The NFL returns to Los Angeles

I like it that the lambs are back where they belong. I do see the NFL as using this to get two new stadiums, LA and one in either Oakland, San Diego or San Antonio (least likely since Jerry doesn't want a third NFL team in his backyard AKA Cowboys territory.)

There was no way the NFL was going to approve 2 AFC teams to share the same stadium. I wouldn't be surprised to see San Diego get a stadium and the Raiders move.

Even if you build a stadium directly between Austin and San Antonio it's a still a small market...of course Texas is football crazy so it might work. But I seriously doubt this is going to happen...for one thing the NFL has no interest in San Antonio, not enough money to be made there to justify it.

I think the Raiders would be better off to go ahead and share a stadium with the 49ers. It's already there, they've been invited to join and it's only 30 miles away from their current location.

Here's what my gut is telling me about the Chargers situation.

1. The Rams don't want to share a stadium (or the market) with anyone, I'm sure they'll be pleased if the Chargers stay put.

2. The NFL wants to keep San Diego in the family. They want to keep the location and they don't want another pissed off city on their hands.

My prediction: The Raiders move across the bay. San Diego gets a new stadium.

S.D. wrote:

Even if you build a stadium directly between Austin and San Antonio it's a still a small market...of course Texas is football crazy so it might work.  But I seriously doubt this is going to happen...for one thing the NFL has no interest in San Antonio, not enough money to be made there to justify it.

I think the Raiders would be better off to go ahead and share a stadium with the 49ers.  It's already there, they've been invited to join and it's only 30 miles away from their current location.  

Here's what my gut is telling me about the Chargers situation.  

1. The Rams don't want to share a stadium (or the market) with anyone, I'm sure they'll be pleased if the Chargers stay put.  

2. The NFL wants to keep San Diego in the family.  They want to keep the location and they don't want another pissed off city on their hands.  

My prediction:  The Raiders move across the bay.  San Diego gets a new stadium.  

Could happen, I agree the San Diego will stay. I think both SD and Oak are playing for new stadiums in the current market. I could see the Raiders staying put or moving to LA if they get the right deal with the rams. They should have gone in on a stadium with San Fran to begin with.

The 49ers stadium is designed to handle two teams, it has identical locker room and office facilities and LED lighting throughout that can change the team colors and logos with a push of a button. The new Inglewood stadium is going to be the same way. Both venues are ready for a second team if the need arises.

I saw an article on Twitter last night where the 49ers have reached out again and asked the Raiders to join them. It really makes the most sense for the fans if they stay put in the bay area.

S.D. wrote:

tohostudios wrote:

The whole thing is just sleazy.

I agree.  I've been reading some of the articles about how far St. Louis (and the state) was willing to go to keep the Rams there and it was a huge waste of effort, Kroenke never had any intention of staying there.  I'm kind of surprised St. Louis even bothered after he purchased the old Hollywood Park Racetrack in Inglewood 2 years ago, the writing was clearly on the wall.  It's a sad state of affairs and I feel sorry for both the city and the fans, but at the same time you guys have the opportunity to get something really valuable with that half a billion in tax money, instead of giving it to the billionaire boys club.  

On a humorous note I was talking to a guy at work yesterday and when I asked him how he felt about the Rams coming back he said "F*ck 'em, I've hated them since they left."  When I responded that yeah, 1995 was a hard year losing two teams he said:  "1995?  I've hated them since they went down to Anaheim in 1980!"  

That bolded part is basically what this guy is saying:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/16/sports/football/st-louis-should-be-glad-it-lost-the-rams.html?_r=0

So, the plot thickens, but my guess is this was all planned in advance...

Two pieces of important news came out of San Diego this morning.

1.  The Chargers and Rams have reached an agreement to share the new stadium in Inglewood.  

2.  BUT...Spanos has decided to stay in San Diego for the 2016 season in hopes of getting a stadium deal done.  They have until January 2017 to decide whether they will go to LA or not.  The NFL has agreed to throw in $300 million (originally they were going to give $100 million).  

So here's my take on all these shenanigans.  

1.  The NFL has very cleverly figured out a way to keep using Los Angeles as a blackmail bargaining chip to get cities to build new football stadiums.  For 20 years they were able to do it because there was no team in Los Angeles...now they can still do the same thing because now there's 1 team in Los Angeles but they will have a stadium built for 2...

