Nflmich17 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 What if NFL agreed to absorb several of the USFL teams & if did which teams(of the final 8 teams) & which teams be still around today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YelichGraphics Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I like to think the Michigan Panthers was the inspiration for Carolina. I mean the logo is very alike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nflmich17 Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 10 minutes ago, Nflmich17 said: What if NFL agreed to absorb several of the USFL teams & if did which teams(of the final 8 teams) & which teams be still around today the last 8 teams were Baltimore Stars Arizona Outlaws Birmingham Stallions Jacksonville Bulls Memphis Showboats Orlando Renegades New Jersey Generals Tampa Bay Bandits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2001mark Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Birmingham from that list. @2001mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJWalker45 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Birmingham, New Jersey, Baltimore and maybe Orlando or Memphis. New Jersey would have been forced to move cities but a big enough payoff would've made it easier for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sykotyk Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 If the USFL award was more than $1, I think there would've been a merger. It's an interesting proposal. Baltimore Stars (formerly from Philadelphia) Arizona Outlaws (currently no team) Birmingham Stallions (never had an NFL team) Memphis Showboats (briefly had the Oilers later on, no team at the time) Jacksonville Bulls (no NFL team at the time) Orlando Renegades (never had an NFL team) Tampa Bay Bandits (poor NFL team at the time) New Jersey Generals (two NFL teams, sharing one venue). In all, you could see how this would effect later team relocation. Baltimore, Arizona, Jacksonville, and New Jersey probably would be shoe-ins to stick around. Baltimore would've latched onto a team quickly being in the NFL. Arizona would've had a team a few years before the Cardinals moved from St. Louis, keeping them in the Gateway City. Jacksonville was ahead of its time, and might have latched onto their team stronger than the mid-90s expansion did. And New Jersey, just because who owned them, the reason for the demanded merger, and that the NYC area could sustain three teams. Then, there's Birmingham, Memphis, Orlando, and Tampa Bay. The first three could've supported a late-80s NFL team. Tampa Bay would've been difficult with two teams, and either there would be a merger of the two, or one would relocate. Though a bit early, it is possible to see the Bandits relocate to another NFL-less market: San Antonio, Charlotte, Raleigh, Oakland, or USFL vacated locations such as Oklahoma (Tulsa). If the NFL were forced to accept the USFL franchises, this would've stalled the growth of the league. Without stadium leverage, you'd see teams still in older venues. The big push through the 90s for newer venues wouldn't have happened. The Raiders may have looked into relocation back to Oakland, but if the Bandits or another team had already moved there, they might have stuck it out in LA, even with the Coliseum. With the Cardinals nowhere to go, the Rams would've probably stayed in Anaheim. I doubt Portland would've been a viable relocation area for a few reasons: the fight with Seattle for the market, and the venue wouldn't have ever been NFL-level. Cleveland would've had a hard time finding a place to move with Baltimore hosting the Stars. Houston would've had trouble moving anywhere with Memphis having a team. A direct jump to Nashville, if at all, would've been the only options. Again, the NFL would have looked a lot different through the 90s. Without the sudden relocation/new stadium bonanza, the NFL would've stuck with older venues, without the power to force their way through. TV might have increased, but stadium prices and venues would've been depressed. The move away from multi-use stadiums was primarily MLB wanting grass fields, while NFL wanted primary tenant status in their own venues. But, we might have seen the NFL with less pull, agreeing to even newer multi-use venues. St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and Cincinnati might not have had the leverage to demand their own stadiums. St. Louis building the EJD (formerly TWD) would've been less by demand, and possibly only by coincidence. Cincinnati couldn't use the Brownsian threat of moving to demand their own venue. Cities might have had a stronger base of support to push back against NFL teams demanding new venues. Only truly old stadiums: LA Coliseum, Soldier Field, or Municipal Stadium would possibly see brand new stadiums solely for a football team. The NFL would look nothing like it does today. In fact, it might look today what it did back in the mid-90s. All because the overwhelming threat of relocation would be nearly gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalsJunkie Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Calling Mac the Knife.