Two L.A. Groups Show Interest in Vikings (1 Viewer)

dav168

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Jan 22, 2000
Messages
4,797
Reaction score
174
Age
60
Offline
that's why they got favre to come back and tank the season smart thinking!
 

DMaestro

Sucker Puncher
Joined
Jul 9, 2001
Messages
5,653
Reaction score
1,206
Online
Damn, that NFC Conference game had some serious repercussions, didn't it.

Remember Minnesota fans: it all began in New Orleans....
 

Ti Rider

Me Worry?
Joined
Feb 6, 2002
Messages
17,276
Reaction score
9,712
Location
My couch
Offline
The Vikings want a new stadium, the voters said no. Saber rattling. I seriously doubt the NFL lets a historic franchise like the Vikings move. Not when the Jags are struggling with fan support. I also believe that a majority of owners aren't interested in really having a team in L.A. A team in L.A. would eliminate their biggest leverage tool in negotiations with their states and fans. A team in L.A. removes that threat. What are the owners going to say then - "Give me a new stadium or I'm moving to San Antonio". That would get them laughed out of the room......
 

HouseCall

Resist, Ronald, resist!
Joined
Dec 7, 1998
Messages
7,496
Reaction score
12,326
Age
45
Offline
I agree for the most part that other than sweetening the tv revenue deal, a franchise in L.A. isn't as big a priority as it used to be.
I think the rule bending recently awarding a Super Bowl to cold-weather New York was a way for Goodell to soften the Super Bowl rules which might eventually allow the big game to return to Los Angeles even without a frnachise in place. Maybe.

The difference now between past "Move to L.A. Leverage Moves" is that now Los Angeles has some real interested parties involved where in the past the response was luke warm at best.
The key is the stadium. If the L.A. folks can break ground without the need for public dollars, a team will move.
My guess would be the Chargers.
 

Saints 4 life

⚜ Falcons Suck ⚜
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
31,546
Reaction score
55,204
Age
49
Location
Easton, Pa
Offline
<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee68/WooleverTim/childress-candyvan.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
 

RazorSaint

Super Forum Fanatic
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 20, 2001
Messages
10,271
Reaction score
4,878
Age
43
Offline
The Vikings want a new stadium, the voters said no. Saber rattling. I seriously doubt the NFL lets a historic franchise like the Vikings move. Not when the Jags are struggling with fan support. I also believe that a majority of owners aren't interested in really having a team in L.A. A team in L.A. would eliminate their biggest leverage tool in negotiations with their states and fans. A team in L.A. removes that threat. What are the owners going to say then - "Give me a new stadium or I'm moving to San Antonio". That would get them laughed out of the room......

I agree that the Vikings won't move to LA, but I disagree that the NFL isn't interested in having a presence in the country's 2nd largest tv market.
 

Dragon

Official SR Twitter Team
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
7,081
Reaction score
5,593
Age
59
Location
Copenhagen, Denmark
Offline
However much I dislike the Vikings I would NEVER want any city and fan group to lose their team.
 

lonestarcajun

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
2,896
Reaction score
2,592
Age
51
Location
Wylie, TX
Offline
However much I dislike the Vikings I would NEVER want any city and fan group to lose their team.
:9:

With as much as a city/state shells out to make accommodations for a team I've always thought that the city should have part ownership in the team. And that a team should not be allowed to move without buying out that ownership.

I understand that sometimes the fan base erodes enough that in becomes no longer feasible to have the franchise stay in a particular location. But the latest trend has been "give me a new stadium or else". That's just wrong.

Bottom line is that it's just gotten too easy for a sports franchise to pull up stakes and move on. As much as teams want the fans to make a commitment to them, the team should make a commitment to the fans such that they are in it for the long haul. I understand the need to have stadiums modernized and just plain kept up. But a new stadium should only be considered when the old stadium is unable to support the fan base -- no because Jerry World looks so sweet and "I want one too". That's a big reason why I'm glad that they decided to fix up the Super Dome instead of stonewalling on a new stadium.
 

muzzy

Explosive
Joined
Mar 3, 2003
Messages
4,004
Reaction score
2,181
Offline
An NFC North team based in L.A.? Perfect!
 

ibelieve

unnecessarily vulgar
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
6,929
Reaction score
904
Age
37
Location
LaPlace
Offline
Put me in the camp that says **** the Vikings but I don't want them to lose their team. Seams like a passionate fan base. The metro dome always seems to be packed and pretty rowdy.
 

GoldRush26

SR is my life!
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
13,568
Reaction score
4,033
Offline
The Vikings want a new stadium, the voters said no. Saber rattling. I seriously doubt the NFL lets a historic franchise like the Vikings move. Not when the Jags are struggling with fan support. I also believe that a majority of owners aren't interested in really having a team in L.A. A team in L.A. would eliminate their biggest leverage tool in negotiations with their states and fans. A team in L.A. removes that threat. What are the owners going to say then - "Give me a new stadium or I'm moving to San Antonio". That would get them laughed out of the room......

You wouldn't consider the Baltimore Colts and Cleveland Browns historic franchises?

A team in L.A. means more money for everyone. A majority of owners aren't really going to move their teams in the first place, so I think the benefit of having them as a bargaining chip is overstated.
 

615saint

I add nothing
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
1,203
Reaction score
1,185
Location
North Coast
Offline
Seems to me they could take the Rams out of the west and put them in the North pretty easily.

The Rams/9ers rivalry would be severed at that point. Not good for football imo.

Also - having a team in the second biggest TV market means a lot of people not watching TV when the game gets blacked out...
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

 

New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

 

Headlines

Top Bottom