![]() |
| |||||||
| |
| Football Forums Football Forums. Smash mouth football talk is a click away. Chat about anything that doesn't fit in one of our team's pro football forums. |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| |||
| Portland Pioneers, Memphis Mustangs, Orlando Rattlers, and San Antonio Alamos |
| |||
| Re: NFL Expansion 2010: LA, Orlando, San Antonio, Portland The NFL is overloaded with teams as it is, so I expect any expansion team to aim for a city with a large population to generate the needed revenue for a franchise that is starting from the bottom, so to speak. Another NFL team in the south would be great, Los Angeles is a city that would do well but the conditions are not very appealing to anyone. I would like to see another team with a red/black color scheme with new "roller-ball" style uniforms; those jerseys tend to fly off the shelves. Austin deserves a team before San Antonio, and Las Vegas definitely has the environment to make any NFL team that resides there to possess a pretty mean swagger. In any outcome, the possible destinations for an expansion team is a VERY short list...talks around the league would have you believe that an exiswting team would re-locate to one of these few cities before the league introduces a 33rd franchise to the mix (although having a 33rd team would have lengthened careers such as that of Daunte Culpepper who is quoted as saying "the NFL just doesnt have a place for me", referring to the quarterback situations across the league). In addition, the NFL conference divisions are already so even (north, south, east, west), it would be nice to keep it that way... |
| |||
| Re: NFL Expansion 2010: LA, Orlando, San Antonio, Portland Portland Pioneers! I'm from Portland, so that name has historical context to it. I HATE football and most sports in general, so it would be nice to see Portland receive a new major-league team other than soccer or baseball. Most Portlanders are waaaaaaayyyyyyyy too hip to watch a game. The Vegas Gamblers should do it for the NFL. The NFL should consider expanding to Canada. How about the Vancouver Maples? |
| |||
| Re: NFL Expansion 2010: LA, Orlando, San Antonio, Portland That or Los Angeles is going to be the future home of the SF 49ers if the stadium ballot doesn't pass in either 09 or 10 on the ballot if the team continues to lose and not attract fans. I know the Yorks are up to something. |
| |||
| Re: NFL Expansion 2010: LA, Orlando, San Antonio, Portland LA as much as it should have a team, just doesn't care enough. I lived there for 5 years. Believe me they love their USC/ UCLA teams more. It truely is a Lakers town and then the colleges. Orlando can only be justified if Jacksonville is relocated (which is rumored). San Antonio makes sense if they ever expand ( a horrible decision BTW). Portland is a viable west coast city if LA does not pick one up. I am of the belief that college towns are nothing more than that. They don't neccessarily translate into Pro towns. Birmingham and Omaha have geographical advantages (broad local viewership) but don't have the national staying power. Look at Jacksonville.. |
| |||
| Re: NFL Expansion 2010: LA, Orlando, San Antonio, Portland Quote:
|
| |||
| Re: NFL Expansion 2010: LA, Orlando, San Antonio, Portland San Antonio is a natural for an NFL team. It's a city of over 2 million, and growing fast, and already has a Dome in place for play while a bigger and better stadium is being built. San Antonians are football crazy and would support any NFL team that came to town. Either through expansion or relocation. San Antonio is a football hotbed that has been clamoring for a team for years. As the second most populated state in the country Texas can and would certainly support a third team. California and Florida have three teams, why not Texas? PS: The mighty University of Texas would never allow an NFL team to play on its Austin turf. To think otherwise is foolhardy. San Antonio is the only logical spot for an NFL team in South Central Texas. |
| |||
| Re: NFL Expansion 2010: LA, Orlando, San Antonio, Portland Quote:
|
| |||
| Re: NFL Expansion 2010: LA, Orlando, San Antonio, Portland Quote:
Think about the NFL and where they've gone. Back to Cleveland, Baltimore, St. Louis, Oakland after having previous franchises. Into Charlotte (not known for football, for sure) and Jacksonville. While JAX is a college town, it is widely accepted as having the most chance to be moved next. In the end, the only viable options in terms of "pro cities" are Los Angeles and Toronto. San Antonio fits the geographic bill but the Longhorns would have something tosay about that. |
| |||
| Re: NFL Expansion 2010: LA, Orlando, San Antonio, Portland Quote:
|
| Sponsored Links |
| |||
| Re: NFL Expansion 2010: LA, Orlando, San Antonio, Portland I don't think the NFL needs to expand right now. How about reshuffling some teams? Panthers should move to San Antonio. Charlotte is about the size of Indianapolis, which was considering a trip to L.A. until Peyton came along. Charlotte just hasn't proven itself as a sports town. The Saints should relocate to LA. I know, the Saints in the City of Angels. Let's face it, New Orleans is shrinking and business is bad there. The Jaguars should move to Portland. I still can't get over the fact that the NFL awarded Jacksonville a team over St. Louis. Seems like a similar-size city but at least Portland doesn't have 20 other teams close by. Oh yeah, the Patriots are sort of in the middle of nowhere. Foxboro is closer to Providence, RI than Boston. They should have moved to Hartford when that whole stadium deal was unfolding. At least they would have been in a big city. The rent is too high in Boston for a team to build a new shop and turn a profit. Why do you think Fenway still looks the same? It's not for nostalgia as New Englanders will tell you. So in 10-15 years when NE wants a new stadium, it looks like The Hartford Insurance Metroplex. The Bills should probably split for Toronto. Big city with more money. Sorry Buffalo. Might be good to get out of town once and a while anyway. And if the Bengals can't get it together, they should move down the road to Louisville, a huge sports town. I'm still amazed that the 'Ville doesn't have a major sports team. It has supported big time college sports and Triple A baseball for years. Actually, I think some teams wanted to be there but the state of Kentucky's democrats kept tanking the stadium/arena deals. Pay to play. Everyone wants a cut these days. |
| |||
| Re: NFL Expansion 2010: LA, Orlando, San Antonio, Portland LA - FAIL Anyone who says LA should get a team has no idea what they are talking about. Yes they may be an incredibly big city but they would show no support. Not to mention Cali has Charges, 49ers, and Raiders. Orlando - FAIL Are you kidding me? Do you really think there arent enough team in Florida as it is? You got Dolphins, Jags, and Bucs. Yes thats enough. San Antonio - FAIL Once again... you already have huge fan support in Texas for the Cowboys and Texans. League could be making much bigger money expanding to regions without teams. Toronto - PASS Bills moving to Toronto is an incredibly smart move. No need to change divisions, its close, Toronto has a much larger pop. than Buffalo, not to mention most of Canada would than have a team to support. (With expection to BC's support of the Seahawks) LV - PASS Definite expansion location. Has everything you need. Omaha - PASS Nebraska is a huge football location. Fan support would be huge and definite money maker. Youd also get support from the Dakotas, Montana, and Wyoming, which have been historically split between Minnesota and Denver. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:35 AM.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||