[Hacksaw]

From: Peter King
http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2016/01/24/nfl- ... -cardinals

L.A.: One team or two?

Eric Grubman, the NFL executive vice president in charge of the Los Angeles decision, worked for six years on market studies of L.A. as well as the competing franchises to move there. So there’s no one inside the NFL—except possibly Roger Goodell, whose job for years before becoming commissioner was to weigh Los Angeles options—more qualified to answer this question: Why is the NFL so set on making Los Angeles a two-team market again, when the league failed so notably in 1994?

“I think that L.A. is a one-team market, I think L.A. is a two-team market, I think L.A. is a three-team market, I think L.A. is a four-team market,” Grubman told me. “But each of those models is going to rest on a couple of essential foundations. One is you have to a have a killer stadium, and two is you have to have flawless execution of the market because you have to have an identity that is unique, and your brand has to really resonate. As big as it is, it is a very competitive place, and second place in anything in Los Angeles, in anything, gets no air time. So if you have two teams in one stadium and they execute flawlessly and it’s a great stadium, they’ll be terrific. If you have two stadiums and each of them execute flawlessly, they’ll be terrific. If you have two stadiums and one executes well and one executes poorly, it doesn’t matter what that second stadium is. It is all about execution, plus a great stadium. With that, I think you can have any number of teams, up to a point of course. And Los Angeles loves a winner. They love a winner, they love sizzle, they love being first.”

For years the Clippers didn’t win, and for years they didn’t register on the L.A. sports meter. Odds are that if Los Angeles hosts two football teams, at least one will be like the Clippers of old (or the Lakers of today). The Rams, for instance, have played an astounding 12 consecutive seasons without being over .500, and the Chargers, should they come, haven’t had a double-digit-winning season since 2009.

Then there’s the matter of the quarterback position. Philip Rivers turns 35 this year; this will be his 13th NFL season. The Rams don’t have a quarterback of the long-term future unless either Case Keenum or Nick Foles shocks the world. So what we have here is one team for sure and maybe a second, and an iffy future for both in terms of on-field success.

“Grading NFL clubs’ probability to win looking forward is the same as grading history on stocks to try to predict future performance,” said Grubman. “And every expert in the world will tell you that you can’t do that. You can grade a management team that is running a company, and you can grade a coach who is running a team, but as long as those variables can change, then performance can change. I think when you raise the stakes and you raise the bar, you generally get a response. Owners are not dumb and owners aren’t shy. They don't want to be second place wherever they live and play.”

==========
“I dissented because I felt the NFL would be best served by having less realignment. Moving one team would be less disruptive to our fan base. And, also, having just one team in Los Angeles would give the league the best chance to be successful.”
—Kansas City owner Clark Hunt, to me, for a story on why the owners chose the Rams to move to Los Angeles instead of the Chargers and Raiders moving to a stadium in Carson, Calif.

Hunt believes what I do: that the NFL should not go to L.A. with two teams now. The league and Rams owner Stan Kroenke should make the 283-acre Inglewood site a dream location for a single team, and make that team a part of the fabric of Los Angeles, before trying to add a franchise that the locals don’t care much about.

[BuiltRamTough]

I'm so happy that we don't have to worry about these things anymore.

The Rams are back.

[Hacksaw]

I am glad there is any written sentiment that this is better having just one team for a while. Make too much sense anyway.