Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Trent Richardson Interviews Fellow Brown Brandon Weeden

Can the NFL Survive in Los Angeles?

LOS ANGELES CA - FEBRUARY 01:  Tim Leiweke President and CEO of AEG holds a football after he  announced naming rights for the new football stadium Farmers Field at Los Angeles Convention Center on February 1 2011 in Los Angeles California. AEG has reportedly sold the naming rights for the proposed stadium to Farmers Insurance Exchange for $650,000 calling the stadium "Farmers Field."  (Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images)

Yesterday, the following comment to Jeff's post about a Los Angeles stadium was brought to my attention:

I was a UCLA reject and went to UCSD, so I am familiar with both areas. The NFL will fail for the third time in L.A., no one cares about pro football. The Lakers are the kings of the sport scene here and are loved by the entertainment industry. We already have two big college teams and the NFL brings nothing to the table. I went to some Chargers games and they seem to attract the trash of SD. The Lakers cater to the Hollywood set. The Clippers are my team since I am a regular person.

No one wants the Chargers, if they do move here they will eventually wind up back in San Diego. SD is not L.A. there is way more to do and see up here, you guys are really flattering yourselves if you think we want the Chargers.

Besides the obvious annoyance I'm sure is shared by most of you, the sentence that I bolded piqued my interest. With both the Rose Bowl and the L.A. Coliseum within a 20 minute drive of where a downtown stadium would go, I began to wonder if this gentleman's statement brought to light a real issue with the NFL in Los Angeles. Can a city support both a college football program (much less two) and also an NFL franchise?

Now, what I'm talking about here is attendance. Will an area that fills up two sets of 90,000+ seats on Saturday also be able to fill 60,000+ seats on Sunday? Let's run through the ten biggest stadiums in college football and see how close they are to the nearest NFL franchise (in driving time)...

 

1. Michigan Stadium (about 1 hour from Detroit Lions)
2. Beaver Stadium (about 2.5 hours from Pittsburgh Steelers)
3. Ohio Stadium (2 hours from Cincinnati Bengals, 2.5 hours from Cleveland Browns)
4. Neyland Stadium (3 hours from Tennessee Titans)
5. Bryant-Denny Stadium (3.5 hours from Atlanta Falcons)
6. Darrell K. Royal - Texas Memorial Stadium (3 hours from Houston Texans)
7. Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum (2 hours from San Diego Chargers)
8. Sanford Stadium (1.5 hours from Atlanta Falcons)
9. Rose Bowl (2.5 hours from San Diego Chargers)
10. Tiger Stadium (1.5 hours from New Orleans Saints)

 

This is something I've thought about many times before. I remember sitting in Philadelphia thinking "Would Temple really fill up the Linc with a good football team?" I couldn't imagine that place getting 70,000 people two days in a row. I wondered why most major cities around the country didn't have a major football program in town or on the outskirts, but maybe the issue is (and maybe part of the reason the NFL has waited so long to come back to LA) simply that a major college football program (or two) and NFL team cannot both be successful in each other's backyards.

There's a few exceptions to the rule, I suppose. The 49ers and Raiders do okay on attendance (not great), with good Stanford and Cal college football programs nearby. The Michigan State Spartans do fine and I believe they're close to Detroit. However, one of the key differences is that those college football stadiums are smaller. We're not just talking about the NFL competing with one of the top 10 biggest college football stadiums, we're talking about the NFL competing with two of the top 10 biggest college football stadiums. And if recent talk is to believed, they want to compete with those two college football stadiums with two NFL teams to ensure that there's football in L.A. on every Sunday during the regular season.

Does this seem like something important that everyone has just been glossing over?

Comment 16 comments  |  1 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

LA can support an NFL team, but...

And it pains me to say this, it would be a lot better for if the relocated team was the Chargers. As the only team in SoCal, there’s already tons of fans in LA. You can count those fans in to buy tickets. Of course, you also can count in the many corporate tickets and tickets from general NFL fans. And also, eventhough a lot of San Diego fans will be jilted and swear off the franchise forever, a good amount will remain loyal and stick with the team if they make the move north.

You won’t get the same level of support from any other team.

http://twitter.com/matthewverygood
http://lobsterstuffedwithtacos.tumblr.com

by matthewverygood on Feb 9, 2011 2:50 PM PST reply actions  

I went to some Chargers games and they seem to attract the trash of SD.

Clearly he never went to any Raider games at the Colosseum.

We already have two big college teams and the NFL brings nothing to the table.

Except for being the most popular sporting league in the country.

As an LA native, I will admit it: its a town full of bandwagon jumpers. Yes, there are plenty of hardcore fans, but just like most towns (San Diego included) interest and attendance swell when the team is doing well. This is true of the Dodgers, Lakers, Kings, Bruins and Trojans.

