L.a. relocation nfl possible?

[shiznit1083]

Personally I think that the NFL has spent too long flirting with LA. I read a Superbowl program feature once about all the teams who have had LA as there home. Can't the NFL take a hint- LA doesn't want you!!

I actually think the idea of an expansion in the NFL is pretty stupid reallY. I can't think of a really big potential NFL market that isn't served by an existing team one way or another, unless they wanna go to Canada or maybe Mexico or wherever. And I don't think LA would want an expansion team anyway. Would LA fans be able to go through 3-4 years of failure before becoming challengers, somehow I doubt it. If it did happen it surely would be a relocation, and not that many teams are looking for a move are they?

Personally I don't think expansion is the answer.  If a team like the Colts went to LA then they would have a winning team to cheer for immediatley.  Maybe that's what the Colts need a la the Avalanche.

[griffin128]

Have 9 divisions of 4 teams. Have 16 teams (9 division champs, 7 wild cards) make the playoffs.

I think Mad Mac is onto something, but he's being a bit short sighted. What the NFL obviously should do is change over to 60 divisions of 1 team each. It's about time L.A ,Toronto, Birmingham, Tuscaloosa, Portland, Portland (ME), Akron, Anchorage, Topeka, and Beaumont Texas had professional football franchises. Now I know what you're saying there's currently 32 teams and I only mentioned 10 new franchises. But wait there's more. They'll add 6 more teams to New York, all playing in Giants Stadium of course, 2 more each to Chicago, Miami and Boston and the Raiders will constantly move to 6 other cities and assume different identities every time. Then every division winner plus 17 wildcard teams will go into a round robin playoff pool.

It sounds more complicated than it really is.

Viva La NFL!!!

[yh]

I actually think the idea of an expansion in the NFL is pretty stupid reallY. I can't think of a really big potential NFL market that isn't served by an existing team one way or another, unless they wanna go to Canada or maybe Mexico or wherever. And I don't think LA would want an expansion team anyway. Would LA fans be able to go through 3-4 years of failure before becoming challengers, somehow I doubt it. If it did happen it surely would be a relocation, and not that many teams are looking for a move are they?

I think the NFL would really like to put a team in Birmingham, a city that did well at the gate for the USFL and WFL.  It would be the only top-tier pro sport in Alabama and we know they love football down there.  The NFL has made no secret of its interest in Mexico City.  Toronto might now be in a position to be a viable option, although there would have to be some kind of agreement with the CFL regarding what to do with the Argos and the rest of the league.  It would be a shame for Canada's largest city to be without Canadian football.  And as for LA, they have never had a team truly of their own.  The Rams moved from Cleveland and the Raiders moved from Oakland.  The Chargers started there but moved while the AFL was considered an upstart league so I wouldn't consider them a big league team at the time they moved.

Bottom line - the NFL will expand if it feels that the teams it creates will be viable entities (regardless of record or location).  The last NFL franchise to out-and-out fold was the 1945 Brooklyn Tigers.  Can't argue with that string of success.

[Ez Street]

I think Mad Mac is onto something, but he's being a bit short sighted. What the NFL obviously should do is change over to 60 divisions of 1 team each. It's about time L.A ,Toronto, Birmingham, Tuscaloosa, Portland, Portland (ME), Akron, Anchorage, Topeka, and Beaumont Texas had professional football franchises.

YEAH TO HELL WITH KANSAS CITY!!!

ok so we have about 125,000 in Topeka

But Green Bay only has about 225,000

Seriously, expansion is rediculous, they have enough teams. I am one who does not like multiple teams in one city, so that being said move the J-E-T-S (crowd boos, hurls beer bottles).In Reality L.A. needs no team!

BTW, why doesn't the NFL adopt the B.C.S. system for their playoff, i mean i works SO WELL in college.

[Pat]

ignore

[jrh31584]

Here's an idea:

Move the Ravens to LA, and move the Colts back to Baltimore.  Have the teams switch owners, since anyone named Irsay would be wise never to set foot in Maryland again.

[mrfab]

YO Hobogrish,

What is/was your Hollywood/LA team name for your LA NFL concept, I STILL haven't discerned said.  Pls. remember loyal CC Forum Flamerz the NFL officially has a "no present appetite", THEIR term, for league expansion.  Face it, The Almighty NFL could have a 40 team league with room to grow, SUCH is Major League Football, Americano style.  ALL serious & otherwise applicants MUST have a Bells & Whistles 70K stadium ready, Suitable For 2.6 Super Bowls/Decade.  Otherwise, you WON'T play NFL, NO exceptions.  Civilian populations are largely extraneous, oddly.  With your super-stadium you need a broadcast uplink and off ya go!!  MY

LA relocation odds, here ya go, sorry if YOUR team might be the new NFL L.A. Cyber Assassin Gundum-Robo Warriors:

