Author Topic: The Los Angeles Vikings?  (Read 1059 times)

rik

  • Guest
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #15 on: January 21, 2007, 12:33:56 AM »
We need a team out here.

To say you need another professional sports team in California is just being greedy.
LA NEEDS A TEAM - Just because there are teams in California doesnt mean shit, LA as an area is bigger than most teams with a NFL team combined. 

Yup, you cannot not have a team in the second biggest media market in the U.S.
 

M Dogg™

  • Greatest of All Time
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 12116
  • Thanked: 19 times
  • Karma: 330
  • Feel the Power of the Darkside
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #16 on: January 21, 2007, 12:34:13 AM »
In a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.
That's very misleading to say primarily because Minnie/St. Paul is more dense then L.A. St. Paul and Minneapolis have about 700,000+ people combined compared to L.A.'s 3.6 million+ people. The entire metro area doesn't even have a higher population then the city of Los Angeles.

The Twin Cities area includes the surrounding suburbs, and has a population of more than 3 million. The area here is unique and if you factor in the "metro area", we are right up there with LA.
The entire Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington Metropolitan Statistical Area has 3 million+ people. Not even the total population of the city of L.A.

The Twin Cities has about 3 million, so does the LA suburb area known as the Inland Empire. The IE, OC and LA make up the Southern California area. Sorry, I live in Burnsville now, but grew up in the IE, and it's easy, LA is WAY bigger than the Twin Cities. I mean, it's not even close. I can drive across the Twin Cities metro area in a very short amount of time. Anyone for the Twin Cities would get overwhelmed by the LA area. You can drive from the beach, and go down the 10 west, and you'd get to San Bernardino in about 4-5 hours, and you will only see urban. It's all cities, back to back to back in So Cal.

On that note, I don't want to see the Viks in LA. Too much tradition of the NFC North, the Viks, Lions, Bears and Packers make for one of the greatest divisions in the NFL.These teams have been doing battle for years, and even though the Viks are the youngest of the 4 teams, they earned their spot and it's for the best interest in the league to keep the Viks here. And besides, that stadium deal in the North Metro area will pass. Personally, I think the Viks should move to Bloomington. I would like to see the Rams move back (yeah right) or another NFC team to take the Rams place. That way it would be Seattle, Arizona, Frisco and LA, a true west coast league. Best team to move to LA, the Charger, they were once the LA Changers after all.

I still will root for the Raiders though.
 

I Am The Anton

  • Muthafuckin' Double OG
  • ****
  • Posts: 734
  • Karma: -26
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #17 on: January 21, 2007, 12:34:35 AM »
We need a team out here.

To say you need another professional sports team in California is just being greedy.
LA NEEDS A TEAM - Just because there are teams in California doesnt mean shit, LA as an area is bigger than most teams with a NFL team combined. 

LA has 2 NBA teams in the same building and 2 MLB teams. Is it really going to hurt you to not have a NFL team? LA had a NFL team and it failed, why do you think LA even deserves to take a franchise from another city.


I need some meaning I can memorize
The kind I have always seems to slip my mind
 

M Dogg™

  • Greatest of All Time
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 12116
  • Thanked: 19 times
  • Karma: 330
  • Feel the Power of the Darkside
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2007, 12:39:50 AM »
We need a team out here.

To say you need another professional sports team in California is just being greedy.
LA NEEDS A TEAM - Just because there are teams in California doesnt mean shit, LA as an area is bigger than most teams with a NFL team combined. 

LA has 2 NBA teams in the same building and 2 MLB teams. Is it really going to hurt you to not have a NFL team? LA had a NFL team and it failed, why do you think LA even deserves to take a franchise from another city.

here's the thing. LA's NFL teams suffered from bad ownership. Al Davis, though I loved the Raiders, was benching Marcus Allen, firing Art Shell after having not one losing season well in LA, and trying to leave the Colisum at all times. The Rams had that lady who screwed over the Rams so badly. She was orginally from St. Louis, so when her husband died and she gained the team, she moved them to her hometown without any second thoughts. Al Davis was in negotations with Hollypark to build a new stadium after the Colisum got huge damage during the 1994 earthquakes. The stadium was not fit to hold a team, and Al left to Oakland once the Hollywood Park deal feel through.
 

