| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Adrenaline_Flux
Joined: 19 Dec 2008
Posts: 15090
Location: The Iowa
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 3:43 am Post subject: |
 |
|
|
Should have brought in Tim Tebow.
_________________
Sig Credit: ChrisC21325 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
PurplePeterson
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Posts: 550
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I would like to see the Rams move back to Los Angeles, they should have never moved to St. Louis |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tom cody
Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Posts: 6571
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Can't see the Falcons being the team to move there. I think it'll be a team like San Diego or Jacksonville.
_________________
Why, if it isn't my old friend, Mr. McGreg. With a leg for an arm and an arm for a leg. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Superman(DH23)
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 16419
Location: Abdi on the sick sig
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Until there is a team in LA, they will be brought up in every stadium negotiation. That new stadium right now is a great tool to get what you want from your current city. Oh you don't want to renovate, well LA would love to have us. And so it goes. Next year, I expect serious talks tho w/ the Chargers and St Louis. LA would like to get both.
_________________
| OneBadCat wrote: | | Ahah Okay first of all Gamble was lost to IR this year but when healthy he proved to be 2nd only to Revis last season. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
broncos67
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 18118
Location: Capitol Cit-ay
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| RuskieTitan wrote: | As someone who went to DECA Nationals back in 2008 and was in and around the stadium, I can say that it's time they built a new one.
Whether they stay or go is Blank's call, but I can't really see the Falcons being the ones to make this move. |
Lol dude I was at DECA nationals then too. That stadium was a disaster area. I saw rats crawling around on the concourse, no lie. The roof was also leaking something fierce throughout the whole ceremony.
Time for a new stadium.
_________________
Thanks, Tzimisce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Badger75
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 5915
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
What do these names have in common?
Dan Reeves, Carroll Rosenbloom, Al Davis, Donald Trump
_________________
"I have to keep playing so people over 40 will have somebody to root for on Sunday afternoons." George Blanda who played until he was 46 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
silus
Joined: 09 Aug 2007
Posts: 1416
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Can someone explain to me why Los Angeles and the NFL can't just create a new team? College football is bigger than its ever been so the number of quality players is enough to support another team. Hell, maybe 3 more teams. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EliteTexan80
Joined: 30 Apr 2007
Posts: 37192
Location: Three time Mr. fanTASTic!
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| silus wrote: | | Can someone explain to me why Los Angeles and the NFL can't just create a new team? College football is bigger than its ever been so the number of quality players is enough to support another team. Hell, maybe 3 more teams. |
33 would be an awkward number for NFL teams. The question isn't "why can't we create a new team for LA?" it is "Who would be the OTHER team to even the number out?" San Antonio? Portland? Toronto?
LA was all but slated to get the 32nd team, but the investors in place didn't have their act together; There were two or three groups, all haggling over location, naming rights, pricing, etc. Houston businessman Bob McNair said he wanted to be considered for a team for Houston, the NFL giggled and said "Ok, cut us a $700,000,000 check - we'll call it an application fee," and figured that was the end of that. A few days later, they got a check from McNair for the amount of $700,000,000 along with a promise to fund a stadium out of his own pocket. The NFL looked over the franchise plans, looked at the $700,000,000 check, looked at the stadium blueprints (at the time, the first NFL stadium with a retractable roof) looked at the $700,000,000 check, looked at the competetive landscape of Houston, looked at the $700,000,000 check, wondered if Jerry Jones would get upset at the thought of losing the Houston market, looked at the $700,000,000 check...
...and now, 10 years later we have the AFC South Champion Houston Texans. 
_________________
iPwn, Kempes and Flaccomania: The official sig makers for THE ET80! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PurplePeterson
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Posts: 550
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| EliteTexan80 wrote: | | silus wrote: | | Can someone explain to me why Los Angeles and the NFL can't just create a new team? College football is bigger than its ever been so the number of quality players is enough to support another team. Hell, maybe 3 more teams. |
33 would be an awkward number for NFL teams. The question isn't "why can't we create a new team for LA?" it is "Who would be the OTHER team to even the number out?" San Antonio? Portland? Toronto?
LA was all but slated to get the 32nd team, but the investors in place didn't have their act together; There were two or three groups, all haggling over location, naming rights, pricing, etc. Houston businessman Bob McNair said he wanted to be considered for a team for Houston, the NFL giggled and said "Ok, cut us a $700,000,000 check - we'll call it an application fee," and figured that was the end of that. A few days later, they got a check from McNair for the amount of $700,000,000 along with a promise to fund a stadium out of his own pocket. The NFL looked over the franchise plans, looked at the $700,000,000 check, looked at the stadium blueprints (at the time, the first NFL stadium with a retractable roof) looked at the $700,000,000 check, looked at the competetive landscape of Houston, looked at the $700,000,000 check, wondered if Jerry Jones would get upset at the thought of losing the Houston market, looked at the $700,000,000 check...
