The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Congrats!  You've really done well for yourself and you are now the owner of an NFL expansion team in Los Angeles. 

You need to pick a name, build a stadium, hire a coaching staff and GM, and perhaps assign responsibilities and a drafting/free agency strategy, depending on how you delegate responsibilities.

How do you market the team?  What type of stadium do you choose?  What do you name the team?  What gimmicks (if any), do you employ?

What type of management do you hire, and do you allow that management to choose other management?  In other words, do you hire a GM and let him choose the coach?  Do you hire each seperately?  And then, which jobs do you assign to each?   Do you let them pick the style of play they want to emulate (run and shoot, west coast, hardnose, etc.) or do you choose that?  If so, what style?

Los Angeles Stars. (Stars are pretty much all they have there other than gangs.) and it would hopefully set a personality...plus, it would piss off the Cowboys. lol)

Marketing: Contests for season tickets, as well as 4+ season ticket discounts. Plus massive community outreach. Fan related events that are for the fans. An end zone similar to the Black Hole, Dog Pound, and Deep End. Rules: Create a costume. Come to the stadium. Enter a contest. Win. Top 50 costumes get the end zone seats. Others would be drawn in.

Open air stadium. Complete bowl.

I bring in the best coach I can find, and give him GM duties. They can do whatever their specialty is.

Stadium building approval is done and the blueprints are already completed (seriously in reality they are). Just waiting for a team to get the green light on the entire project. One worry I don't have being in LA is stadium. Word is Super Bowl 50 will be in LA, 50th anniversary and all go back to where it began. And they get moving quick because they haven't broke ground on that stadium yet. So if I am moving my team to LA I have no stadium issues

Market the team, easy we are in LA. Just give Celebs free tickets and have them show up and give them VIP treatment. It's LA marketing is a non-factor. You got the sports media and the TMZ/ET/Access Hollywood Crowd in your backyard. Getting exposure won't give me 1 gray hair.

Find a football guy who won't get caught up in the glitz and glamour of LA and the celebrity atmosphere. Let him hire a coach and run the football operations. So that means no Bill Parcells.

Team Name...who cares, hold a dopey contest where fans can submit suggestions take 3 or 4 good ones. Let the fans vote on what they like out of that group and combine that with what my staff think is good and get their input and come up with one. Not that big a deal.

LA Tidal Waves, seeing as the waves are notoriously large out there.  The fans can nickname the team the 'Waves for short. 

I would hire two guys to head up the entire project.  My VP of Marketing would be a guy with strong business instincts and would be entirely focused on marketing and profits.  My VP of Football Operations would have an extensive football background and be focused entirely on the front office personnel, coaching staff, and players.  He may hire a GM or may be the GM himself, but ultimately, the final decision on personnel is entirely up to him.

Where to begin on building my fan base?  I would have team employees hanging out at USC and UCLA games to try to target those fans and go from there.  After all, the average college football fan also likes pro football.

I would sell the naming rights of the stadium to Sun Life, install a nightclub, move all of my games into the 4:15 PM time slot and sell minority shares to celebrities and musicians while hiring a football czar to run the football operations by bringing in management and personnel all from the same former team to draft an offensive lineman with the 1st pick of the draft.

I almost choked on my skoal when I read this. 

Got a nice chuckle out of this, and with what's going on today, I wasn't expecting one.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/lordthundergod/lmao.gif)      (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/lordthundergod/scoreit.gif)

It's funny, Frimp -- I was thinking the name "Stars" when I asked this question.  I think it's a good a name as any.

1) I would sell between 25-49% of ownership to the regular people of Las Angeles.  I think that this would create immediate fans and a sense that the team wasn't going to be getting up and leaving the community.

2) MikeO says a stadium is ready.  ...but if not, I create a mid-sized capacity (not Texas-stadium style) and have as intimate an experience as possible.  Make it natural  grass, football only, with seats close to the field.  I'd prefer open air with an opening on one end, overlooking either water or the city skyline, with some kind of partial or retractable shade cloth.  I would make a super-high end club level, with the hopes of drawing in celebrities, but one that still has the game at the heart of the experience.  I'd also (if I could), create a downtown atmosphere outside the stadium, with food/drink/entertainment options, encouraging tailgating and coming out to watch the 1 PM games before going in to watch the late game.  Palm trees, on the water....etc.  Whatever you can do to capture the L.A. feel.

