Los Angeles is gearing up for the NFL
- Thread starter derringer007
- Start date
I think the talent in the NFL is diluted enough myself, you think going to 34 teams is good for the quality of product in the NFL?? That is 106 more players on active rosters than we have right now.....and IMO, that is a lot! For that reason alone I would hope they do not expand past 32 teams, would just water down the product.
Good point Miller but the samw was said before the last expansion as well. Did it water the product down in a noticable way then?
yeah, I think it did from a quality standpoint. Don't get me wrong, it's still a great product, but there is no doubt there is a thinner talent base now than there was before expansion to 32 teams. There just comes a point where enough is enough....I think they are there at 32.
Not to mention if the owner get there way and go to 18 games; one of the concessions I expect to see is a couple more roster spots. So you could already be seeing an expanding of the active rosters for all 32 teams, adding more would compound the issue.
Not to mention if the owner get there way and go to 18 games; one of the concessions I expect to see is a couple more roster spots. So you could already be seeing an expanding of the active rosters for all 32 teams, adding more would compound the issue.
Cerberus
In Dog We Trust
Some good points there yet i'd still rather see an expansion than some team being moved out of current city. I dont really think talent has thinned out. The NFL can easily handle 2 more teams. They will just need to adjust to economic times like the fan base has had to do and forget about such stupidly insane salaries. Drop ticket prices and offer free parking a couple times a year. Give out free perks that will attract the public. And for gods sake stop charging 7$ for 12oz of warm flat beer. If they do decide to "strike" next season over money, i hope they fall flat on their faces and feel the economic crunch real people have felt. I for one will not support the nfl if they do strike and would be along time before i even gave enough care to catch any news about it. Alot of college ball and hockey to suffice my sports bone.
Kingdome
FOOTBALL!
Los Angeles was a great NFL city. They had the second most season tickets/attendance of any NFL city. The issue in LA is having to privately fund your own stadium. The Raiders and Rams left because of sweetheart stadium deals, not lack of fan support.
Kingdome
FOOTBALL!
Los Angeles Raiders, round 2
Kingdome
FOOTBALL!
Autzen Stadium is a death trap? They dug that sucker out of a giant pile of dirt.
Kingdome
FOOTBALL!
That just happened to Seattle with our NBA team. Where was the national outcry? There was none. ESPN, other fans, etc. are not looking out for the fans in these situations. ESPN, Fox Sports, TSN, etc. should have made a big deal about the Sonics being stolen away by a bunch of thieving liars from OKC, but they didn't.
Kingdome
FOOTBALL!
OKC? No way. How about some real cities that are twice as big like Portland, San Antonio, or Salt Lake City before that thieving little crap hole. There has been a quiet effort to bring the NFL to Portland. The biggest stumbling block is lack of stadium, however the Oregon legislature has come up with some creative financing schemes in the past in an effort to attract the Expos when they were moving.
Cerberus
In Dog We Trust
OKC i just picked out of the blue. Not sure as i'm not a huge basketball fan, but it seems OKC is really supporting their team there. There are alot of cities that can come up with a good arguement to have an NFL team. The question now is, besides LA, who else gets the nod. Alot of these markets have arena football instead and might make an interesting bid for an NFL team. Las Vegas maybe?
RZR
Sun-kissed & restless
Before the NFL can decide which team is going to enjoy LA's weather, first we have to settle the "who's going to build the field of dreams and where is he going to plant his corn field" questions.
As in sports, there are two competing "teams" trying to build NFL stadiums in Southern California. The newest proposal announced by Anschutz Entertainment Group President and CEO Tim Leiweke calls for spending about $1.35 billion for a 64,000-72,000-seat stadium in downtown Los Angeles. The previous proposal announced three years ago is from Majestic Realty Co. CEO billionaire Ed Roski Jr. for an $800 million 75,000-seat stadium in the hills of Industry, near Walnut and Diamond Bar.
We've compared the two in order to determine which proposal comes out on top. Using almost all criteria, Roski's stadium is a superior choice. Here's why:
Design. Roski's stadium is cheaper to build because of an innovative design concept. The Industry stadium will be carved into the hills and require less steel - that will reduce construction cost. Roski's stadium will be greener than AEG's; it'll use less energy. It would be the NFL's first LEED-certified green stadium. Advantage: Roski.
