Thursday, September 6, 2012

NFL Franchise In L.A.: My Thoughts

I think there should be one or two NFL franchises in L.A. but I think they should come in the form of a new franchise and not an existing one. Yes, the NFL does already have 32 teams. And yes, L.A. is looking for a winning team or two to stick in a new arena to draw fans but I think  with the options they have looking into moving to L.A. such as Oakland, Jacksonville, at one point Minnesota, St. Louis and the best of the group San Fran. I think they would be better suited to have a new franchise because the ones looking into moving in are almost like starting a new one excluding San Fran.

The NFL wants two teams to run the arena. Similar to the NY Giants and the NY Jets situation. Where one team gets home field every other Sunday. They are mostly discussing the two California teams that are already there in Oakland and San Fran. But like I said earlier, lets add two new franchises and keep everyone else where they are. So I say call one the L.A. Oilers (named after Houston’s former team) and the other L.A. Cougars (no pun intended) .It would make it exactly like NY’s. Two teams, same city, same stadium, more money for the NFL and some new excitement for those in L.A.  I know it would lead to four teams in California..but I don't honestly see a problem with that. The NFL shouldn't either. It will help keep their pockets full.

Not to mention it helps to keep current franchises where they are already. I wouldn't want to see another Cleveland Browns turned Baltimore Ravens situation when Cleveland lost their franchise to Baltimore then out of nowhere they revived them a few years later.Why don't we just skip a step and add two new franchises instead of moving San Fran and Oakland to L.A. then only to have San Fran and Oakland end up with franchises later on.

As for the two new teams, I would stick one of the teams in the NFC West (more competition needed) and AFC West (same). I do see where one division would have an extra team in each the AFC and NFC, but that’s the way the NFL used to be before realignment. 

Do I think the NFL will listen to my suggestions, probably not. Will there be a new team in L.A., I think so. I think it will be an existing franchise or two.  And if I was to make a guess that will be by 2015. And I think they will immediately put them into the running to hold a Super Bowl as well since L.A. is well L.A.

What do you think? Should the NFL put a franchise in L.A.? Should they be a new franchise or an existing one? Would love to hear what you guys think!!


  1. It's tough not to get overwhelmed with all of the details about franchising out there, so it's wonderful to have something like
    this readily available. I've been doing franchise development for a while now and I like discovering things like this that I can easily provide to associates and individuals looking to start franchising. Finding good franchising info is fairly challenging, so it's good to be
    able to share this with individuals that are into franchising or are testing
    the waters also.
    Here is my site : restaurant startup

  2. I don't think that they should have another team out in Cali. L.A. has already had their chances with the Raiders and the Rams and both have failed. Their economy has not gotten any better since those times either so what makes them think that anything will change now? I think that they should consider other areas that do not have teams but have strong football followings I.E. Nebraska or Alabama that way they can get fans from the neighboring states if they are seriously considering expansion. I mean look at how many fans attend their college games, and those games sell out year in and year out. Why, because there is no professional sports anywhere near their location. Cali already has three teams, Florida has three, New York has three, Texas has two, so if the NFL is going to expand do it in a region where they don't have a team near by. That is my opinion.