I don't see much Angel red around town. The Angels are still behind the Lakers, Dodgers, USC football, and UCLA basketball. Maybe even the Raiders.

And I thought Plaschke and Simers were bad…

You were right about that. :)

And I thought Plaschke and Simers were bad…

Dwyer was the sports page editor at the Times before he went into semi-retirement two years ago, i.e. the man who thought those two made good columnists.

The best team in baseball isn’t even the biggest story in its own city.

The Tom Brady hysteria will die down eventually.

I listen to a some talk radio in town. Here's my take on the public's pecking order:

1. Kobe. More Kobe. Then some more Kobe. Oh, and how is Bynum's knee?
2. USC football



3. Just how crazy is Al Davis?
4. The Chargers got screwed!
5. UCLA football



6. Manny's awesome! Don't let Jeff Kent anywhere near this team.


7. Hey anyone notice that the Angels are good again?

What about the Clippers? Baron Davis hasn't pushed them higher on the list?!

There was a flurry of Clipper talk after Elton Brand's disappearing act. Since then, nothing. And for good reason, they are the Clippers after all.

As an Orange County resident that gets to LA a couple of times a month, I've noticed More Red incrementally every year, in different ways, shapes and forms. Still, in LA proper, the pecking order of LA talk radio is pretty close.

And still, in OC, where Arte gets the extra advertising revs for the name-change, where the team draws 3M+ in attendence each year and just wins, where we fans can still get out of our parking lot in five minutes, who cares what they think in LA proper?

who cares what they think in LA proper

unfortunately your lame ass owner does.

Dwyer was the sports page editor at the Times before he went into semi-retirement two years ago, i.e. the man who thought those two made good columnists.

Dwyer was the sports editor for a very long time -- he was at the helm when the LA Times sports page was at its peak -- he was Jim Murray's boss. Dwyer's credentials as an editor are pretty damn good -- National Editor of the Year, Red Smith Award, the President of the Associated Press Sports Edictors, etc.Sure, the Times sports page has declined, but that is an industry trend, and it has killed Dwyer.

Dwyer is not a Dodgers' fans by any stretch of the imagination -- he is either a Brewers or a Cubs' fan (along with Notre Dame), so the lead on the link is whacked. Plus, the article is pretty dead on. The Dodgers are still Los Angeles's team, and much of the red that has popped up around town in recent years has disappeared with the excitment of the Dodgers' this year. If Angels' fans thought that the "red" changes would be sustained during Dodger success, then they don't know the LA fan base very well.

unfortunately your lame ass owner does.

The Angels owner is doing just fine, thanks. I don't think he's unhappy at all with the course of his team or the growth of his fan base and advertising revenues. I'd offer up the net worth of his team since purchase as an example, but I'm guessing by the nature of your response here that this isn't something you'd easily understand.

Right now, Los Angeles is all caught up in the Dodgers’ magic number and only casually interested in the Angels’ magic team.

I'm sure the Dodgers are more popular than the Angels are, but teams that are still in the playoff hunt always get more coverage than teams that have already clinched.

If Angels' fans thought that the "red" changes would be sustained during Dodger success, then they don't know the LA fan base very well.

Or is it possible that they care even less about Dodger fans than they do about Journalist Bill's fancy awards?

where we fans can still get out of our parking lot in five minutes

When BOS comes to LAA I usually go to the games, and that parking lot is something else. Not only is it easy as hell to get out of, but they don't charge as much compared to what I have seen at other places. The entire atmosphere is really nice. The LAA fans are also laid back considering a lot of fans there are cheering for BOS. The last series there was the only time that the taunts and insults to players and fans had such a violent under(over)tone to them (at least that I had seen).

not that i'm looking for it, but angel paraphernalia is simply not very visible around the parts of L.A. that i hang out in. i live in central L.A., my gf and i visit all over town. angel fans are orange county in my limited experience.

angel fans are orange county in my limited experience.

Angels fans are all over the place in Chicago, if you localize your search entirely to my apartment.

the OC Angels of OC are the OC Angels of OC, and what's wrong with that?

I mean, as a Yankee fan I hate them with the passion of a thousand white-hot suns, so I may not be the best judge here, but.....why do they have a legitimate claim on LA proper? Stupid name changes don't make it so.

why do they have a legitimate claim on LA proper?

The Los Angeles Angels have existed for over 100 years.

The Angels owner is doing just fine, thanks. I don't think he's unhappy at all with the course of his team or the growth of his fan base and advertising revenues. I'd offer up the net worth of his team since purchase as an example, but I'm guessing by the nature of your response here that this isn't something you'd easily understand.

Way to make a tirade about nothing at all. Sometimes if you can't answer something, it's best to just write a lot of words, it makes you look smart... like Lasorda. If your lame ass owner was "doing just fine", he wouldn't have fought so hard to get Anaheim out of the team name and have Los Angeles in the team name. But, based on the fanboy nature of your response, this is not something that you would easily understand.

he wouldn't have fought so hard to get Anaheim out of the team name

He didn't fight to get Anaheim out of the team name.

He didn't fight to get Anaheim out of the team name.

Not out. Just all back of the bus.

If your lame ass owner was "doing just fine", he wouldn't have fought so hard to get Anaheim out of the team name and have Los Angeles in the team name.

Changing the name from Anaheim to Los Angeles was all about marketing, particularly national marketing. If the change improves the Angels' ability to snag LA fans, that's another plus to add to the fact that with the name change the Angels' secured a bigger local TV deal than the Dodgers- something that would have been unthinkable just a decade ago.

