Rumor Mill from Pro Football Weekly
 

Of course there have been many mixed signals, but I can't help but feel Benson's ultimate plans are to move the team. However, right now, I don't see the NFL giving there approval. If I were Tom, I would stay put. He'll get his new stadium in a few years. If he leaves, he is heartless and plain stupid...

A league source tells us that NFL Commmissioner Paul Tagliabue had multiple heated exchanges with Saints owner Tom Benson this week regarding reports that Benson planned to use the Hurricane Katrina tragedy as a catalyst for moving the Saints out of New Orleans.



Per the source, Tagliabue accused Benson of being "heartless," and Tagliabue told Benson that the league would not allow itself or the Saints to appear opportunistic in the face of the disastrous circumstances in and around the Crescent City.



Several other owners also were involved, we're told, to support Tagliabue's position that Benson should abandon any short-term intentions to lay the foundation for a permanent move based on Katrina and its aftermath.



Word of Benson's plans first surfaced on Saturday, September 3, when The New Orleans Times-Picayune reported that team exec Arnold Fielkow had told Louisiana state senator Mike Michot that a permanent move was a possibility. Two days later, New Orleans sports radio host John Marie forwarded to us an e-mail from Fletcher Mackel of WDSU-TV regarding further statements from Fielkow regarding Benson's intention to provoke a fight with the Louisiana legislature by refusing to provide refunds to season-ticket holders.



The next day, Fielkow issued a statement that implicitly conceded the accuracy of the comments attributed to him by Michot and Mackel.



Benson later issued a statement of his own expressing a clear commitment to New Orleans -- and to declare that refunds could be requested -- presumably after Tagliabue twisted some arms and/or booted some boo-tay.



And if it is Tagliabue's intention to slap a muzzle on Benson, the Commish also should pay a visit to Benson's buddy, former Vikings owner Red McCombs. Big Red is trying his damnedest to lure the Saints to San Antonio, ostensibly for 2005 only. But our guess is that Red's unseemly enthusiasm for capitalizing in the short term on the New Orleans situation will eventually give way to a more calculating plan to keep the Saints in San Antone.



And with McCombs whispering in Benson's ear, no amount of yelling from Tabliague will make a lasting difference.

RE: Rumor Mill from Pro Football Weekly
 

Sorry but that's not what we here. This is some great dramatic writing but facts are the Saints have massive efforts toward the Katrina recovery in place, including players and the organization raising money. Saints camp on Airline Highway will be repaired etc with state and federal money, by the way it's the best NFL facility in the league, built by the State of Louisiana, and the Saints are already first in line for federal dollars and tax incentives for businesses to stay in or move into the State. Also, facts are San Antonio is not a large market and has poor facilities for an NFL franchise. The Saints are practicing at a high school field, the Alamo Dome is not an NFL caliber stadium, and there's no where for the team to work out. Nice writing from pro football weekly, but no one's buying it.

Though I'd love it, I'm one that's not as convinced as many that the Saints will remain in New Orleans. Anything is possible when "business is business".


8)

Yeah not buying any of the crap in the opening post of this thread... I think its "Diddley Poo".

Re: RE: Rumor Mill from Pro Football Weekly
 

Not advocating the move, but first Halo, San Antonio is a larger market than New Orleans, and the San Antonio-Austin I-35 corridor is the second largest market without a team, Los Angeles is first. This info was provided in a research article done when Benson announced he wanted to move the team a few months back. i posted it here, but can not tell you where to find it right now. Second, as of right now, there are no facilities in New Orleans for the Saints to play, and no people to go watch them play. San Antonio can build facilities as well. It will take longer for them to rebuild New Orleans than it would take for San Antonio to build facilities, especially if they have to tear down the dome and rebuild it. Then there is the matter of getting people to come back to the area. My mom has said she is never going back, and I have heard that same sentiment from numerous people. The fact is, San Antonio was not prepared for the Saints to arrive, and is doing what they can with them here. The incentives package they have in place to lure NFL teams, again from when Benson made his statements about moving earlier in the year, included facilities and either an updated Alamodome or a new stadium. Benson was not gonna leave without either. So the fact is, should the choose to move here, San Antonio is more than capable of handling an NFL franchise and providing the necessary facilities. The reality is, I like noone else who is a Saints fan wants this to happen. But to dismiss San Antonio as not able to support a team is pure folly. And that's not even getting into the economic differences between San Antonio and New Orleans, or TX and LA in general.

