Keep up with the Probably not much effect on USC. But a new stadium for 2 NFL teams and USC would sure be cost efficient.
Pure speculation from the Pioneer Press:
"Latest Los Angeles stadium whispering is that there could be two NFL teams relocating to share a stadium. If just one stadium is built, the San Diego Chargers, Jacksonville Jaguars, Oakland Raiders and Vikings are considered contenders for relocation."
It's a tough situation in LA: (2) teams would make the stadium issue easier since you now have 16 home games versus only 8. So from a budget standpoint, it makes sense.
But if you're bringing in a new team, you want the focus to be on that one team in order to make it a success. Not to mention you need to excise the Raiders demons/fans as they still have a huge chunk of the marketshare in Los Angeles.
With that in mind, the best fit's in LA would be:
1) Raiders
2) Chargers
3) Jacksonville: need to move somewhere...should have been in Orlando to start with
4) Minnesota: Twins just got a new stadium...so did U of Minnesota...is there money for a 3rd?
 |
|
| Conference Realignment News, NCAA School Message Board Directory & Conference Realignment Forum Community | |
Save And Share :
To read more on topics similar to this, follow on Twitter @NCAAsportsDiscuss this topics and others in the CollegeSportsInfo.com Forums. And if leaving a comment, it's always great to include your name.
Comments 7 comments
Jaguars and Vikings seem like the most likely to move to LA.
Here's another point: if the state court in Minnesota rules that the NFL effectively cannot enforce their drug policies, that might be another straw that might get them to stop doing business in Minnesota.
With the sky rocketing taxes in California, the state near bankruptcy, and many people leaving the state due to the high taxes, why would anyone in their right mind want to move their NFL team to Los Angeles?
Jags are not able to move, do your research before you run your mouth and think you know everything
Well Anonymous...how about filling us in on some of these details. We're talking about a team that continues to have blackouts, reduced their asking price for stadium naming rights after failing in 2008, covers up more seats JUST to avoid even MORE blackouts, and an owner that has had to refinance over $110 million in debt just to stay afloat. If Weaver sells the team and that buyer wants to move it, they will move. It's that simple. The buyout costs are minimal at this point and only lower over time. A $100 million stadium buyout is less than what a new owner would make in 1 year moving from market #46 t0 market #2.
I'm curious "Anonymous" what other facts has anyone failed to read? Because the ultimate fact is straightforward: if Weaver sells team and that owner wants to move, they will move.
Jags owner said himself he is not selling or moving the Jags so you can count them out.... Let's get the Rams back baby...
Perhaps the Rams, but you have Oakland, Chargers, Minnesota and Jacksonville. I'm so sorry to have to break this but just because an owner says they are not selling or moving a team, it means absolutely nothing. And when you're refinancing debt over $110 million, you have issues to resolve. And ultimately, that resolution could be selling the team.
There's is a big difference between "want" and "need". Weaver does not want to sell the team. But he might have no choice and be need to.
ESPN's take on the failure of the NFL in Jacksonville:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=garber_greg&page=hotread8/Jacksonville/Main
Post a Comment