1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

NFL Team in LA?

Discussion in 'All Other Team Discussions' started by GakkofNorway, May 22, 2006.

  1. cheesey
    Offline

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    It IS absurd. I repeat.......the Packers CAN'T be sold! Not just because i don't want them to be sold, they CAN NOT be sold. Plus.....if it were based on the possibility that they MIGHT be lousy, wouldn't they have been moved during the 1970's or 80's?
    The Browns, Colts, Raiders........all have an OWNER! The Packers DON'T.
  2. PackerChick
    Offline

    PackerChick Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,143
    Location:
    Ashland, WI
    Ratings Received:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    And if they dare to, we will commit acts of civil disobedience.
  3. Vikeman
    Offline

    Vikeman Guest

    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    The Packers or the Vikings are never moving. The nfl would never allow it. To much tradition and thefan bases are two big. the Vikings are locked into the dome for a while. By then the stadium will have been built.
  4. CaliforniaCheez
    Offline

    CaliforniaCheez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Location:
    Citrus Heights CA
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    I can't believe fans with knowledge are responding to this new poster.

    There are a few things to consider.

    1. The LA market can handle 2 football teams. It is huge.

    2. It will likely be both an AFC and NFC team.

    3. Ralph Wilson does not have the Bills in his will to anyone. They will be sold upon his death. With an old(relative) stadium and a small market on the border that can't expand, Buffalo Bills might be one of the teams.

    4. The vikings are the lowest revenue teams with the highest ratio of debt to value. They are the NFC team most likely to move.

    5. Atlanta wants a new stadium and will use a move as leverage in negotiations. They could move.

    6. If the vikings move, all of Minnesota and the Dakota's would become Packer territory. It would be a revenue enhancer for the Packers.

    7. The Chargers are negotiating a new stadium. They really don't want anyone in LA. They could move but really want the present situation to continue.

    I think given he vikings and Bills situations they will be the most likely to move but not in the next couple of years.
  5. PackerLegend
    Offline

    PackerLegend Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,947
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Would the Vikings still be in our division if they moved or would we get a differnt team? And how would they come up with new names for the teams that move?
  6. cheesey
    Offline

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    I would think if the Vikings moved they would be out of our division. I'm not sure how they decide on a new team name. The Colts remained the Colts and the Rams the Rams. But the Browns became the Ravens when they moved. I doubt that the Vikings would be the L.A. Vikings. But maybe they would.
  7. carol k
    Offline

    carol k Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    592
    Location:
    wrenshall, mn
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    The Packers cannot be moved. If I remember correctly, there is something in their by laws that they have to stay in Green Bay.

    On the other hand, I was wondering about the vikings. I think it is interesting that MN lawmakers voted to build a stadium for the twins and the gophers, but put the vikings on hold. Makes one wonder, doesn't it?
  8. Vikeman
    Offline

    Vikeman Guest

    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    One again the vikings cannot move or consider moving till 2011. They are locked into the dome under a lease. By then the stadium will have been built.
  9. cheesey
    Offline

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Even if the owner sells the team?
  10. big3
    Offline

    big3 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Messages:
    784
    Location:
    Novi, MI
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Funny how that works. The lions bought their way out of the silverdome a couple of years early when they built ford field. Their was a big pissing contest with the city of Pontiac, but the Lions moved anyway. That was IMO the biggest reason the lions were 2 - 14 a few years ago. The city of Pontiac knew they were leaving so they wouldn't let them practice at the silverdome. This was before the allen park practice facility was built. The dome went as far as blairing the PA system with loud music and turning on the air under the turf to blow it around and get them to leave. Basically the lion's left frustrated and had to figure out a new place to practice. The City of Pontiac would only allow the Lion's in the silverdome on game days that last year.
  11. cheesey
    Offline

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    They should write a book:
    "How to make friends and influence people" by The City of Pontiac
  12. Vikeman
    Offline

    Vikeman Guest

    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    even if the owner sells, the minnesota vikings are in a contractual lease to the metrodome till 2011...which they cannot break. it would be proposperous for a brand new owner to sell the vikes withen the next 5 years anyway...he is guaranteed to take a loss if he does it. wilf will get the stadium deal done by next year...especially with his clout and constructing deals in the past.
  13. CaliforniaCheez
    Offline

    CaliforniaCheez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Location:
    Citrus Heights CA
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    As I said the Vikings move to LA will not happen right away. There are a few things to get done.

    I find it humour when viking customers claim they have a lease. A lease is a contract. Any lawyer will tell you contracts are made to be broken. Oh it will cost but it can always be done.

    The NFL's lowest revenue team can still afford it. Especially with the higher revenues that will be gained in LA. Player endorsement deals are so much better in LA that free agents want to go there.

    The new viking stadium will be built......in LA.

    Packer games will then be broadcast across Minnesota as a Packer market.
    It is a good deal for the vikings, the NFL, and the Packers.
  14. Vikeman
    Offline

    Vikeman Guest

    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    It's more then just a simple lease....more like an obligation which can and will not broken. Do you know anything at all or are you just that ignorant of the truth? Wet the bed all you want, but the vikes are in Minnesota forever. Red McCombs tried this avenue "breaking the dome lease" and the nfl shot it down before it even became an issue with the State. Wilf has flat out stated he will never move the Vikings...they belong in Minnesota. No realistic Vikings fan is even worried about it. It's people with distorted facts like yourself who keep bringing it up. Starved for attention and a warped mind.
  15. CaliforniaCheez
    Offline

    CaliforniaCheez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Location:
    Citrus Heights CA
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Before you insult people vikeman look at the calender.

