Eric R. You raise a valid point. LA is per capita not as good an NFL town as other more “black and white” cities.

But that relative lack of enthusiasm for NFL games is more than offset by the shear number of people in what is defined as the Greater LA Area — which encompasses 5 counties. That’s 18,000,000 people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Los_Angeles_Area

The Las Vegas area has a demographic population of less than 2,000,000.

My San Diego pro teams struggle because our demographic area holds a bit over 3,000,000 people. We’ve NEVER won a top championship in any major league sport — holding the national record for mediocrity.

First, the city has been without the NFL for 20+ years. The area has gotten used to life without the league.

Second, the city (and maybe the county) are now majority Hispanic, with most of those being immigrants or first generation growing up in a heavily Spanish-speaking Mexican cultural atmosphere. They are not big fans of American football, they follow “futbol”. Even more assimilated Hispanics do not seem to embrace the gridiron the way that they follow soccer or baseball. Some do, but not in the same proportion as Anglos, be they white or black.

Third, California has become a very left-wing, deep blue state, and even those who can afford tickets to NFL games are more and more of the leftist variety who view the NFL with the same disdain that they do NASCAR.

Which is why, I think, it is only a matter of time, until one of the two Bay Area teams move – Las Vegas, Salt Lake City and Oklahoma City being likely candidates.

Richard, if a group of wealthy investors thought that an NFL team would be a profitable venture in the LA area it would have already happened. But those involved don’t want to risk their own money. They want the taxpayers to risk our money on the new team. Screw that! And it’s an unfair proposal since the majority of the taxpayers don’t even like NFL football or pro sports. If a vote was taken by those in the LA area whether to financially support NFL, NBA or MLB with public funds my guess is that it would get shot down by over a 20% margin.
On the firefighter issue I think we did agree in spirit. I concur that firefighter compensation should be reduced by a full 50% so that the firefighters get paid a TRUE blue collar compensation. You seem think that’s possible. I don’t. So my belief is that since we pay firefighters compensations over and above compensations for regular jobs that require a 4 year college degree we should raise standard entry educational level to a 4 year college degree from an accredited brick & mortar university to be a cop or a firefighter. So we agreed in principle about the nature of the larger problem. We had a minor disagreement over how to solve it. So I don’t feel it’s ackward when we agree. That’s a distorted comment.

One who is opining does not need a proof source. That’s what you do too, LIC. When you opine you don’t own your own facts.

LetitCollapse — The two NFL teams left (and no one moved in) because the city wisely decided not to build them a stadium with taxpayer dollars. Al Davis brought the Raiders to LA hoping to get a new stadium. He didn’t get it, so he blackmailed Oakland into spending hundreds of millions renovating their aging football stadium, and moved back to Oakland. The Rams were offered a great stadium by St. Louis, and moved. Kudos to the LA govt for not caving in.

Awkward when we agree — NO taxpayer subsidies for sports millionaires (players) and billionaires (owners). I fought this for years in San Diego. Even took it to the state Supreme Court (and lost).

Richard, if LA is such a great market and econ opportunity for an NFL franchise why hasn’t the region had a team for decades? Why did both the Raiders and the Rams make a hasty exit?

No matter where a team plays – if it’s in the cellar year after year (like the Clippers were) it’s not going to draw a crowd and it’s going to be a losing venture. If a San Diego NFL team had a run of good seasons it wouldn’t matter whether LA had a team or not. The games would sell out.

Personally, I don’t care if a team is #1 or #10 in the standings. I don’t want my tax dollars supporting it. If the team can’t stand on it’s own 2 feet financially without gubment support it doesn’t deserve to exist.

If the Chargers DON’T get picked for this plum, a new LA NFL team would cost the small market San Diego Chargers crucial revenue — at least 30% of their sky boxes are leased to LA area businesses. The LA businesses would likely switch to the LA sky box option.

All this makes a great case for not subsidizing the SD Chargers new stadium. While enjoying a great season (so far), any San Diego pro sports team is doomed to also-ran status. Indeed, San Diego leads the nation in the number of seasons without winning ANY Super Bowl, World Series or NBA Finals. I think it’s about 108 total tries, zero successes.

Thank Goodness for our great weather and fine beaches. And HD TV!

Desmond, what really kills me is that these misfits are already making tons of loot (multi-millions each) and then strike for more money or benefits – causing a huge inconvenience for the ticket holders – and then once the strike is over the fans still pour into the stadium to cheer the ones who just got though dissing them!!! LOL!!! Masochists! Personally, I am DONE with pro sports. And I was a loyal fan (NFL, NBA, MLB) for years! In fact, I will go out of my way to avoid buying products sold by the NFL, NBA, MLB sponsors too. Most consumers don’t care. I do. Oh, and if the NCAA athletes ever unionize and start demanding huge salaries and benefits (that’s the latest talk)- I will stop watching college ball too – and will focus entirely on local high school sports for the rest of my days on the planet. Unless we consumers fight back, there is no end to this crap!