3) I would fill the stadium in the first year, with 75% season tickets, even if at a loss.  I'd make certain tickets very affordable, and possibly give price breaks for children's tickets.  The goal would be to bring in families that will build long-term loyalty.  I want to make sure that while a normal fan experience will still bring in money, and a high-end experience will bring in lots of money, that there's a budget option for a family of 4 to come in, eat a hotdog, and get a foam finger or whatever, and still have enough money for gas for the ride home.  I think that you can "tier" the concessions, as well.

4) I would like to run a high-scoring offense, as a first priority.  I think that the NFL rule changes favor that type of offense, and the excitement of that will bring people in.  I'd hire my GM first and we'd choose a coach together, perhaps a college coach with big ideas and that wouldn't have preconceived ideas of how they want things.  I'd be very clear that the GM would be responsible for personnel, and the coach would be responsible for his direct assistants and gameplanning.

5) I'd bring in a statistician (seriously) to help re-strategize the gameplan.  I belive, and math supports this, that the NFL punts too often, and I think that we're in for a "moneyball" type of revolution, once someone has the balls to figure it out.  I'd let it be known to the coaches that it's how I'd like the team to be run, and hire someone, with the help of that statistician, who buys into the idea.

6) I'd split the business into: Me (owner), Stat Guy, Money guy (to be in ultimate control of spending), Head of Operations (representing the fans/shareholders), GM, Head Coach, Marketing Guy -- We'd all have regular meetings together.  I'd set the direction of the franchise, and we'd work together to have the same goals, from the top down.

Go Stars!

It is ready to be green-lit, just gotta have a team. The RUMOR now is both Jax and SD will move to LA and share the stadium and the NFL will do some shuffling and move one team to the NFC and one NFC team will go to the AFC and such.. LA will go from no teams to 2 teams. That's the latest rumor making the rounds.

Jax Jaguars to LA..... ;D ;D ;D ;D

L.A. Quakes or L.A. Tremors

I don't know why people keep suggesting realignment.  It's not going to happen.

If the NFL cared about the geographical accuracy of its divisions, when they chose a team to move from the AFC East to the AFC South, they would have picked the southernmost team in the entire league over a team in a state on the U.S. northern border.  Even if JAX and SD both moved to LA, the league would just keep one LA team in the AFCS and one in the AFCW.

I wouldn't call swapping one team for another from the AFC to NFC as realignment, but whatever.  But if 2 AFC teams move to LA (as rumored), one has to be switched to the NFC somehow....some way. That's all!

They will NOT keep two teams in the same city in the same conference. Because it hurts them financially as a league. LA is the #2 media market. Why give both LA teams to one network. Split them up so FOX gets one team and CBS gets one team, splitting the pie to get more money from the networks. If BOTH are in the same conference, they lose leverage. It's very simple.

Not to mention what game do you air when BOTH play at the same time if you have 2 teams in one city on the same network constantly. It can't work!

Currently, of the top ten media markets, the NFC has:

#1 (NY, split)
#3 (Chicago)
#4 (SF, split)
#5 (Dallas)
#6 (Philly)
#8 (DC)
#10 (Detroit)

So with no NFL presence currently in LA, the NFC has sole possession of 3 of the top 5 remaining media markets, and split possession of the other two (while having the senior, more successful team in both of those markets).  Seems to me that both LA teams going to the AFC would make things closer to equal.  Right now, the AFC network has a decided disadvantage.

As for what game to air when both are playing at the same time:  given that this proposal involves two teams sharing the same stadium, you can simply look to NYG and NYJ for a clue on how this will work.  Cliff notes: there is no week in 2011 where both NYG and NYJ are playing road games at the same time, and there is only one week where both of them are playing at the same time (excluding NYG vs. NYJ, of course).