    2010 is not that far away as far as govenment permits and construction of a stadium in LA.

    The former viking owner got frustrated over at least one of the these:
    a. the stadium
    b. league not permitting him to move
    c. a terrible fan base
    d. being stuck in a low revenue franchise

    The vikings are in worse financial shape than when Red owned the team!
    They have been the lowest revenue franchise for 2 years and since being sold to a group outside MN, the franchise with the highest % of debt(Houston has more debt but the Texans are worth a lot more).
    Nothing creative being done to increase revenues.

    The state of Minnesota turned down the out of state owners group who were seeking corporate welfare from their taxpayers when the vikings already have a publicly funded stadium. After all the plastic Metrodome is the best Minnesota can afford.

    The Lions have a new stadium. The Bears have practically a new stadium and Lambeau field had a major renovation.

    The vikings are further and further behind. Now with revenue sharing viking customers should thank the fans of division opponents for financially supporting them. The high revenue teams have to support those who don't earn enough. Some kid in Detroit buys a hot dog at a Bears game and part of the profit goes to the vikings.

    Nothing would help the troubled franchise more than moving to the very high revenue LA. Why would vikeman want to prevent the vikings from turning around financially and becoming one of the highest revenue teams.

    As big 3 pointed out contracts can always be modified.
    Look for the move if it happens in 2009 or 2010.

    However, this new group has proven more inept than Red in running the team and has brought embarassment to the league. That's not how you win friends and influence people when you want a lucrative market like LA.

    The only reason the vikings ownership group will not get to move is because the NFL owners have a longer term more deserving owner or at least a competent one to reap the benefits of moving to LA.
  16. Vikeman
    Offline

    Vikeman Guest

    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Developers ask Vikings to consider Shakopee as a site for stadium


    By Shannon Fiecke
    Staff Writer

    Wednesday, June 07, 2006

    The Minnesota Vikings are considering Shakopee as a possible stadium home should the proposed stadium in Blaine not work out.
    Lester Bagley, vice president of public affairs and stadium development, said Wednesday the Vikings are in the "earliest stages" of discussions with real-estate developers about a site in Shakopee.

    He wouldn't say who the developers are or where the site is, but said the location appears workable. Any successful proposal, he said, would require local and political support and financial partnership.


    Previously, developers considered a site near Canterbury Park for a stadium home for the Minnesota Twins.

    Bagley said the Vikings still have a solid partnership with Anoka County for a stadium in Blaine, but had to consider alternatives after the stadium plan failed in the state Legislature.

    The Vikings are continuing to work out key issues with Anoka County as the organization considers alternatives, he said.

    "Right now, that's the one and only proposal that's viable," he said.

    Bagley said numerous communities have approached the Vikings, but Shakopee is one of two or three locations the Vikings organization is exploring further.

    He said a stadium can serve as a commercial anchor for a community and bring significant economic development, as is proposed in Blaine.

    That proposal leverages private investment for restaurants, retail shops, corporate offices and the like, he said.

    "The Vikings proposal goes far beyond 10 football games a year," he said. "It includes a broad economic development package.
  17. Vikeman
    Offline

    Vikeman Guest

    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    and "a terrible fanbase". That's just your ignorance shining through once again. It's just a retarded, biased, untrue comment. Our concessions is what kills the Vikings revenue because the dome is a pile of junk. And the fact the metrodome has been sold out year after year after year after year throws your ignorant comment right to the wind.
  18. porky88
    Offline

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Location:
    Title Town
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    If the Vikings don't get a new stadium built then they are a possible suitor to move, IF the owner wants to move the team.

    I think the Chargers are the likely contender to move or possibily the Saints in the future, if they don't get any revenue in New Orleans.
  19. Anubis
    Offline

    Anubis Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2005
    Messages:
    767
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    I think your "inside source" has been hitting the rock pipe:

    1. Arizona just completed building a brand new stadium and had been awarded the 2008 Super Bowl to showcase it. There is no way the Cards will be leaving Arizona anytime soon.

    2. The Green Bay Packers cannot ever leave Green Bay. That is because they are the only publically owned franchise in the league, and a majority of the shareholders would have to vote to move them out of Wisconsin. This would never happen for obvious reasons.

    3. The front-runners for a move to L.A. are the Saints, the Bills and the Queens. However, there is a much greater chance of the Saints going to L.A. than anyone else. Zygi Wilf has publically stated he wants to stay in Minnesota, however he could be lured by the league into moving to what is potentially a much more lucrative market.

    I have read that the Jaguars and the Colts could also be candidates for a move to L.A., but it seems that many of these rumours are simply pure speculation.

    GO PACK!!!

    Robert C. Hedley
  20. calicheesehead
    Offline

    calicheesehead Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    742
    Location:
    91214
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    The Saints are who's being targeted as well as the Chargers. The probelm with the whole deal is the political pull the collisium and its investors hold on this town. The collisium sucks. It is located in a bad area of L.A. and hardly fluffy. The locals will make sure you do not feel fluffy. Having one Mongolian hunter shooting some locals would be very welcomed over the nightly drive-by's and turf wars. The police have given the night to the gangs and are hand tied to do anything about it. Most good folks of So Cal do not want to have to park their Lexus on some bangers lawn so that they can watch the game. Had the location been a different or newer facility it may be welcomed and supported. The problem is as a born and raised resident of this great state, we have been taxed to death, and the cost of living so great that we do not want to spend one more dime to help somone else get rich. L.A. can support as many hard nosed football teams as it wanted since it's in the top 10 economies of the world, however, there is just so much attention one can give with all the thousand of activities and entertainments available.

Share This Page