NO Saints: LA will NEVER build the new stadium needed, sorry, just don't see it.  MN Vikes: Maybe a stadium/urban mall football city brewing near Anoka?!? IN Colts: Mr. Irsay sez he's

dedicated do doing it in Nap Town.  Hope he does and you KNOW the Irsays always tell the truth! SD Chargers: Loverly

"Yego" barely found the $ for MLB & Petco Park, relations w/

"current owners" are icy, Chargers will BOLT (couldn't resist!)north @ first shovel-turn of LA stadium.  "I share your pain",

Charger-holics, but remember they WERE the LA Chargers originally.  NFL Teamhood, it's a DIRTY business... That there are BUT 32 NFL teams is flat out restraint of trade, but it's by design, after all... "... it's only NFL TOWN, Jake..."

:cool:

[Grish]

To answer some questions.

No my fantasy team is not the Hollywood Stars concept.

Yes the uniform is Miami Hurricane based.

I purposed the Hollywood Stars, as an idea. The name actually comes from the old PCL, team owed by many of Hollywood's Actors in the golden age of Hollywood.  The colors come from the indea, no one in the NFL is using this combo.  

As for thoughts of relocation of Indy or S.D.. With the concern that many critics have brought to the surface in the last week about the quality of play in the NFL, I wondered if relocation was the going ideal for L.A.  Personally, I the NFL needs to do many of things.

Of those, getting a state of the art stadium in two cities is need is the first of its problems.  New York and the Bay Area, are in need if they are going to be considered for Superbowls.  

As for a team in L.A.. How can you say there is not interest on the NFL, to have a team there based on TV rating possibilities.  But I also think if you add one you need to add four teams. This again brings up the quality of play on the field.   If you are looking for cities for teams, here is a short list of cities to think about (some have already been brought up). These 4 are, L.A., Vancouver B.C., Toronoto and Mexico City.   This would allow for equal divisions, geographic allignments could be easily drawn.

The only city that will see a team in the next step will be L.A.. Even with better choices available.  As long as the NFL is getting a good market share in L.A. already, is there really a need to have a team there? Not really.

So my two cents is that NFL needs to worry more about improving their current product. Salary cap needs to be adjusted and N.Y. as well as the Bay Area need new stadiums all before L.A. needs a team.

[mrfab]

Thank you, Hobogrish,

LA is a supreme front-running "LUV our team, win OR tie!" kind of town that can't CANNOT stay for the ends of 4th quarters,

ninth innings, last laps OR 3rd periods!  I'm partial, don't know why, to "Los Angeles Stars" for our 1ST NFL team, a nod to the PCL Stars as mentioned.  The League knows LA is easily a 2 team market, but let's get that 1ST team squared, whaddya say, Mr. Commish?!?!  The NFL expands @ a glacial pace, when at all.  The next new teams, whenever they may be, will surely be $1 BILLION priced, "and I'll stop calling you 'Shirley'!".  Limited relocation will be permitted as more revenue producing football stadia are built, wherever that may be.  It's the League that's posturing for an LA team, certainly not THIS amorphous dystopic megalopolis!  San Fran

is dragging its civic feet replacing Candlestick, Oakland's shot the wad for the Raiders & it ain't enough either.  My beloved J-E-T-S! are actually going to build that fantasy westside retractodome, so there ya go!  "Build it, & the NFL will come"!

[Le Suisse]

i have heard that the reason the NFL did not move to toronto(which they were seriously considering) was becasue Trudeau stepped in and said that that would destroy canadian football, and he wanted the nfl to stay out of canada for that reason.

Tell them who was Trudeau.

Bah, I'll tell them: Trudeau was the Canadian Prime Minister.

Ah, about the stuff of the NFL in LA, I never felt that LA was a NFL city. It's like pretending that Washington DC is a baseball city.

[Mac the Knife]

Have 9 divisions of 4 teams. Have 16 teams (9 division champs, 7 wild cards) make the playoffs.

I think Mad Mac is onto something, but he's being a bit short sighted. What the NFL obviously should do is change over to 60 divisions of 1 team each. It's about time L.A ,Toronto, Birmingham, Tuscaloosa, Portland, Portland (ME), Akron, Anchorage, Topeka, and Beaumont Texas had professional football franchises. Now I know what you're saying there's currently 32 teams and I only mentioned 10 new franchises. But wait there's more. They'll add 6 more teams to New York, all playing in Giants Stadium of course, 2 more each to Chicago, Miami and Boston and the Raiders will constantly move to 6 other cities and assume different identities every time. Then every division winner plus 17 wildcard teams will go into a round robin playoff pool.

It sounds more complicated than it really is.

Viva La NFL!!!

Is it me, fellow vets, or is newbie giving me 'tude?  