...and now, 10 years later we have the AFC South Champion Houston Texans. |
Yup and there is 4 teams in the division so adding a expansion team is not going to work either since it would be weird to see 5 teams in 1 division while all the other division have 4 teams |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Superman(DH23)
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 16419
Location: Abdi on the sick sig
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| EliteTexan80 wrote: | | silus wrote: | | Can someone explain to me why Los Angeles and the NFL can't just create a new team? College football is bigger than its ever been so the number of quality players is enough to support another team. Hell, maybe 3 more teams. |
33 would be an awkward number for NFL teams. The question isn't "why can't we create a new team for LA?" it is "Who would be the OTHER team to even the number out?" San Antonio? Portland? Toronto?
LA was all but slated to get the 32nd team, but the investors in place didn't have their act together; There were two or three groups, all haggling over location, naming rights, pricing, etc. Houston businessman Bob McNair said he wanted to be considered for a team for Houston, the NFL giggled and said "Ok, cut us a $700,000,000 check - we'll call it an application fee," and figured that was the end of that. A few days later, they got a check from McNair for the amount of $700,000,000 along with a promise to fund a stadium out of his own pocket. The NFL looked over the franchise plans, looked at the $700,000,000 check, looked at the stadium blueprints (at the time, the first NFL stadium with a retractable roof) looked at the $700,000,000 check, looked at the competetive landscape of Houston, looked at the $700,000,000 check, wondered if Jerry Jones would get upset at the thought of losing the Houston market, looked at the $700,000,000 check...
...and now, 10 years later we have the AFC South Champion Houston Texans. |
I think if you go the Expansion route you have to add at least 4 teams, 1 being LA and 1 being London. Maybe a San Antonio team and maybe a 2nd LA team. Before anybody starts w/ but it's america's game and London isn't blah, blah, blah. They love this game internationally too, don't think they don't. Look how many Brits, Aussie's, & Kiwi's we have who come to this site everyday to talk football. And I for one would love to see the London Knights. Put em in the AFC East so its Knights vs Pats twice a year. Scheduling wise, they get their home/away scheduled in 4 game blocks. 4 games at home, then away, rinse repeat. Every team that has to go to London gets their bye scheduled for the week afterward, just like know. It's not really the logistics problem everyone makes it out to be.
_________________
| OneBadCat wrote: | | Ahah Okay first of all Gamble was lost to IR this year but when healthy he proved to be 2nd only to Revis last season. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EliteTexan80
Joined: 30 Apr 2007
Posts: 37192
Location: Three time Mr. fanTASTic!
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Superman(DH23) wrote: | | 4 games at home, then away, rinse repeat. Every team that has to go to London gets their bye scheduled for the week afterward, just like know. It's not really the logistics problem everyone makes it out to be. |
So, you're proposing that they live here for a month, then live in the UK for a month, then live here for a month, then live in the UK for a month?
The jet lag alone would be a nightmare. Just as soon as their bodies were adjusting to US time, they're back in the UK, and vice versa. You better be paying these players double what they'd make in the US, because you're asking them to maintain two houses, with two completely different set of tax laws and a stark difference in cost of living. You better hope the team sells a lot of merchandise, because you're asking the team to maintain two different facilities for practices, film study, workout facilities, etc...
The logistics on Sunday aren't the concern, it's the logistics from Monday to Saturday that are.
_________________
iPwn, Kempes and Flaccomania: The official sig makers for THE ET80! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StLunatic88
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 7227
Location: How good is your Good?
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Im not going to get into the dumb Rams-to-LA debate again, because its not going to happen. Both sides here in St. Louis have basically acknowledged as much, that they are staying here, just where is St. Louis is the new question.
Of the teams that have been mentioned to be moving in the past few years that are still up in the air, The Falcons are Below even the Rams on that list.
In order of Likelihood ot end up in LA:
Chargers
Raiders
Jaguars
Rams
Falcons
Bills
"Keeping the divisions intact" is a joke in itself. They dont mean anything and half of them are put together oddly as it is.
And sometimes Moore isnt Better, expansion isnt going to help the league. They are at the perfect number of team, with the perfect number of games and the perfect number of playoff spots. Stop trying to add unneeded crap.
In the next decade Im sure LA will get a team, possibly 2, and those will likely be the Chargers and/or the Raiders. the only other 2 real possible moves are the Jags (San Antonio is enticing to the NFL) and the Bills (but they wouldnt go anywhere other than Toronto, but unlikely) Other than those 4 possibilities, everyone else is staying put. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StLunatic88
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 7227
Location: How good is your Good?
