NYJets90 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/02/opposition-to-special-legislative-session-could-force-vikings-hand/ Opposition to special legislative session could force Vikings’ hand Posted by Mike Florio on November 2, 2011, 2:03 PM EDT It’s been a bad week for the proposed Vikings stadium in Minnesota. On Tuesday, Governor Mark Dayton announced that the proposal won’t impose a sales tax on the community hosting the project without a public vote. On Wednesday, House Speaker Kurt Sellers voiced opposition to a special legislative session, which would push the issue completely into 2012. The team’s lease at the Metrodome expires on January 1. “The strategy of avoiding a stadium issue has not worked. It only gets more costly and more difficult to resolve, especially if they allow the lease to expire with no action,” Vikings V.P. of business affairs and stadium development Lester Bagley told the Associated Press. Bagley previously has said that the Vikings won’t sign a new lease at the Metrodome without a plan in place to build a new stadium. He also has told PFT Live that multiple communities have contacted the team about relocation, and that the Vikings have decided to defer such discussions until January 2012. Some of the politicians in Minnesota could be thinking that the Vikings are bluffing. If the Vikings aren’t bluffing, however, the politicians will lose their chips — and the citizens of Minnesota will lose their football team. Looks like the Vikings could be at the front of the line to LA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanFromQueens Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 http://profootballta...e-vikings-hand/ Looks like the Vikings could be at the front of the line to LA. Hopefully that doesn't happen. No fan base deserves to lose their team. Thank god we never have to worry about the Jets leaving NY/NJ for another state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Zellers is such a stubborn moron. His opposition mainly comes from the consistent whining for a public referendum for a tax increase and the notion that the stadium should be treated like any other policy issue, which is outrageous. The only thing this does is increase cost if they do eventually stay, or it opens up the door for LA. More importantly, I just can't fathom how officials still see fit to defer discussions when it comes to this stuff after what Baltimore did to Cleveland in the 90's. Quintessential example of what happens when you let idiotic blind partisanship delay what's best for the city itself. Minnesota's been in bad enough shape recently, if the Vikings leave Minneapolis, that is just a real tough loss to recover from with their current state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StraightCash Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 It worked for the Lakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 http://profootballta...e-vikings-hand/ Looks like the Vikings could be at the front of the line to LA. It's convenient, then, that their uniforms match the Lakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 It's convenient, then, that their uniforms match the Lakers. It does cut down on the transition costs associated with the move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 It's convenient, then, that their uniforms match the Lakers. True, but while there are no Lakes in LA, there sure as hell weren't any Vikings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peebag Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Zellers is such a stubborn moron. His opposition mainly comes from the consistent whining for a public referendum for a tax increase and the notion that the stadium should be treated like any other policy issue, which is outrageous. The only thing this does is increase cost if they do eventually stay, or it opens up the door for LA. More importantly, I just can't fathom how officials still see fit to defer discussions when it comes to this stuff after what Baltimore did to Cleveland in the 90's. Quintessential example of what happens when you let idiotic blind partisanship delay what's best for the city itself. Minnesota's been in bad enough shape recently, if the Vikings leave Minneapolis, that is just a real tough loss to recover from with their current state. The trouble is...the people in Minnesota suffer from short term memory loss...they lost the Lakers and the Stars and then turned around and remembered..."it's freakin' cold outside in Minnesota in the winter time" and paid far more for replacement franchises had they supported their old teams better...and quite frankly Cleveland could have kept the Browns, they just didn't want to have to pony up the money..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t79hUuE2vuI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 The trouble is...the people in Minnesota suffer from short term memory loss...they lost the Lakers and the Stars and then turned around and remembered..."it's freakin' cold outside in Minnesota in the winter time" and paid far more for replacement franchises had they supported their old teams better...and quite frankly Cleveland could have kept the Browns, they just didn't want to have to pony up the money..... The problem with the Browns is that Cleveland did want to pony up the money, however the issue spent way too much time caught up in agenda processes like the above. By the time the city got around to its referendum, Baltimore had already made it clear that the offer was exploding if not accepted before everyone went to the booths. And right now LA is itching for a team even worse than Baltimore was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 The Vikings moving to LA would make sense for re-alignment purposes. The LA Vikings would go to the NFCW and the St. Rams can go to the NFCN. I know there's the rivalry between Vikes-Pack-Bears-Lions, but that pretty much dies with the move to LA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green DNA Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 It would be a damn shame if the Minnesota Vikings no longer existed. This is a legendary NFL franchise and the league would be a lot poorer without them. Nobody would give a crap if Seattle, Jacksonville or St. Louis moved to L.A.but the Vikings, c'mon man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSage Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 All I have to say here is that Ziggy is a good guy and nice man who just wants a fair deal. He is from a family of holocaust survivors who are charitable to a fault but wont and should not wait to be destroyed by an ungrateful community or politicians it for for their own ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 http://profootballta...e-vikings-hand/ Looks like the Vikings could be at the front of the line to LA. The Lakers were from Minnesota Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYJets90 Posted November 3, 2011 Author Share Posted November 3, 2011 All I have to say here is that Ziggy is a good guy and nice man who just wants a fair deal. He is from a family of holocaust survivors who are charitable to a fault but wont and should not wait to be destroyed by an ungrateful community or politicians it for for their own ends. and he's also a Giants fan from NJ who only bought the team 6 years ago, so he probably doesn't have much loyalty to the state of Minnesota and if I were a Viking fan that would worry me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 The Lakers were from Minnesota Fascinating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Fascinating. Thanks Yoko. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelticwizard Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 It would be a damn shame if the Minnesota Vikings no longer existed. This is a legendary NFL franchise and the league would be a lot poorer without them. Nobody would give a crap if Seattle, Jacksonville or St. Louis moved to L.A.but the Vikings, c'mon man. I agree with you strongly, but weren't the Rams originally from LA? Oh well, Al Davis moved his team back to Oakland, why not the Rams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peebag Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 I agree with you strongly, but weren't the Rams originally from LA? Oh well, Al Davis moved his team back to Oakland, why not the Rams? No the Rams were originally from Cleveland... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 True, but while there are no Lakes in LA, there sure as hell weren't any Vikings. There are a ton of vikings on Hollywood sets. That's the only reason why I am ok with this move! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.