L.A. to NFL: Not Interested

Based on experience, not many people listen to NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, but when he delivers his annual pre-Super Bowl address today, he’s expected to declare the NFL’s return to Los Angeles is now a priority.

Now you understand--he hasn’t even opened his mouth yet, and you’ve stopped reading.

In this case, it’s not Tagliabue’s fault. You include a discounted personal seat license and a genuine Ram cap, and the people of Southern California already have made it clear they don’t give a rip about the return of the NFL.

A Los Angeles Times Poll, conducted Jan. 10-13 of 1,207 Southern Californians, showed that 59% of those surveyed do not consider having a football team in the Los Angeles area important to them. Two-thirds of them wouldn’t be willing to use public funds to build a new stadium, most aren’t paying attention to the talk about bringing a team to Los Angeles, and half don’t even confess to having a favorite NFL team.

“The longer the NFL is out of Los Angeles, the worse those numbers will get,” said agent Leigh Steinberg, who fought to save the Rams and now works on behalf of Hollywood Park in its effort to lure a team and build a stadium. “These figures are a great argument for the NFL--why they need to put a team in now before a generation grows up without any hometown football team.”

Holy Roman Gabriel, only 1% of the Southern Californians quizzed claimed the Rams as their favorite team, and each person polled was allowed two selections. Interest in the Rams, Raiders and Chargers was less combined (14%) than the leading team of favor in Los Angeles, the San Francisco 49ers (17%).

“The NFL needs Los Angeles more than Los Angeles needs the NFL,” said Anaheim’s Richard Hong, a participant in the survey. “Eventually, it’s going to hurt them not having a team. The TV networks will lose the L.A. market and won’t bid as high on the next contract.”

The NFL, still enjoying the euphoria that comes from a new $17.6-billion, eight-year television contract, is quietly reminding all interested parties in Los Angeles that not having football in the nation’s No. 2 market had no impact on the TV negotiations.

Dick Ebersol, NBC Sports president, who decided to withdraw from bidding because the NFL’s asking price was too high, said the lack of a football team in Los Angeles “may not have affected the TV contract, but not having a team in L.A. is still a lost opportunity--for both the league and the city.

“And in my personal opinion, and I emphasize this is a personal opinion, L.A. will not get a team as long as it pins its hopes on the Coliseum as the site.”

The Southern Californians’ leading survey choice for the site of a new football stadium in the Los Angeles area is “don’t know” at 26%.

Although the new Coliseum and its campaign leader, Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas, have had more than a year to exclusively sell themselves to the NFL and the people of Los Angeles, only 19% of the respondents favored the Coliseum. Dodger Stadium drew 18%, Hollywood Park 10% and South Park 9%. Of those surveyed in Los Angeles County, 26% picked the Coliseum to 20% for Dodger Stadium.

Ridley-Thomas did not return a telephone call.

“I think the politicians want a team more than the people,” said Rialto’s Dave Todd, who participated in the survey. “I was a Rams fan for 20 years, a real sports nut who lived and died with the Rams, but I have no real drive now for football. As time goes on, I just don’t miss it.”

Domenick Medina of Pasadena, another survey participant, said he does not think the Coliseum is in an appropriate area and he would not attend the games, although he considers himself a football fan.

“I don’t hear a lot of talk about why we don’t have a football team,” he said.

Charger owner Alex Spanos, echoing the sentiments of many of his peers, said from the outset that Los Angeles will come begging for the return of football as did Baltimore and St. Louis, which used public money to build new stadiums and lure the Browns and Rams.

“I don’t agree,” said John McKay Jr., who has been working on behalf of Hollywood Park. “I think the numbers in this survey truly reflect apathy here, and that apathy will grow in time. From an NFL standpoint, L.A. needs to be addressed now.”

Some L.A. observers, after reviewing the poll results, suggested that Southern Californians’ indifference toward the NFL might be the result of the confusion and chaos surrounding the different sites vying for NFL attention and lack of leadership, especially the notable absence of Mayor Richard Riordan.

The survey, which has a sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points, indicates it might be a tough sell with the public no matter who emerges in the fight for football. Of those polled, 52% said they wouldn’t even buy a ticket if Los Angeles had an NFL team. Thirty-eight percent said they would.

“I’m not surprised by the survey,” said Dodger owner Peter O’Malley, who spent a lot of time examining the feasibility of a football stadium in Chavez Ravine. “It clearly points out the challenge our community faces to identify a solution that will work for the NFL and for Los Angeles.

“The NFL needs Los Angeles and Los Angeles needs the NFL. What’s happening in San Diego this week with the Super Bowl the last 10 days has been extraordinary, and Los Angeles would benefit from a similar experience in the same way with Super Bowls in the future. We’ve got to come up with a solution soon.”

Southern Californians indicated they weren’t staunch football fans even when they had the Rams and Raiders, and since both teams left after the 1994 season, 73% said their interest in the NFL has remained the same, while 17% indicated they now have less interest in football.