[griffin128]

Have 9 divisions of 4 teams. Have 16 teams (9 division champs, 7 wild cards) make the playoffs.

I think Mad Mac is onto something, but he's being a bit short sighted. What the NFL obviously should do is change over to 60 divisions of 1 team each. It's about time L.A ,Toronto, Birmingham, Tuscaloosa, Portland, Portland (ME), Akron, Anchorage, Topeka, and Beaumont Texas had professional football franchises. Now I know what you're saying there's currently 32 teams and I only mentioned 10 new franchises. But wait there's more. They'll add 6 more teams to New York, all playing in Giants Stadium of course, 2 more each to Chicago, Miami and Boston and the Raiders will constantly move to 6 other cities and assume different identities every time. Then every division winner plus 17 wildcard teams will go into a round robin playoff pool.

It sounds more complicated than it really is.

Viva La NFL!!!

Is it me, fellow vets, or is newbie giving me 'tude?

No, no no. No disrespct intended, just friendly ribbing here.

[NoHoJoe]

I certainly hope that Indy can keep the Colts. I think that's been a really good market for the NFL. Granted, they need a serious upgrade to their playing facility, but other than that, they've had great fan support and for those who have never been, Indy is a great city and should be considered an "NFL caliber" market. As for the Chargers, why should the ninth largest city in America lose their team because the second largest city doesn't have one? Are the Chargers having serious attendance problems? Perhaps the Chargers can be part of the solution to the "LA problem" by playing one or two home games in LA, just like Green Bay used to do in Milwaukee? Or perhaps the team should be renamed the Southern California Chargers and they could split 4 and 4?

The Colts should go back to Baltimore. Indianapoils should get a new team name, like the Speed or the Rhinos, or the gazelles!

[NoHoJoe]

I certainly hope that Indy can keep the Colts. I think that's been a really good market for the NFL. Granted, they need a serious upgrade to their playing facility, but other than that, they've had great fan support and for those who have never been, Indy is a great city and should be considered an "NFL caliber" market. As for the Chargers, why should the ninth largest city in America lose their team because the second largest city doesn't have one? Are the Chargers having serious attendance problems? Perhaps the Chargers can be part of the solution to the "LA problem" by playing one or two home games in LA, just like Green Bay used to do in Milwaukee? Or perhaps the team should be renamed the Southern California Chargers and they could split 4 and 4?

The Colts should go back to Baltimore. Indianapoils should get a new team name, like the Speed or the Rhinos, or the gazelles!

I was refering to the Colts team name!

[Le Suisse]

The Colts should go back to Baltimore. Indianapoils should get a new team name, like the Speed or the Rhinos, or the gazelles!

Ah yes? And what about the Ravens? Send back to Cleveland?

And so the new Browns? Send them to LA?

Hey... the original Brownies were born in LA!!!

[Le Suisse]

Reading this topic convinced me that NFL means "Nomadic Franchise League".

[yh]

Hey... the original Brownies were born in LA!!!

I don't believe so.  The Cleveland Browns were a charter member of the All American Football Conference back in 1946.  The LA team was called the Dons.  Four AAFC teams, including the Browns, merged with the NFL following the 1949 season.

I think you might be mistaking the Cleveland-LA connection with the Rams, who started in St. Louis as the Gunners but then sold the franchise back to the NFL who then gave the franchise to investors in Cleveland who called the team the Rams and then moved them to LA where of course they eventually became the St. Louis Rams.

[Mac the Knife]

I think you might be mistaking the Cleveland-LA connection with the Rams, who started in St. Louis as the Gunners but then sold the franchise back to the NFL who then gave the franchise to investors in Cleveland who called the team the Rams and then moved them to LA where of course they eventually became the St. Louis Rams.

I've never heard the Gunners-to-Rams connection before, yholl... what's your source on that?

[jrh31584]

Hey... the original Brownies were born in LA!!!

I don't believe so. The Cleveland Browns were a charter member of the All American Football Conference back in 1946. The LA team was called the Dons. Four AAFC teams, including the Browns, merged with the NFL following the 1949 season.

I think you might be mistaking the Cleveland-LA connection with the Rams, who started in St. Louis as the Gunners but then sold the franchise back to the NFL who then gave the franchise to investors in Cleveland who called the team the Rams and then moved them to LA where of course they eventually became the St. Louis Rams.

Only three AAFC teams joined the NFL...the Browns, Colts, and 49ers.  The Colts folded after the 1950 season and a new Colts team came into the league in 1953.

[Le Suisse]

I think you might be mistaking the Cleveland-LA connection with the Rams, who started in St. Louis as the Gunners but then sold the franchise back to the NFL who then gave the franchise to investors in Cleveland who called the team the Rams and then moved them to LA where of course they eventually became the St. Louis Rams.

You're right, man. I was mistaken. Thanks for your time explaining me all the stuff of the moves.