L.A. relocation seen as inevitable
 

Back in October, PFT got the ball rolling on the notion that an NFL franchise would be rolling to Los Angeles within the next 12-24 months. Only two months later, a relocation seems inevitable by 2016, at the latest.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...&utm_tags=

---

Not a single mention of the Jaguars in the article. Guess even PFT can't make that story stick anymore. 

---

wow, I honestly can't believe they would want to move 2 teams to LA...  That makes no sense...  Why  lose 2 cities to gain one?  

 

Losing SD and Oakland/St. Louis seems dumb.  Just move one team to LA...  Why waste 2 teams?

---

wow, I honestly can't believe they would want to move 2 teams to LA...  That makes no sense...  Why  lose 2 cities to gain one?  

 

Losing SD and Oakland/St. Louis seems dumb.  Just move one team to LA...  Why waste 2 teams?

Oakland already shares a market with San Francisco and LA is bigger than Oakland and St. Louis combined twice over. 

---

Oakland already shares a market with San Francisco and LA is bigger than Oakland and St. Louis combined twice over. 

 

Understood about Oakland, that's why it makes sense for them to move to LA...

 

But even if LA has a significantly larger market, why lose the good will of an entire city for adding another team, if the Raiders are already there?  

 

The 1 team already captures the market.  You've heard the law of diminishing returns, right?  Moving 2 teams in and losing a whole other city makes no sense once you've already got the Raiders in LA...

---

wow, I honestly can't believe they would want to move 2 teams to LA... That makes no sense... Why lose 2 cities to gain one?


Losing SD and Oakland/St. Louis seems dumb. Just move one team to LA... Why waste 2 teams?

Well according to the Chargers, LA is a secondary market to them. So if they were to relocate they really wouldn't loose much and probably assume that they could still keep a healthy group of fans still in the San Diego market.


Oakland's fan base is divided between the 49ers and still have a healthy fan base in LA from the 90s (according to the polls) so they would stand to gain as well. I still think San Antonio is an option for the Raiders if LA doesn't work out.


TBH, LA's market is more than big enough for 1 team, and the 2 team business model has worked out well for the second biggest market in New York.

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

Understood about Oakland, that's why it makes sense for them to move to LA...

 

But even if LA has a significantly larger market, why lose the good will of an entire city for adding another team, if the Raiders are already there?  

 

The 1 team already captures the market.  You've heard the law of diminishing returns, right?  Moving 2 teams in and losing a whole other city makes no sense once you've already got the Raiders in LA...

LA can easily support two NFL. They already have two NBA teams, two MLB teams and two NHL teams.

---

Both you guys make valid points that I really can't argue with too much.

 

In terms of the individual teams (Chargers or Raiders) moving and what would be in thier best interest, I can see that.  I just wonder if it's the best move for the NFL as a whole to have 2 teams in LA...

 

You got to remember that LA may not fundamentally be a market that lends itself to 2 teams the same way NY does.  

 

I know that LA is working on creating a legit NFL ready venue that will be lights years ahead of the Old Colloseum...  

 

But you have to remember that LA is a city of transplants, and NFL loyalties are diversified because of this and the multiple decades of not having a "hometown" team.  

 

I think it's prudent to first test the waters with 1 team and not jump in with 2.  Again the law of diminishing returns comes to mind.  Though LA may be a large market, similar to NY, it's not the same as NY...  2 teams could very well be an over-saturation of that market.  And again, if it is, you've then got a situation where you have to move a team again.  

 

It makes more sense, business-wise, to take a prudent approach, in my opinion.

---

LA already has a team. The chargers. If the chargers are blacked out in SD they are also blacked out in LA. I've missed several Jags games on DirecTv in LA because San Diego couldn't sell out. I'm 90 miles away from SD.


This is a quote from Wikipedia on the nfl blackout rules

"The NFL does allow in some cases for secondary markets to go beyond the 75 mile radius in part to help draw fans to attend the game. Some of these exceptions are in Charlotte where many of its secondary markets lie outside the 75 mile radius (Raleigh). Others include San Diego, primarily due to Los Angeles (116 miles (187 km) from San Diego) not having an NFL team since 1994, as southern parts of the Los Angeles market are within San Diego's 75-mile radius"


So LA is already charger market.

---

The LA threat has built, or upgraded a lot of stadiums on the tax payers dime.

 

The NFL has ratcheted up the ol LA threat time again as needed to bend the local tax payer/politician over the barrel for years.

 

The reason a team is not in LA today is because the NFL doesn't have a viable replacement to scare other NFL cities into ponying up the money to build a new stadium to keep "their" team.

 

So currently, the NFL is using LA to scare ... St. Louis, Oakland, and San Diego.

 

5 Years from now, it will be 3 different cities.  This has been going on for a long long time. ... The NFL can't afford to lose the LA threat by actually placing a team in LA, it has made them too much money.

 

"We're going to do it"

"We're really not kidding this time"

"We have rich men buying land"

"This is your last chance"

 

Never heard those threats before.

 

Hey, did you guys hear? ... The Vikings are building a new stadium.  A couple years back, they were in line to move to LA.