The NFL is aware of such issues when creating the schedule.

But the Jets and Giants BOTH aren't on one network because they aren't in the same conference. In LA, you will be giving ONE network a double-header every week if 2 AFC teams are in LA. That ain't gonna fly.

But whatever, live in your bubble and believe what you want.

So giving both teams to one network is totally unreasonable, but that same network being shut out of 3 of the top 5 NFL media markets (and sharing the other two) is completely fine?

Not unreasonable. IMPOSSIBLE for it to work!

And yeah, because the network that has those top teams pays a boatload more than the other. FOX pays a ton more than CBS. Both know what they are getting. CBS or NBC or ABC could pony up a ton of money and get the NFC if they wanted, they don't.

Not that complicated

So if I understand you correctly, two LA teams can't both be in the AFC because that would make the AFC package lopsidedly overvalued... like the NFC package is right now (and has been for years).  And even though CBS or NBC can choose to buy the more expensive NFC package (and they don't), somehow the same does not apply to Fox if the AFC package became more valuable.

You're right, it's not that complicated.

You are twisting everything and don't understand anything correctly. The 2 LA teams won't be in the SAME CONFERENCE because it can't work. It would mean CBS would have a double header every week having to air BOTH LA teams.

It has NOTHING to do with what package would be worth more. Zero. Nill. Nadda. Nothing to do with that.

If I understand correctly, MikeO is saying that the NFL is contractually obligated to 1) show sold out home games on the local affilliate and 2) flip flop between which network has the double-header each week.

If they both were in the same conference, the same network would have the rights to both.  They'd be contractually obligated to either air both games at the same time on the same channel (if one were home and one were on the road at the same time), which can't happen OR have a double-header every week, which also can't happen.

Therefore, it's impossible for them to live up to their contracts and have both teams in the same conference.

So the NFL can create a new SNF contract that allows NBC to cherry-pick a game from CBS/FOX's schedule, but they can't create a contract that allows for two teams in the same market in the same conference?  They can't make an allowance in the new contract that allows the AFC network to pick one of the LA market games, or have the LA road team have broadcast priority?  (2 of each team's games per year would be owned by the NFC network anyway.)

They could probably do whatever they wanted, if they wanted to.  But it would be easier to take the path of least resistance and complication and put the two teams in different conferences.

It would probably also be better for fan-bases, as you could kinda be fans of both.

I don't know the answer off the top of my head, but are any 2 teams in the same market (in any sport) ever in the same conference?  Mets/Yankees, Giants/Jets, A's/Giants, Raiders/Rams, White Sox/Cubs.

In the NHL and NBA (which are divided into Eastern/Western conferences), they're in the same division.

Lakers/Clippers
Knicks/Nets
Rangers/Devils/Islanders
Kings/Ducks

THANK YOU!!!!

But its not a league wide TV contract like the NFL. Each team cuts their own local TV deals in those sports. Can't compare. It's apples to oranges.

Why can't the NFL allow BOTH networks (CBS and FOX), to show a doubleheader every week?  More variety for fans all over the nation.

They could, but they don't.

I think the reasons is because  the networks pony up BIG bucks because they know if they have a stand-alone game every other week, that football fans are FORCED to watch their channel. And FORCED to watch commercials and promos for their network comedy's and drama's..etc.  So they don't want double-headers every week.

And since the Sunday Ticket reaches so few people, they don't care about that hurting them that much in this way.

NHL, NBC/Versus Ink 10-Year, $2 Billion National TV Rights Contract (http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2011/4/19/2120467/nhl-nbc-versus-tv-contract)
NBA extends TV deals with ESPN/ABC, TNT (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/2007-06-27-3096131424_x.htm)

OK, then.

Oh my god, I know you are smarter than this. But the teams in the NHL and NBA  have the VAST majority of their games  on local regional sports networks.  The NFL doesn't have that! EVERY NFL game is a national game on a national network where they SPLIT the money evenly! That's why you can't have 2 NFL teams in the same conference. Because its the ONLY league where every game is played essentially on the same day and its really only 1 day a week. Minues the Monday Night schedule an a handful of Thursday games.