2.  The Chargers reaching a potential agreement but not moving right away does a couple things.  a) It screws the Raiders (again).  They are now stuck in limbo for another 12 months waiting to find out what SD is going to do.  If the Chargers had declined the Raiders could have started negotiations to return to the LA market immediately.   But they are pretty much going to have to sit around and wait until November to see whether San Diego agrees to help finance a new football stadium.  If a stadium deal gets done in San Diego then the Raiders are back on the LA clock...if not they are stuck in Oakland trying to get their own stadium built.  Which brings me to b) This is what the league wants.  They want San Diego to pay for a stadium so the team can stay there...they also want Oakland to pay for a stadium so the Raiders will stay there (neither the NFL or the city of Los Angeles really wants the Raiders back here).  ...and the NFL keeps their bargaining chip.  If both the Raiders and Chargers stay put there's a vacancy in the 2nd biggest market in the country...and then any other team in the league could threaten to relocate there if they are having stadium-envy.  

If both stadiums get built then the NFL will have accomplished their goals.  They have a team in Los Angeles and new stadiums to replace the two oldest remaining venues in the league.  

3.  This is just a guess, but I think Spanos might have been paying attention to social media and realized that NOBODY in Los Angeles wants the Chargers here.  They have no following in this city whatsoever, the Rams and Raiders both have history and they both have a passionate fanbase...the Chargers just happen to be another team within a 150 mile radius...but Angelenos don't give a shit.  The Chargers started in Los Angeles, but they were only here for 1 season prior to relocating to San Diego...55 years ago.  They need to stay put.  

4.  If Kroenke is paying attention to the local market he's going to eventually realize that the Raiders will give him a much more profitable partner for this market.  The Chargers would have to try and build a fanbase from scratch, all the Raiders would need to do is reignite interest.  

And for people that say Kroenke doesn't want to share the stadium or the market with anyone...that makes no sense.  Since he is part owner of the stadium and the complex surrounding it, another NFL partner in the stadium gives him 10 more games per season of revenue to get his piece of. **and I was also wrong on this originally, but I read an interview with Kroenke that changed my mind**

I think Kroenke has been working on this plan ever since he became the owner of the Rams; his sights were set on LA all along.  And he'll sure as hell share the stadium; he's said so himself because it brings in someone else to help shoulder costs. 

I still think Spanos and Kroenke should have just swapped team ownership.  Spanos would be hailed as a hero for bringing the Chargers to STL after the reviled Kroenke bolted.  Even keep the team names the same as each owner had.  Kroenke has so poisoned the well here about the "Rams" that Spanos could have brought in the Chargers as "The Chargers" and STL would have embraced them.

AND...in that scenario Kroenke could have shared his new stadium and the associated costs with a team LA actually might care about, Oakland.

Kroenke's statement about the Chargers decision:

"The Los Angeles Rams have reached an agreement with the San Diego Chargers to join us in the new Inglewood stadium if they choose to exercise their option to relocate in the next year. We look forward to partnering with the Chargers in Inglewood, but the decision is of course Dean's to make."

At least this whole thing gives me something to root for in the NFL besides the AZ Cardinals.  I want the Chargers and ESPECIALLY the Rams to suck big time.  Sadly, I think the Rams are on the cusp of becoming a competitive team, something they haven't really been here in 12 years.   But I'd love it if they threw up something like a 4-12 record next year.  We here in the STL would all be laughing our asses off.  Probably won't happen though unless they start Nick Foles again.

I don't think the move is going to magically improve the team, it's going to take a QB and some offensive line upgrades among other things. Yes, they probably are on their way back, but I don't think 2016 is going to be their year.

I do think the buzz of playing in a new city could give them a boost initially, but they still have 8 road games to play.

The players moving from St. Louis are going to need to get used to playing outdoors on a natural grass field as well....a field also used by USC on Saturdays, so probably not pristine condition for NFL Sunday games.

Now all we need is to move Indy back to Baltimore and the Cardinals back to St Louis and my 70s NFL poster would look complete

Yes! I've got things from when I was a kid that are way out of whack by today's NFL.

exact33 wrote:

Now all we need is to move Indy back to Baltimore and the Cardinals back to St Louis and my 70s NFL poster would look complete

You'd have to move Baltimore back to Cleveland in turn disbanding the current Browns, rename the Texans back to the Oilers and as well you'd need to get rid of Jacksonville and Carolina.

1960



Los Angeles Chargers
New York Titans
Dallas Texans
Boston Patriots

A local lawyer who advertises like crazy here bought a spot during the Superbowl to slam Kroenke.  Too bad it only aired here.