the Donald Sterling debacle. Especially an owner like Spanos who's well-liked in ownership and league circles. 

 

The owners would never, ever let the league set that kind of precedent.

 

He'll be printing money once that new stadium opens just like Sterling did with the Clippers for decades.

 

Saying Spanos will move back to SD or be forced to sell the team so it can be moved back to SD is ignoring all economic and practical realities.

 

 

I never said that Spanos will move back to San Diego. I think that the league will find someone to make him an offer that's too good to pass up; and the new owner will move the team back.

And there is no reason to think that the Chargers will draw better in the new stadium in L.A. than they do now in the Galaxy's park.  Even assuming that the Rams will have success in the new stadium, the Chargers' floundering will overshadow this and will be the main story. I doubt that Spanos will continue to be so well-liked by his fellow owners as the value of his team plummets and as the Chargers' attendance woes subject the league to a great deal of ridicule.

 

The Chargers' move to L.A. was a bad mistake; several other people have observed that the team is just not wanted in L.A. This is unlikely to change. So I'd say that to expect the NFL to go on throwing good money after bad is less realistic than to think that the league will effectuate a solution that makes the problem go away.

[colortv]

7 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

I never said that Spanos will move back to San Diego. I think that the league will find someone to make him an offer that's too good to pass up; and the new owner will move the team back.

And there is no reason to think that the Chargers will draw better in the new stadium in L.A. than they do now in the Galaxy's park.  Even assuming that the Rams will have success in the new stadium, the Chargers' floundering will overshadow this and will be the main story. I doubt that Spanos will continue to be so well-liked by his fellow owners as the value of his team plummets and as the Chargers' attendance woes subject the league to a great deal of ridicule.

 

The Chargers' move to L.A. was a bad mistake; several other people have observed that the team is just not wanted in L.A. This is unlikely to change. So I'd say that to expect the NFL to go on throwing good money after bad is less realistic than to think that the league will effectuate a solution that makes the problem go away.

 

I also addressed your idea of the league forcing Spanos to sell, much less being forced to sell to move it back to San Diego. That is a non-starter and not based on reality.

 

Additionally, saying the team will not be able to build a greater fan base over the course of years more than it does now without any supporting basis also doesn't make sense. Fanbases take time to build.

 

I again refer you to the Clippers on court ineptitude and financial success.

 

The Chargers will be able to adequately fill the stadium if nothing else by also selling tickets to fans of opposing teams.

 

Lastly, the value of the team will not plummet.

 

The Knicks might be the worst run organization in sports and they are the highest valued NBA team, purely by being in a giant market.

 

None of your points are supported by the actual business of sports.

[IceCap]

2 hours ago, colortv said:

The Chargers will be fine.

I really don't think they will be.

[colortv]

11 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

I really don't think they will be.

 

There are over 20 million people in Southern California.

 

That's bigger than Toronto and Chicago combined.

 

It's equal to the entire population of Florida.

 

They will be fine.

[IceCap]

27 minutes ago, colortv said:

 

There are over 20 million people in Southern California.

 

That's bigger than Toronto and Chicago combined.

 

It's equal to the entire population of Florida.

That may be true. Just ask the NHL how relying on population numbers alone works though.

The Atlanta Thrashers regularly needed handouts via revenue sharing to stay afloat while playing in the tenth largest media market in the US. Then they moved to a small Canadian prairie city with a fraction of Atlanta's population and proved to be such a successful draw they're now paying into the league's revenue sharing rather than receiving payments to stay afloat.

 

The lesson is that it doesn't matter how many people are in a market if not enough of them care about your product. Go where the fans are, not where they could eventually be carved out of an audience that's indifferent at best.

Spanos burnt his bridges with San Diego and no one in LA cares. So in what way do they get a sustainable part of that 20+ million people marketplace?

 

The team can't even sell out a soccer stadium of less than 30,000 seats. And when they do manage it? It's to visiting fans. It was apparent when they played the Chiefs in LA and the crowd was all red. It was made exceptionally clear when they played the Eagles, with Eagles fans basically taking over the stadium. It's an embarrassment to the Chargers organisation, Chargers fans, and the NFL as a whole. This team does not belong in LA.