RE: Re: RE: Rumor Mill from Pro Football Weekly
 

I really dont wanna see a move happen, i just dont no what I would do.......

Re: RE: Re: RE: Rumor Mill from Pro Football Weekly
 

Noone wants to see a move happen, except Tom Benson and Red McCombs. If Tagliabue is the one who smacked this down, good for him. Someone needs to tell benson to stop being a greedy bastard and start helping do what's right to restore the city, with its football team.

Los Angeles is not the first market the NFL wants to go to. Los Angeles has had several franchises over the years and has never been able to sell tickets or create any revenue that interested the NFL. The city wants the league to build a stadium outside the city and then the State government takes all revenue from consessions and charge a high property tax and rental fees to any NFL club.

I think where you are wrong is San Antonio is first to get a football club, but that team is not the Saints. The Saints practically invented the "We're going to Move" negotiation tactic, which made Tom Benson buy them to start with.

Seriously doubt that. With Baton Rouge now the largest city in Louisiana with a seam busting population of about 800,000, mostly New Orleans area overrunning the city and the locals outnumbered in population, look for Tiger Stadium to be filled. It was said last night on NFL countdown that lead in as "Are the Saints moving to LA?" that Tom Benson and Paul Tagliabue are looking for Tiger Stadium as a long term option for the forseeable future. But...

Announced last night by the Mayor was the immediate plan for the city. By October 2nd people will start to migrate back to the Uptown districts and Downtown New Orleans will be open for business by October 15th if not before. They also announced that the Superdome is scheduled to be ready for the Sugar Bowl in January, and by next spring Mardi Gras is on. Many parts of the city were untouched as my old house on Carrolton and Cambronne as well as all of Uptown and the French Quarter took no damage at all.

Saints facility took some damage, but they belong to the State which will be rebuilt by the federal government.


Saintswhodi, where the press in San Antonio have gone wrong is, you guys need to fill the stadium to show support for NFL football so you can get a franchise there, but with the Saints being a profitable franchise (not the most profitable, but ranked 20th among 32 teams), with sold out consecutive years in the Dome (4) and collecting all revenue from consessions and receiving portions of all profits from travel and tourism industry, it's economically hard to see them leave.

This next year there will be a dip in New Orleans in travel and tourism, but with New Orleans is now one of the most popular places in the world because of Katrina. The government is working with the military and federal agencies to get the city back in operation and the Mayor of New Orleans is not a goof ball at all.

The airport, reported to be closed until December, opened today, did everyone know that. And so too did the port of New Orleans and the ports on the Gulf Coast.

http://www.wwltv.com/local/stories/0....89b4c947.html

Most of you guys don't live here and you don't see what the local officials are reporting on a daily and hourly basis.

The city is drying out and business are already heading back in. Same with Jefferson Parish. Yes many area of the city will be bull dozed, they are also the poorest areas of the city which were low laying.

Whodi, I think San Antonio will get a franchise of it's own within the next 3 to 5 years. The Saints and New Orleans markets are too profitable for the NFL to move out of. Chris Mortensen from ESPN, the expert on how many times the Saints have moved to LA in the past 6 years, said it himself as a quote right out of Tagliabue's mouth.