Site/size. Roski's has clearance for a 2.7-million-square-foot stadium on 600 acres. That's huge. It will be more than just a place to play football games. It will be surrounded by two parking lots - ample room for what NFL fans call "tailgating" activities - as well as basketball and volleyball courts and wave pools for a total "fan experience." Those in the Rowland Unified School District were excited two years ago about a sports medicine facility that students could use for classes. AEG, on the other hand, wants to build the stadium where the Los Angeles Convention Center's West Hall exists; they have only 15 acres. The fan experience will come from fans "tailgating" at nearby private garages, much like Ford Field in Detroit. It will be near bars and restaurants at LA Live. Advantage: Roski.
Location. When Ed Roski spoke to our editorial board, he said he had a hard time convincing the NFL owners that "L.A." doesn't just mean beaches and Rodeo Drive.
In fact, using charts and slides, he told them that most of the 16 million people in Southern California, referred to as "L.A." by people in New York, live in Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and eastern Los Angeles County. So it makes more sense to build a stadium within an hour or less driving distance from the people's homes than in downtown L.A. or the Westside.
In fact, there are stadiums east of L.A. that do quite well: Angel Stadium, Honda Center, Home Depot Center. In short "L.A." is a big place - more spread out than any other megalopolis. It can fill a stadium located 25 miles east of the downtown skyscrapers. Also, we would ask, Would you rather drive into downtown L.A. or drive to Industry to see a game? Advantage: Roski.
Landing a team. Each developer needs a team. No team has committed to moving to Southern California. The advantage may go to AEG which has L.A. clout on its side, including Lakers legend Magic Johnson. But this is academic until a team commits. Advantage: Neither.
Timing. Clearly, Roski has the jump on his former partners, Leiweke and Anschutz. He has a completed, approved Environmental Impact Report. Industry already has approval to sell $500 million in bonds, of which, $160 million will be spent on improving nearby roadways, offramps, etc.
He has signed deals with Diamond Bar and Walnut to improve infrastructure. And even has approval from the Legislature that blocks all other lawsuits. AEG is at least a year or two away from clearing these hurdles.
Point after: While we favor the Industry stadium, there's no guarantee either will materialize. No cute Hollywood ending about "building it and they will come" works this time. This is all about business and a very fickle NFL with its own internal labor disputes to solve, first. Until then, may the best plan win.
Original Article: PasadenaStarNews.com
As in sports, there are two competing "teams" trying to build NFL stadiums in Southern California. The newest proposal announced by Anschutz Entertainment Group President and CEO Tim Leiweke calls for spending about $1.35 billion for a 64,000-72,000-seat stadium in downtown Los Angeles. The previous proposal announced three years ago is from Majestic Realty Co. CEO billionaire Ed Roski Jr. for an $800 million 75,000-seat stadium in the hills of Industry, near Walnut and Diamond Bar.
We've compared the two in order to determine which proposal comes out on top. Using almost all criteria, Roski's stadium is a superior choice. Here's why:
Design. Roski's stadium is cheaper to build because of an innovative design concept. The Industry stadium will be carved into the hills and require less steel - that will reduce construction cost. Roski's stadium will be greener than AEG's; it'll use less energy. It would be the NFL's first LEED-certified green stadium. Advantage: Roski.
Site/size. Roski's has clearance for a 2.7-million-square-foot stadium on 600 acres. That's huge. It will be more than just a place to play football games. It will be surrounded by two parking lots - ample room for what NFL fans call "tailgating" activities - as well as basketball and volleyball courts and wave pools for a total "fan experience." Those in the Rowland Unified School District were excited two years ago about a sports medicine facility that students could use for classes. AEG, on the other hand, wants to build the stadium where the Los Angeles Convention Center's West Hall exists; they have only 15 acres. The fan experience will come from fans "tailgating" at nearby private garages, much like Ford Field in Detroit. It will be near bars and restaurants at LA Live. Advantage: Roski.
Location. When Ed Roski spoke to our editorial board, he said he had a hard time convincing the NFL owners that "L.A." doesn't just mean beaches and Rodeo Drive.
In fact, using charts and slides, he told them that most of the 16 million people in Southern California, referred to as "L.A." by people in New York, live in Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and eastern Los Angeles County. So it makes more sense to build a stadium within an hour or less driving distance from the people's homes than in downtown L.A. or the Westside.