---

I could see the Chargers moving up to LA and maybe the rams later on. Then maybe the Raiders to SA.

 

Im just happy the Jags are no longer in the talk.

---

:thanks: Extra Life 2016 is 11/05/16 :thanks:

I could see the Chargers moving up to LA and maybe the rams later on. Then maybe the Raiders to SA.

 

Im just happy the Jags are no longer in the talk.

 

No, we're in the talk to go to London. Progress!

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

No, we're in the talk to go to London. Progress!

You hit it on the head Adam, with 'London' emerging as the new 'boogeyman' the nfl can get back to letting LA have the obvious canidates (Raiders, Rams, Chargers) and use London as the beating stick for everyone else. Or Toronto. Doesnt matter. Enough other options have appearred that someone can make the obvious move to LA.

---

Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 

Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.

 

LA already has a team. The chargers. If the chargers are blacked out in SD they are also blacked out in LA. I've missed several Jags games on DirecTv in LA because San Diego couldn't sell out. I'm 90 miles away from SD.


This is a quote from Wikipedia on the nfl blackout rules

"The NFL does allow in some cases for secondary markets to go beyond the 75 mile radius in part to help draw fans to attend the game. Some of these exceptions are in Charlotte where many of its secondary markets lie outside the 75 mile radius (Raleigh). Others include San Diego, primarily due to Los Angeles (116 miles (187 km) from San Diego) not having an NFL team since 1994, as southern parts of the Los Angeles market are within San Diego's 75-mile radius"


So LA is already charger market.

Being from smack dab in the middle of LA. I would say the Raiders are still the most popular, followed by the Rams then the Chargers.. And to be honest, Charger fans seem to be the "softest" of the bunch

---

You hit it on the head Adam, with 'London' emerging as the new 'boogeyman' the nfl can get back to letting LA have the obvious canidates (Raiders, Rams, Chargers) and use London as the beating stick for everyone else. Or Toronto. Doesnt matter. Enough other options have appearred that someone can make the obvious move to LA.

Just out of curiosity, is Toronto still a treat for Buffalo?

---

The LA threat has built, or upgraded a lot of stadiums on the tax payers dime.


The NFL has ratcheted up the ol LA threat time again as needed to bend the local tax payer/politician over the barrel for years.


The reason a team is not in LA today is because the NFL doesn't have a viable replacement to scare other NFL cities into ponying up the money to build a new stadium to keep "their" team.


So currently, the NFL is using LA to scare ... St. Louis, Oakland, and San Diego.


5 Years from now, it will be 3 different cities. This has been going on for a long long time. ... The NFL can't afford to lose the LA threat by actually placing a team in LA, it has made them too much money.


"We're going to do it"

"We're really not kidding this time"

"We have rich men buying land"

"This is your last chance"


Never heard those threats before.


Hey, did you guys hear? ... The Vikings are building a new stadium. A couple years back, they were in line to move to LA.

Eventually a team will move to LA. It won't be a threat anymore. Then London will take over as the new "threat" city.

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

Just out of curiosity, is Toronto still a treat for Buffalo?

Not till 2020, as I understand, and still not likely even then.

---

Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 

Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.

 

Being from smack dab in the middle of LA. I would say the Raiders are still the most popular, followed by the Rams then the Chargers.. And to be honest, Charger fans seem to be the "softest" of the bunch

Totally agree. But the Chargers are not going to want to be stuck in san diego while the raiders or rams take LA

---

Eventually a team will move to LA. It won't be a threat anymore. Then London will take over as the new "threat" city.

 

 

I agree, but another angle to look at this ... the NFL could put just one team in LA, and then use the second team spot to continue to blackmail current NFL cities to continue investing tax payer money to build, or upgrade stadiums to keep “their” team from being the second team to move to LA.

 

There is a gamble the NFL would make in that scenario. The first team may garner the majority of the local fanbase support. If that happens, what team (owner) would risk playing second fiddle to an existing team in their own city?

 

The NFL has to find (or create) a completely separate, and viable threat to replace LA threat before they can place even a single team in LA. The whole London, San Antonio, or even Toronto has been nothing more than a toe testing the warmth of the water (failed threats). The NFL knows it has been very lucrative to keep the LA market threat OPEN, and void of a true home team. Toronto is out since the Bills have the Toronto market, San Antonio is as ruse (Jones would throw a hissy fit), as is London (weak sauce). Which leaves? LA as the lone “best” threat to continue the blackmailing of the current cities that lack caviar stadiums.

 

The Rams aren't moving back to LA … The Raiders failed in LA because of the distance to their home grown fanbase. I think the only viable team to relocate to LA would be the Chargers. … If that does happen? The LA 2^nd (supposedly) team will continue to carry the blackmail torch.

 

 

Until London ... As we agree.  :yes:

---

"the Rams, Raiders, or Chargers could be forced to stay in their city, or forced to find a new destination"

 

No Kidding? Boy that's some real journalism there.

 

There is something nobody is talking about though and that is the people who are investing the money to build a stadium complex in L.A. want to OWN the team. They don't want a tenant which means one of those teams must be for sale.

 

Regards.................the Chiefjag

---