First again, let me set this straight, I am not trying to get the Saints to move or to come to San Antonio, I was just disputing a misconception about the size of San Antonio and its ability to support a team.
When I said LA was first, you must have mis-read it. I said they are first as far as areas of the country without a football team populus wise. San Antonio/Austin is second. I never said they would be first to get a team. I think you misread that.

Second, we ALL know how apathetic people in Baton Rouge have been towards the Saints. Hell, we can see it in the budgets they propose and how most of them aren't even concerned about the negotiations. Baton Rouge loves LSU, and that's it. I am sure there are Saints fans there, loads more now, but Baton Rouge and Northern Louisiana doesnot have much care for the Saints. Also, even with all the dispalced people there, who do you propose they buy tickets to a football game? They have nothing. Sure the tickets can be donated so it looks like a sellout, but that won't create revenue. San Antonio will sell out. The city has guaranteed it as part of their proposal. That will be more attractive to Benson than anything else.

Next even if Jefferson parish is up and running, what does thathave to do with Orleans Parish? For most, it's not just a matter of getting the water out, it's also a matter of the hazardous substance that will eb left behind thathas to be cleaned. It's also a matter of not havign residence. Some of the richest sections of town flooded, including lakefront, Gentilly, and New Orleans East(eastover). Even Jazz land flooded. That's where a good bit of the money is. Those people won;t be coming back anytime soon.

Next, noone knows the extent of the damage of the dome. The estimate is not supposed to be complete until Thursday. So noone knows if it has to be scrapped, repaired, or the cost. To say it will be ready by January is WAY premature. Also the airport only opened to COMMERCIAL traffic. No passenger flights yet. That's not really open, but it's on its way.

Lastly, I think San Antone will get a franchise, but I do not want it to be the saints either. I was basically just pointing to your statement:
and disagreeing with that. It wasn't an argument for the saints to move here, or why they should. Just that they could.

Not sure where Los Angeles stands in the pecking order for franchises. But I do know the NFL is interested in the market. So much they are considering a $500-600 million dollar loan. A June 2005 report by The Los Angeles Business Journal said "The NFL has all but conceded that any arena in the L.A. market would have to be paid for without public funds". Earlier this summer the NFL and the Los Angeles brass were deciding and studying what that site will be - the Rose Bowl, Coliseum and Anaheim.

This is info from early summer and very well may have changed. It's my suspicion, and only a suspicion, that Los Angeles may be years away.

I dunno.

8)

One more note on Los Angeles and I'll shut my pie hole. This was comment when Houston was awarded their franchise...

"The NFL was determined to put a team in the nation's second-largest television market, but when the final showdown came, L.A. was hamstrung by conflicting proposals, a lack of public money, limited city and state support and fans who didn't seem to care."


... and "Raiders owner Al Davis has long maintained LA is still his territory". :wink:


8)

Any potential site is years away tally. There aren't too many populated areas of the country sitting there readily able to support a team. So I definitely agree with you there. As it stands now though, New Orleans seems to be years away as well. I mean before the hurricane they had like what, 1 Fortune 500 company, Entergy. If it still is a Fortune 500 company. Los Angeles and San Antonio can beat that number easily. And San Antonio has Toyota and Washington Mutual moving in. The NFL is definitely interested in LA, but IMO, their best bet is to have a new franchise altogether, or move a winning one in a small market like Indy. They can't move a small market losing team. Those people will lose interest so fast your head will spin. But the only reason the NFL wants a team in LA so bad is the advertising and tv revenues they would receive from a market that large. Remember they have a limited revenue sharing, so the more money the league makes, the more each team makes. And they are looking to expand that revenue sharing in the next agreement, as there are already numerous owners lobbying for it. LA would make it more palatable for the richer owners to accept having to share their cash with the ones who don't make as much.