In order to understand marketing you should look it up, read about it, and if you have any further questions- take them directly to that lame ass owner. Not only is he a billionaire because of it, he's at every game mingling with the folks and is a very nice guy to chat with.

I don't love the name myself, but Arte's got a lot of "near perfect owner-credit" to burn through before I even start to worry about it.

Or is it possible that they care even less about Dodger fans than they do about Journalist Bill's fancy awards?

Oh, many care. They care very much. The inferiority complex when it comes to the Dodgers wasn't dispelled by 2002 or the fact that the Angels have become a quality organization. I am not saying all, if even most, Angels' fans possess that inferiority complex. However, it still exists within a certain sect of Angels' fans. Apathy isn't what prompted an Angels' fan to post this article with this comment: "The amount of Angel red sprouting up in the LA area begs to differ with Bill Dwyre’s 'opinion'."

Angels fans are all over the place in Chicago, if you localize your search entirely to my apartment.

look, all i'm saying is i've been living in L.A. for two years. los angeles as i have experienced it is a dodger town. i think i would have noticed by now if somehow the city and fans were heavily into the angels, but they just aren't. if the angels have caught and passed the dodgers in quality of organization, it hardly matters. angelenos are mostly dodger fans, and for most of them i imagine its just tradition. they might rather that it was easier to get out of the parking lot, or that frank mccourt wasn't such a dweeb, but things would have to be much worse before people just desert the team. fine, if halo is saying suddenly there are all these angelenos who are angels fans, i'll try opening my eyes and see if i'm missing something.

I am not saying all, if even most, Angels' fans possess that inferiority complex. However, it still exists within a certain sect of Angels' fans.

I'd say that a majority of Angels fans have some sort of inferiority complex when it comes to the Dodgers, but I'm biased. It's not good enough for the Angels to do well — the Dodgers have to stink, and I root for that to happen every day, all the time.

I see a lot of Angel gear in the OC, but nobody there calls them the L.A. Angels.

How much does free television matter? The Angels have become much more available on LA broadcast channels than the Dodgers - it wasn't always that way. That the city still "belongs" to the Dodgers probably still has a great deal to do with Vin Scully, but if there's less Vin to hear, ...

The Dodgers are still the overwhelming favorite in the city of LA for a couple of obvious reasons including geography and the fact that the Angels were pretty lousy for their first forty years. The key question from a marketing standpoint is how are the Angels doing with young fans in areas that aren't clearly "Los Angeles." Are 13 year-old baseball geeks in Long Beach, Claremont, or Whittier becoming more apt to root for the Angels than they would have been 20 years ago? I don't think there is any question that they are.

The fact that the Dodgers remain the LA standard is a function of tradition, geography, and (previous) competence. The relevant inquiry isn't whether there are lots of Dodger hats in Sherman Oaks, of course there are and that's not likely to change. The bigger question is will the Dodgers remain the gold standard throughout the basin in the next 25 years. McCourt's squad has a huge head-start in Southern California but I wouldn't bet much on him keeping the lead considering his competition.

Oh, many care. They care very much. The inferiority complex when it comes to the Dodgers wasn't dispelled by 2002 or the fact that the Angels have become a quality organization.

Really? I just don't see it. I mean, I hated the Dodgers when they were good, but now I just kind of feel sad about my Dodger-fan friends having to deal with an owner like Frank McCourt. Judging by the apathy that Angels fans treat Dodgers & their fans at the Big A, and the hostility that wearing an Angels cap will get you at Chavez, I think the Maginot line of inferiority has long since pushed northward on the 5.

Gene Autry who built a pretty large media empire, tried that Los Angeles game. It wasn't until he was able to create a separate identity for his franchise that they started to draw fans, tops in the league in 1966. He was willing to shell the money for free agents and the team was at or near the top of the league in attendance through the 1980s.

Yep, the 1990s were bad. But the fans came back when a quality product was placed on the field.

Unfortunately putting two cities in the team name wasn't just silly, it announced that they were unhappy with the niche they had carved out and willing to be second or seventh fiddle in a greater market. Fan loyalty is a generational thing. Sure there are people who saw the LA Angels in the fifties who will take note of the LA of A, but the two generations in between are pretty hostile. Fan loyalty isn't like product loyalty where consumers will switch because one is cheaper or even because one has had a better model over the last 8 years.

Moreno is fighting over the new generation who are just starting to follow baseball. He is at quite a disadvantage not only becuase his team is farther away, but kids tend to root for the same teams as their parents. That generation has a lot of sports to root for and don't respect baseball like their grandparents. As a business consultant who advises companies on how to expand their base, it sad watching this. Not for Moreno whose money he is free to spend as he wishes and takes the risk, but for the fans who have the emotional investment. But if he is playing for the hearts of Los Angeles, it will take generations.

On the other hand when he became owner, there was talk that he would be able to market to Mexico. I would agree that identifying with Los Angeles should increase his MLB share of the Mexican market. Unfortunately how much potential there is in that market and why they would buy MLB merchandise rather than their local team is a study that I am unable to undertake.

For me, no issues whatsoever regarding the Dodgers. I wouldn't call myself a Dodger fan, but I'll usually root for them depending on who they face in the playoffs. A freeway world series would be cool.

A freeway world series would be cool.

No, it would not.

However, a Godzilla/Mothra-esque "Shredder versus his surrounding Northsiders" world series would be quite cool.