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Superman(DH23) wrote: | | Before anybody starts w/ but it's america's game and London isn't blah, blah, blah. They love this game internationally too, don't think they don't. Look how many Brits, Aussie's, & Kiwi's we have who come to this site everyday to talk football. And I for one would love to see the London Knights. Put em in the AFC East so its Knights vs Pats twice a year. Scheduling wise, they get their home/away scheduled in 4 game blocks. 4 games at home, then away, rinse repeat. Every team that has to go to London gets their bye scheduled for the week afterward, just like know. It's not really the logistics problem everyone makes it out to be. |
They love it as a Novelty right now, they get it one time per year with atleast one very good team coming over. What happens when they get a crappy expansion team who is winning 4-6 games per year for the next half decade? You think they wont get fed up with that, with something that isnt even "their sport"?
Not to mention it would be a draft & free agent Nightmare, players will not want to go over there, 21-23 year old college players wont want anything to do with moving to London (atleast not the ones that matter and can afford to hold out) and then 25-28 year old free agents that are just starting families are going to want to uproot to move to a new continent?
There are so many more factors than just the logistical of getting teams back an forth for games. Playing on Thrusday nights is causing players problems, how do you think constantly flying internationally will affect the product on the field? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mancunian Raven
Joined: 09 Oct 2012
Posts: 511
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Superman(DH23) wrote: | | EliteTexan80 wrote: | | silus wrote: | | Can someone explain to me why Los Angeles and the NFL can't just create a new team? College football is bigger than its ever been so the number of quality players is enough to support another team. Hell, maybe 3 more teams. |
33 would be an awkward number for NFL teams. The question isn't "why can't we create a new team for LA?" it is "Who would be the OTHER team to even the number out?" San Antonio? Portland? Toronto?
LA was all but slated to get the 32nd team, but the investors in place didn't have their act together; There were two or three groups, all haggling over location, naming rights, pricing, etc. Houston businessman Bob McNair said he wanted to be considered for a team for Houston, the NFL giggled and said "Ok, cut us a $700,000,000 check - we'll call it an application fee," and figured that was the end of that. A few days later, they got a check from McNair for the amount of $700,000,000 along with a promise to fund a stadium out of his own pocket. The NFL looked over the franchise plans, looked at the $700,000,000 check, looked at the stadium blueprints (at the time, the first NFL stadium with a retractable roof) looked at the $700,000,000 check, looked at the competetive landscape of Houston, looked at the $700,000,000 check, wondered if Jerry Jones would get upset at the thought of losing the Houston market, looked at the $700,000,000 check...
...and now, 10 years later we have the AFC South Champion Houston Texans. |
I think if you go the Expansion route you have to add at least 4 teams, 1 being LA and 1 being London. Maybe a San Antonio team and maybe a 2nd LA team. Before anybody starts w/ but it's america's game and London isn't blah, blah, blah. They love this game internationally too, don't think they don't. Look how many Brits, Aussie's, & Kiwi's we have who come to this site everyday to talk football. And I for one would love to see the London Knights. Put em in the AFC East so its Knights vs Pats twice a year. Scheduling wise, they get their home/away scheduled in 4 game blocks. 4 games at home, then away, rinse repeat. Every team that has to go to London gets their bye scheduled for the week afterward, just like know. It's not really the logistics problem everyone makes it out to be. |
While we do love the NFL, over here in the UK, I still think a London team is less than a sensible idea. Because of the many things we love about the NFL, one of them is the team each of us has chosen to follow.
I don't see many people dropping their team just to start supporting the London Knights (which would be a good name, I admit). They'd have to attract a whole new audience who would actually be invested in following that team, or they'd have no real basis of support or source of revenue in this country. And because of the regionalism in the UK, there are plenty of people who wouldn't be interested in a London team, regardless of whether they were new to the sport or not.
If the NFL were to expand, I think they'd be wiser to look within the US borders for candidate areas. L.A, Las Vegas, Portland, Utah, Oklahoma, New Mexico.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Superman(DH23)
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 16419
Location: Abdi on the sick sig
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| EliteTexan80 wrote: | | Superman(DH23) wrote: | | 4 games at home, then away, rinse repeat. Every team that has to go to London gets their bye scheduled for the week afterward, just like know. It's not really the logistics problem everyone makes it out to be. |
So, you're proposing that they live here for a month, then live in the UK for a month, then live here for a month, then live in the UK for a month?
The jet lag alone would be a nightmare. Just as soon as their bodies were adjusting to US time, they're back in the UK, and vice versa. You better be paying these players double what they'd make in the US, because you're asking them to maintain two houses, with two completely different set of tax laws and a stark difference in cost of living. You better hope the team sells a lot of merchandise, because you're asking the team to maintain two different facilities for practices, film study, workout facilities, etc...
The logistics on Sunday aren't the concern, it's the logistics from Monday to Saturday that are. |
No they'd only have 1 home, and that's in London, when they are on the road, they would be living out of a hotel in whatever city they are playing in that week.
_________________
| OneBadCat wrote: | | Ahah Okay first of all Gamble was lost to IR this year but when healthy he proved to be 2nd only to Revis last season. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
