Advertisement dollars Because fans in L.A. didn't want to pay for a new stadium for a sorry team. That's like buying a new toilet bowl for the same old 5h1t. And if they do manage to get a team in L.A. _ if there is a sorry product on the field people won't show up. Which is probably why owners are cautious when it comes to putting a team back in L.A. Because if that wasn't the case _ they would have put a team there a lonnng time ago instead of just using L.A. for leverage. We'll see how it plays out if the Raiders move there.
Love how you left out that I said its a fun pipe dream. I will continue to say that the city of SA or the city of Austin will never get an NFL team alone. The biggest obstacle for either city is the small media market, the whole central TX area makes it much bigger. San Marcos and calling them Texas something is the only option IF it central TX ever gets a shot at a team. I'm sure private money from both Austin and SA investors would have to be thrown in to make an NFL caliber stadium right now in San Marcos but do not underestimate the central TX in between area, it is growing fast and has a bright future (more than just an awesome outlet mall anyway). Plus, I never intended it to sound like it would happen anytime soon, it would be some years down the road and central TX would have to keep growing like it has been throughout that time. Arlington did pay for a good portion of Jerry's world, so it's not out of the question that down the road in time San Marcos couldn't do the same. I do understand it sounds a lil crazy right now but if ppl continue to move to TX from other areas of country over time it won't sound as crazy. If they stop moving here or even worse Texans start moving out of TX then no it'll never happen.
Again, the teams don't see any individual TV advertising revenues separate from what other teams get. There aren't tv stations in San Antonio (or companies in San Antonio) paying the Texans directly for anything. First of all, fans of most large cities aren't going to bend over and pay for new stadiums for billionaire owners anymore... unless you're in podunk towns desperate for the NFL. Houston had to lose a team before having the new stadiums pass (they likely wouldn't have passed otherwise), and even then its essentially taxing people who don't live in Houston. Building a stadium in LA is far more difficult than building a stadium in the hill country... there's less available land, its more expensive, and you have far more investors/landowners that are going to make the whole process as complicated as can be in order to get as much $$$ as possible. Also, its not as simple as just putting a team there in the first place. First you need an owner in good standing with the other owners, secondly you need that owner to sign off on the already complicated stadium plan as just mentioned. Additionally, why would the NFL expand right now to LA when there are several teams in "relative" financial peril that are candidates to move there? An expansion team would be yet another team all the owners would have to share revenue with. The NFL has actually made it known that they'd want TWO teams in LA eventually. Its not just about fans buying tickets... that's actually the least important variable in this whole process.
That was apart of the total pipe dream I guess. TX is just blowing up period, esp in triangle which is DFW, Houston area and central TX. It's not the craziest pipe dream but Texas Oilers will never happen, sadly. I wonder how many Texans fans would jump ship if the Oilers did return to Central TX? They would have to get permission cause Bud had the NFL retire the Oilers name and logo
My original point is that San Antonio can support a NFL franchise. They are the 2nd biggest city in the country without an NFL team behind L.A. and it would probably be safer for an owner to put a NFL team there instead of anywhere in California, especially L.A. What point are you trying to make...?
Yup! We may be getting the Gamblers back if A11FL picks Houston. Phoenix, Seattle, Houston, Philly and Denver are the 5 finalist for last 3 teams right now. A11FL has property rights to Houston Gamblers and logo
That they aren't an ideal location. First of all, they are a small corporate/media market base which is what is important when looking at "big city sizes" (ranked 36th in the nation... lower than Portland, Raleigh-Durham, Hartford, Columbus and Salt Lake City). It would be very risky to put a team in San Antonio... even with this being an all football all the time state. The reasons why the NFL didn't expand there in the first place still exist. Sure, they could make a go of it for a few years... and end up in potential limbo just like St. Louis and Jacksonville are now. The owners want max dollars, and a team in San Antonio would not guarantee that by any stretch.
Yea... According to you. That's just your opinion. The NFL thinks differently and apparently San Antonio does as well. They don't just have to depend on the corporate market in San Antonio... Red already made that known and Austin and Laredo/Mexico isn't too far away. And it would be just as risky to put one in L.A. especially considering the fact that they lost teams already. Which is probably why those cities (and Houston) got a team before L.A. Corporate and Media market is nothing if fans aren't showing up.
1. How do you know the NFL thinks they're a good market for a franchise? 2. LA didn't get a team in the expansion race with Houston because they didn't have a plan for funding a new football stadium. That's it. Had they had one, there was no way in the world Houston was getting the 32nd NFL franchise over LA. Honestly, making the argument that LA is "just as risky" as SA for being the location of an NFL franchise is just amazing to me. I'm guessing not even the Mayor of SA feels that way.
That's like saying the only reason the Texans didn't make the playoffs last year is because they were an awful football team.
Everyone who takes time to discuss Raiders to LA as the reason SA won't/can't get a team is wasting everyone's time. 1. Davis family are not billionaires, their money comes from the Raiders. 2. Davis family does not have the money to put towards a stadium. Not even a %. 3. LA will not pay 100% for a stadium. 4. This means Davis family would need to give up ownership %s to get new investors. For those reasons you will never a Davis owned Raiders play in LA. He would have to sell to someone who could provide money towards a stadium. Davis family will not sell any time soon. Frankly, SA is willing to give the Davis family a stadium 100% free so for that reason alone SA is a real player over LA. Keep in mind this only applies to the Davis owned Raiders. The Rams and the Chargers are the only realistic options to go back to LA because they have the money to contribute toward a stadium deal. Davis owned Raiders are NEVER going to LA!!!
An opinion based on facts. San Antonio is the 36th largest media market in the US. This isn't the first time they have gone after an NFL team... and they've been passed over again and again (whether it was expansion or trying to get another team to move there). They went ahead and built the Alamodome without any assurances that a NFL team would actually play there. Tell me, what about the market has changed over the last 15 years to improve their prospects as an NFL city? You keep bringing this up over and over again as if this is the current situation. Its like saying the Texans are a risky investment in Houston because they lost the Oilers before (where in fact they are in the top 10 of valuable franchises in the world). The only thing LA needs is a stadium... and they'd not only get one team, but possibly get two teams.... and the value of that franchise(s) would be through the roof. Additionally, you have the previous franchises that left LA facing stadium crisis' and economic issues in Oakland and St. Louis... if they would have known their future perils after leaving the LA market, they'd probably do it over and try to make it work there.
Because a city can't be used as leverage if they are not. Didn't even consider that... Sorry Nick, But did not read. You're just arguing to be arguing cuz you want to be right... But, you can hit me up in the "pre-season thread" since you were talking all that 5h1t about Blake Bortles:grin:
