Jump to content


Looks like the LA Vikings


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#1 Toshiero

Toshiero

    Rookie

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 368 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:02 AM

http://espn.go.com/n...house-committee

More reason for Bills fans to rest easier that the Bills are staying...not that there was any chance they were moving anyway.

#2 apuszczalowski

apuszczalowski

    Official Transport of TBD Members and WGR 550

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,694 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:10 AM

You know theres plenty of other locations that would love the chance at an NFL team too, The Bills aren't locked into staying just cause LA wouldn't be available anymore. When the Bills are put up for sale, they could have straighten things out in Minneosota and they might be looking for a replacement to the vikings (If the current vikings leave)

These days, if your not willing to pay (for stadiums or stadium upgrades, etc.) you might not survive very long cause theres probably someone somewhere else that will pay

#3 Billsrhody

Billsrhody

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,027 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:25 AM

Tough to be a vikings fan right now..

#4 Max997

Max997

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,545 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:27 AM

LA isnt and never has been a real threat to the Bills.

The NFL wants to move into other coutries and witht he Bills so close to Toronto thats the only real threat to the bills leaving IMO

#5 ACor58

ACor58

    Legend in my own mind

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,387 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:27 AM

Such a tough situation, especially after the Twins (66%) and the University of Minnesota (48%) got a publiclly financed stadium. It's not like they are giving Zygi Wilf a choice. They are basically telling him to leave if he can find a better deal.
I feel bad for the Vikings fans if they lose the team, no city deserves to lose their team.

Edited by ACor58, 17 April 2012 - 10:27 AM.


#6 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    TBD's franchise poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,571 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:31 AM

View PostToshiero, on 17 April 2012 - 10:02 AM, said:

http://espn.go.com/n...house-committee

More reason for Bills fans to rest easier that the Bills are staying...not that there was any chance they were moving anyway.
Except that the talk was for L.A. to get TWO teams!  One in each conference.  Easier to pay off a 2 Billion dollar stadium with two teams.  I guess the NFC is taken care of.

PTR

#7 Why So Serious?

Why So Serious?

    Washington Generals of the NFL

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,032 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:33 AM

Back to the Bills, that's why the appropriate response to the Bills' renovation project is
"Phew, it's only going to be $200M."

Asking Minnesotans to cough up $1B takes some big balls.

Back to the Bills, that's why the appropriate response to the Bills' renovation project is
"Phew, it's only going to be $200M."

Asking Minnesotans to cough up $1B takes some big balls.

#8 nucci

nucci

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,938 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:36 AM

View PostMax997, on 17 April 2012 - 10:27 AM, said:

LA isnt and never has been a real threat to the Bills.

The NFL wants to move into other coutries and witht he Bills so close to Toronto thats the only real threat to the bills leaving IMO
Any franchise in any sport is a threat to move when a new owner takes over.

#9 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    TBD's franchise poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,571 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:38 AM

Why didn't Minny build a shared facility when they built the U of M a new stadium?

PTR

#10 erynthered

erynthered

    I'm not dead.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,109 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:45 AM

View PostWhy So Serious?, on 17 April 2012 - 10:33 AM, said:

Back to the Bills, that's why the appropriate response to the Bills' renovation project is
"Phew, it's only going to be $200M."

Asking Minnesotans to cough up $1B takes some big balls.

Back to the Bills, that's why the appropriate response to the Bills' renovation project is
"Phew, it's only going to be $200M."

Asking Minnesotans to cough up $1B takes some big balls.


I guess you didnt read the article
I guess you didnt read the article

$398 million from the state from taxes on expanded gambling, $150 million from the city of Minneapolis from existing sales taxes and $427 million from the Vikings with assistance likely from the NFL.

#11 UConn James

UConn James

    I'm a little behind on my paperwork

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,236 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:46 AM

View PostPromoTheRobot, on 17 April 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

Except that the talk was for L.A. to get TWO teams!  One in each conference.  Easier to pay off a 2 Billion dollar stadium with two teams.  I guess the NFC is taken care of.

As I wrote at the time that came out, perhaps the league should first see if LA can support one team. Because even that is highly questionable.

View PostPromoTheRobot, on 17 April 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

Why didn't Minny build a shared facility when they built the U of M a new stadium?

Yup.

#12 ACor58

ACor58

    Legend in my own mind

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,387 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:58 AM

View PostPromoTheRobot, on 17 April 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

Why didn't Minny build a shared facility when they built the U of M a new stadium?

PTR

They couldn't come to an agreement on the design and layout. TCF Bank Stadium is a horseshoe that only seats 50,000 and has 39 suites - the U of M wanted more of a collegiate feel to it.

