sisdog Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Dolphins Dynasty, on 13 Jan 2016 - 20:46, said:Quillz, on 13 Jan 2016 - 20:39, said:MNtwins3, on 13 Jan 2016 - 19:45, said:Mitch B, on 13 Jan 2016 - 19:32, said:hawk36, on 13 Jan 2016 - 17:16, said:ARTnSocal, on 13 Jan 2016 - 16:12, said:jrodsep, on 12 Jan 2016 - 19:31, said:I was doing a image search on NFL throwbacks and came across a Patriots concept that looks really sharp (IMHO). It comes from Reddit, what do you guys think? That looks pretty sharp. Nice one.That is a great look. They should change to that asap. A great mix of the old and new.A rare example of combining two eras and it looking good, but I am a sucker for UCLA-like shoulder stripes.If they did this, then the AFC east would be nothing but white helmetsThat would be kind of neat, actually. An unintentional unifying factor of all the division rivals.Agreed. Who cares if every team in the division has the same colored helmet? If they look good doing so then by all means, make it happen.Really hate the truncated shoulder stripes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Wow... a lot of talk about something that isn't never going to happen. http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmening Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 It's just a random image I found online. I was thinking the same thing about the Giants having their 1976 logo but no Bucs or Seahawks. I'm not sure which part is wrong. I'm sure some people get these boards and magnets are missing so they buy replacements without being sure if they've got the correct era.Oh, and bluefalcon, these things go for big dollars on ebay if they're in decent shape. I've always wanted one, but they're always either in bad shape or too expensive. I've got about every other worthwhile NFL collectible from the 70s, but this and the Gatorade top display still elude me.Off topic, but I love what you've done with your avatar. Pretty much sums up where my Bengals fandom stands right about now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleVermilion81 Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Wow... a lot of talk about something that isn't never going to happen.That is the essence of this board, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thisguyphelps Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 I heard something about Mark Davis getting land somewhere in between San Antonio and Austin. And playing in the Alamodome temporarily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Yeah, but come on. Who's going to pay for that silver and black pleasure palace? The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresno St. Alum Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Yeah, but come on. Who's going to pay for that silver and black pleasure palace?Maybe the St.Louis mayor jumped out of the NFL business a couple days early. They have the new stadium plans ready. St.Louis Raiders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Davis has already ruled out St. Louis. Didn't even bother to dangle them as leverage.But I was speaking of the hypothetical Austin/San Antonio stadium. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrodsep Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 I heard something about Mark Davis getting land somewhere in between San Antonio and Austin. And playing in the Alamodome temporarily.What are the chances the Chargers muck up the negotiations due to a riff between Spanos/Kroenke, then the Raiders move in to LA? Then San Diego moves to San Antonio? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FSUViking Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Bob McNair and Jerry Jones would rip the state of Texas out by it's roots and move it across the ocean before they'd vote to allow a 3rd team in Texas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAstrodome Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 From what I'm seeing, they don't really see it as a threat. Dallas pretty much has most of the state on lock while we suck but still turn a profit with season ticket holder and have never, ever been blacked out. They don't like the idea, but they know that Raiders would have a uphill battle to win hearts in San Antone. All New: NFL RandomWebsite ★ Behance ★ Twitter ★ Geekier Twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old School Fool Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 I heard something about Mark Davis getting land somewhere in between San Antonio and Austin. And playing in the Alamodome temporarily.As a Raiders fan, I'd probably quit football if that happened. It would be the dumbest decision ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCdog Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 I heard something about Mark Davis getting land somewhere in between San Antonio and Austin. And playing in the Alamodome temporarily.Mark Davis used San Antonio for leverage once before the Carson deal. He already knows San Antonio city council won't fall for the same charade again. So his next move is the "Kroenke Move" ...rumored to be buying land between SA & Austin. It worked for Kroenke when he bought the Hollywood Park site ...STL stepped their game up afterwards. Will Libby Schaaf step up to the plate with funding to keep the Raiders at Coliseum City if he buys land elsewhere?Jerry Jones could lose the most and he'd vehemently oppose such a move. Central Texas (Austin/SA) combine is a big market he probably makes big money on. Jones has a lot of influence over the league's owners and that was on full display at the LA relocation meetings in Houston this week. Also, Bob McNair (Texans owner) is on the NFL's relocation committee.IMO, If the Chargers leave for Inglewood (still can't see Spanos dealing with Kroenke), the Raiders would likely move to San Diego. There is a fan base here and a proven history of 3 NFL teams within a 120 mile radius surviving in the Southland (coincidentally involving the same 3 teams in the 80's). If the Chargers stay in SD, then we have an 80's NFL reboot at Inglewood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 rumored to be buying land between SA & Austin. Same rumors that have an NHL team moving to middle-of-nowhere Wisconsin between Madison and Milwaukee so that people from both cities can drive to the games? gtfo ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Is San Antonio now the nation's largest city without a NFL team? If so, expect it to replace LA as the new go-to location for teams that want new stadiums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LAWeaver Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Is San Antonio now the nation's largest city without a NFL team? If so, expect it to replace LA as the new go-to location for teams that want new stadiums.Nope. Portland is, but San Antonio is second with Orlando and Vegas right behind:https://www.google.com/search?q=largest+cities+without+nfl+team&oq=largest+cities+wi&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l3.10587j0j4&client=ms-android-verizon&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8EDIT: looks like St. Louis is, actually, according to Wikipedia:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_major_cities_in_U.S_Lacking_an_NFL_Football_team @loganaweaver - Twitter / @loganaweaver - Instagram / Nike Vapor Untouchable Football Template / Logan's Logos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Yeah, but St. Louis isn't a credible threat for relocation. Neither is Portland, given its antipathy for taxpayer-funded stadiums. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrodsep Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Yeah, but St. Louis isn't a credible threat for relocation. Neither is Portland, given its antipathy for taxpayer-funded stadiums.Those people in Portland are very intelligent. No billionaire should be given tax payers money to build a massive money printing machine that the team operates to his hearts content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Is San Antonio now the nation's largest city without a NFL team? If so, expect it to replace LA as the new go-to location for teams that want new stadiums.Nope. Portland is, but San Antonio is second with Orlando and Vegas right behind:https://www.google.com/search?q=largest+cities+without+nfl+team&oq=largest+cities+wi&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l3.10587j0j4&client=ms-android-verizon&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8EDIT: looks like St. Louis is, actually, according to Wikipedia:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_major_cities_in_U.S_Lacking_an_NFL_Football_teamOh wow, and given that the NFL has typically returned to markets it's left in the past...Gonna be interesting seeing how many teams threaten St. Louis relocation if they don't get new stadiums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 St. Louis will need to build, or at least fund, a stadium first. Nobody is going to take them seriously as a relocation threat until they do. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.