“I don’t find those results to be surprising,” Steinberg said. “Let’s remember that there was a scorching of the earth in the last years of the Rams and the Raiders, and I’m surprised there’s not more bitterness in this poll.

“It was a shattering experience for fans who put a lot of heart into teams that left, and people who have been rejected like that don’t normally like to put themselves in that position again.”

For the past three years, Southern Californians have had their pro football only on TV, and while showing disinterest in having their own team, Los Angeles’ TV ratings ranked higher than the national average on ABC, NBC and Fox. In fact, Los Angeles ranked No. 10 among the nation’s top 38 ABC-TV markets, tied for No. 22 on Fox and tied for No. 23 on NBC.

“Not having a team in Los Angeles obviously did not impact this TV deal,” McKay said. “But there are a lot of kids growing up now who aren’t going to NFL games, and it’s going to impact their TV ratings 10 years from now, and that’s when they could be hurt.”

The NFL, while making it appear it was interested in Los Angeles the last few years, has really done little, while waiting to determine how it will live up to its agreement with Cleveland and put a team there for the 1999 season. The NFL is expected to award an expansion franchise to Cleveland sometime later this year, and then announce plans to expand a few years later to the city that can present the best case--be that Los Angeles, Houston or another city stepping forward.

“My feeling is if we miss the window that’s opened with Cleveland coming in 1999, at that point there stops being any imperative for the league adding L.A. for a while,” Steinberg said. “Los Angeles deluded itself in the early part of this process that the NFL had to inevitably put a team back into the city, but guess what? We’ve played three years, and nothing’s happened. The NFL doesn’t have to do anything. The city has to prove to the league that it has a location, funding and proper ownership.”

But the survey says: Who cares?

“After losing the Rams and the Raiders close to three years ago, these results are not surprising to us,” said Roger Goodell, the NFL’s executive vice president for league and football development. “This is the challenge the NFL faces in getting a new stadium project and an NFL team that will excite the Los Angeles market.

“We remain very confident that fans in the Los Angeles area are outstanding NFL fans, and we expect to actively address the Los Angeles issue in 1998.”

Even when considering the survey results of those who answered that they follow football closely, only 51% said having a team in Los Angeles is at least somewhat important, and only 37% said they would be willing to spend public money.

“I would guess if you ran a similar poll that 95% of the people in the city of Los Angeles have very little interest in ballet and 90% may have no interest in concerts,” Steinberg said. “Now having said that, the ballet and concerts do very well and support themselves and are available for the audiences with those interests.

“A large portion of the public in every city doesn’t care about sports. We’re talking about only 10 home dates and 65,000 to 70,000 seats and the capacity for major corporations to look at that as a good venue for entertaining and luxury boxes. The rest of the people couldn’t come anyway--all you need is 65,000 fans.”

Staff writer Larry Stewart and associate poll director Sharon Pinkerton contributed to this story.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Times Poll / Football in L.A.

Los Angeles has just completed its third season without an NFL team. With the Super Bowl in San Diego, are Southland residents clamoring for pro football, with either an established franchise or an expansion team?

*

How willing are you to spend public money to build a stadium

Definitely willing: 12%

Probably willing: 17%

Probably unwilling: 13%

Definitely unwilling: 49%

Depends, Don’t know: 9%

*

Would you prefer an expansion team or an established team?

Expansion team: 41%

Established team: 27%

Either/Neither (volunteered): 20%

Don’t know: 12%

*

Where is the best location for a new stadium?

The Coliseum: 19%

Dodger Stadium: 18%

Hollywood Park: 10%

South Park (near Convention Center): 9%

Anaheim (volunteered): 3%

Orange County (volunteered): 1%

Other: 8%

Don’t know/Don’t Build/Don’t care: 32%

*

Before they left, were you a fan of . . . Raiders?

A strong fan: 9%

Somewhat of a fan: 21%

Not a fan: 69%

*

Before they left, were you a fan of . . . Rams?

A strong fan: 6%

Somewhat of a fan: 16%

Not a fan: 77%

*

How important is it to have an NFL team in Los Angeles?

Very Important: 16%

Somewhat Important: 22%

Not Too Important: 19%

Not Important At All: 40%

Don’t Know: 3%

*

Percentages may not total 100% where some answer categories are not shown.

Source: L.A. Times Poll

The Times Poll contacted 1,207 adults in Southern California by telephone January 10 through January 13. Telephone numbers were chosen from a list of all exchanges in the six counties of Southern California (Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Ventura, Riverside and San Bernardino). Random digit dialing techniques were used so that listed and unlisted numbers could be contacted. The sample was weighted slightly to conform with census figures for sex, race, age, education and region. The margin of sampling error for all adults is plus or minus three percentage points; for certain subgroups the error margin may be somewhat higher. Poll results can also be affected by other factors such as question wording and the order in which questions are presented. Interviews were conducted in both English and Spanish.