Actually you're talking about neighborhoods there in sections that may have wealthy people living in there, but Gentilly and New Orleans East are very poor. Lakeview was hit and that's where it's bad, lots of money there and Lakefront also you are right about that was hit hard. But most big money is Uptown and on the Northshore in Mandeville and Covington/Madsionville which is in business right now. Slidell was rocked on the east side only, anything west was wet but just got some wind damage, otherwise St. Tammany is in tact.

I agree with that. I don't see how that's going to happen even if the Mayor says it but I just heard word (LSU connections and not official so take it for what it's worth) that the Sugar Bowl will be played in Tiger Stadium and that's almost a done deal. The Dome may be plowed and a new stadium built. The state is trying to get that into the federal recovery deal.

But it's not you Whodi, it's a lot of media in New York mostly that assume Benson wants to move. If that were the case he would have done so years ago, that's my only point. But when they play there make sure you head to the game.

This is my last comment on this and I'm going to shut my pie hole too. I'm not on you whodi, and I understand you points too.

Well Halo, I am gonna take advantage of going to the games here, cause I am hoping this will not become a permanent move, and I will get to see my Saints in person for three games out of my life here in San Antonio. I never want them to leave New Orleans. Ever. But I willt ake advantage of the chance to see them. So when they sell out, know I contributed, and I hope every dollar goes to getting the city of New Orleans back in working condition.

Who are you and what have you done with whodi?


8)

When have I said anything different than that? Every time I spoke about San Antonio I made it clear I wanted the Saints to stay in New Orleans. I just like to clear up mis-conceptions about this city. :D

Sorry Saintswhodi

The O.C. wants some football ......


While three sites just north of here fought over a football team, the NFL came to Anaheim and asked us to put together a proposal for the return of professional football to the nation’s second largest media market. They recognized that Anaheim is the demographic, economic, and social center of this market, with better affinity not only to Orange County, but Riverside, San Bernardino, and portions of Los Angeles County as well. By this time next year, we will know if a new football stadium will be in our future, moving forward on our terms.

http://www.anaheim.net/article.asp?id=1033

Um 08, that says media market. Now you do know the difference between media market and populus right? Populus is what I have been talking about all this time. Actual population? Nice try though bro.

Orange County California
Population, 2003 estimate 2,957,766

San Antonio Population: 1,144,646

Keep talking ......

Christ 08, you are getting worse. I said every time San Antonio/Austin corridor. That equals about 2 mil people, and growing, and doesn't include South to Laredo. Nice try again though. You sure are a persistent bugger. If you don't see where I said San Antonio/Austin corridor numerous times i'll be glad to point it out for you. It's only in every post I made on this subject But please, keep trying. :-)
Isn't LA Orange County? :P

Los Angeles County California
Population, 2003 estimate 9,871,506


Nope .....

The O.C. is still larger in population then the San Antonio - Austin cooridor . Not to mention they have their own t.v. show . :P

http://www.fox.com/oc/

Okay 08, I don't know where you are getting your info, but this population map says San Antonio is the 8th most populus city in America as of 2003, and even Austin is bigger than Anaheim, in Orange County. As a matter of fact, no city in Orange County is even close to San Antonio or Austin, let alone both.

http://www.citypopulation.de/USA.html

So your info is screwed dude. :P

Where do I get my info ???
I bring the info to the debate .

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06059.html

I assume you are referring to the following counties as the San Antonio - Austin cooridor .

Bexar
Comal
Hays
Travis

I will even toss in :
Williamson

The total for these 5 counties is 2,834,413 established by the 2003 U.S. Census .

The O.C. , which by the way is 1 county is 2,957,766 established by the 2003 U.S. Census .