#13 Wayne Cubed

Wayne Cubed

    TBD's Local Shell Fish

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,447 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:06 AM

View PostUConn James, on 17 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

As I wrote at the time that came out, perhaps the league should first see if LA can support one team. Because even that is highly questionable.

I lived in LA for many years and I never got when people on this board talk like LA can't support a team. Do people not understand that the Raiders and Rams left because a new stadium couldn't be built. Both teams just didn't want to play in the coliseum anymore, which wasn't built to hold NFL teams. It had almost little to do with fan support. There is tons of fan support for the NFL in LA. LA ISa viable NFL city.

#14 MarkyMannn

MarkyMannn

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,123 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:11 AM

View Posterynthered, on 17 April 2012 - 10:45 AM, said:

$398 million from the state from taxes on expanded gambling, $150 million from the city of Minneapolis from existing sales taxes and $427 million from the Vikings with assistance likely from the NFL.

I did not read the article.  But with the numbers you are posting, then why renovate RWS?  If we were to put $150m into renovation, just go new.

#15 Mr. WEO

Mr. WEO

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,892 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:13 AM

View PostToshiero, on 17 April 2012 - 10:02 AM, said:

http://espn.go.com/n...house-committee

More reason for Bills fans to rest easier that the Bills are staying...not that there was any chance they were moving anyway.


View PostPromoTheRobot, on 17 April 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

Except that the talk was for L.A. to get TWO teams!  One in each conference.  Easier to pay off a 2 Billion dollar stadium with two teams.  I guess the NFC is taken care of.

PTR

Any team "moving to LA" will have to sell a significant chunk of their team to AEG or that goofy Ed Roski character.

Anyone who is relieved by this news is under the impression that the Bills would be moved to LA, which is and has been a totally crazy belief that Ralph and the boys would be happy to let float around out there in order to squeeze another 200 mil (plus) out of the taxpayers.

#16 QCity

QCity

    GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,412 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:29 AM

View PostWayne Cubed, on 17 April 2012 - 11:06 AM, said:

I lived in LA for many years and I never got when people on this board talk like LA can't support a team. Do people not understand that the Raiders and Rams left because a new stadium couldn't be built. Both teams just didn't want to play in the coliseum anymore, which wasn't built to hold NFL teams. It had almost little to do with fan support. There is tons of fan support for the NFL in LA. LA ISa viable NFL city.
Little to do with fan support? It had everything to do with fan support. LA fans are fickle and simply won't support a losing NFL team over an extended period. The Rams played their last 15 years in Anaheim Stadium, so the Coliseum excuse won't hold water for them. And that's all it was - an excuse. Interest in the Raiders waned and the fans became indifferent after the honeymoon phase was over. People on this board say that LA can't support a team because history has shown they can't - twice.

#17 Max997

Max997

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,545 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:33 AM

View PostPromoTheRobot, on 17 April 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

Why didn't Minny build a shared facility when they built the U of M a new stadium?

PTR

thats my question as well and would have made perfect sense

#18 Gordio

Gordio

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,550 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:36 AM

View PostACor58, on 17 April 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

They couldn't come to an agreement on the design and layout. TCF Bank Stadium is a horseshoe that only seats 50,000 and has 39 suites - the U of M wanted more of a collegiate feel to it.
Bingo, the U of M did not want to play in a NFL Stadium anymore.  They wanted to customize it so they could finally have some semblance of college atmosphere at their home games after playing in the metrodome for all those years.

#19 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    TBD's franchise poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,571 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:38 AM

View PostGordio, on 17 April 2012 - 11:36 AM, said:

Bingo, the U of M did not want to play in a NFL Stadium anymore.  They wanted to customize it so they could finally have some semblance of college atmosphere at their home games after playing in the metrodome for all those years.
And apparently that was worth spending tax money on, but not the Vikings.

PTR

#20 Gordio

Gordio

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,550 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:42 AM

View PostWayne Cubed, on 17 April 2012 - 11:06 AM, said:

I lived in LA for many years and I never got when people on this board talk like LA can't support a team. Do people not understand that the Raiders and Rams left because a new stadium couldn't be built. Both teams just didn't want to play in the coliseum anymore, which wasn't built to hold NFL teams. It had almost little to do with fan support. There is tons of fan support for the NFL in LA. LA ISa viable NFL city.


The Rams never played in the Colleseum did they?  I always thought they played in Aneheim where the Angels play.  

& yes fan support is a real concern in LA.  I remember Raider games that I would watch on TV where the Colleseum had just sections upon sections of empty seats.  I remember games when they only got 35-40K at the game.  So it may not be the main concern but it is a concern.

View PostPromoTheRobot, on 17 April 2012 - 11:38 AM, said:

And apparently that was worth spending tax money on, but not the Vikings.

PTR


Apparently.