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FDW Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 It largely depends on when and how the NFL and USFL end up merging. It's easier to go through a list of what teams would not make it in the NFL (The Pittsburgh Maulers, The Denver Gold, The Boston and New Orleans (but not Portland) Breakers, The Oklahoma Outlaws, The Tampa Bay Bandits, The Philadelphia Stars, The Washington Federals, and The Houston Gamblers) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo_prankster Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 1 hour ago, Sykotyk said: If the USFL award was more than $1, I think there would've been a merger. It's an interesting proposal. Baltimore Stars (formerly from Philadelphia) Arizona Outlaws (currently no team) Birmingham Stallions (never had an NFL team) Memphis Showboats (briefly had the Oilers later on, no team at the time) Jacksonville Bulls (no NFL team at the time) Orlando Renegades (never had an NFL team) Tampa Bay Bandits (poor NFL team at the time) New Jersey Generals (two NFL teams, sharing one venue). In all, you could see how this would effect later team relocation. Baltimore, Arizona, Jacksonville, and New Jersey probably would be shoe-ins to stick around. Baltimore would've latched onto a team quickly being in the NFL. Arizona would've had a team a few years before the Cardinals moved from St. Louis, keeping them in the Gateway City. Jacksonville was ahead of its time, and might have latched onto their team stronger than the mid-90s expansion did. And New Jersey, just because who owned them, the reason for the demanded merger, and that the NYC area could sustain three teams. Then, there's Birmingham, Memphis, Orlando, and Tampa Bay. The first three could've supported a late-80s NFL team. Tampa Bay would've been difficult with two teams, and either there would be a merger of the two, or one would relocate. Though a bit early, it is possible to see the Bandits relocate to another NFL-less market: San Antonio, Charlotte, Raleigh, Oakland, or USFL vacated locations such as Oklahoma (Tulsa). If the NFL were forced to accept the USFL franchises, this would've stalled the growth of the league. Without stadium leverage, you'd see teams still in older venues. The big push through the 90s for newer venues wouldn't have happened. The Raiders may have looked into relocation back to Oakland, but if the Bandits or another team had already moved there, they might have stuck it out in LA, even with the Coliseum. With the Cardinals nowhere to go, the Rams would've probably stayed in Anaheim. I doubt Portland would've been a viable relocation area for a few reasons: the fight with Seattle for the market, and the venue wouldn't have ever been NFL-level. Cleveland would've had a hard time finding a place to move with Baltimore hosting the Stars. Houston would've had trouble moving anywhere with Memphis having a team. A direct jump to Nashville, if at all, would've been the only options. Again, the NFL would have looked a lot different through the 90s. Without the sudden relocation/new stadium bonanza, the NFL would've stuck with older venues, without the power to force their way through. TV might have increased, but stadium prices and venues would've been depressed. The move away from multi-use stadiums was primarily MLB wanting grass fields, while NFL wanted primary tenant status in their own venues. But, we might have seen the NFL with less pull, agreeing to even newer multi-use venues. St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and Cincinnati might not have had the leverage to demand their own stadiums. St. Louis building the EJD (formerly TWD) would've been less by demand, and possibly only by coincidence. Cincinnati couldn't use the Brownsian threat of moving to demand their own venue. Cities might have had a stronger base of support to push back against NFL teams demanding new venues. Only truly old stadiums: LA Coliseum, Soldier Field, or Municipal Stadium would possibly see brand new stadiums solely for a football team. The NFL would look nothing like it does today. In fact, it might look today what it did back in the mid-90s. All because the overwhelming threat of relocation would be nearly gone. Would a USFL/NFL merger have zapped the London games? The Fictional Story of Austus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy! Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 One can only hope. "I secretly hope people like that hydroplane into a wall." - Dennis "Big Sexy" Ittner POTD - 7/3/14 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo_prankster Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 5 minutes ago, Jimmy! said: One can only hope. But would that stop the hypothetical "superleague" from finding a "Final Frontier" to scare cities into building new ballparks? The Fictional Story of Austus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy! Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Four teams could have worked. In '86, you were a few years removed from the Colts leaving, the Cardinals were still in St. Louis, and we were a few years away from Carolina, Jacksonville, and Tennessee. I don't see any reason why the USFL Stars, Generals, Panthers, and one more team (maybe the Bandits) couldn't have worked over a staggered expansion process of several years. That doesn't mean those franchises would stay in their current location. Birmingham Generals, Carolina Panthers, Memphis Stars, etc. You get the jist. "I secretly hope people like that hydroplane into a wall." - Dennis "Big Sexy" Ittner POTD - 7/3/14 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sykotyk Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I think a USFL/NFL merger would've squashed any plans for the WLAF. Without enough U.S. markets open, and an abundance of NFL teams (38 with a full USFL/NFL merger), I just don't see it happening. A three-team European league wouldn't have happened on its own. Maybe more teams. But, doubtful. Also, in the CFL, the Montreal Alouettes may have been delayed. The CFL still could've went to U.S. markets, but Sacramento, Las Vegas and Shreveport teams would've been the most likely options. Memphis would maybe have favored Nashville. Birmingham never would've happened. San Antonio may have happened, depending on where the Bandits ended up (Oklahoma, San Antonio, or Oakland. Though the Raiders could've moved to San Antonio if Oakland had been taken again. Or somewhere else. Baltimore would've been guaranteed out. Which was the only successful U.S. based CFL team. Which with the Ravens moving in, punted them to Canada and the vacant Montreal market. With 38 NFL teams, and WLAF not taking flight, we may have seen an eye to the north and Canadian relocation/expansion, despite the dollar valuation being an issue. Which would've been crazier. The CFL took a stab at U.S. expansion as a desperate measure. They were in dire financial straits, which the NFL came to their rescue with a cash infusion that took years to overcome. With 38 NFL teams... would they have been so willing to help the CFL? Or cannibalize their northern neighbor? Toronto, Montreal, Edmonton, and Vancouver could've been eyed as NFL markets already with stadiums suitable for the NFL size needed at that time in history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo_prankster Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 1 hour ago, Sykotyk said: I think a USFL/NFL merger would've squashed any plans for the WLAF. Without enough U.S. markets open, and an abundance of NFL teams (38 with a full USFL/NFL merger), I just don't see it happening. A three-team European league wouldn't have happened on its own. Maybe more teams. But, doubtful. Also, in the CFL, the Montreal Alouettes may have been delayed. The CFL still could've went to U.S. markets, but Sacramento, Las Vegas and Shreveport teams would've been the most likely options. Memphis would maybe have favored Nashville. Birmingham never would've happened. San Antonio may have happened, depending on where the Bandits ended up (Oklahoma, San Antonio, or Oakland. Though the Raiders could've moved to San Antonio if Oakland had been taken again. Or somewhere else. Baltimore would've been guaranteed out. Which was the only successful U.S. based CFL team. Which with the Ravens moving in, punted them to Canada and the vacant Montreal market. With 38 NFL teams, and WLAF not taking flight, we may have seen an eye to the north and Canadian relocation/expansion, despite the dollar valuation being an issue. Which would've been crazier. The CFL took a stab at U.S. expansion as a desperate measure. They were in dire financial straits, which the NFL came to their rescue with a cash infusion that took years to overcome. With 38 NFL teams... would they have been so willing to help the CFL? Or cannibalize their northern neighbor? Toronto, Montreal, Edmonton, and Vancouver could've been eyed as NFL markets already with stadiums suitable for the NFL size needed at that time in history. No way the Bandits could stay in TB long enough to move into the Suncoast Dome? Could an Oklahoma franchise have played at Owen Field or is that too far from OKC proper? What happens to the Express with the Raiders and Rams still in LA? The Fictional Story of Austus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 The Bandits had a lien against them by a former player, Bret Clark, over deferred payments. They were broke. Plus, the dome in St. Pete was just under construction when the USFL went under. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2001mark Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 2 hours ago, Sykotyk said: Toronto, Montreal, Edmonton, and Vancouver could've been eyed as NFL markets already with stadiums suitable for the NFL size needed at that time in history. I've wondered if Toronto would've had more NFL potential had the CFL died when it nearly did several years ago. To be marketed as Canada's team like the Raptors & now Blue Jays. @2001mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 5 hours ago, BengalsJunkie said: Calling Mac the Knife.. You rang? Short answer: it would've been an ABA-NBA style merger with not all teams allowed to join. Longer, more speculative answer: They'd have admitted four teams, tops: Arizona, Baltimore, Jacksonville and Memphis. The Bandits and Stallions ownership was in total disarray by the time of the trial's conclusion. Orlando would be out due to its proximity to Tampa. Portland doesn't get in because Jacksonville would. New Jersey doesn't get in due to its proximity to New York, and due to Donald Trump. Each of the four are cashed out for the equivalent of what an NFL expansion franchise of the era would be valued at (probably around $75 million apiece). