mardek1995 200 Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I'm surprised nobody made a thread about this, but, at this point, time is getting closer for at least 1 team to move. Either the Rams, the Chargers, or the Raiders will move to LA for the 2016 season, though there is a chance they might delay it another season. I think that the best option is if the NFL creates 2 expansion teams in LA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TVNewsLover 728 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 I'm surprised nobody made a thread about this, but, at this point, time is getting closer for at least 1 team to move. Either the Rams, the Chargers, or the Raiders will move to LA for the 2016 season, though there is a chance they might delay it another season. I think that the best option is if the NFL creates 2 expansion teams in LA. Or move the Jaguars there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardek1995 200 Posted December 20, 2015 Author Share Posted December 20, 2015 Or move the Jaguars there.I'd rather the Rams move back there or better yet, an expansion team or 2 in LA as I've just said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Payton39 25 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 I'm a San Diegan who admittedly does not follow the NFL. But this situation is very interesting to me. The Chargers have never, in my mind, evidenced wanting to be here, so I'll be happy if/when they go. I do like soccer, but I'm not sure we could handle MLS. Maybe we could. People are talking about it. Maybe NASL (or if divisional status flips, then USL). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardek1995 200 Posted December 20, 2015 Author Share Posted December 20, 2015 I'm a San Diegan who admittedly does not follow the NFL. But this situation is very interesting to me. The Chargers have never, in my mind, evidenced wanting to be here, so I'll be happy if/when they go.Most Charger fans wouldn't be happy to see them leave San Diego. In fact, neither do Rams or Raiders fans if either/both of their teams left their cities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eat News 4738 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 Most Charger fans wouldn't be happy to see them leave San Diego. In fact, neither do Rams or Raiders fans if either/both of their teams left their cities And take that idiot Mark Fabiani with them....upside down and nude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A3N 996 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 And take that idiot Mark Fabiani with them....upside down and nude. Can't come soon enough. Spanos is a chickensh*t owner that doesn't have the balls to even speak to the people of San Diego, so he has his little troll sidekick Fabiani do the talking for him. Spanos and Fabiani have poisoned their chances of getting things done in San Diego due to their rhetoric and the lousy way they run their franchise. Unfortunately the media keeps giving Fabiani air time, so that allows him the opportunity to keep pissing on San Diegans and Charger fans as a whole. The City of San Diego is not free from criticism either, their inaction all these years is one of the reasons we're in this mess in the first place. If Spanos thinks that LA will embrace, then he is delusional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardek1995 200 Posted December 20, 2015 Author Share Posted December 20, 2015 I think the Rams should be the team go back to LA. Either by themselves, with the Raiders, or with the Chargers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TVNewsLover 728 Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 All three teams should stay put and fix their current situations. I think the outcome that would make the most sense would be for Kroenke and Khan to swap franchises, and for Kroenke to pay a relocation fee and move the Jaguars from Jacksonville to Los Angeles, with some of that money going towards the building of new stadiums in St. Louis, San Diego, and Oakland. Solves a lot of problems: 1. Khan gets what he originally wanted, the Rams in St. Louis. 2. St. Louis, San Diego, and Oakland get new stadiums and get to keep their teams. 3. Kroenke goes to LA. 4. Los Angeles gets a fresh start with a team that's never been there before. 5. The Inglewood stadium is built, which I think is the better plan and has greater future potential. 6. The NFL rights a wrong they committed 20 years ago, giving Jacksonville an expansion team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennTV1983 748 Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 All three teams should stay put and fix their current situations. I think the outcome that would make the most sense would be for Kroenke and Khan to swap franchises, and for Kroenke to pay a relocation fee and move the Jaguars from Jacksonville to Los Angeles, with some of that money going towards the building of new stadiums in St. Louis, San Diego, and Oakland. Solves a lot of problems: 1. Khan gets what he originally wanted, the Rams in St. Louis. 2. St. Louis, San Diego, and Oakland get new stadiums and get to keep their teams. 3. Kroenke goes to LA. 4. Los Angeles gets a fresh start with a team that's never been there before. 5. The Inglewood stadium is built, which I think is the better plan and has greater future potential. 