If an NFL team, including the Chargers, got a brand new stadium in LA and put out at least a decently competitive product, people will come. The Stadium will sell out the necessary 10 times a year, people will watch on TV (mostly by default, since every game will be broadcast locally), and they’ll buy enough stuff to make it worthwhile for the team. Throw in some playoff runs or a Super Bowl and they would be the toast of the town. Simple human nature.

by CABurrito on Feb 9, 2011 3:30 PM PST reply actions  

Also
No one wants the Chargers, if they do move here they will eventually wind up back in San Diego. SD is not L.A. there is way more to do and see up here, you guys are really flattering yourselves if you think we want the Chargers.

Rubbish. Despite there being “so much to do” in LA, the area still supports 6 major pro sports teams and 2 major college teams. This whole line of reasoning is stupid. I’ve lived in LA and New York, and yes, there are a lot of things to do. But both cities still manage to support multiple sports franchises. There are a lot of football fans for whom “something to do” means watching football on Sundays in the fall.

If the Chargers move, it won’t be to bump up attendance. It will be because they got a sweat deal on a new stadium.

by CABurrito on Feb 9, 2011 6:51 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Why is LA the sacred cow of the NFL?

First, this is my initial post on BFTB and if you’ll indulge me for a moment, I love the site.

I live in Maryland but grew up in SD before moving for college and staying here afterward. I can say for a fact that Maryland can pull down 50k when they are doing well, but they will NEVER be a big time college team because you have the Redskins and Ravens in the backyard. If its not the Skins or Ravens, the support is fickle for my Terps, at best.

So its a very good point that the storied teams of USC and UCLA would certainly at least pull some “base” support from the NFL. By “base” I mean the people who are passionate enough to attend a live football game (a demo that is waning every season, thank you HD). They are not going to plunk down season tickets for both Saturday and Sunday. I’m talking about the chumps like you and me who are going to sit in the upper deck to cheer on the team from the thin air. Remember, no sell out, no TV. This isn’t the price of a hockey/basketball/baseball game. The NFL taint a cheap ticket, folks. They’ve only got 10 games to rake in gate, not 41 or 82.

Yeah, you’ll have corporate boxes and suites and the like, but I guess it will be a franchise that is dead from the inside. Maybe that’s business as usual for a city with the Dodgers, Clippers, Duck and Kings.

I’m going to be so bitter when this happens.

by ElectricTerp on Feb 9, 2011 3:40 PM PST reply actions  

Yeah, you’ll have corporate boxes and suites and the like, but I guess it will be a franchise that is dead from the inside. Maybe that’s business as usual for a city with the Dodgers, Clippers, Duck and Kings.

Certainly for the Lakers, Clippers and Kings. Staples Centers boxes, which seem to separate the haves from the have-nots, robs that place of any real atmosphere

Bolts from the Blue - Destroying your opinions with facts.

by John Gennaro on Feb 9, 2011 6:04 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, you’ll have corporate boxes and suites and the like, but I guess it will be a franchise that is dead from the inside. Maybe that’s business as usual for a city with the Dodgers, Clippers, Duck and Kings.

The Angels and Dodgers regularly draw over 3 million a year and are regularly in the top 5 in MLB attendance. There are plenty of hardcore Ducks and Kings fans, and both teams draw reasonably well despite the fact that its a warm weather city with 2 teams. Even the Clippers have decent attendance given their usually sorry state, and even though they are a clear second fiddle to the Lakers they still fill their arena fairly well and have a core of passionate supporters. The area is just so populated that there are enough fans and fan dollars to go around for everyone.

I really don’t see how a single NFL team, assuming they were any good, would struggle to find fans in this market. LA supported the Rams for decades, and then supported 2 NFL teams for over a decade. The teams eventually left because they couldn’t get the city to build them new stadiums, not because they didn’t have a fanbase.

by CABurrito on Feb 9, 2011 6:45 PM PST up reply actions  

Maybe it’s a distinction without a difference, but even though all the professional teams are considered to be LA teams, the Angels and the Ducks are Orange County-based, whereas the Dodgers and the Kings are LA-based. When LA had two NFL teams, the Raiders were in LA, and the Rams were in Orange County (at Angel Stadium). My memory is quite bad, but I thought that at the time when the Rams and Raiders were in So Cal, USC football stank it up bad and wasn’t in direct competition for fans. (No recollection at all about UCLA.) My gut feeling is that the greater LA area (translation – all of Southern CA) can support multiple teams for each sport, but I would think that an NFL team in Orange County, not competing directly with a reasonably strong USC football program and an improving UCLA football program, would draw better than one right in LA sandwiched between the Coliseum and the Rose Bowl.

by Chargers Chickee on Feb 10, 2011 10:37 AM PST up reply actions  

A very intriguing question, John.