M Dogg™

  • Greatest of All Time
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 12116
  • Thanked: 19 times
  • Karma: 330
  • Feel the Power of the Darkside
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #19 on: January 21, 2007, 12:43:36 AM »
Georgia Frontiere (born c. 1928 in St. Louis, Missouri) is the co-owner and chairman of the St. Louis Rams.

She inherited ownership of the team in 1979 after the death of her then-husband, Carroll Rosenbloom. The inheritance was designed as a tax dodge so that Georgia would not have to pay high taxes on Rosenbloom's estate, and it appears that he never intended for her to have a role with the team. But that was not Georgia's intention at all as she immediately took over control as owner and through her lawyers and tax attorneys began to make major changes to the team's organization. She quickly fired her stepson Steve Rosenbloom as the head-office executive and began hiring people loyal to her.

A native of St. Louis, Missouri, Georgia moved the Rams to St. Louis, which was a financially risky proposition initially but soon proved to be a goldmine as the city of St. Louis provided a publicly funded stadium for $260-million, and more than $22-million was guaranteed in annual luxury suite and ticket revenues. For a period of time, the St. Louis Rams were exposed to a great deal of public humiliation as the press and other NFL teams made fun of them for having the league's only female owner. There is a popular story that the Rams once entered the visiting team locker room at another team's stadium and found that the towels and the soaps provided to them were pink and that a lot of pink bunting had been hung on the walls. However, Georgia got the last laugh in 2000 when the Rams, under head coach Dick Vermeil and MVP quarterback Kurt Warner beat the Tennessee Titans in Super Bowl XXXIV and Georgia was on the platform hugging Vermeil when the Lombardi trophy was awarded to the Rams as the winners.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Frontiere
 

Just Another Sunny day in California

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1778
  • Karma: -47
  • Twin Turbos....yeeeee
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #20 on: January 21, 2007, 12:54:02 AM »
i think LA needs a team but not the Vikings, please God no.
Oh I like this one... One dog goes one way, the other dog goes the other way, and this guy's sayin', "Whadda ya want from me?

 

J$crILLa

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 5128
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • Karma: 142
  • J$crilla -aka- JDolla$iGn -aka- $crillVille
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #21 on: January 21, 2007, 03:04:53 AM »
dosent look like they r moving

Bay Area Jat

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1925
  • Karma: 97
  • Fremont A's
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #22 on: January 21, 2007, 08:35:26 AM »


In a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.

Yall already took our basketball team, yall don't need our football team too. How many lakes does LA have anyways? One? Give our damn name back at least.
[/quote]
I've forgot more about music and sports than you will ever know!!!
 

M Dogg™

  • Greatest of All Time
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 12116
  • Thanked: 19 times
  • Karma: 330
  • Feel the Power of the Darkside
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #23 on: January 21, 2007, 01:38:59 PM »


In a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.

Yall already took our basketball team, yall don't need our football team too. How many lakes does LA have anyways? One? Give our damn name back at least.
[/quote]

I live in Burnsville homie, I grew up in LA. There is no way that 100 square mile is right. Maybe average, but there are parts of LA that in a 100 square miles, it's as dense as New York. I've lived in both.

As for the Lakers, LA made them. They moved to LA because they won 5 titles in Minneapolis, and they never had people come to the games. They were losing money, and they were making basketball history. They were the first NBA team to play the Harlem Globetroders, as back then no NBA team would play a black team, much less the World Champions. The MN Lakers were making history, and no one knew it in their own city. So to survive as a franchise, they had to move. And they can keep the name, as the Lakers in Los Angeles are basketball history. Oh, here's a list of Lakes in Los Angeles.

