LA had teams already and they left. I remember watching on TV and the rams and radiers staduim were empty. California has enough teams. How about Iowa or South Dakota were probably the entire state would be at the game. I understand the money in TV markets but look at GB they have been highly succssesfull organization being small market and one of the most legendary teams. LA you had your chance let someone else get a team.

Iowa is a great place to give an NFL team, even though the 32 team system is working fine, unless you mean relocate a team?
But literally EVERY game for the Iowa Hawkeyes, Kinnick stadium is packed. Even when they play Northern Iowa! They have a great fanbase and you're right a lot of small market cities can be succesful with NFL teams if you have interested fans, something Iowa has plenty of.

like you said it is the tv market and thats where the money is.

Well I agree that LA doesn't deserve a team, they had the Rams and the Raiders at one time. Iowa and South Dakota are pretty much out because of lack of population density. I think that right now with 32 teams and 4 divisions per league each with 4 teams expansion might be out for a while.

wow u sound like u no what ur talken about. people will look what la lakers r and clippers r if there good theere loved but if u get trded 2 a city u suck so they leave. and la no need team they have local state teams like oakland san and sanfran. and sanfran is lokken good oakland is reabulding and san is good now la has there hands full now

tell that to the commissioner and the 32 league owners

Paris Hilton is bored.

I agree CA has enough and LA had there chance. Srriously, like they need more traffic going through that city.

I agree.
They don't support the NFL out there so I too don't think they deserve a franchise.
I felt the same way when Houston got another team. They pretty much ran the Oilers out of town due to lack of support towards the latter years. They didn't deserve to get back another franchise either.

But, like you stated, it's mostly based on TV markets. LA has the 1st or 2nd largest TV markets. Houston is also in the top 5.

I live in the greater LA area, and I have to agree. No team here means there are no TV blackouts, so we can get more football on Sunday than before.

i agree with you that los angeles doesn't deserve a team, but iowa a south dakota don't have any cities that are big enough. how about somewhere like san antonio, birmingham, orlando, memphis, columbus, toronto, salt lake city, oklahoma city, portland or new york city (giants and jets are in east rutherford, new jersey).

Money and ratings for the NFL and the TV networks the coop with. Also there are enough football fans in LA to sell out games every sunday.

The thing is Los Angeles has a ton of other sports teams and forms of entertainment for people to go to. They, as a whole, don't have the passion for an NFL team. The league would be better off adding a team perhaps in Canada, and maybe one more in the south like Alabama or perhaps Memphis.

L.A. had their chance, they lost all of their teams. The Raiders ended up moving back to Oakland, the Rams went back to the Midwest after moving out from Cleveland. This wasn't an NFL team at the time, but the Chargers left for San Diego after only one year in L.A.

How about another team in Florida instead of LA. LA had there chance and the fans arent there. It's a bad site for NFL. Iowa would be nice, San Antonio would be nice. what about Alabama or south Carolina? What about :Tallahassee or Pennsacola or St. Petersburg, Florida. There are plenty of cities that could have a team and support it. But like everybody knows, you need fans, money and a great location and stories to be told.

Won't USC get upset if they try and move another pro team to LA?

5, 611, 110 tv households, 5.039 % of the US tv audience !!!