The O.C. has the advantage ...... :wink:

08 is correct OC is huge.....just go to an Angels or Ducks game and you will see how populated the county actualy is........Don't know about S.A.,but I doubt it's as dense as here...IMO

I see your population figures 08, and raise you a county map. I should have known this since I was in Diamond Bar, CA mid month August, even went to Disney World, LA county and Orange County are right on top of each other. There is no way in HELL the NFL would consider putting a team in one, and then the other. Plus San Diego is right down the road. So if either Orange County or LA County gets a team, that's it for that market. Two franchises have already failed there. SO thusly, they count as ONE market, just like Austin San Antonio. Putting two teams in that same area would be like Jefferson PArish saying they want an NFL team now, that's how close they are. So ha!!! LA and Orange County counts as one entity when talking about placement of an NFL franchise, thus their pop figure total counts as 12 mil or so. That makes San Antonio/Austin second. And like I said before, that doesn't even include south to Laredo, even Mexico and west to El Paso. Gotcha bro. Nice try though. You tried to divide an area that is geographically the same. Not flying. Sorry my man. I am still right. :P

You can toss in all the counties of : Webb , LaSalle , Duval , McMullen , Frio and Medina .

Still come up short on Riverside County with 1, 782,650

By the way , it is Disneyland in Anaheim , not Disney World ..... :wink:

You are wrong :P

Disney Land, Disney World, same difference. It's still Disney right? Anywho, Riverside is less than Austin/San Antonio, AND they already have one team in SoCal, so as far as NFL expansion they would only get one more, FOR THE AREA. So a slong as you are looking there, you are dead wrong. That whole area counts as ONE PIECE. Just like Austin/San Antonio counts as ONE PIECE. Give it up. You tried. You wanted to split a huge area into parts to prove a point, and it almost worked. But the county map did you in. And the fact that So Cal has one team already did that in. That area is the largest area in populus without a team, San Antonio/Austin with all parts South and West is second. That doesn't change whether Disney Land, Disney World, Disney ISland, Disney Planet, or Disney Universe is in Anaheim or Florida. You are wrong. And you started out wrong showing some article about MEDIA size, and continued to try to adjust from that gaffe. Sorry bro, maybe next time. :P

Well SOMEbody is wrong here. I don't really care who tho. I haven't enjoyed anything this much since Jake Delhomme got his A$$ kicked last Sunday. :lol:

saintstoneymountlurksmomore:

LOL... boy you guys are in rare form today. My only question is is it possible for O.C. and the San Antonio/Austin Corridor to both get teamswhile leaving the Saints in New Orleans. (IMHO) the Saints will be in New Orleans. There is a ton of pressure on the NFL from all angles to keep the team in New Orleans. From a PR stand point its the right thing to do. From a financial Stand point its the right thing to do. Also if I remember correctly before this Katrina Krap Kicked OFF, the debate was refurbish the Dome or build a new stadium. Now its no debate. One or the other is going to happen. And it depends on the condition of the dome. Right bnow the process is moving forward and we will no soon which direction things are going to go. Before this disastor we didn't know what was going to happen or if anything was going to happen. Now we know somthing is going to happen. The Dome can't sit in it's current state. On top of all this, we have already seen the pressure of politics and the media. Just over a week ago Benson was "reportedly sneaking around trying to sneak out of New Orleans. Now "at least publicly" Benson is talking about a commitment to rebuilding and keeping the Saints in New Orleans. What happen to the old dirty bastard that would torment us with silence and talk cut offs and calculated media leaks to hold our city hostage.........CNN. The spotlight is on Benson and the NFL. And everyone wants to look like the good guy. Except red. He's to old to give a damn.

Your losing it today ..... :P

What I started out showing you was the :
2005 State of the City Address given by Mayor Curt Pringle of the city of Anaheim. City seal and all .... :wink:

Where he indicates he has been contacted by the NFL to supply a proposal for a NFL franchise , with demographics other then the ones used by the Los Angeles / Ventura counties .

Now the counties they are using for the proposal total around 8 million people .

Now you got that between San Antonio , Austin , Laredo and Bare Butt Briar Patch ????

That's between Dripping Springs and Oatmeal, isn't it?