Lake Machado, Harbor City (made popular by the elusive "Reggie the Alligator")

Lincoln Park Lake (formerly East Lake), Lincoln Heights

Lake Balboa, Sepulveda Basin (Encino/Van Nuys)

MacArthur Park Lake (formerly West Lake), MacArthur Park

Echo Park Lake, Echo Park

Lake Hollywood (Hollywood Reservoir), Hollywood

Los Angeles Japanese Garden lakes, Sepulveda Basin, Van Nuys

Hollenbeck Lake, Boyle Heights

Reseda Park Lake, Reseda

Ernest Debs Park Reservoir (pond), Montecito Heights

Toluca Lake (there are actually 2 of them: one in the L.A. community of Toluca Lake and a smaller one in Burbank)

Del Rey Lagoon

Pond (in the shape of a "Mexican guitar") from a natural spring at Los Encinos State Park, Encino

Hansen Dam Lake, Lake View Terrace
 

Low Key

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 3140
  • Karma: 555
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #24 on: January 21, 2007, 02:06:41 PM »


In a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.

Yall already took our basketball team, yall don't need our football team too. How many lakes does LA have anyways? One? Give our damn name back at least.

I live in Burnsville homie, I grew up in LA. There is no way that 100 square mile is right. Maybe average, but there are parts of LA that in a 100 square miles, it's as dense as New York. I've lived in both.

As for the Lakers, LA made them. They moved to LA because they won 5 titles in Minneapolis, and they never had people come to the games. They were losing money, and they were making basketball history. They were the first NBA team to play the Harlem Globetroders, as back then no NBA team would play a black team, much less the World Champions. The MN Lakers were making history, and no one knew it in their own city. So to survive as a franchise, they had to move. And they can keep the name, as the Lakers in Los Angeles are basketball history. Oh, here's a list of Lakes in Los Angeles.

Lake Machado, Harbor City (made popular by the elusive "Reggie the Alligator")

Lincoln Park Lake (formerly East Lake), Lincoln Heights

Lake Balboa, Sepulveda Basin (Encino/Van Nuys)

MacArthur Park Lake (formerly West Lake), MacArthur Park

Echo Park Lake, Echo Park

Lake Hollywood (Hollywood Reservoir), Hollywood

Los Angeles Japanese Garden lakes, Sepulveda Basin, Van Nuys

Hollenbeck Lake, Boyle Heights

Reseda Park Lake, Reseda

Ernest Debs Park Reservoir (pond), Montecito Heights

Toluca Lake (there are actually 2 of them: one in the L.A. community of Toluca Lake and a smaller one in Burbank)

Del Rey Lagoon

Pond (in the shape of a "Mexican guitar") from a natural spring at Los Encinos State Park, Encino

Hansen Dam Lake, Lake View Terrace

There are more lakes in walking distance from my house. We have 11,000+ lakes in Minnesota. It just seems logical to call a Minnesota team the Lakers, wouldn't you agree?

Anyways, fan turn out was terrible as a whole back then, not just in Minneapolis. It wasn't until the addition of the shot clock in the mid 50s that got people more interested and involved. It literally saved the sport. When the final score is Pistons 19, Lakers 18 (lowest score ever in the NBA), you know damn well you aren't gonna sit and watch more games.
 

swangin and bangin

  • Guest
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #25 on: January 21, 2007, 02:07:03 PM »
would they change their name from the vikings to some thing else?
 

M Dogg™

  • Greatest of All Time
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 12116
  • Thanked: 19 times
  • Karma: 330
  • Feel the Power of the Darkside
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #26 on: January 21, 2007, 02:28:10 PM »


In a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.

Yall already took our basketball team, yall don't need our football team too. How many lakes does LA have anyways? One? Give our damn name back at least.

I live in Burnsville homie, I grew up in LA. There is no way that 100 square mile is right. Maybe average, but there are parts of LA that in a 100 square miles, it's as dense as New York. I've lived in both.