6. The NFL rights a wrong they committed 20 years ago, giving Jacksonville an expansion team. Under that scenario, you would also have to do a division realignment in the AFC, with the Kansas City Chiefs likely being moved to the AFC South as a result since they're the furthest east of all of the teams in the AFC West (and are in closer proximity to the Texans/Colts/Titans than they are the Broncos/Raiders/Chargers). I think the Raiders are going to get a new stadium one way or another, but it may not necessarily be in Oakland (considering Golden State is working on building a new arena in San Francisco, and the A's want to build a new ballpark in Santa Clara). A move back to LA is possible if all else fails, though I still think they want to stay in the Bay Area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24994J 5279 Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 No matter what, I have a feeling the wrong team(s) will make the move. I think the Rams SHOULD move, but they're seemingly the least likely. Those poor Oakland fans can't catch a break. The team begins to show promise, the fans can have hope, so let's move'em to LA. I'd rather they stay put. San Diego...I'm indifferent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardek1995 200 Posted December 22, 2015 Author Share Posted December 22, 2015 No matter what, I have a feeling the wrong team(s) will make the move. I think the Rams SHOULD move, but they're seemingly the least likely. Those poor Oakland fans can't catch a break. The team begins to show promise, the fans can have hope, so let's move'em to LA. I'd rather they stay put. San Diego...I'm indifferent. Why the indifference to the Chargers moving? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24994J 5279 Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 I just have no opinion on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TVNewsLover 728 Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 Under that scenario, you would also have to do a division realignment in the AFC, with the Kansas City Chiefs likely being moved to the AFC South as a result since they're the furthest east of all of the teams in the AFC West (and are in closer proximity to the Texans/Colts/Titans than they are the Broncos/Raiders/Chargers). I think the Raiders are going to get a new stadium one way or another, but it may not necessarily be in Oakland (considering Golden State is working on building a new arena in San Francisco, and the A's want to build a new ballpark in Santa Clara). A move back to LA is possible if all else fails, though I still think they want to stay in the Bay Area. I forgot about the realignment part. I think what would make most sense is to leave the AFC West as is. The "Los Angeles Jaguars" would move from the AFC South to the more appropriate NFC West. That would then bump the St. Louis Rams out of the NFC West and into the NFC South. And then I would move the Carolina Panthers from the NFC South to the AFC South. Why Carolina? It's nice to have geographical balance among the two conferences, and it's two closest neighbors mileagewise are Atlanta and Washington, both NFC teams. MLB has done a good job with the geographic balance in having one AL and one NL team in each area (Houston and Arizona should be switched for it to be perfect). The A's actually want to move to San Jose. The 49ers are in Santa Clara. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardek1995 200 Posted December 22, 2015 Author Share Posted December 22, 2015 As I repeatedly said, I still think that the NFL should create expansion teams, one for each division, NFC West and AFC West for example, will have teams in LA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24994J 5279 Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 A 40-TEAM LEAGUE??? I both love and despise that idea. 4 more games per weekend would be kinda cool (Monday night could become a double-header), and they'd have to add like 2 more weeks to the season (which might happen with 32, anyway), BUT the quality of players and officials would go in the crapper. (I claim a second team for Chicago, right now.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennTV1983 748 Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 The A's actually want to move to San Jose. The 49ers are in Santa Clara. Well, Freemont was what I meant to say, but the A's had intended to move to Santa Clara County at one point before opting to stay where they are. The city of San Jose tried to lure the A's, but they got stopped from doing so recently by the U.S. Supreme Court (keep in mind, MLB is the only major league sport protected from federal antitrust laws). As I repeatedly said, I still think that the NFL should create expansion teams, one for each division, NFC West and AFC West for example, will have teams in LA Having 32 teams is enough as it is both from a financial and structural standpoint. Even if the NFL opted to have just 36, that would still be too much (and cost the league billions more) to a point that they would have to consider retracting and disbanding teams down the road (hence why the NBA and NHL respectively have been hesitant in adding new teams). I would much rather have some kind of "farm league" system in place to complement the existing NFL teams, but of all of the attempts done to do so, none have been successful in the long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio B 20 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 I always enjoy when people throw out the Jaguars as a team that's primed to move, when they really haven't been for a decade or so. They haven't had a blackout since 2009 (and the rules have been suspended for at least 2015) and ever since they tarped off some seats (after building the place too big thanks to the World's Largest Cocktail Party), they do reasonably well for attendance considering they haven't been good for several years on end now. They put some money into the stadium too. The problem the NFL has now is that none of the three teams are probably going to be on the move. Nobody wants to move to LA more than Stan Kroenke and while the city has done the most to try to get a stadium deal done, you won't have too many people shedding tears with the Rams moving. St. Louis is basically done as an NFL market. Oakland has the most fan support trying to keep the Raiders