Matt Young 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 Story Tagliabue Says NFL Team in Los Angeles Is Likely Fri Feb 4, 2:32 PM ET Add to My Yahoo! Sports - Reuters JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (Sports Network) - NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue made his state of the league address on Friday and once again said a move back into the Los Angeles market is likely. Photo Reuters Photo The league has been without a team in the nation's second-largest television market since the Raiders and Rams left following the 1994 season, but the commissioner believes Los Angeles will have an NFL club by the end of this decade. "We've been working very hard with four sites -- Carson, Rose Bowl, LA Coliseum and Anaheim," Tagliabue said. "It's becoming a reality. It is a top priority and has been for some time." After deciding on a site, Tagliabue said the league will then determine whether expansion or the relocation of an existing team will occur. The time frame for a move, he added, does not concern him. "What matters is two teams left LA and we want to get back there. What matters is we get this right. We want to get it done within this decade and when we do it, we want it to stay there." Other questions about expansion included whether it could be done outside of the United States' borders. "I think it could be very likely that the next franchises in the NFL are outside of the United States," Tagliabue remarked. "Certainly Canada or Mexico. We're giving consideration to playing a regular-season game outside of the United States. "My guess is it will happen. It's impossible right now to have a timeline." Tagliabue made a few statements then answered questions during his hour-long address. Included were questions about the health of the league economically and how the NFL's system is trying to be implemented by other sports, particularly the NHL, which is embroiled in a lengthy lockout. "I have no reaction to what's going on in the NHL," he said. "The salary cap works. It's complicated. There are varying degrees -- hard caps, soft caps. There are things we'd both like to improve. The record shows we have a very competitive league with everyone having a shot at winning." Tagliabue also praised both owners of the teams in this year's Super Bowl -- Philadelphia's Jeffrey Lurie and New England's Robert Kraft -- also remarking about how the Patriots are playing for their third championship in a four-year span. "When we did this system, we thought there was enough flexibility to keep teams together. We thought the system would allow for great competition and great winners. Maybe there's a little bit of luck there, too." Other topics of discussion centered around minority hiring, particularly in the front office, the league's contract negotiations with television networks and the viability of holding future Super Bowls in small markets like Jacksonville. "I think that Jacksonville will prove that it has all the things you need to host a Super Bowl successfully. The likelihood is that it will be back here at some point." ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This is great news. I'd love to be able to go check out some games. Hopefully they'll move a team here, though, because at 32 teams, I don't think the league needs to do any more expanding for a while. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dobbs 3K 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 Yeah, I really don't want to see the NFL add any more teams at this point. I still can't believe they let two teams leave LA in the same year. That was insane. Anyone know which teams could realistically re-locate to LA? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Golgo 13 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 I'd really hate for them to add more teams. There's just no need for it. The number is perfect at this point. And fuck it. Have the Raiders make another jump to LA. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Salacious Crumb Report post Posted February 6, 2005 Fuck L.A. They had two teams at the start of the 90s and they didn't support either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X Report post Posted February 6, 2005 They really should give up on the whole Arizona idea. The Cardinals are just terrible. LA can support bad teams (Clippers and Angels, anyone?) but the Rams were just terrible for so many years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Star Ocean 3 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 I'd rather the Super Bowl come back regularly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Prophet of Mike Zagurski 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 They really should give up on the whole Arizona idea. The Cardinals are just terrible. LA can support bad teams (Clippers and Angels, anyone?) but the Rams were just terrible for so many years. Um the (Anaheim) Angels won the World Series about 3 seasons ago. Also, the Clippers are terrible because their owner will not put money into the team. I think if anyone is a football fan in LA, they could watch the Chargers play. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X Report post Posted February 6, 2005 Yeah, NOW they can. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KingPK 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 If they do get a new team, it's going to have to be a relocation since expanding again to 33 teams is foolhardy. Problem is, almost every team seems to be well supported in their area, and they are building a new stadium in Arizona so they aren't moving the Cardinals anytime soon. Either move the Chargers to LA or just tell them to root for the Raiders (since there still seems to be a strong fanbase for them there). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Czech Republic 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 Tagliabue forgot there were the Los Angeles Chargers for one season so if you count the AFL that makes THREE teams to leave L.A. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hektik 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 Well, if you believe Peter King, he says the Saints are the front runners to move to LA. I guess it could work, maybe have the Saints and Rams switch divisions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kahran Ramsus 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 LA would have had the Texans if the city didn't fuck it up. They've had enough chances. If a team wants to move there, fine, but don't force it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X Report post Posted February 6, 2005 Well, if you believe Peter King, he says the Saints are the front runners to move to LA. I guess it could work, maybe have the Saints and Rams switch divisions. The Saints moniker actually works in Los Angeles in a deviously ironic way, considering the city name (The City of Angels). Wouldn't mind having a team there, either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2GOLD 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 LA doesn't deserve a team and as many reporters in the city have said, it really doesn't want one. It's a basketball town and the fans of LA are more interested in NBA preseason games than the NFL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Czech Republic 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 They're the #1 league (as much as I wish baseball was) without an LA team, there's clearly no need to add one, especially through expansion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X Report post Posted February 6, 2005 This is true, although there are fair amounts of interest in Dodgers as well as Kings games as well from what I remember. But all I remember of football in LA was the Raiders finishing 8-8 every year and the Rams not doing anything worth noting. Hard to be supportive of a team that sucks or is consistently average. ...which really wouldn't make the Saints move to LA any better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X Report post Posted February 6, 2005 They're the #1 league (as much as I wish baseball was) without an LA team, there's clearly no need to add one, especially through expansion. I thought the NBA was? If not, they have to be a close #2, even if this season has really been kind of uninteresting since there's something of a "change of the guard" going on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Czech Republic 0 Report post Posted February 6, 2005 I figured in terms of popularity and revenue and all that, it went football-baseball-basketball-hockey. the NBA and NHL were probably ahead of baseball directly following the strike. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Richard 0 Report post Posted February 7, 2005 LA has the Trojans. That's all they need. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sass 0 Report post Posted February 8, 2005 The late 80's and early 90's ended any hope for the Raiders or the Rams being a draw. The "phantom sack" on Jim Evertt in the '90 playoffs. The 1991, 51 - 3 AFC Championship game beatdown on the Raiders by the Bills. These two events helped no one. Both teams wanted a new stadium but the city council would not pony up the cash. The Raiders always had trouble getting sell-outs in LA compared to the Rams who had one of the best attendance records in the league for 30 years. The past ineptness displayed by both teams was too much for many fans to overcome. LA attendance hit an all new low in 1992 not seen since the early 50's after the Rams had just debuted in Los Angeles. To this day, I'm still surprised at how none of the rich fucks in California didn't feel like springing for a new NFL team to pay for in the late 90's expansion team process. A new team would have a chance at drawing fans. Bringing 40 years of emabarassment by adding the Saints would probably fail most likely at attracting many fans. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Czech Republic 0 Report post Posted February 8, 2005 Like I said, the NFL is hardly struggling as a league right now, so it's not entirely necessary to add an LA team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X Report post Posted February 8, 2005 LA has the Trojans. That's all they need. Not if you're a UCLA fan (which I am-son of alumni here). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Precious Roy 0 Report post Posted February 8, 2005 I love basketball, and the NBA, as much as anyone possibly can, but they're not even close to the NFL in terms of popularity. The violence aspect, and the one game a week on Sundays makes it hard to compete with. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LivingLegendGaryColeman 0 Report post Posted February 8, 2005 They really should give up on the whole Arizona idea. The Cardinals are just terrible. LA can support bad teams (Clippers and Angels, anyone?) but the Rams were just terrible for so many years. Arizona has a decent football following. ASU and U of A football, along with some NAU football gets big talk. High School football gets good attendence of course and the Arena League team the Rattlers remains pretty popular with several die hard fans. The problem is the owners are idiots. It is a shock with the way they don't spend that there will be a new stadium. The team management has never given the fans to care about the Cardinals. Before they moved to Arizona from St. Loius, the football team broadcast the most out here was the Cowboys, followed by the Raiders, who were winning while the Cardinals did nothing. There had been some Cardinal buzz the year they upset the Cowboys in the first round, but the ball was dropped again. The Bidwells (family that owns the team) won't give up the team, but won't do anything to make anyone care. If they move the franchise to LA, it will remain unsuccessful, because of the same poor management. Until there is a way to get the Bidwells out of the front office, the Cardinals will most likely remain the biggest joke in football. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Czech Republic 0 Report post Posted February 8, 2005 Don't worry. The Cardinals are for real. They tweaked their logo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