One that I doubt that the NFL is asking themselves in their rush to get into the second largest media market in the United States.

My guess would be that attendance would likely be a constant problem for any NFL team in the LA area, but with proper marketing they could still make a fortune on corporate sponsorships, suite sales, and retail sales of licensed apparel.

Get the local populace to identify with the team and, more importantly, the brand, and revenue will not be an issue.

And may I digress just long enough to say that this is not the first time I have heard/read the comment from an LA native that there is less to do in SD than there is in LA, and each time I hear/see it I want to break something. It is so clearly some half-assed way of covering for their own laziness or agoraphobia that I just want to grab them and shake some damn sense into them!

I went to college in LA, and I can’t think of one recreational activity I did there that couldn’t be replicated in some manner in San Diego.

Seriously grinds my gears.

by SDzeke on Feb 9, 2011 5:05 PM PST reply actions   2 recs

Rec'd

Bolts from the Blue - Destroying your opinions with facts.

by John Gennaro on Feb 9, 2011 6:05 PM PST up reply actions  

The Clippers are for normal people?

Come one, the Lakers are by far the most popular team in LA. Not even close.

The thing about the distance issue is a little moot in LA, I think. I was a student at UCLA, and I went to exactly ONE home game at the Rose Bowl. Why only one? Because it took THREE HOURS in traffic to get there! From UCLA to the “home stadium.”

My point: the 20 minutes of proximity isn’t really that close. 15 minutes of LA driving could be done in 5 minutes in SD. The closeness of the franchises won’t matter so much.

Does that mean LA will care… I don’t know. I’ve lived her for 5 years, and I’ve only met as many fellow charger fans as I can count on ONE hand.

by counterpoint on Feb 9, 2011 10:13 PM PST reply actions  

The Chargers In Los Angeles

Is a big mistake all the way around. I don’t post here as often as I’d wish to, so if this has been brought up already I apologize, but Los Angeles was and still largely is a Raiders town and people continue to neglect that. It’d be a shame to move the Chargers to Los Angeles and have them be the second team in town in their own league as well. The fact that they play the Raiders twice a year and the Raiders are sworn rivals as it is doesn’t help matters either.

That’s just one thing. The whole idea that the league needs Los Angeles is stupid regardless. I think the media wants this more than the citizens of Los Angeles do and it’s a shame they’re willing to take a team from a fan base to do it. They had two teams and failed to support either sufficiently. Why do they think it would be different now?

I hate it.

"You play to win the game."

by MrWayneKeller on Feb 10, 2011 6:40 AM PST reply actions  

i really like this article and the way it makes you think...

also the comments by everyone are good points and you can really see that it will be a controversial couple of years to come with the LA stadium issue. Are the SD Chargers good for that city? Will they get the support needed to compete with both UCLA & USC? Will the already there Raider fanbase reject (immediately) a Charger team it knows entirely as a rival?

If only we knew.This situation really has me feeling sick about my team.I hope they don’t move,let alone move to a city where it might and has the possibility to fail.What will happen to our city as well? I know a lot of ppl who have said that if the team moves to LA they will stop rooting for them period,no matter how much it hurts. I’m talking about real hard core fans,that’s how much animosity there is between SD and LA. We have ourselves quite a dilemma folks.

by Gorditoe1 on Feb 10, 2011 10:48 AM PST reply actions   1 recs

What About the Charger Legacy?

Let’s assume worst case scenario, say the chargers leave for LA. Any way we can get the charger name, team colors, history, etc. left in San Diego, just like the Browns in Cleveland?

50 years of history shouldn’t be able to up and leave like that.

by Potatoeboy on Feb 10, 2011 11:47 AM PST via mobile reply actions   1 recs

Agree

It would make sense IF the Chargers moved to give them a new name and a new identity to appeal to the broadest fan base possible in LA.

"If you wanna crown em, then crown their asses"

by Natrone Means Business on Feb 10, 2011 1:53 PM PST up reply actions  

on the flip side, the move might alienate the SD fanbase who still want to follow the team and drive up north to watch games. Personally, I don’t know if I’d still root for them if they moved, name change or not.

"If you wanna crown em, then crown their asses"

by Natrone Means Business on Feb 10, 2011 1:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


BFTB Apparel Store

Bftbshirtstore_medium

Facebook

Chargers on Twitter


Managers

Paddlin_small John Gennaro

Assistant Editors

Dont-panic-thumb_small Wonko

Pomeranian_of_war_small Richard Wade

Antonio_small creanium

Columnists

Sdclogo2_small Orz

Tn_small Jeff (sliderockmpc)

Wrong_small_small Superduperboltman

Screen_shot_2011-08-05_at_2 jkvandal