Los Angeles NFL Brands Discussion

[duxrcool048]

I would love to see them wear the white pants, and navy socks with the yellow jersey.

 

[IceCap]

23 hours ago, NicDB said:

Even after Magic retired and the Lakers fell into their lean years in the 90s, mainstream sitcoms still made Clippers jokes.

The media is still making Clippers jokes...

 

 

[MilSox]

10 minutes ago, duxrcool048 said:

I would love to see them wear the white pants, and navy socks with the yellow jersey.

 

The stripe could use a thin yellow outline.  

[BBTV]

I love all the revisionist history that the rams were beloved in LA and are the Lakers to someone else’s Clippers.  For one thing, it would mean that an Anaheim team was the core team in the LA market, which would complicate some other arguments that some have made in other thread.  

[duxrcool048]

37 minutes ago, NicDB said:

The stripe could use a thin yellow outline.  

 

I understand. I just mocked it up with their current white pants. Here is another one I made.

 

[IceCap]

3 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

I love all the revisionist history that the rams were beloved in LA and are the Lakers to someone else’s Clippers.  For one thing, it would mean that an Anaheim team was the core team in the LA market, which would complicate some other arguments that some have made in other thread.   

I don't think people are applying that retroactively.

Rather they're arguing that presently? The Rams are in the "Lakers" position in terms of support levels, whereas the Chargers are clearly fighting for scraps.

[guest23]

 

Yet they are still the most popular nfl team in LA. That's pretty impressive.

[IceCap]

19 minutes ago, guest23 said:

 

Yet they are still the most popular nfl team in LA. That's pretty impressive.

Citation needed

 

I have no doubt that the Raiders have a strong fanbase in LA, but I'm hesitant to say they're more popular than the Rams presently. I recall a poll indicating that, back in 2016, the Rams were the clear preference among Los Angeles fan. The Raiders were a respectable second, and the Chargers were a distant third.

[colortv]

3 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

I love all the revisionist history that the rams were beloved in LA and are the Lakers to someone else’s Clippers.  For one thing, it would mean that an Anaheim team was the core team in the LA market, which would complicate some other arguments that some have made in other thread.  

 

The Rams were LA for around 50 years, and spent only a portion of that in Anaheim.

 

As for the Raiders, they just have a more visible and vocal presence in the fans, and people were likely to continue rooting for a team still located in California.

 

But there is a silent majority that doesn't like the Raiders and in particular the image their fans project. I've noticed this particularly among women.

[guest23]

23 minutes ago, colortv said:

 

The Rams were LA for around 50 years, and spent only a portion of that in Anaheim.

 

As for the Raiders, they just have a more visible and vocal presence in the fans, and people were likely to continue rooting for a team still located in California.

 

But there is a silent majority that doesn't like the Raiders and in particular the image their fans project. I've noticed this particularly among women.

 

Regardless of their perception is non-raider fans, they have been the #1 draw for viewers in LA and the cowboys have been #2 for a couple decades. Nfl is a tv driven sport so having a local team to grow your fan base is irrelevant in 2018. Kids who grew up without a local team chose others and transplants brought their allegiance with them from the big cities back east. It will take at least a decade for the rams to get real traction.

[Gothamite]

1 hour ago, colortv said:

But there is a silent majority that doesn't like the Raiders and in particular the image their fans project. I've noticed this particularly among women.

 

Yeah, I find it terribly silly and therefore charming, but the cosplay does turn a lot of people off.

[Red Wolf]

4 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

I don't think people are applying that retroactively.

Rather they're arguing that presently? The Rams are in the "Lakers" position in terms of support levels, whereas the Chargers are clearly fighting for scraps.

Plus, the Chargers using LAC just like the Clippers (which obviously they would). It's just perfect. Just like it took me most of the Chargers' first season to stop saying San Diego (same for saying St. Louis is reference to the Rams), it took me a while to adjust to seeing LAC and not instantly thinking Clippers.

