After four months of sometimes angry debate, the General Assembly took a crucial step toward solidifying the city's NFL future Friday night by easily approving a financing plan for a new Colts stadium and expanded Indiana Convention Center.
The vote paves the way for the start of one of the biggest public works projects in Indianapolis history and appears to end years of questions about whether the Colts are here to stay.
"We are going to expand the Convention Center, and we are going to build a new stadium for the Indianapolis Colts to play in for 30 more years," Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson said. "This is really an extraordinary project."
Originally posted by Mayhem That's good news. I'd have a harder accepting them as an AFC South team (more than I do now).
Now the question remains: Will L.A. EVER get another NFL team?
I know the Seahawks looked to move there a few years ago but that plan died out. I remember some rumors of either the Vikings or the Cards going to LA, but I haven't read or heard anything recently on that.
Originally posted by Mayhem That's good news. I'd have a harder accepting them as an AFC South team (more than I do now).
Now the question remains: Will L.A. EVER get another NFL team?
I know the Seahawks looked to move there a few years ago but that plan died out. I remember some rumors of either the Vikings or the Cards going to LA, but I haven't read or heard anything recently on that.
Cards have a new stadium being built, so that eliminates them. The best bets would be Vikings, Saints, Chargers and Raiders(just because Al Davis is Al Davis) due to current stadium deals/deficiencies. The dark horse would be the Jets should the West Side Stadium Plan fall apart and Woody Johnson decide to stick it to New York for not building him a stadium. Very longshot, but, as long as L.A. would be the next place, a possibility.
Originally posted by redsoxnationCards have a new stadium being built, so that eliminates them. The best bets would be Vikings, Saints, Chargers and Raiders(just because Al Davis is Al Davis) due to current stadium deals/deficiencies. The dark horse would be the Jets should the West Side Stadium Plan fall apart and Woody Johnson decide to stick it to New York for not building him a stadium. Very longshot, but, as long as L.A. would be the next place, a possibility.
The Vikings and Chargers are working on new stadiums as well. I wouldn't bet against them getting their new stadia (when has a city refused at all to build a stadium?).
Best bet IMO would be New Orleans, as they have had issues with the State of Louisiana not paying them as much money as their agreement specifies (due to the economic downturn we have been in the last couple years).
NOTE: The above post makes no sense. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Originally posted by Mayhem That's good news. I'd have a harder accepting them as an AFC South team (more than I do now).
Now the question remains: Will L.A. EVER get another NFL team?
Better question: So what if it doesn't? The NFL doesn't need L.A. and the teams that have been there before have never drawn well. I know, I know, No. 2 TV market, but what good does that do you if every game is blacked out?
Originally posted by Mayhem That's good news. I'd have a harder accepting them as an AFC South team (more than I do now).
Now the question remains: Will L.A. EVER get another NFL team?
I know the Seahawks looked to move there a few years ago but that plan died out. I remember some rumors of either the Vikings or the Cards going to LA, but I haven't read or heard anything recently on that.
Cards have a new stadium being built, so that eliminates them. The best bets would be Vikings, Saints, Chargers and Raiders(just because Al Davis is Al Davis) due to current stadium deals/deficiencies. The dark horse would be the Jets should the West Side Stadium Plan fall apart and Woody Johnson decide to stick it to New York for not building him a stadium. Very longshot, but, as long as L.A. would be the next place, a possibility.
I could see the Saints moving. Hopefully if that happens the Superdome is still used for Super Bowls (I'm a big proponent of Simmons theory of having the SB just rotate between New Orleans, Miami, and San Diego).
Vikings seem to have a strong following in Minny so I think their might be a public outcry if they wish to make the LA move. CRZ would be better to comment on that since he lives in that area. And on the subject of the Chargers, I think Guru might be upset if they move, but what about the rest of the San Diego fans feelings on that possibility?
I seriously doubt the Jets would move to LA. I thought the West Side Stadium was a done deal last I heard?
The Raiders? Yeah, Davis still makes noise everytime talk of LA getting a team comes up, as he claims to still have the rights to that market. Maybe they could do this then;
The longer LA doesn't have a team, the owners will always have a card in their back pocket...well, we want to stay in [insert city here], but we would entertain the thought of moving to Los Angeles...build us a new stadium bitches.
Originally posted by Packman V2The longer LA doesn't have a team, the owners will always have a card in their back pocket...well, we want to stay in [insert city here], but we would entertain the thought of moving to Los Angeles...build us a new stadium bitches.
Exactly. I think LA is more valuable as a threat to other cities than having a team in LA would be.
NOTE: The above post makes no sense. We apologize for the inconvenience.
why is having a team there so important? do they not have the NFL on tv there? I mean, it aint like people in LA arent currently watching the games, is it?
Every NFL media guy and writer Ive read says that Paul Tagliabue is determined to get the NFL back in LA before he steps down. Take that for what you will.
"I could be wrong, but I doubt it"---Charles Barkley
I was actually surprised a couple of years ago when Houston got the 32nd NFL franchise instead of Los Angeles, based on the fact that Tagliabue's mission in life, apparently, is to get an NFL team in Los Angeles.
But with the current "four teams in eight divisions" format, it doesn't seem numerically feasible to simply add a 33rd team for Los Angeles. Which means, obviously, one team would have to relocate.
But is Tagliabue allowed to manipulate things behind the scenes to try and get a team to move to L.A.? Wouldn't that be tampering, or a violation of antitrust laws, or a conflict of interests or something?
“I have an idea. It starts with 's' and ends with 'litting their throats.'” --Elan, The Order of the Stick
Four-Time Wiener of the Day (5/27/02; 7/3/02; 7/30/04; 8/28/04)
The Only Five-Time (and Last) N.E.W. World Heavyweight Champion
Certified RFMC Member-- Ask To See My Credentials!
Originally posted by Packman V2The longer LA doesn't have a team, the owners will always have a card in their back pocket...well, we want to stay in [insert city here], but we would entertain the thought of moving to Los Angeles...build us a new stadium bitches.
This has always been my thought on Tags' big push for LA every year. It's a great threat to any city that wants to keep their team. "Play ball, or we're leaving for LA."
As long as the cities play ball, I don't think we'll ever see a team in LA (unless they expand the league again).
SEADAWG, here's some help for your argument. Sproles. Sproles is an incredible running back, expecially for his size. The guy just gets better as the game goes on. They aren't reliant on just one player.