Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

INDIANAPOLIS -- Commissioner Roger Goodell says if the NFL puts a team in Los Angeles, it is probable the league would expand to 34 franchises.

Appearing Thursday night on "Costas Live" on NBC Sports Network, Goodell said the league "doesn't want to move any of our teams."

"We probably don't want to go to 33" teams by adding just one new club if a suitable stadium is built in the Los Angeles area, Goodell said.

There has been speculation a Los Angeles stadium could house two NFL franchises, although Goodell did not address that with show host Bob Costas on Thursday.

Goodell says there are several issues that must be solved in the city, particularly which of two current stadium proposals is best. He didn't suggest any timetable for returning to Southern California.


http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nfl/stor ... os-angeles" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

LA Cobras from the early arena football days
LA Express from the USFL

That works! What about the LA Avengers, Anaheim Piranhas, from arena?

wtf? so I guess divisions would be thrown out the window. the league is fine with 32, don't need another 2. Just move Jacksonville or Minny to LA.

Seahawks08 wrote:wtf? so I guess divisions would be thrown out the window. the league is fine with 32, don't need another 2. Just move Jacksonville or Minny to LA.

LA Vikings

Fargo would get one - who the other?

dbackjon wrote:Fargo would get one - who the other?

If there is one in North Dakota, then Minnesota will want a pro team also.

Gil Dobie wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Fargo would get one - who the other?

If there is one in North Dakota, then Minnesota will want a pro team also.

If the Vikes do move to LA, an expansion team in Fargo would be an interesting thought. It would never happen in my lifetime, but it's fun to think about.

Why not just merge with the SEC and have done with it?

Or are the SEC "student athletes" afraid that they'll have to take a pay cut?

Why not just make Ohio State an NFL team? They are already the best professional team in the state of Ohio.

34? No way. The divisions would be too convoluted.

Contract Carolina and Jacksonville and move the Rams back to L.A. instead. Oh, yeah. And move the Cardinals back to St. Louis (or Chicago), too.

SuperHornet wrote:34? No way. The divisions would be too convoluted.

Contract Carolina and Jacksonville and move the Rams back to L.A. instead. Oh, yeah. And move the Cardinals back to St. Louis (or Chicago), too.

You're a f'ing idiot.

andy7171 wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:34? No way. The divisions would be too convoluted.

Contract Carolina and Jacksonville and move the Rams back to L.A. instead. Oh, yeah. And move the Cardinals back to St. Louis (or Chicago), too.

You're a f'ing idiot.

If they did expand to 34 to have a team in LA, I wouldn't be shocked if the 34th team is in London. The NFL has been pushing in that direction for some time and they've even made the deal with the Rams to have 4 games there in the next 4 years. So even if a franchise didn't move there you'd start the idea of London having a single team to follow and root for.

GannonFan wrote:If they did expand to 34 to have a team in LA, I wouldn't be shocked if the 34th team is in London. The NFL has been pushing in that direction for some time and they've even made the deal with the Rams to have 4 games there in the next 4 years. So even if a franchise didn't move there you'd start the idea of London having a single team to follow and root for.

If the NFL had a brain it'd stop trying to cram its product down London's throat. Name a single college or pro player from Great Britain?? Now Australia on the other hand, that's where the NFL should be playing & marketing. Plus, the women are much better looking....

SuperHornet wrote:34? No way. The divisions would be too convoluted.

Contract Carolina and Jacksonville and move the Rams back to L.A. instead. Oh, yeah. And move the Cardinals back to St. Louis (or Chicago), too.

Yeah, like Chicago needs another team.

Cubs
White Sox
BlackHawks
Bear
Bulls

They need to leave well enough alone.

bluehenbillk wrote:

GannonFan wrote:If they did expand to 34 to have a team in LA, I wouldn't be shocked if the 34th team is in London. The NFL has been pushing in that direction for some time and they've even made the deal with the Rams to have 4 games there in the next 4 years. So even if a franchise didn't move there you'd start the idea of London having a single team to follow and root for.

If the NFL had a brain it'd stop trying to cram its product down London's throat. Name a single college or pro player from Great Britain?? Now Australia on the other hand, that's where the NFL should be playing & marketing. Plus, the women are much better looking....

London Fletcher??????

bluehenbillk wrote:

GannonFan wrote:If they did expand to 34 to have a team in LA, I wouldn't be shocked if the 34th team is in London. The NFL has been pushing in that direction for some time and they've even made the deal with the Rams to have 4 games there in the next 4 years. So even if a franchise didn't move there you'd start the idea of London having a single team to follow and root for.

If the NFL had a brain it'd stop trying to cram its product down London's throat. Name a single college or pro player from Great Britain?? Now Australia on the other hand, that's where the NFL should be playing & marketing. Plus, the women are much better looking....

If Australia was closer, sure, I'd say expand there rather than London. But London is already 7-11 hours by air from any NFL city and a 5 hour time difference with the East Coast. Australia is 14-20 hour plane trip(s) and is a 12-15 hour time difference from the East Coast. Just ain't going to happen. And the NFL isn't going there to widen its player base, it's going there to make money. They do that well enough if they just stay in London and not do what they did with the World League and spread it out.

andy7171 wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:34? No way. The divisions would be too convoluted.

Contract Carolina and Jacksonville and move the Rams back to L.A. instead. Oh, yeah. And move the Cardinals back to St. Louis (or Chicago), too.

You're a f'ing idiot.

Care to explain, Andy?

Oh, BTW, the "too many teams" argument is already taken by Marky-Mark.

tampajag wrote:

bluehenbillk wrote:
If the NFL had a brain it'd stop trying to cram its product down London's throat. Name a single college or pro player from Great Britain?? Now Australia on the other hand, that's where the NFL should be playing & marketing. Plus, the women are much better looking....

London Fletcher??????