Do the Jets sign a deal with the MSG network to air games? No every Jets game is on CBS, FOX, ESPN, or NBC! Do the Dolphins sign a deal with Fox Sports Florida to air LIVE games? I mean come on. Do the Patriots have a deal with NESN to air any games?

It's not comparable. It's apples and Oranges!

This would be an amazingly relevant point if we were discussing this issue from the standpoint of individual team revenue.  We are not.  From the national TV network perspective, having multiple teams in the same conference or division doesn't matter.

The bottom line is, the NFL has the ability to work any potential LA scenario into the pricing structure of the new TV contracts without realigning any teams.  You just finished saying that the NFC package already costs more than the AFC package, so surely you acknowledge that the opposite is a possibility.  And given that not too long ago, the NFL told FOX/CBS that their best game every week would be up for grabs in the new contract and both of them sucked it up... well, that shows a clear precedent for radical scheduling changes on a new TV contract.

This league will not realign twice in ten years for any reason.

jesus christ, moving 1 team isn't realignment!  MLB is sending Houston to the American League, I don't hear people calling it some major vast realignment. It's just moving 1 team. lol, WOW!

And its funny you say no way will they do realignment (which nobody is even mentioning but YOU) but they will do a radical schedule change to fit your silly and weak argument. ha ha, that's funny!

The NFL does not realign for individual team moves.  There are plenty of instances of teams moving, and the NFL has never shuffled teams around for ANY of them.

Not for the Colts.
Not for the Raiders.
Not for the Cardinals.
Not for the Rams.
Not for the Ravens.

In the span of two offseasons (94-95), the NFL had three teams move and added two more new teams.  They did not realign a single team (not even 1!) to accommodate the new regional changes.  They chose putting Carolina in the NFC West over moving a single team.

In contrast, the NFL has shown much more willingness to revamp TV contracts.  They eliminated the week 17 game from MNF.  They created Wild Card Saturday for the third broadcast network.  Hell, they completely swapped the showcase game from Monday night to Sunday night to accommodate ratings, implemented flex scheduling to make sure that game is always relevant, and gave exclusive highlight rights to the SNF network (effectively ending ESPN's NFL Primetime, as it existed, in the process).

The NFL is very flexible and innovative when it comes to broadcast contracts.  They don't give a damn about conference alignment, and are extremely reticent to realign any team for any reason, no matter how much geographical or logistical sense it might make.

For what it's worth, I wouldn't like 2 teams in L.A.

^^^ I only disliked it the first time because Oakland had relocated which I thought was a shame. It doesn't really affect me.

That is wrong on so many levels I don't know where to start. But I don't have the energy anymore.  Nobody is even talking realignment, but you are arguing it against yourself. WOW!

It might happen. SD and Jax it looks like. Time will tell. I'm with you though, hope it doesn't. To to from no teams to 2 is foolish.

I don't know what kind of word game you're trying to play, but when two teams change divisions (cross-conference, even!), that's a realignment.  Replace the word "realignment" with whatever term you like; the point is, the NFL doesn't do that for moving teams.

Have 2 teams ever moved to the SAME city at the SAME time in NFL history?! NO. That's the point. It's not realignment, its just swapping teams.

Whatever, you believe you what you want. Time will prove me right IF 2 teams end up going to LA. And I will be here saying I told ya so!

So in your plan where a team moves from the NFC to the AFC (to replace an LA AFC team), where does that NFC team come from?  How is that team not participating in a realignment?

If you don't call two teams switching (cross-conference!) divisions a "realignment," then Miami could trade divisions with Indy next year and that also wouldn't be a "realignment."  That's absurd.

Whatever term you want to use for what everyone else calls a realignment, the NFL does not do it when teams move.  To your point, two teams LEFT LA in the same offseason and the NFL did not realign a damned thing.

dude, let it go. We will see what happens IF 2 teams move to LA. You know my stance, I know yours. We will see who ends up being right and wrong. And the other can say I told you so.

let's not go in circles for a 3rd day on this. It's pointless