99Balloons
Pro Bowler
Exactly! That's what I'm thinking too. I'd prefer the Chargers stay in San Diego and the Raiders stay up north or move to Las Vegas.
And the Rams have all of L.A./OC/Ventura/Riverside and the Inland Empire all to themselves.
Chargers expected to exercise option to move to L.A.
- Thread starter Prime Time
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Exactly! That's what I'm thinking too. I'd prefer the Chargers stay in San Diego and the Raiders stay up north or move to Las Vegas.
And the Rams have all of L.A./OC/Ventura/Riverside and the Inland Empire all to themselves.
I'm a Rams fan, pure and simple, and yeah, I'm from STL, but that's irrelevant. The league wanted the Rams to be in Los Angeles. They even agreed to give the Raiders and Chargers and extra $100 million each in hopes that they would be able to stay in their current markets, and presumably stay out of Kroenke's way. But if the lone team in the market can't build a following in a supposedly football-starved city, then tough nuts. At least with the Chargers, the Rams could still be the big dog in LA. Lord help them if the Raiders get their chance to move to town. The Rams won't stand a chance.
I certainly hope that this thread doesn't turn into some kind of STL vs LA bullshit.
I'm gonna go ahead and thank all of you for making sure that doesn't happen from this point forward.
I'm gonna go ahead and thank all of you for making sure that doesn't happen from this point forward.
exactly. im born and raised in socal and a Rams fan had season tickets from 1970 until they left I don't really care if Stan loses his ass out here this time around. I will watch the games on tv and will never buy a season ticket again
Disagree. If the Rams continue to play boring Fisherball and the Chargers come in and win, then the Rams become the Clippers. All in all its stupid to have two teams in one city.
If the Chargers move to LA it's good for Rams fans. It puts even more pressure on the team to win. They'll be competing against another team for support from their own city. I think the Chargers and especially the Raiders moving into town is bad for Kroenke, so from that perspective I hope it happens. But from a fan's perspective I hope San Diego and Oakland can keep their teams. Both LA fans and St Louis fans know it sucks losing your team.
That's one thing I have thought as well. It also puts more pressure on them to fix the coaching situation, and thus, fix the offense (and to make sure Goff is developed to his full potential).
I still don't want anyone else in the market with the Rams, but if another team does come, the pressure to win and be a more exciting and entertaining team is a silver lining in the cloud.
I foresee a serious downturn in NFL profits and Fandom in the next ten years. The game seems less fun than it used to and the owners are more despicable than ever.
Yamahopper
Hall of Fame
It's just Business.
Spanos has first dibs, either he takes it or Davis will.
Neither can go it alone or even combine to build a new stadium since the new stadium model is Dallas or LA.
Rams are happy to have a tenet to defray stadium costs. More fat stacks for the Rams.
It should be obvious by now that a NFL team isn't about football, it's only about profit and return on investment.
Spanos has first dibs, either he takes it or Davis will.
Neither can go it alone or even combine to build a new stadium since the new stadium model is Dallas or LA.
Rams are happy to have a tenet to defray stadium costs. More fat stacks for the Rams.
It should be obvious by now that a NFL team isn't about football, it's only about profit and return on investment.
If the Rams can get the Chargers to share the stadium they won't even have to worry about winning to filling their games with fans. They can spread the costs and keep most of the profits.
The Rams will be the Jets west!:baghead:
The Rams will be the Jets west!:baghead:
They don't care about the fans or the players. They continually make money grabs. It will come back to bite them. They had a good product, but the product isn't even that good anymore.
RamsCardsJazz
Starter
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #57
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...geographic-futures-likely-to-be-decided-soon/
Chargers, Raiders geographic futures likely to be decided soon
Posted by Mike Florio on December 5, 2016
As the Chargers flirt with the possibility of moving to Los Angeles and the Raiders flirt with the probability of moving to Las Vegas, the future geographic locations of the two teams will quickly become, as one source with knowledge of the dynamics recently told PFT, a “game of four-dimensional chess.”
The Chargers have the more immediate deadline, given their ability through January 15 to strike a deal with the Rams to share space in Inglewood. Previously, Commissioner Roger Goodell was believed to be “fixated” on keeping the Chargers in San Diego. In recent weeks, however, there’s a sense his stance is softening.
His stance may be softening due to the realities of the situation. With no public money available in San Diego and no chance of even trying to change that until the elections of 2018 or 2020, the Chargers will be spinning their wheels if they stay put.
