Outside of San Antonio Which City Will Be Used as Leverage to Build A New Stadium? (1 Viewer)

DerrickB

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Approved Blogger
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
6,534
Reaction score
12,224
Offline
Now that Los Angeles has two teams and Vegas possibly getting the Raiders, which city will an owner use to hold their current one hostage to build a new stadium?
 
I actually don't see Mexico City or Toronto as options for the same reason: the exchange rate.

I think St-Louis had a plan prepared for a new stadium, with public finances approved. They may be the new leverage.

But I really think that the Los Angeles experiment is not going to end well with both the chargers and rams there.

I think they may look for a new home for the chargers, and of course, there is always the idea of sending the Jaguars to London.
 
San Antonio will never be used as leverage. The Cowboys and Texans wil never even allow the possibility.
London will never be taken seriously. Toronto is a pipe dream for consideration of the NFL.
I think the League is happy if the Raiders go to Vegas. All major markets and areas will be covered.
At this point, a team will be threatening to move to Oklahoma or Mississippi.

But what teams, besides the Raiders are a threat for relocation? The Jaguars? Anyone else?
 
Mississippi really?

San Antonio will never be used as leverage. The Cowboys and Texans wil never even allow the possibility.
London will never be taken seriously. Toronto is a pipe dream for consideration of the NFL.
I think the League is happy if the Raiders go to Vegas. All major markets and areas will be covered.
At this point, a team will be threatening to move to Oklahoma or Mississippi.

But what teams, besides the Raiders are a threat for relocation? The Jaguars? Anyone else?
 
It's unlikely you'll ever see the Saints move unless the city just dries up and dies.

We actually cover a pretty large geographic market with LA, MS, parts of AL, and parts of FL. We aren't the Jaguars, who's market extends about as far as their city limits.

The NFL isn't interested in moving teams to markets that don't add value. San Antonio adds no value to the league. It's already saturated with Dallas fans.

There also aren't any big markets left without teams now that LA and Vegas have been covered. The NFL isn't going to push for a team in St. Louis the way they did for LA. Foreign teams, as much as it's Goodell's wet dream, just aren't feasible most likely.
 
I agree, if Goodell would allow the Saints to leave New Orleans it would be a black eye to the league.

It's unlikely you'll ever see the Saints move unless the city just dries up and dies.

We actually cover a pretty large geographic market with LA, MS, parts of AL, and parts of FL. We aren't the Jaguars, who's market extends about as far as their city limits.

The NFL isn't interested in moving teams to markets that don't add value. San Antonio adds no value to the league. It's already saturated with Dallas fans.

There also aren't any big markets left without teams now that LA and Vegas have been covered. The NFL isn't going to push for a team in St. Louis the way they did for LA. Foreign teams, as much as it's Goodell's wet dream, just aren't feasible most likely.
 
Looking at a map of US population density, one of the only highly populated areas without a team nearby is around Salt Lake City.
 
It all depends on who takes over the team after Tom Benson, but our stadium situation is a can of worms waiting to be opened.

The wrong owner(s) will want a new billion dollar palace, and there are few options for doing so even if the city/state had the necessary funds.
 
I doubt they care enough, but Portland, OR would be a city to try to use as leverage.

Louisville, KY could be one.. pretty large city.

Albuquerque, NM.

Imagine a team in Hawaii? Probably not a lot of interest there.

Omaha, NE (Payton Manning buys a team! Omaha!)
 
IMO, cities that have already lost teams. To wit:

St. Louis (lost Cardinals, then Rams)
San Diego (losing Chargers)
Oakland (losing Raiders)

On a side note, does anyone other than me think that placing a team in LA is monumentally stupid? They have LOST more teams than have ever threatened to relocate there. They've lost the Chargers (AFL days), Rams, and Raiders (twice?). There's something about that demographic...LA just doesn't care about football. Unlike NY, who routinely support the Giants & Jets, no matter how good or bad they're doing; LA has never been able to support a team, let alone 2 teams...the Rams & Raiders simultaneously only caused BOTH teams to leave.

I can kind of, sort of understand wanting the Rams back in LA for sentimental & historical reasons, but I don't see it working out...especially when St. Louis was ready to pony-up to keep em. And now they're gonna shoehorn the Chargers in there too? The greed is overwhelming...

I hope they both flop badly, leaving 2 more HUGE black eyes on Goodell's legacy.
 
It all depends on who takes over the team after Tom Benson, but our stadium situation is a can of worms waiting to be opened.

The wrong owner(s) will want a new billion dollar palace, and there are few options for doing so even if the city/state had the necessary funds.

I think the Saints will eventually get a new stadium. Everyone wants to look at Lambeau field, but all they do is Packers games. No Super Bowls. No Final Fours. No College Football Playoffs.
A new stadium where the Super Dome lies will succeed. It will make New Orleans even more of a destination city.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom