papazoid Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Despite significant political momentum throughout California for a downtown Los Angeles stadium that would house an NFL team, the league had a recent message for people involved with the project: Right now, no thanks. During a Sept. 6 meeting at the NFL offices in New York, commissioner Roger Goodell told Los Angeles Councilwoman Jan Perry and political aide Bernard Parks, Jr. that neither the league nor any team interested in moving there would agree to the business proposal set forth by Anschutz Entertainment Group, according to three sources with knowledge of the conversation. AEG is the private company that has offered to build and operate a retractable-roof stadium, which would be named Farmers Field, on the site that is currently part of the Los Angeles Convention Center. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-cole_nfl_downtown_la_stadium_concerns_100611
Buffalo Barbarian Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Good they don't deserve a team, The league did all they could to expand there and their "fans" didn't care if they got a team or not so the team went Houston who should have never lost the Oilers.
RkFast Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Dont worry...once someone dangles a few more bucks in Goodells facehe will drag a team there.
PromoTheRobot Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Here is an example of greed workng in reverse. The NFL won't go to L.A. because they won't make enough billions. The irony. PTR
San Jose Bills Fan Posted October 8, 2011 Posted October 8, 2011 (edited) No, the NFL will be in Los Angeles soon… or in The City of Industry. The NFL is simply pitting one stadium group against the other in order to extract the best deal possible. Edited October 8, 2011 by San Jose Bills Fan
clancynut Posted October 8, 2011 Posted October 8, 2011 (edited) At least the article links to why Buffalo is the perfect fit for the Bills. Edited October 8, 2011 by clancynut
DJasper Probincrux III Posted October 8, 2011 Posted October 8, 2011 (edited) The NFL would rather sell an expansion franchise to LA so all of the owners get a piece of the pie rather than move an existing team there. Houston paid 700 million for their franchise almost 10 years ago. Anyone doubt that an expansion franchise in LA would fetch double that? Edited October 8, 2011 by Big Papi
Doc Posted October 8, 2011 Posted October 8, 2011 The NFL would rather sell an expansion franchise to LA so all of the owners get a piece of the pie rather than move an existing team there. Houston paid 700 million for their franchise almost 10 years ago. Anyone doubt that an expansion franchise in LA would fetch double that? I've been saying this for awhile now. While maybe not $1.4B, the owners would get all of the expansion fee, not just a relocation fee (of about $400M). Plus it keeps the existing NFL markets intact instead of removing one for LA.
UConn James Posted October 8, 2011 Posted October 8, 2011 Perhaps today's news of Al Davis's death will light a fire under some fannies.... After a period of due respect.
sweatpantsjoe Posted October 8, 2011 Posted October 8, 2011 Good they don't deserve a team, The league did all they could to expand there and their "fans" didn't care if they got a team or not so the team went Houston who should have never lost the Oilers. Yes, the NFL doesn't agree with parts of the proposed stadium plan in Los Angeles therefore the fans of Los Angeles don't deserve a team. Your logic is sound. Good job ace.
BillsBytheBay Posted October 8, 2011 Posted October 8, 2011 The NFL would rather sell an expansion franchise to LA so all of the owners get a piece of the pie rather than move an existing team there. Houston paid 700 million for their franchise almost 10 years ago. Anyone doubt that an expansion franchise in LA would fetch double that? one billion four hundred million dollers. nope, I cant see anyone paying the NFL that for a start up team. Definitely not in a town that has a history of running teams off.
Recommended Posts