In fact, there are stadiums east of L.A. that do quite well: Angel Stadium, Honda Center, Home Depot Center. In short "L.A." is a big place - more spread out than any other megalopolis. It can fill a stadium located 25 miles east of the downtown skyscrapers. Also, we would ask, Would you rather drive into downtown L.A. or drive to Industry to see a game? Advantage: Roski.
Landing a team. Each developer needs a team. No team has committed to moving to Southern California. The advantage may go to AEG which has L.A. clout on its side, including Lakers legend Magic Johnson. But this is academic until a team commits. Advantage: Neither.
Timing. Clearly, Roski has the jump on his former partners, Leiweke and Anschutz. He has a completed, approved Environmental Impact Report. Industry already has approval to sell $500 million in bonds, of which, $160 million will be spent on improving nearby roadways, offramps, etc.
He has signed deals with Diamond Bar and Walnut to improve infrastructure. And even has approval from the Legislature that blocks all other lawsuits. AEG is at least a year or two away from clearing these hurdles.
Point after: While we favor the Industry stadium, there's no guarantee either will materialize. No cute Hollywood ending about "building it and they will come" works this time. This is all about business and a very fickle NFL with its own internal labor disputes to solve, first. Until then, may the best plan win.
Original Article: PasadenaStarNews.com
Kingdome
FOOTBALL!
Some potential candidates would be:
San Antonio - was a possible relocation site for the Saints. Nearby Austin is another large, unsaturated pro-sports market.
Portland - A group led by auto giant Scott Thomasen has quietly coveted the NFL for awhile. Portland is another un-saturated pro-sports market.
Salt Lake City - rapidly growing with a diverse economy, Salt Lake City will land another major sports franchise in the future. The potential con with NFL is devout mormons will be unable to attend Sunday games.
Las Vegas - Large enough, but most of its population has relocated there from elsewhere, so there isn't as much local loyalty there. Also mediocre corporate base dominated by the gaming industry.
Louisville/Memphis/Birmingham/Oklahoma City - Any of these smaller cities could support NFL if they can build a stadium and get local corporate support behind the sucker. NFL will kill NBA in Memphis and OKC.
Columbus - Large enough, good corporate base, unsaturated, but loyalty to other teams may hurt a prospective NFL team there.
Sacramento - Large enough, but they are about to lose the Kings. Would take a totally private effort. Would also be helped if the Raiders moved back to LA leaving the huge NorCal market with just one NFL team.
Orlando - Large enough, but too close to Tampa Bay. Would also poach away potential Jaguars fans.
Hartford - Almost landed the Patriots. Large enough, by loyalty to the Patriots and NY area teams would hurt the prospective team. Would instantly become ESPN darling, a mega con against Hartford in my book.
NFL is by far the easiest of the Big 4 to sustain. Because of the small amount of games, primarily on weekends, a regional concept could work (sort of like New England, but on a smaller scale). For example placing a team in Williamsburg, VA which is in between Richmond and Norfolk/Hampton Roads.
Other than the Oakland Raiders, there are no real failing NFL markets. The NFL could domestically expand to 40 and be viable.
Well done King.
Kingdome
FOOTBALL!
Even with UT, Austin is mighty tempting. As far as I know, it is still growing while much of the rest of the country stagnates.
I could see two strategies for NFL in San Antonio:
- Get the city to chip in on a Final 4 / Super Bowl dome downtown.
- build a private open air stadium NE of town to take advantage of cheaper land and to be closer to the Austin market.
cctekguy
Staff member
I don't care who goes to LA as long as they change the team name.
There are no Vikings in California history just as there are no Cardinals in Arizona. Rams in St.Louis are scarce and Indy is not especially known for horse breeding.
I hate having to reprogram my brain to accommodate stupid name changes.
There are no Vikings in California history just as there are no Cardinals in Arizona. Rams in St.Louis are scarce and Indy is not especially known for horse breeding.
I hate having to reprogram my brain to accommodate stupid name changes.
Twins got a new stadium and its great. The Vikes have had stadium deals in place, only to have local politicians drop the ball. They had a great deal in place to build a stadium, shopping mall, and a hotel or 2 only to have local sewer and water people refuse to back it. The Vikes could share the new stadium at the University of Minnesota campus and do really well. This would be temporary, until the politicians see how much downtown Minneapolis will do because of Target Field.