The Chargers also will likely lose money if they don’t move. In 2015, the uncertainty over a potential relocation helped the team have its best year ever in local revenue, according to a source with knowledge of the situation. The renewed embrace of the team came from the uncertainty regarding a move. In 2016, the numbers are down — and the team expects the trend to continue if the franchise adopts year-to-year status in San Diego.
The possibility floated here last week of Rams owner Stan Kroenke kicking in cash to keep the Chargers out of L.A. and to help them build a new stadium in San Diego ultimately isn’t practical, for two reasons. First, it would take about $500 million to bridge the gap between the contribution from the Chargers and the NFL and the full stadium costs. Second, if the Chargers decide to stay in San Diego, the Raiders then would acquire the right to go to Los Angeles.
Yes, Raiders owner Mark Davis wants to move to Las Vegas. But, as one source explained it, the Los Angeles deal actually would be better for the Raiders than the Las Vegas deal. It also would potentially make the Raiders the prime draw in L.A., relegating the Rams to red-headed stepchild status.
These dynamics make it more likely the Chargers will move to L.A. As one source explained it, Kroenke has offered a fair deal to the Chargers. While the upside from local revenues are limited, the Chargers also aren’t required to borrow hundreds of millions of dollars to build their own stadium, along with assuming the risks of cost overruns. Coupled with the increased value of the franchise after the move, an L.A. relocation makes a lot of sense.
So if the Chargers go to L.A., the Raiders will be left with staying in Oakland or moving to Las Vegas. Oakland won’t be a viable option unless and until there’s a real proposal that doesn’t entail Davis selling any of the team. Even then, his mind seems to be firmly made up — and it won’t be easy to change it at this point.
However it plays out, it’s all going to play out soon, with a seismic shift potentially coming to California’s NFL teams very, very soon.
Chargers, Raiders geographic futures likely to be decided soon
Posted by Mike Florio on December 5, 2016
As the Chargers flirt with the possibility of moving to Los Angeles and the Raiders flirt with the probability of moving to Las Vegas, the future geographic locations of the two teams will quickly become, as one source with knowledge of the dynamics recently told PFT, a “game of four-dimensional chess.”
The Chargers have the more immediate deadline, given their ability through January 15 to strike a deal with the Rams to share space in Inglewood. Previously, Commissioner Roger Goodell was believed to be “fixated” on keeping the Chargers in San Diego. In recent weeks, however, there’s a sense his stance is softening.
His stance may be softening due to the realities of the situation. With no public money available in San Diego and no chance of even trying to change that until the elections of 2018 or 2020, the Chargers will be spinning their wheels if they stay put.
The Chargers also will likely lose money if they don’t move. In 2015, the uncertainty over a potential relocation helped the team have its best year ever in local revenue, according to a source with knowledge of the situation. The renewed embrace of the team came from the uncertainty regarding a move. In 2016, the numbers are down — and the team expects the trend to continue if the franchise adopts year-to-year status in San Diego.
The possibility floated here last week of Rams owner Stan Kroenke kicking in cash to keep the Chargers out of L.A. and to help them build a new stadium in San Diego ultimately isn’t practical, for two reasons. First, it would take about $500 million to bridge the gap between the contribution from the Chargers and the NFL and the full stadium costs. Second, if the Chargers decide to stay in San Diego, the Raiders then would acquire the right to go to Los Angeles.
Yes, Raiders owner Mark Davis wants to move to Las Vegas. But, as one source explained it, the Los Angeles deal actually would be better for the Raiders than the Las Vegas deal. It also would potentially make the Raiders the prime draw in L.A., relegating the Rams to red-headed stepchild status.
These dynamics make it more likely the Chargers will move to L.A. As one source explained it, Kroenke has offered a fair deal to the Chargers. While the upside from local revenues are limited, the Chargers also aren’t required to borrow hundreds of millions of dollars to build their own stadium, along with assuming the risks of cost overruns. Coupled with the increased value of the franchise after the move, an L.A. relocation makes a lot of sense.
So if the Chargers go to L.A., the Raiders will be left with staying in Oakland or moving to Las Vegas. Oakland won’t be a viable option unless and until there’s a real proposal that doesn’t entail Davis selling any of the team. Even then, his mind seems to be firmly made up — and it won’t be easy to change it at this point.
However it plays out, it’s all going to play out soon, with a seismic shift potentially coming to California’s NFL teams very, very soon.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #58
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/12/13/san-diego-scrambles-to-save-the-chargers/
San Diego scrambles to save the Chargers
Posted by Mike Florio on December 13, 2016
The 4-D game of chess continues between and among San Diego, Oakland, Los Angeles, and Las Vegas.
