Thread: L.A. Vikings

Still like the "LA Lawyers" . . . they've got about as many per capita as MN has lakes.

"SKOL" wrote:

"LAVike" wrote:

I live in LA, and I would be sick to death if the Vikings moved here! Oh God, I can just imagine all the bandwagon fans that would join on just like Laker fans. The horror! And just as bad . . . there's not one f@cking lake in LA!! They should be called the "LA Resevoirs", or the "LA Toxic Runoffs". Teams shouldn't be able to keep names if they move. The Browns were able to keep their name. Can you imagine the LA Vikings? I might be the only person in this town of Nordic descent. If they ever moved here they should be called the "LA Migrant Workers" or better yet, the "LA LAWYERS". God, I hope I never see the day!!

I hear ya LAVike. A cities, or a regions, identity shouldn't follow a team if it moves. Has there ever been a Cardinal in Arizona? They should have been forced to change their name. The same with the Colts. There was so much history with the Baltimore Colts, championships and players. Even if the franchise moves, if they're forced to change their name, when the original city get's another franchise, at least they have the chance of restoring their history. My dad witnessed the Minneapolis Lakers championship years. When Minnesota got another franchise, if they could have kept their identity, by taking back their name, they could have also kept their history.

That's a great point about not allowing teams to take their name with them. The name should belong to the city. Just think, there would still be a Baltimore Colts team instead of the gay "Ravens", The Oilers would still be around, even the Northstars would still have a team in hockey...

If Minnesota moves to another city, I will not be a fan of the team anymore. I'll switch to the giants...

holy cow.... heavily moderated is obviously an understatement. I take it no images are allowed as sigs either?

ok that was a short lived stay...

Ahh, one of those spam and run kinda fans.

"Chief" wrote:

holy cow.... heavily moderated is obviously an understatement. I take it no images are allowed as sigs either?

ok that was a short lived stay...

Don't let the e-door hit you on the way out.

Like Minnesota L.A. will not build a new stadium but it would really hurt the economy in Minnesota if the Vikings moved. A mojor league sports team helps generate millions of dollars to the local area every year. A lot of stores would close, bars would close, possibly some hotels or motels and that would mean alot more unemployed workers.

All things considered, I am sure there is somewhere that would build one. Cleveland and St. Louis didn't waste anytime getting teams back after they left.

I don't want "our" team to leave. I don't care if we can get one back in a few year. I want to have that team forever, starting over from scratch would completely suck!! Look at how long it took St. Louis to actually start winning, the same with Cleveland, granted they went to the playoffs after a couple of years, but one playoff berth since there return is hardly anything to be happy about. Just keep the vikes in Minny!!

Speaking of new stadiums, anyone read Taglibue's comments, on nfl.com, SI.com, Foxsports.com, espn.com or anyof the others?

"UTVikfan" wrote:

Speaking of new stadiums, anyone read Taglibue's comments, on nfl.com, SI.com, Foxsports.com, espn.com or anyof the others?

You talking about the fact that he wants a team in L.A. by 2008? I still think that the Colts are the front-runners for relocation. They've moved once, so it's not like they have a history of being tied to one place. The owner has been trying to get a new stadium, so they can get more revenue, but the local fan base just isn't large enough to get it done. Their lease at the RCA Dome is up soon as well. Everything seems to be falling in place for the Colts to head out west. Plus, L.A. is technically south of the Mason-Dixon line, so they could still (technically) be part of the AFC South.

Somebody get Mayflower on the line.