Who will be in Los Angeles?

#1
VolsSportsFan

VolsSportsFan

Where are the turtles?
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
72,982
Likes
46,033
#1
Right now we got the Chargers, Raiders, and Rams all who have owners with their sights on the LA market.

The Rams' owner obviously wants to be there and has the land to build a stadium for just the Rams. The Chargers and Raiders appear to almost be a package deal, as they will both go in on one stadium and will share it. It appears if one of them doesn't go, neither will.

As far as their current homes, St. Louis appears to be the only one with a serious stadium proposal that appears to have the necessary funding. San Diego just sent in a proposal that's the first serious attempt in months but it is contingent on a public vote. Oakland has basically sent in a picture of the mayor pulling out empty pockets.

The NFL definitely seems to want a team in LA, so this appears to be a real possibility for the first time in 20+ years. So I think we'll definitely have one of them go. The other issue though is the NFL does seem to frown on teams leaving markets that are actively working to get a stadium in place, so the fact that St. Louis is serious about a new stadium works in their favor.

My guess is either both the Chargers and Raiders will go and the Rams will stay in St. Louis, or both of those teams will stay and the Rams will move. I don't think all 3 teams will go, and I don't think the Chargers or Raiders can go without the other. What will really be interesting is if St. Louis' proposal is accepted AND San Diego comes up with an acceptable proposal for the Chargers. That would leave the Raiders almost SOL because Oakland has basically said they got nothing for them and I don't think the Raiders can or will go to LA without a second team.
 
#3
#3
Boston Vol said:
Hopefully just the Rams.
Click to expand...

I definitely think the Rams are the best choice; but I sort of feel for St. Louis if they come up with the demands of the ownership and are still spurned.

I almost wonder if the NFL will work out some Cleveland type deal where they lose the Rams but the NFL basically promises them an expansion team in the future.

Also, it should be a requirement if the Rams go back that they have to go back to their classic royal blue and yellow look.
 
#5
#5
Raiders and Chargers. St Louis has a more concrete stadium proposal in place, and the NFL seems to value the St Louis market a bit more than San Diego and Oakland.

If he misses out on LA, Kroenke will immediately start pushing for the Rams to move to London.
 
#6
#6
I think the Raiders will be willing to go even if they have to go alone. Oakland isn't helping at all with a new stadium for the Raiders or the A's, and fwiw, the two teams aren't even working well together for each to stay in Oakland.

As mentioned, the NFL is cooperative with cities trying to work out stadium issues and St Louis is abiding by that. I honestly don't know what will happen to the Chargers. Would be a shame imo if San Diego lets them bolt (pun wasn't intended, but I liked it when I proofread this).
 
#7
#7
I would say the Chargers -- The Raiders and Rams had their chance and left
 
#8
#8
508mikey said:
I would say the Chargers -- The Raiders and Rams had their chance and left
Click to expand...

I'm failing to see how that matters now? The Raiders have exhausted efforts to stay in Oakland and get out of the dump known as O.Co with minimal assistance from the city of Oakland. And San Fran is making it difficult to find anywhere just outside of Oakland that isn't in the middle of nowhere.
 
#9
#9
volfanbill said:
I'm failing to see how that matters now? The Raiders have exhausted efforts to stay in Oakland and get out of the dump known as O.Co with minimal assistance from the city of Oakland. And San Fran is making it difficult to find anywhere just outside of Oakland that isn't in the middle of nowhere.
Click to expand...

I can see with different owners but LA fans didnt support them or they would never have left in the first place -- NFL owners should consider or even poll LA fans and ask which of the 3 they would actually support
 
#10
#10
I think a more interesting question is where will the team(s) relocate after the LA project fails again.
 
#11
#11
508mikey said:
I would say the Chargers -- The Raiders and Rams had their chance and left
Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, the Chargers called LA home once upon a time as well.

I think the Raiders would make the most sense. They already have a deep connection to the city and are easily the most popular of the 3 among Angelenos.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#16
#16
volfanbill said:
I think the Raiders will be willing to go even if they have to go alone. Oakland isn't helping at all with a new stadium for the Raiders or the A's, and fwiw, the two teams aren't even working well together for each to stay in Oakland.

As mentioned, the NFL is cooperative with cities trying to work out stadium issues and St Louis is abiding by that. I honestly don't know what will happen to the Chargers. Would be a shame imo if San Diego lets them bolt (pun wasn't intended, but I liked it when I proofread this).
Click to expand...

The only problem with Raiders going alone is I don't know if they can (or are willing to). They were going in with the Chargers because they split their side of the cost. If no Chargers then they are left holding the entire bill.

I can see wanting to get out. The A's apparently want out too but are locked in another decade.
 
#18
#18
Oakland presented ten or so possible sites for the A's to relocate to. Granted, all the sites were rather crappy, but from what I've seen, the Raiders were not given such options. The plan apparently is that the A's move and hope the Raiders would stay in O. Co. Mark Davis has been rather demanding in a totally new stadium. Seems like the city of Oakland knows they are gone.

There was talk of the Raiders building a new stadium where O. Co sits, but I haven't heard any new talk of that since early summer.
 
Last edited:
#19
#19
Whoever goes, will they stay? Raiders have moved between LA and Oakland more than once!
 
#21
#21
Like others have said, I think the Chargers and Raiders move and the Rams don't.

This is further down the line, but if that happens, one of the two teams would almost certainly move to the NFC. (I'd think the Chargers.) So who comes back the other way? Seattle used to play in the AFC West, but they have 3 Super Bowl appearances as an NFC team now. Arizona? St. Louis? The possibility of these new division rivalries is intriguing to me.
 
#23
#23
bamawriter said:
Raiders and Chargers. St Louis has a more concrete stadium proposal in place, and the NFL seems to value the St Louis market a bit more than San Diego and Oakland.

If he misses out on LA, Kroenke will immediately start pushing for the Rams to move to London.
Click to expand...

London is Jacksonville's :p.
 
#25
#25
VKAman said:
Like others have said, I think the Chargers and Raiders move and the Rams don't.

This is further down the line, but if that happens, one of the two teams would almost certainly move to the NFC. (I'd think the Chargers.) So who comes back the other way? Seattle used to play in the AFC West, but they have 3 Super Bowl appearances as an NFC team now. Arizona? St. Louis? The possibility of these new division rivalries is intriguing to me.
Click to expand...

Why would one move to the NFC? The Chargers-Broncos-Chiefs-Raiders is clearly one of those old AFL combinations the NFL has tried to keep together since the merger.


The only divisional realignment would be if someone much further east - like Jacksonville - had moved to LA...then likely the Rams would have just been moved into the AFC South.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top