With the Chargers running out of days to exercise their absolute option to move to L.A. with the Rams, San Diego is showing unprecedented urgency to keep the Chargers from leaving.
Via Bernie Wilson of the San Diego Union-Tribune, four city council members want to offer the Chargers a 99-year, $1-annual lease at Qualcomm Stadium. That would keep the team in town under very team-friendly terms while efforts continue toward building a new stadium.
As noted by Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune, the NFL separately has been trying to come up with ideas for keeping the Chargers from leaving for L.A. This meshes with the notion, as PFT has heard in recent weeks, that Commissioner Roger Goodell is “fixated” on keeping the Chargers in San Diego.
The problem for the Chargers is that staying put for now would likely mean losing permanently the chance to move to Inglewood with the Rams. As it currently stands, the Raiders acquire as of January 16 the current rights the Chargers hold to partner up with Stan Kroenke. If the Chargers don’t move, and if the Raiders realize once the chance slides to them that it makes more sense to return to L.A. than to go to Las Vegas or to stay in Oakland, the Chargers will have two competing franchises in their backyard.
The most obvious potential options for keeping the team in San Diego include having Kroenke purchase the exclusive rights to L.A. by giving the league and the Chargers a large check to assist with the construction of a San Diego stadium (that’s not considered to be viable, given the amount that would be needed) or extending the team’s window to move to L.A. in order to allow a new stadium vote to be conducted in 2018, the next election cycle with a strong turnout expected.
For now, the signs continue to point to an L.A. move. Daniel Kaplan of SportsBusiness Daily reports that the Chargers will ask the league for a waiver of the team’s debt limit, so that it can borrow half of the $550 million relocation fee that will arise if the team abandons San Diego for Los Angeles.
However things turn out, Wednesday’s league meeting in Dallas could be a day when the Chargers, Raiders, and other owners begin to put their cards on the table. With the clock ticking on the Chargers’ ability to move to L.A. and the Raiders’ practical ability to take advantage of $750 million in free Nevada money, it’s getting closer and closer to proverbial nut-cutting time.
San Diego scrambles to save the Chargers
Posted by Mike Florio on December 13, 2016
The 4-D game of chess continues between and among San Diego, Oakland, Los Angeles, and Las Vegas.
With the Chargers running out of days to exercise their absolute option to move to L.A. with the Rams, San Diego is showing unprecedented urgency to keep the Chargers from leaving.
Via Bernie Wilson of the San Diego Union-Tribune, four city council members want to offer the Chargers a 99-year, $1-annual lease at Qualcomm Stadium. That would keep the team in town under very team-friendly terms while efforts continue toward building a new stadium.
As noted by Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune, the NFL separately has been trying to come up with ideas for keeping the Chargers from leaving for L.A. This meshes with the notion, as PFT has heard in recent weeks, that Commissioner Roger Goodell is “fixated” on keeping the Chargers in San Diego.
The problem for the Chargers is that staying put for now would likely mean losing permanently the chance to move to Inglewood with the Rams. As it currently stands, the Raiders acquire as of January 16 the current rights the Chargers hold to partner up with Stan Kroenke. If the Chargers don’t move, and if the Raiders realize once the chance slides to them that it makes more sense to return to L.A. than to go to Las Vegas or to stay in Oakland, the Chargers will have two competing franchises in their backyard.
The most obvious potential options for keeping the team in San Diego include having Kroenke purchase the exclusive rights to L.A. by giving the league and the Chargers a large check to assist with the construction of a San Diego stadium (that’s not considered to be viable, given the amount that would be needed) or extending the team’s window to move to L.A. in order to allow a new stadium vote to be conducted in 2018, the next election cycle with a strong turnout expected.
For now, the signs continue to point to an L.A. move. Daniel Kaplan of SportsBusiness Daily reports that the Chargers will ask the league for a waiver of the team’s debt limit, so that it can borrow half of the $550 million relocation fee that will arise if the team abandons San Diego for Los Angeles.
However things turn out, Wednesday’s league meeting in Dallas could be a day when the Chargers, Raiders, and other owners begin to put their cards on the table. With the clock ticking on the Chargers’ ability to move to L.A. and the Raiders’ practical ability to take advantage of $750 million in free Nevada money, it’s getting closer and closer to proverbial nut-cutting time.
Just like the welcome home thing for the Rams, it would be MORE true for the Chargers...(I least I only remember them moving once, I could be wrong)
It will never ever happen Fro. It's like saying the Padres would cut into the Dodger market, or the Clippers will overtake the Lakers, which will also obviously never ever happen.
The Raiders? - another story, but at most a 50-50 split.