Wow, nothing left so it's down to jokes? I don't know why you jumped in initially 08, but you have been wrong since you did. Answer me this, if ANAHEIM gets a team, which is in the OC right, do you think LA is still in the running for one at that point? OR did you look at a map, see they are both in SoCal, along with San Diego, and if ANY another team goes there it will only be one? So if only one team is gonna go to SoCal, THE ENTIRE AREA COUNTS AS ONE MARKET. Get it yet?

And you started out by saying:

which you even highlighted the media portion, and were 1000000000% wrong based on the convo that was taking place. You have been fishing out BS figures ever since. Your whole argument is done as long as you use SoCal for your locale cause, and let me spell it out for you, T-H-A-T M-A-R-K-E-T I-S O-N-L-Y B-E-I-N-G C-O-N-S-I-D-E-R-E-D F-O-R O-N-E T-E-A-M. So no matter what incorrectly used media figures, or population figures you throw out, you are dead wrong. Unless, and I would hate to believe you think this, you think the NFL would look at putting two teams in that same area gain back to back. Please tell me you don't think that 08. Please.

Yes , it has been a discussion point for years .

Anaheim feels as though they have the market for an NFL franchise and the league has had discussions with them .
Los Angeles is the largest market without an NFL Franchise and feels they should have one .

You are talking about a demographic area that between Ventura county , Kern County, Santa Barbara County , Los Angeles County , Orange County , Riverside County and San Bernadino County has about 20 million people based upon the U.S. Census . That is over half the poulation of California in 7 Counties .

The O.C. is a viable Market for an N.F.L. Franchise , regardless of Los Angeles getting one or not .

I copied the Media Market from the Anaheim Release .

Are you not aware that the 2nd market for an NFL Franchise is Orlando Florida ??? Thought this was common Knowledge .

LMAO. Um, no, that is not common knowledge. Sorry. And that is not even the argument. The argument is outside of SoCal, San Antonio/Austin is the next largest populus without a football team. You have yet to disprove that, unless you seriously believe Orlando is even in the running. Why wouldn't Tom Benson threaten to move to Orlando if they wanted a team? HE pulled New Mexico out his arse before Orlando. Please.

As a note to this conversation , if you believe that Anaheim wants an NFL team so it can be called " Los Angeles " you have lost your mind ....

City of Angels not home to baseball's Angels
By Patrick McFawn


I'm letting one of my biases out of the bag - I'm an Angels fan. What can I say? There's nothing like the nostalgic ballpark atmosphere when you head out to Angel Stadium, watch America's favorite pastime and you hear the announcer yell: "Here are your Los Angeles Angels!"

What?!

By now, you've most likely heard of the controversial name change for the Halos. The Anaheim Angels are now the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. Wow - that's quite a mouthful. And I must admit that I'm slightly disappointed as an Angels fan displaced in Los Angeles territory.

Both the city of Los Angeles and city of Anaheim don't like the Los Angeles tag on a team that plays almost 40 miles away from downtown.

The city of Anaheim contends that the name change violates the lease agreement that the Angels signed in 1996, which states that the name Anaheim must be included in the official name of the Angels. The contract also included that the bill of $20 million for the recent stadium renovation to be paid by the city of Anaheim, which would gain virtually no increase in income through municipal taxes.

As a result of this legal controversy, the city of Anaheim sued Angels Baseball, LP. The court date is set for Nov. 7, which conveniently happens to occur after this year's season. You have to love the speed of the legal system.

The city of Anaheim, during January, sought a preliminary injunction baring the name change until the outcome of the November trial was determined. Orange County Superior Court Judge Peter Polos didn't issue this temporary restraining order baring the L.A. tag, since, according to him, the city had not demonstrated that it would ultimately win.

Andrew Guilford, who represents the city of Anaheim, contends that the team is being referred to as the L.A. Angels during the preseason and the phrase "of Anaheim" is never included.

