Will do it in January when the window opens...here is the link:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-foot...os-angeles

Say hello to your St. Louis Raiders!!!!

Interesting turn of events.

Los Angeles has 2 teams and San Diego has an NFL team added.

The LA market continues to grow to the point that it absorbs San Diego.

LA franchises can't get a stadium deal so they leave the market and are out of the market a long time.

This allows the San Diego franchise to grow its presence in LA over time to become an important revenue factor for the franchise.

Franchises then try to get dibs on relocating in the LA market and San Diego tries to cut them off at the pass by relocating to LA.

Don't confuse rhetoric with what really motivates these guys. Spanos' rhetoric is that he wants to protect his LA-area revenue, but it's not that much revenue.

What he fears is something different. He owns a team that doesn't really have passionate fans in SD or LA or anywhere (their following pales in comparison to the Raiders or the 49ers) and there is a history, in other sports, of SD sports fans rooting for LA teams (Dodgers, Lakers, USC, UCLA), partly because the SD area has a lot of LA transplants.

Spanos fears that if the Chargers are in SD and the Rams and/or Raiders are in LA, a lot of SD-area fans will shift their allegiance to one of the LA teams. That's why Spanos wants to either be in LA himself, or keep LA NFL-free. He thinks that being in SD with a team or two up the road in LA is the least attractive option.

(10-24-2015 12:09 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Interesting turn of events.

Los Angeles has 2 teams and San Diego has an NFL team added.

Not a big deal but the the Chargers were the second LA team then moved to San Diego after a season. Then the Radiers entered the area making it the third team.

(10-24-2015 12:30 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Don't confuse rhetoric with what really motivates these guys. Spanos' rhetoric is that he wants to protect his LA-area revenue, but it's not that much revenue.

What he fears is something different. He owns a team that doesn't really have passionate fans in SD or LA or anywhere (their following pales in comparison to the Raiders or the 49ers) and there is a history, in other sports, of SD sports fans rooting for LA teams (Dodgers, Lakers, USC, UCLA), partly because the SD area has a lot of LA transplants.

Spanos fears that if the Chargers are in SD and the Rams and/or Raiders are in LA, a lot of SD-area fans will shift their allegiance to one of the LA teams. That's why Spanos wants to either be in LA himself, or keep LA NFL-free. He thinks that being in SD with a team or two up the road in LA is the least attractive option.

Maybe Kroenke will make him an offer he can't refuse, to buy the Chargers, and put them in the Inglewood Dome.

(10-24-2015 12:30 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Don't confuse rhetoric with what really motivates these guys. Spanos' rhetoric is that he wants to protect his LA-area revenue, but it's not that much revenue.

What he fears is something different. He owns a team that doesn't really have passionate fans in SD or LA or anywhere (their following pales in comparison to the Raiders or the 49ers) and there is a history, in other sports, of SD sports fans rooting for LA teams (Dodgers, Lakers, USC, UCLA), partly because the SD area has a lot of LA transplants.

Spanos fears that if the Chargers are in SD and the Rams and/or Raiders are in LA, a lot of SD-area fans will shift their allegiance to one of the LA teams. That's why Spanos wants to either be in LA himself, or keep LA NFL-free. He thinks that being in SD with a team or two up the road in LA is the least attractive option.

Are people not supporting the team really that much of a concern? If the LA area has like 18 million people, only a fraction has to really care about the new team for them to have plenty of fans. Even if it's only like 5-10%, that is more than enough. Plus, if the team is successful, there will be plenty of bandwagoners in that city.

(10-27-2015 11:34 AM)All Dukes_All Day Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 12:30 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Don't confuse rhetoric with what really motivates these guys. Spanos' rhetoric is that he wants to protect his LA-area revenue, but it's not that much revenue.

What he fears is something different. He owns a team that doesn't really have passionate fans in SD or LA or anywhere (their following pales in comparison to the Raiders or the 49ers) and there is a history, in other sports, of SD sports fans rooting for LA teams (Dodgers, Lakers, USC, UCLA), partly because the SD area has a lot of LA transplants.

Spanos fears that if the Chargers are in SD and the Rams and/or Raiders are in LA, a lot of SD-area fans will shift their allegiance to one of the LA teams. That's why Spanos wants to either be in LA himself, or keep LA NFL-free. He thinks that being in SD with a team or two up the road in LA is the least attractive option.

Are people not supporting the team really that much of a concern? If the LA area has like 18 million people, only a fraction has to really care about the new team for them to have plenty of fans. Even if it's only like 5-10%, that is more than enough. Plus, if the team is successful, there will be plenty of bandwagoners in that city.

You've got the right idea there: Owning a team with lukewarm support in LA is more valuable than owning a team with lukewarm support in SD.

The Clippers are a great example of that, including the fact that they sold for $2 billion. The franchise value of a second-banana team in that enormous market is going to be greater than the same franchise's value as the only local team in most markets, so even if the Chargers have to "share" LA with the Rams or Raiders, their franchise will be worth more than it is now.