there of these three teams but you're never getting another stadium built in that area, and they've basically now missed out on Santa Clara with the 49ers. San Diego isn't building a stadium anytime soon, the LA talk has soiled the fanbase (which was never that huge to begin with) and just like St. Louis, it isn't a market for the NFL to fight hard for. There are going to be two team in LA at some point and if you put a gun to my head, I think it will be both the Rams and Chargers. The next question is then what will happen to Oakland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nelson R. 560 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 I forgot about the realignment part. I think what would make most sense is to leave the AFC West as is. The "Los Angeles Jaguars" would move from the AFC South to the more appropriate NFC West. That would then bump the St. Louis Rams out of the NFC West and into the NFC South. And then I would move the Carolina Panthers from the NFC South to the AFC South. Why Carolina? It's nice to have geographical balance among the two conferences, and it's two closest neighbors mileagewise are Atlanta and Washington, both NFC teams. MLB has done a good job with the geographic balance in having one AL and one NL team in each area (Houston and Arizona should be switched for it to be perfect). The A's actually want to move to San Jose. The 49ers are in Santa Clara. As for the Panthers moving to the AFC, I think Fox would have something to say about that seeing is the network just bought WJZY 3 years ago. They would not want to lose an NFC market they own. The Saints would have to be the ones to move to the AFC, New Orleans is the only non Fox O&O market in the NFC South. Unless of course Fox turned right around and sold WJZY/WMYT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TVNewsLover 728 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 As for the Panthers moving to the AFC, I think Fox would have something to say about that seeing is the network just bought WJZY 3 years ago. They would not want to lose an NFC market they own. The Saints would have to be the ones to move to the AFC, New Orleans is the only non Fox O&O market in the NFC South. Unless of course Fox turned right around and sold WJZY/WMYT. Which makes Fox's strategy sound even stupider to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevieboy247 42 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Since my favorite team was originally the Rams (right before they moved for St. Louis in '95), I'm hoping they'll be one of the teams moving to L.A. However, if it happens to be just the Raiders and/or the Chargers, then I'll have absolutely no problem with that at all. We'll just have to wait and see. And as far as what mardek1995 said about expansion, that's pretty much out of the picture. There's just no way L.A. will get a team via expansion. That's what I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardek1995 200 Posted December 29, 2015 Author Share Posted December 29, 2015 Which makes Fox's strategy sound even stupider to me. Or they could just buy partial stakes. Or, even better, the Cowboys could become an AFC South team (and by extension, its home games would be broadcast by CBS 11 instead of Fox 4) in exchange for either the Colts (WXIN instead of WTTV, though both are owned by Tribune) or the Texans (Fox 26 instead of KHOU) becoming an NFC East team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Action Newsroom 1151 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 This just in from overnight: The Rams, Chargers AND Raiders have filed for relocation starting next season http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Chargers-Raiders-Rams-NFL-LA-Relocation-364198011.html?cid=sm_fb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TVNewsLover 728 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 This just in from overnight: The Rams, Chargers AND Raiders have filed for relocation starting next season http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Chargers-Raiders-Rams-NFL-LA-Relocation-364198011.html?cid=sm_fb No one saw that one coming ... not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Former Member 207 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Or they could just buy partial stakes. Or, even better, the Cowboys could become an AFC South team (and by extension, its home games would be broadcast by CBS 11 instead of Fox 4) in exchange for either the Colts (WXIN instead of WTTV, though both are owned by Tribune) or the Texans (Fox 26 instead of KHOU) becoming an NFC East team As long as Jerry Jones owns the Cowboys, they'll always be in the same division with the Giants, Eagles, and Washington. Their divisional rivalries, especially with Washington, are much too valuable to them and the NFL as a whole, plus I don't think it was much of a coincidence that the NFC East comprises of four of the top ten largest TV markets in the nation. Besides, if geography mattered to the NFL, the Cowboys would at least play in the NFC South (especially given that New Orleans, Atlanta, and Tampa are all geographically closer to Dallas), or the NFC West or Central under the old pre-2002 conference/divisional alignments. Another bit of a history lesson...the Colts were part of the old NFL prior to the merger to the American Football League, in which they, the Browns and Steelers were paid $3 million each to join the newly-christened AFC. As far as the Texans, I think CBS would throw a fit losing a Top Ten market to the Fox and the NFC--you lose Houston, then there's a big drop-off in market size between Boston (the third-biggest AFC market, behind New York City and Oakland/San Francisco) and Miami (market #16)--all of the other markets in between those two (and Houston) are NFC markets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.