The City of Angels (don't get confused now) filed an amicus curie brief with the city of Anaheim stating "Anaheim is not located in the city of Los Angeles, and the Angels should not be permitted to adopt a name that begins with the geographical identifier 'Los Angeles.'"

http://www.dailytrojan.com/media/pap...s-920725.shtml

If you eliminate California , then yes , San Antonio is the next largest city in total population that does not have a football team .

And for Damn good reasons .....

The TPI for San Antonio is generally in the toilet ......

Portland Oregon looks better on paper then San Antonio .

That is why they can build the Alamo Dome out there and NFL teams have not been interested .

Another media based explanation has been :

http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives/005358.html

Okay, I have only said that for the last 5 posts. But now that we got that straight, I still said Austin/San Antonio.

Actually, they built the Alamadome to attract a team, and they did have a team, in the USFL. lol But the Alamadome has never been a first rate NFL facility due to the lack of luxury suites. Also, the numerous attempts to move a team here by Red McCombs has been consistently voiced with displeasure, cause of the seedy way he has tried to do it, similar to the seedy way he wants San Antone to try and steal the Saints right now. But they are on the short list for a team. Houston beat them out on expansion cause they had an owner that had recently moved the team. The only thing preventing San Antone from having a team right now is the NFL, and the fact we have a perfect number of teams in the league as is, so moving an existing team is about the only option.

Again, what does being a MEDIA market have to do with selling out games? Nothing, and it's not what I have been talking about at all. I never even mentioned the media so consistently reading reports about media size is not phasing me. This is what phases me:

Lastly, what does tis have anything to do with baseball and the Anaheim Angels? Nothing. Weren't they the California Angels, then went through all kind of weird changes? What does that have to do with a FOOTBALL team coming in for that area?

No , your point was in eliminating Los Angeles and the market . The O.C. is one county with a larger population then the 5 counties that connect Austin/San Antonio , including those cities .

With its own stadium proposal .

http://bastienarchitects.com/live/anaheimnfl.html

If you think for one minute that the O.C. is going to build a stadium to have the name Los Angeles put on it , you are nuts .

By the way , if you have an issue with that whole proximity thing check a map around central California in the Bay area .... :wink:

Man, I was waiting for you to bring up the bay area. Didn't Al Davis move the first time cause he was losing money due to the proximity of the 49ers? Didn't he, as an owner, have to move his team BACK to Oakland from Los Angeles when he got pissed with the city? Sorry, not even close to the same as expanding a franchise into the area. The NFL didn't go and say, "We need to put a team right across the bay from San Fran right now." Didn't happen. Oakland had a team, had that team leave, and then come back. Think if Anaheim gets a team the Rams will move back to Los Angeles? Pass the wacky tobacky.

Regardless to who proposes what or where they play, SoCal will only get ONE MORE TEAM. I thought you had gotten that, now you are just making things up to keep this going. They can call them whatever they want where they play, that will be it, for now at least. So trying to squeeze them as separate markets is futile.

One, that's MLB. Nowhere near the dominant force that football is. Two, if either location gets a team, they are not gonna be called the LA(insert franchise name here) of Anaheim, or vice versa. The NFL wouldn't do that. They would call them the Los Angeles whomever or the Anaheim whomever, or the California whomever, and that area will have to supprt them or not. It's really not this hard to understand.

Stadium issues

1. When the NFL first declined to approve the Raiders' move from Oakland to Los Angeles back in 1980, the team along with the Los Angeles Coliseum successfully sued the league for violating antitrust laws.

2. The Raiders sued the city of Los Angeles over the fact that the city backed out of a stadium deal for the team.

3.After moving back to Oakland, they were sued by the NFL for losing the Los Angeles television market, the second largest in the United States.

The greedy bastard just wanted the rights .....

No , the A.F.L. did though ...... :wink: The N.F.L. just declined the move to Los Angeles .

Anaheim had a team , had that team leave , and now wants one to come back .

Wrong . That's just life in general ......