Am I the only person who enjoys the fact that Los Angeles does not have a football team? I mean, here it is, the second largest city on the country, and there’s no home-town football team for the people to cheer on. I think that’s fantastic. At the end of the day, when the city had two teams, very few people attended all the games, and the biggest claim to fame was that the Raiders stuff got all gang-related and everything.
The National Football League is pushing its agenda to get a team in L.A., and I am soundly against it. And worst of all, the organization wants to pull another team from another city and move it there. I mean, unoriginal much? We’ve already had the Rams. We’ve already had the Raiders. If they’re going to do this, they really need to start a new team, an “official” Los Angeles team, and let the surrounding community embrace it. Like, the L.A. Palm Trees or something. The L.A. Beaches, as a play on words that could almost be bad.
But on the whole, I’m still against a football team in Los Angeles. The area has the Lakers, and the Clippers, and the Kings, and the Ducks, and the Dodgers. So they really need a football team?I enjoy that it’s a sign of the area’s individuality that there’s no football team. I enjoy that, really, the people of L.A. are more apathetic than anything about having a team in their backyard. I think that’s what makes the people there more interesting than anything. There is a serious love for football, certainly, but they’re all, “not really in my backyard, thanks so much.”