As for the Lakers, LA made them. They moved to LA because they won 5 titles in Minneapolis, and they never had people come to the games. They were losing money, and they were making basketball history. They were the first NBA team to play the Harlem Globetroders, as back then no NBA team would play a black team, much less the World Champions. The MN Lakers were making history, and no one knew it in their own city. So to survive as a franchise, they had to move. And they can keep the name, as the Lakers in Los Angeles are basketball history. Oh, here's a list of Lakes in Los Angeles.

Lake Machado, Harbor City (made popular by the elusive "Reggie the Alligator")

Lincoln Park Lake (formerly East Lake), Lincoln Heights

Lake Balboa, Sepulveda Basin (Encino/Van Nuys)

MacArthur Park Lake (formerly West Lake), MacArthur Park

Echo Park Lake, Echo Park

Lake Hollywood (Hollywood Reservoir), Hollywood

Los Angeles Japanese Garden lakes, Sepulveda Basin, Van Nuys

Hollenbeck Lake, Boyle Heights

Reseda Park Lake, Reseda

Ernest Debs Park Reservoir (pond), Montecito Heights

Toluca Lake (there are actually 2 of them: one in the L.A. community of Toluca Lake and a smaller one in Burbank)

Del Rey Lagoon

Pond (in the shape of a "Mexican guitar") from a natural spring at Los Encinos State Park, Encino

Hansen Dam Lake, Lake View Terrace

There are more lakes in walking distance from my house. We have 11,000+ lakes in Minnesota. It just seems logical to call a Minnesota team the Lakers, wouldn't you agree?

Anyways, fan turn out was terrible as a whole back then, not just in Minneapolis. It wasn't until the addition of the shot clock in the mid 50s that got people more interested and involved. It literally saved the sport. When the final score is Pistons 19, Lakers 18 (lowest score ever in the NBA), you know damn well you aren't gonna sit and watch more games.

that maybe true, but people came out in numbers to see the new  Los Angeles Lakers, and that saved the franchise. So LA didn't still anything, they just provided the market. The T-Wolves now can't keep people come in to watch there games, as the T-Wolves are not nearly as popular as the other sports, where as in LA, the Lakers rival the Dodgers in popularity. The LA market can support the Lakers properly, and had they stayed in MN, they may have not seen the same sucess that they did. Oh, and yeah, Minneapolis Lakers make more sense, but that the same time, who cares?

And you would have to change the Vikings name. Vikings pay tribute to the heritage of Minnesota. I think LA would change the name anyways. I mean, the Dodgers, Rams, Lakers were all import names, but now I think LA is into it's own image, and own identity.
 

Mr. Nice Guy

  • Muthafuckin' OG
  • ***
  • Posts: 336
  • Karma: 7
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #27 on: January 21, 2007, 04:49:10 PM »
LA Vikings? has a nice ring to it.
 

Don Jacob

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 13827
  • Karma: -136
  • don status, bitch
Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #28 on: January 22, 2007, 03:16:32 PM »
fuck the vikings.......

<---------will refuse to cheer for la vikings....fuck that, we need a new team here


R.I.P.  To my Queen and Princess 07-05-09
 

E. J. Rizo

Re: The Los Angeles Vikings?
« Reply #29 on: January 24, 2007, 09:38:03 AM »
In a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.
That's very misleading to say primarily because Minnie/St. Paul is more dense then L.A. St. Paul and Minneapolis have about 700,000+ people combined compared to L.A.'s 3.6 million+ people. The entire metro area doesn't even have a higher population then the city of Los Angeles.

The Twin Cities area includes the surrounding suburbs, and has a population of more than 3 million. The land division here is unique and if you factor in the "metro area", we are right up there with LA.
if you want to include surronding suburbs... then you really in trouble.... look at all the cities around LA...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_County,_California

"Los Angeles County is a county in California and is the most populous county in the United States."