Thread: Chargers AND Raiders Building Stadium In L.A.?

Originally Posted by Lancane

Davii you may be right, however there is a lot more to this then simply approving a single stadium proposal. The city of St. Louis is not giving up without a fight, they can still approve a stadium proposal themselves that could endear the league to not be so quick to vacate a market they want to keep and has proven lucrative and successful. Secondly, St. Louis could do what Cleveland did and force the Rams to lose their name, since the teams main success has come and could be tied to the relocation to the city.





If the Raiders and Chargers both of which have a more lustrous history in the league can set forth a proposal that the league sees as a better fit they can still win out over the Rams and Kroenke, if they'll still be the Rams at all.

Building the smallest stadium in the NFL is not the way to keep your team from moving to the second largest media market in the nation.

Raiders have a better history, Chargers don't. St Louis would lose a Court battle for the name as LA had the name first.

I am not saying this is a done deal. I'm saying right now, this second, the Rams are the front runners. Period.

Viewing selfishly, as an SD resident if the Chargers move to LA I could care less.

But out of the division I'm on the fence about. I currently have an opportunity to watch the Broncos in person every year with the current arrangement - though I don't always take it due to being really tired of rooting against the crowd (and the crowd against me), costs of tickets, and the fact that the stadium is a dump with a lot of poor views (which results in a need for higher cost tickets).

OTOH, if the Chargers leave the division there goes that local TV arrangement and I bet I'd see more Broncos games without needing the NFL Ticket.

I think most everyone sees the writing on the wall for the Rams. Noway Kroenke is involved in a new stadium deal and doesn't move the Rams there.

But I believe the Chargers are the 2nd team. If that's the case then no one changes divisions. And that means for us Cali people that we will see more Broncos games!

The size of the stadium will matter just as much as the size of market after a few years when LA has lost interest.

Originally Posted by Jaded

The size of the stadium will matter just as much as the size of market after a few years when LA has lost interest.

Only team with worse attendance numbers than the Rams (total and %) is Minnesota.

because they have the worst record of all the nfl for last 10 years.

You act like Rams fans are the reason they dont go to games, and not the product on the field. Who wants to sit around and watch Kellen Clemens? And whatever non factor qb it was last year, i dont even remember his name. Thats how bad he was.

for chrissakes, hockey games sell out in St. louis. Why? Because the Blues win games. They are having a good season again this year Go blues!

i was reading an article on a STL website, and they were talking about how some local business guys were getting together to try to buy the Rams from Kroenke.

The desire to keep the Rams in STL is 100% there. The NFL has stated many times it wants to keep the STL market. Until they have a vote, i am not going to trip over any news.

Hey Shane, everyone supports a winner. Your town hasn't supported that team in a long time. Mo already schooled you on that. Bottom line, terrible attendance, black out games, a currently small stadium, and a proposal to build the smallest in the NFL. Keep telling yourself it all be ok Shaney, someday you might even believe it.

Everybody supports a winner?

How about a team that gives 4 playoff appearances in 20 years? And holds the record for the worst record of the last 10 years....

Oh but its those horrible STL sports fans that sell out hockey games. Its their fault. Not the sub par product that has been called a football team.

team doesnt even go above .500 for years and you honestly think its a "lack of support" from the fanbase.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colum...6c86d9584.html

St. Louis gets an unfair rap for NFL support

Blah blah blah blah blah. Your team is the front runner to move (back) to LA. Enjoy.

Originally Posted by Davii

Blah blah blah blah blah. Your team is the front runner to move (back) to LA. Enjoy.

Well, all is on hold until Kroenke gets league approval. Don't expect it to be soon either, according to Sirius Sports the several owners want to see if the Chargers and Raiders can create a joint plan and get city approval and measure the two because they do not want to lose the St. Louis market. However, according to some Kroenke will likely be the winner of the Los Angeles sweepstakes but that does not mean that the Chargers and Raiders will not be moving, because the league is not happy with either home city at this time. Some believe should the Rams move, then St. Louis' doors are open and the likely candidate to replace the Rams would be the Chargers (there is already a Facebook page for this), they would remain in the AFC West, St. Louis has proven willing to develop a new stadium and it would add to a long standing rivalry. Also the Raiders are drawing serious interest from investors in Portland, they are the largest metropolitan city with only one professional team.

Albert Breer tweeted this in light of that

Portland is a bigger TV market than Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Indy, Baltimore, San Diego, Nashville, KC, Milwaukee, Cincy, NOLA, Jax, Buffalo.

San Diego and Oakland may have thought they got one up on the owners of both teams, soon they'll find out that that is not the case.

Portland I could see happening, but no way San Diego loses a team. San Diego will build a new stadium and there's no way the NFL wants to leave there, it's a great super bowl site. STL is truly not a great market. At all. It should be evidence enough that their plan for a new stadium is the smallest in the NFL. That's a laugher.

Originally Posted by Davii

Portland I could see happening, but no way San Diego loses a team. San Diego will build a new stadium and there's no way the NFL wants to leave there, it's a great super bowl site. STL is truly not a great market. At all. It should be evidence enough that their plan for a new stadium is the smallest in the NFL. That's a laugher.

You could be correct Davii though right now I have to disagree, I do not see the NFL caring whether San Diego has an NFL team, their average market in 2014 while greater then Indianapolis and Pittsburgh was worse then Jacksonville, but both Indianapolis and Pittsburgh are more popular nationally. The other possibility could still be Los Angeles, but the NFL does not want to lose the St. Louis market, they are pretty adamant about that, so what becomes the correct course? You keep saying St. Louis is a bad market, in 2004 they had a higher attendance then the Denver which is a marquee market, continuously sold out - in fact it could be argued that during the years they were winning the market is far better as Falco was trying to explain. Neither market is a prime, but the NFL knows that most prime markets give a few like Portland already have a franchise. The NFL doesn't like to be strong armed, they do the strong arming, that is my opinion at least.

As for the Super Bowl argument, it holds no weight. San Diego isn't set to host a Super Bowl for the next few years at least, hell the last one was what 2003? Twelve years ago. This year it's in San Francisco, then Houston and then Minneapolis. We've now had Denver in the mix for one so was Indianapolis this year, Detroit and New York/New Jersey hosted one, so the idea that the league cares about that aspect is sort of comical, if St. Louis developed a great facility then they could be hosting one, I don't see that as a factor, I wouldn't be surprised if one here soon was held in Hawaii or internationally.

Cold weather SB won't happen again, last year was the test case and results weren't good. That argument does hold weight and San Diego hasn't had one because of their stadium, which obviously will be new if the Chargers stay there.

You keep saying the NFL doesn't want to lose the STL media market, but I see nothing saying that's true. It's also the smallest media market of the three teams we're discussing, by a long shot.

The rams are second to last in attendance, dead last in team value, and are at or near the bottom in virtually every single revenue statistic. Here's Forbes to agree.

In the end, the NFL is a business and the $ signs will win.

Oakland and Raiders could build in LA. But what will it do as it would hurt the San Diego fanbase most of all than it would Oakland.