 

Go on about the Clippers if you want, but that's the thing. No team should aspire to be the Los Angeles Clippers.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

 

20 minutes ago, colortv said:

Additionally, saying the team will not be able to build a greater fan base over the course of years more than it does now without any supporting basis also doesn't make sense. Fanbases take time to build.

 

The passage of time means nothing here.  The identities of the Rams and Chargers are established; and nothing will change L.A. fans' attitude towards them.  The Rams have a emotional base of support; the Chargers have absolutely nothing.  What's more, identity of the Raiders is also firmly established, as is their rabid support in L.A.; the Raiders arguably have greater support in L.A. than even the Rams do.

 

 

27 minutes ago, colortv said:

The Knicks might be the worst run organization in sports and they are the highest valued NBA team, purely by being in a giant market.

 

Not purely by its location; also by virtue of an established brand identity that is strongly identified with its city and has great cultural currency there, qualities which are utterly lacking with the Chargers.  The Chargers' situation is only going to look worse as time goes on. The combination of the perception of fiasco and the falling revenues will surely cause a drop in the team's value, despite its being located in L.A.

 

 

31 minutes ago, colortv said:

The Chargers will be able to adequately fill the stadium if nothing else by also selling tickets to fans of opposing teams.

 

Well, that's true.  The best thing about the Chargers being in L.A. is that this brings the Raiders to town once a year.  (The irony here is that attracting opposing fans to the games was assumed to be one of the strategies that the Raiders will employ in Las Vegas; but it's the Chargers' fate to have to rely on this in L.A. in order to have anyone at all at their games.)

 

There is no precedent in the history of sports of looking at a long-term problem and just saying "well, golly, there's nothing we can do about this but hope that it gets better".  Rich and powerful people didn't get rich and powerful by taking that attitude.  The L.A. Chargers are a problem for the NFL, and also for the Rams, who are tied to them contractually; someone is going to solve that problem eventually.

[colortv]

1 minute ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

 

The passage of time means nothing here.  The identities of the Rams and Chargers are established; and nothing will change L.A. fans' attitude towards them.  The Rams have a emotional base of support; the Chargers have absolutely nothing.  What's more, identity of the Raiders is also firmly established, as is their rabid support in L.A.; the Raiders arguably have greater support in L.A. than even the Rams do.

 

 

 

Not purely by its location; also by virtue of an established brand identity that is strongly identified with its city and has great cultural currency there, qualities which are utterly lacking with the Chargers.  The Chargers' situation is only going to look worse as time goes on. The combination of the perception of fiasco and the falling revenues will surely cause a drop in the team's value, despite its being located in L.A.

 

 

 

Well, that's true.  The best thing about the Chargers being in L.A. is that this brings the Raiders to town once a year.  (The irony here is that attracting opposing fans to the games was assumed to be one of the strategies that the Raiders will employ in Las Vegas; but it's the Chargers' fate to have to rely on this in L.A. in order to have anyone at all at their games.)

 

There is no precedent in the history of sports of looking at a long-term problem and just saying "well, golly, there's nothing we can do about this but hope that it gets better".  Rich and powerful people didn't get rich and powerful by taking that attitude.  The L.A. Chargers are a problem for the NFL, and also for the Rams, who are tied to them contractually; someone is going to solve that problem eventually.

 

Again, nothing you are saying as any basis in the actual facts of sports business.

 

Fanbases aren't built overnight. It's a business that takes time and strategic growth. Not a season or half a season.

 

The Chargers sold out their season-ticket packages in stubhub, that's a fact.

 

You're talking about precedents.

 

Your precedent is the Clippers and Knicks, who in spite of being arguably the two worst run franchises in sports for periods of decades are among the most valuable in sports. purely by the markets they reside in.

 

You're basically saying, "the value of the franchise will plummet and they won't be able to build a fanbase over time" without anything to back it up. You're using talking points and emotions, not facts.