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nflmich17 Posted January 26, 2016 Author Share Posted January 26, 2016 16 hours ago, Sykotyk said: If the USFL award was more than $1, I think there would've been a merger. It's an interesting proposal. Baltimore Stars (formerly from Philadelphia) Arizona Outlaws (currently no team) Birmingham Stallions (never had an NFL team) Memphis Showboats (briefly had the Oilers later on, no team at the time) Jacksonville Bulls (no NFL team at the time) Orlando Renegades (never had an NFL team) Tampa Bay Bandits (poor NFL team at the time) New Jersey Generals (two NFL teams, sharing one venue). In all, you could see how this would effect later team relocation. Baltimore, Arizona, Jacksonville, and New Jersey probably would be shoe-ins to stick around. Baltimore would've latched onto a team quickly being in the NFL. Arizona would've had a team a few years before the Cardinals moved from St. Louis, keeping them in the Gateway City. Jacksonville was ahead of its time, and might have latched onto their team stronger than the mid-90s expansion did. And New Jersey, just because who owned them, the reason for the demanded merger, and that the NYC area could sustain three teams. Then, there's Birmingham, Memphis, Orlando, and Tampa Bay. The first three could've supported a late-80s NFL team. Tampa Bay would've been difficult with two teams, and either there would be a merger of the two, or one would relocate. Though a bit early, it is possible to see the Bandits relocate to another NFL-less market: San Antonio, Charlotte, Raleigh, Oakland, or USFL vacated locations such as Oklahoma (Tulsa). If the NFL were forced to accept the USFL franchises, this would've stalled the growth of the league. Without stadium leverage, you'd see teams still in older venues. The big push through the 90s for newer venues wouldn't have happened. The Raiders may have looked into relocation back to Oakland, but if the Bandits or another team had already moved there, they might have stuck it out in LA, even with the Coliseum. With the Cardinals nowhere to go, the Rams would've probably stayed in Anaheim. I doubt Portland would've been a viable relocation area for a few reasons: the fight with Seattle for the market, and the venue wouldn't have ever been NFL-level. Cleveland would've had a hard time finding a place to move with Baltimore hosting the Stars. Houston would've had trouble moving anywhere with Memphis having a team. A direct jump to Nashville, if at all, would've been the only options. Again, the NFL would have looked a lot different through the 90s. Without the sudden relocation/new stadium bonanza, the NFL would've stuck with older venues, without the power to force their way through. TV might have increased, but stadium prices and venues would've been depressed. The move away from multi-use stadiums was primarily MLB wanting grass fields, while NFL wanted primary tenant status in their own venues. But, we might have seen the NFL with less pull, agreeing to even newer multi-use venues. St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and Cincinnati might not have had the leverage to demand their own stadiums. St. Louis building the EJD (formerly TWD) would've been less by demand, and possibly only by coincidence. Cincinnati couldn't use the Brownsian threat of moving to demand their own venue. Cities might have had a stronger base of support to push back against NFL teams demanding new venues. Only truly old stadiums: LA Coliseum, Soldier Field, or Municipal Stadium would possibly see brand new stadiums solely for a football team. The NFL would look nothing like it does today. In fact, it might look today what it did back in the mid-90s. All because the overwhelming threat of relocation would be nearly gone. that be amazing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nflmich17 Posted January 26, 2016 Author Share Posted January 26, 2016 So i ask a question what USFL what could live in NFL & someone said merger & take best four teams Jacksonville Bulls,Memphis Showboats,Arizona Outlaws,Baltimore Stars so alignment them in NFL if you have a better alignment idea go hard & post it here. AFC AFC East:New England Patriots,New York Jets,Buffalo Bills,Indianapolis Colts AFC North:Cleveland Browns,Cincinnati Bengals,Pittsburgh Steelers,Memphis Showboats* AFC South:Miami Dolphins,Kansas City Chiefs,Houston Oilers,Jacksonville Bulls* AFC West:Denver Broncos,Los Angeles Raiders,San Diego Chargers,Seattle Seahawks NFC NFC East:New York Giants,Washington Redskins,Philadelphia Eagles,Dallas Cowboys NFC North:Chicago Bears,Minnesota Vikings,Detroit Lions,Green Bay Packers NFC West:Los Angeles Rams,San Francisco 49ers,St.Louis Cardinals,Arizona Outlaws* NFC South:Tampa Bay Buccaneers,Atlanta Falcons,New Orleans Saints,Baltimore Stars* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBGKon Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Swap the Stars and Showboats and you're good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.