Remember when I said the NFL has no team in LA to bully NFL cities to fund stadiums..

[thenewera44]

Here are the numbers for MLB attendance in 2012.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...012-misc.shtml

Both LA teams are in the top 10. Only team in MLB that has two teams from the same city in the top 10. One Chicago team and only one NY team in the top 10.


In the NBA. LA only city in the NBA with two teams with top 10 attendance, and both Lakers and Clippers in the TOP 5 for percentage.

http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/...12/sort/allPct


This does not even take into account the cable deals that the NBA and MLB teams have in that market.

[bronx_2003]

Here are the numbers for MLB attendance in 2012.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...012-misc.shtml

Both LA teams are in the top 10. Only team in MLB that has two teams from the same city in the top 10. One Chicago team and only one NY team in the top 10.


In the NBA. LA only city in the NBA with two teams with top 10 attendance, and both Lakers and Clippers in the TOP 5 for percentage.

http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/...12/sort/allPct


This does not even take into account the cable deals that the NBA and MLB teams have in that market.

They have always supported the NBA and the MLB, but they failed both times the NFL gave them a team.

TBH As a fan of the game I'm not really bothered about the money side, I just hate to see teams given to places that show such indifference and such a lack of passion and support towards the NFL.

When you look at cities like Denver, KC, GB, N.O, etc............ its just a complete joke to give a football team to LA

[thenewera44]

They have always supported the NBA and the MLB, but they failed both times the NFL gave them a team.

TBH As a fan of the game I'm not really bothered about the money side, I just hate to see teams given to places that show such indifference and such a lack of passion and support towards the NFL.

When you look at cities like Denver, KC, GB, N.O, etc............ its just a complete joke to give a football team to LA

Again, they used LA to bully cities to build new stadiums with tax subsidies. The vacant city (second largerst market in the world) provided significant leverage.

Now, the NFL will count on the fact that the city has not had a team, and they will use mass promotions to sell a team. The Rams were once a big draw, and in the early 90s their attendance dropped significantly.

[BroncosDivision]

Second largest market in the world based on what? and are we talking Los Angeles/OC or California as a whole?

[thenewera44]

Second largest market in the world based on what? and are we talking Los Angeles/OC or California as a whole?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...rts_franchises

Based on population.

Top 3 cities in the country. (no not the world)

1. New York City 22,085,649
2. Los Angeles 17,877,006
3. Chicago 9,686,021

[BroncosDivision]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...rts_franchises

Based on population.

Top 3 cities in the country. (no not the world)

1. New York City 22,085,649
2. Los Angeles 17,877,006
3. Chicago 9,686,021

Oh, pop.

I was just wondering since you said this:

Again, they used LA to bully cities to build new stadiums with tax subsidies. The vacant city (second largerst market in the world) provided significant leverage.

But it's all good then. Carry on

[thenewera44]

Oh, pop.

I was just wondering since you said this:



But it's all good then. Carry on

I actually could not get the numbers of the world cities. I mean I am sure there are more populated cities. Perhaps Mexico Cito, or Rio de janeiro oe something.

However, as far as sheer numbers, that is a giant pool of people and trust me, the NFL wants to be in there. Just so long as all opportunities to use it as leverage to bully current NFL cities to build stadiums through tax subsidies.

It is just about done, and that is why we have been hearing more and more about moving teams there.

The Rams could quite possibly be moving back there.

[BroncoFanBoy]

Alright let's try this again....

I'M NOT SAYING L.A. SHOULDN'T HAVE A TEAM.

I'M SAYING THAT THEY SHOULD MOVE A TEAM THAT'S ALREADY IN CALI THERE, BECAUSE THEY ALREADY STRUGGLE FILLING THEIR STADIUMS. IF A STATE HAS 3 TEAMS, AND 2 OF THEM ARE GETTING BLACKED OUT EVERY OTHER WEEK, YOU SHOULDN'T ADD A 4TH.

Exactly.

Forget L.A. i'm surprised Vegas doesn't have a team

I'm surprised too. The only things Vegas has is a Triple-A baseball team, and their college teams.

I also think we shouldn't completely worry about L.A Getting an NFL team because their current sports teams are already very popular. The Dodgers are popular, along with the Lakers and Clippers. The Lakers aren't as good as they were in the past, but they're still one of the most popular franchises in sports. The Clippers are really good though.

To add to that, the Kings just won the Stanley Cup last year. An NFL team may not be up to par in that city. I guess unless the Raiders move there or something.

[Cahill]

You really overestimate how much of LA cares about NFL football. The Browns left Cleveland and look how they reacted. The Rams and Raiders both left LA and nobody cared. UCLA and USC games had higher attendance than the Raiders when they were there. Sure, you could sustain a team there and make a profit but why go to LA when you can get the same end result in another city with an already established fanbase. I think the NFL will continue to use the city as a bargaining chip like it does now.