Posted on 01/04/2016 8:08:47 PM PST by Perdogg
The Chargers made it official Monday night.
The AFC West franchise wants out of San Diego, its home since 1961.
The Chargers, nearly seven months after breaking off negotiations with San Diego city and county officials, formally submitted relocation documents with the NFL on Monday, the first day of the league’s window for franchises to apply to move.
The Rams and Raiders also applied for relocation Monday night, setting up a three-way race for no more than two spots in the Los Angeles-Orange County market that will likely be decided by a vote of the league’s owners next week in Houston.
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
It’s weird that the three teams that have applied for relocation to Los Angeles all played there previously. I guess they forgot why they left.
I listen to L.A. radio (still better than anywhere else in this country or Canada).
They are already starting the “name our new team(s)” discussions.
I heard “The L.A. Opportunities” floated as a possibility :)
I remember back in the day when both Jack and Jim Youngblood played for the Rams. One of them (IIRC) was complaining loudly about "our damn white-wine drinking fans."
Los Angeles fans may be the most devastating in all of sports because if you don't win, we don't care!
The opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference.
The Rams left because of it. The Raiders left because of it. It will take very little time for the new team(s) to realize it as well.
(note: as far as sports goes, I am always an L.A. fan as I was born, raised and lived there until a few years ago).
I haven’t heard from the Cardinals about what they think of this idea, either. I would bet they don’t want to leave the NFC.
LOL! Good one!
1. A 2003 proposal to redevelop the Qualcomm site had drawings and a conceptual $400M financing outline: Chargers to pay half for free land.
2. An offer from National City for the team to develop 52 acres controlled by the Port and railroad that collapsed with no formal team plan.
3. A study of land in Chula Vista paid for by the Chargers that found two possible stadium sites but involved no formal team financing plan.
4. Discussion of building a stadium and office space in Oceanside, an idea that doesn’t pencil out and thus never includes a financing plan.
5. A suggestion from a national developer to build an Oceanside stadium and shopping center, all together now, with no team financing plan.
6. The possibility of buying a bunch of land in Escondido in 2009 to cobble together a stadium site, which quickly falls apart with no plan.
7. A plan hatched in 2009 to transform several East Village sites, including an operating busyard, into a stadium built with team/NFL $400M.
8. The 10th Avenue Marine Terminal site plan pushed most publicly by then-U-T ownership in 2012 without support from city or team officials.
9. Public officials’ new Mission Valley idea, which the team met with opposition, refusing to negotiate let alone consider a financing plan.
If two teams move to LA then there should be a 25,000 seat stadium they can use so it looks like a big crowd sellout. The NFL has capped its organic growth and has real problems with fan support in Jacksonville, Tampa Bay, and other sites. That is why they look lustfully at London, Mexico City, Tokyo etc but I don’t see that ever working. Maybe the NFL needs to downsize instead of upsize. As for Cleveland, Art Modell gave them a really raw deal, in part to settle his gambling debts as I have heard. Same with the old Baltimore Colts of Unitas fame. The effeminate media including the networks and ESPN are also degrading the NFL product. Many would turn it into touch football if they could.
The Chargers played there too, but only for the first season of their existence (1960), as the Los Angeles Chargers. The Rams effectively drove them out, to San Diego.
The Oakland Raides moved to Los Angeles, then back to Oakland. Now they want to move back to Los Angeles?
And the Rams— why did you leave LA in the first place? And now you want to go back?
The franchise trade of teh Los Angeles Rams for the Baltimore Colts arguably cost both cities their teams.
This may be an exception, since all three came from there.
The Mets, when they started, put the Giants’ script NY on a hat of Dodger blue and put pinstripes on the home uniform — claiming, “well, those are the colors of the City of New York.”
They also copied the Cincinnati Reds’ mascot. Both Mr. Red and Mr. Met are big baseball heads.
St. Louis has to be vacated first. Then they might be able to go there.
I understand the Jags have also had talks with San Diego.
They could do like the Bills, who play a game a year in Toronto, and play a game or two (one preseason, one season?) in San Diego. At least for a few years.
The White Sox did a similar thing for Milwaukee when it was out of baseball, playing each opponent in County Stadium once per season.
You’d still get them on TV, anyway
They should never have been allowed to leave. Art Modell argued against expansion to Baltimore, then cut off stadium negotiations with Cleveland. Then he got a state-built, rent-free stadium from the people of Maryland.
to make it worse, when the Ravens arrived, Orioles owner Peter Angelos (a piece of human debris if there ever was one) invoked the "parity clause" in the Orioles lease at Camden Yards to get out of paying any more rent to the state.
I guess this was Parris Glendening's gift to Baltimore for stealing enough votes to get him elected.
The Chargers also originated in LA.
Actually, the Rams are originally from Cleveland — but that was a LONG time ago! (Just as the Redskins are originally from Boston.)
Just let them keep their names. They all have prior history in LA. It’s not the Oilers moving to Tennessee or the Browns moving to Baltimore. (BTW, the Orioles are the old St. Louis Browns. if you value your team, do NOT name it the Browns or Baltimore will steal it.) It’s not the Cardinals leaving St. Louis for Arizona. It’s three teams that have been there before with their current team names.
The AFC West is one of the divisions that continues long-standing rivalries, going back to before the merger. (The others are the NFC East and the NFC North.) They need to leave those divisions alone.
Do away completely with a place location for teams. In other words, instead of San Diego Chargers and New England Patriots, just call the teams "Chargers" and "Patriots."
That way, people can root for their favorite teams regardless of location. There may be be Packers fans in Denver and Broncos fans in Green Bay, for instance.
Just have the teams play the stadiums randomly. For example, MetLife Stadium in New Jersey could host "Cardinals vs Vikings" one week and then "Falcons vs Buccaneers" another game. The Jets and Giants might actually never play one game in New Jersey because technically they are not associated with a location anymore.
In this manner, people will become fans of multiple teams and they will go watch games in their area regardless of what teams are playing.
I think this is brilliant. And it's all my idea.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.