Sunday, April 2, 2017

Relocation depends on perspective

Relocation has been a part of the NFL for a long time. Recently, three NFL franchises have announced moves to new cities. The Rams are moving from St.Louis back to Los Angeles; the Chargers are joining the Rams in Los Angeles; and the Raiders are leaving Oakland for Las Vegas.

One's view of relocation often depends on age and perspective. For instance, a 18 year old living in Las Vegas, who knows little of the Raiders' history is excited about getting a football team in his home city; while a 40 year old Raiders fan is unhappy about the move.

Relocation also has economic implications. People who worked at the stadiums in San Diego, Oakland and St. Louis will have to look for work. Local restaurants and hotels in those cities will have less business because of the moves.

Some decisions to relocate are questionable. The Chargers decision to leave San Diego for Los Angeles is dubious at best. Both the NFL and the city of San Diego offered Dean Spanos a lot of money to stay in San Diego. The NFL offered Spanos 300 million dollars to stay in San Diego. The city offered Spanos 375 million dollars towards the building of a new stadium, but the Chargers were asking for a subsidy of 500 million dollars. The Chargers will have to spend over 500 million dollars to relocate to Los Angeles. Some analysts are suggesting that the Chargers will not make a profit for 10 years. In any event, Spanos must believe he will make more in Los Angeles than he did in San Diego.

For many years, the NFL resisted having a team move to Las Vegas. The league was concerned about having a team in a city where there was so much gambling. However, the league must be comfortable with it now. NFL games have been gambled on for a while. It's not certain that having a team in Las Vegas will invite more gambling. It's unlikely that having a team in Las Vegas would invite point shaving or other unethical activity. As many have observed, the Raiders have a national following, is they will be embraced in Las Vegas, while they are missed in Oakland. Nevertheless, many, including myself, will always associate the Raiders with Oakland.


The NFL preserves its history well. Many fans remember teams from their original cities before they moved. I remember when the the Colts moved from Baltimore to Indianapolis. The Colts had a strong history in Baltimore. They won Super Bowl V, lost Super Bowl iii, and won the 1958 NFL championship game in overtime in what some called "the greatest game ever played." Johnny Unitas led the Colts to many good seasons and is one of the greatest quarterbacks in history. Players like Art Donovan, Bert Jones, Joe Washington, Bubba Smith all had good careers in the "charm city" of Baltimore


Some teams have moved multiple times. For instance, the Rams originated in Cleveland and moved to Los Angeles in 1946, only one year after they won the NFL championship. The Rams, named after the Fordham Rams, would stay in Los Angeles for 49 years before they moved to St.Louis, a city who lost the Cardinals in 1988. Now, the Rams are back in Los Angeles, a city who will soon havetwo NFL franchises after going 21 years with none

The Arizona Cardinals began as the Chicago Cardinals in 1920. They stayed there for 40 years. Under pressure from the league to move, the Cardinals migrated to St. Louis. According to an article from the Chicago Tribune, the Cardinals could only pay visiting teams $20,000 to play in Chicago,while the league required home teams to pay visiting teams $30,000 per game. the Cardinals moved to St. Louis in 1960 and over to Arizona in 1988.

Speaking of St.Louis, how must those fans feel now? They have seen two franchises move to other cities. Attendance was a factor with the Rams. While in St. Louis, the Rams had some of the lowest attendance numbers in the league. Those numbers should improve eventually in Los Angeles. Although, they may not improve because the people of Los Angeles have so many entertainment options. Only time will tell if the move back to Los Angeles will bear financial fruit.

Sometimes a team's decision to relocate actually helps the league. The Dallas Texans decision to move to Kansas City helped the AFL. The Texans lost money every year they were in Dallas. Business leaders in Dallas did not think the community could support two teams.Owner Lamar Hunt moved the Texans to Kansas City in 1963 and founded the AFL that year. Hunt thought having a team in Kansas City would be good for the AFL. He asked the people of Kansas City to buy 30,000 tickets as a precondition for the move. The tickets were purchased within 8 weeks.


It's good for the NFL when teams can sustain long term financial success in one city. It's good when teams stay in one city for a long time. When a team stays in one city for a while, it creates fan loyalty and it contributes to the strength of the local economy. Local fans who support a team develop an attachment to the team.


The NFL's penchant for relocation shows a subtle disregard for the fans. Many fans identify with their local teams. Many fans have memories of important games and prominent players. Many fans miss teams that relocate. NFL teams may make more money after relocation, however, the disregard for the fans is unfortunate.


Ultimately, it's a  matter of perspective. People who live in cities that are receiving new teams are thankful, whereas fans in cities that are losing teams are frustrated.

No comments:

Post a Comment