The historic vote in a fourth-floor conference room at a suburban hotel left open the possibility of the Chargers or Oakland Raiders sharing the Inglewood stadium. The league will also give the Chargers and the Raiders each $100 million to put toward new stadiums if they stay in their current home markets. No public money will be used to build the Inglewood stadium.
There's two ways to look at this, it could work and it could blow up in the leagues face. The reason I say it could blow up on the league is that they've tried this once before. In fact they had a couple of teams in LA back in 1194, but this didn't work out as the two teams ended up moving to Oakland and St. Louis respectively. I'm sure the city could support having an NFL Franchise in the city, but then why did the Rams and Raiders leave the city after the 1994 season? I think it was money at the time that drove the Rams out of the city, same thing with the Raiders. Los Angeles didn't have the money to rebuild the stadiums for the teams, so they just up and left for other cities.
With the way the times have changed between then and now, the city is finally ready for the NFL to come back to the City of Angels. Now out of the three teams who were up for relocation, the Rams, Raiders and Chargers, it made the most sense for the Rams to move back to LA. There's a couple of reasons for this. One is league attendance. Facts are, the Rams were last in the NFL last year in home attendance, finishing 32nd in the NFL in people in the gate. Oakland was 30th, while San Diego came in 18th. The Chargers could draw, so factor that in with all the positives about the stadium in San Diego, it really made no sense for the Chargers to move. I really felt it should have been either the Rams or Raiders. The attendance numbers from last season played a big factor. So to did history.
With Oakland, they had spent less time in LA, totaling twelve years out there. During that stretch, going from 1982 to 1994, Oakland was a good team. They made the playoffs seven times in that twelve year stretch, winning a Super Bowl in 1983. For some reason, Owner Al Davis wasn't happy with the way things were going in LA. He moved the team only after Oakland made the best offer to build a new stadium, so off the team went to Oakland, thus leaving LA without a team. Oakland had one three year stretch, 2000 to 2002, where they were a great team. 2002 saw the Raiders make the Super Bowl, losing to the Bucs that season. Ever since then the team has not had a winning season. To a degree, it would have made sense to move the Raiders back, due to the fact that they've sucked for over thirteen years. But they were drawing out in Oakland, something the Rams aren't doing in St. Louis.
Between 1946 and 1989, the Rams had been a winning franchise. They played in one Super Bowl, during the 1979 season, and made the conference championship seven more times during their heyday. Then you look at 1990 through 1994, the Rams never won more than six games in a year. Once they moved to St. Louis, mostly between 1999 and 2004, the Rams finished above .500 five times in that six year span. They played in two Super Bowls, winning once. But between 2004 and now, St. Louis has finished at .500 or better once, that being the year they went 8-8 in 2006. The numbers in attendance had been going down in St Louis, which is why it made more sense for the Rams to move.
Now the offer is still on the table for the Chargers and Raiders to both move as well, if one of them so chooses. Once one of them agrees to move, if they so desire, the other team can't relocate. Should both teams decline to move, they will be given $100 million to update their stadiums.
Football is finally back in the City of Angels! Will it last? Only time will tell
No comments:
Post a Comment