[The_Admiral]

The Los Angeles Raiders had mediocre attendance magnified by an L.A. Coliseum that was too big for its own good, but no one who liked them has ever shut up about them, and their merchandise looked cool. Of course they would be more romanticized in their absence than the Rams were, because no NFL team has ever romanticized itself as relentlessly as the Raiders. (The Bears are second and it's a wide tie for third.) "Silent majority" is right on the money.

[LMU]

28 minutes ago, the admiral said:

The Los Angeles Raiders had mediocre attendance magnified by an L.A. Coliseum that was too big for its own good, but no one who liked them has ever shut up about them, and their merchandise looked cool. Of course they would be more romanticized in their absence than the Rams were, because no NFL team has ever romanticized itself as relentlessly as the Raiders. (The Bears are second and it's a wide tie for third.) "Silent majority" is right on the money.

Here's the thing...

 

There is definitely still a strong Raider presence in LA, however, the fanbase consists mostly of socioeconomic groups who couldn't afford to buy tickets to the Coliseum back in the 90s let alone now.  The infatuation has much more to do with the colors, the connection with gang culture, and Ice Cube wearing snapback hats than it does with the actual team itself.  Most of the window decals you see on LA Raider fans' cars have the pirate replaced with a skull to make up for the lack of intimidation.  For example:

 

 

So, the whole "LA is a Raiders town" bit is a little misleading.  The fans aren't exactly the type who would be forking over a whole lot of money for season tickets and the like. They're mainly a bunch of people who think that the colors make them look badass even though the team's owner is the absolute anthesis of this. Plus, let's face it, a perennial 4-12 team who gave its generational superstar away for peanuts isn't exactly what one would call intimidating.

[The_Admiral]

I'd argue that no metropolitan area ever can nor should be a "Raiders town." They're supposed to be too countercultural to just be the local team. Liking the Raiders has to be a conscious alternative choice you make and subsequently regret. That's one part among many of what makes this Las Vegas situation so gruesome, the idea that they'll just be the default institution for dopes who live in a half-foreclosed housing tract with lawns made of gravel.

[BBTV]

8 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

I don't think people are applying that retroactively.

Rather they're arguing that presently? The Rams are in the "Lakers" position in terms of support levels, whereas the Chargers are clearly fighting for scraps.

 

Then Wouldn’t they be averaging more than 69k/game?  That’s certainly not bad, and I know the LA market is tough, but to me it doesn’t seem like a Lakers/ Clippers situation, but more like Clippers A and Clippers B (albeit B far behind A)

[threesox84]

9 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

I love all the revisionist history that the rams were beloved in LA and are the Lakers to someone else’s Clippers.  

It isn't revisionist to say so at all. The Rams were indeed beloved in LA, which is precisely why so many people were so upset at them for moving to Anaheim and why they lost such a huge chunk of their traditional fan base by doing so. The Rams were the Lakers before the Lakers were the Lakers. To say otherwise is revisionist history, or at least suggests you aren't familiar with Los Angeles before 1980. 

[BBTV]

Correct. I’m not familiar with LA or the Rams prior to 1980. I only know that when I started folllowing NFL in late 80s (the Jim Everett era) they weren’t the Lakers. So while I’ll take what you’re saying as true for that time, but it certainly had faded by the 90s. 

[threesox84]

9 hours ago, guest23 said:

 

Yet they are still the most popular nfl team in LA. That's pretty impressive.

It sure seemed that way in the parking lot before the exhibition game this year. First game at the Coliseum since the NFL returned, last game there ever, apathetic home crowd waiting for the regular season, prime Saturday kickoff, etc. Then the game started and it turns out most of those Raider fans must've stayed in the parking lot. The damn stadium was half empty, and half the people there were the Rams fans that weren't supposed to show up. 

[Red Wolf]

As somebody who visited LA once, I can definitely confirm that the Chargers are actually the third most important football team there. Similar to the Clippers being less important to basketball than both the Lakers and UCLA.