If your NFL team left town, what would you do?

[The_Admiral]

4 hours ago, 2001mark said:

I'm reading a book about Belichick called 'War Room' (2010 I think), it touches on Modell's leaving town.

I guess concerning business he felt cornered - Cleveland had paved the way for new Indians & Cavs stadium & arena alike, which took the Indians' money out of Cleveland Stadium.  Modell's baseball tenant was both removed from his stadium & the same city gave that team a greenlight for Jacob's Field, double whammy.

 

Modell didn't want a new stadium. That was on him.

[Sykotyk]

19 hours ago, the admiral said:

 

Modell didn't want a new stadium. That was on him.

Exactly, Modell was an idiot. He had the option to be involved in the Gateway project, but didn't want a new stadium when he had entire control and profit of Municipal Stadium for $1 a year. In his short-sightedness, he didn't realize that when the Indians move to their new stadium, a lot of loge box money would go with it since 81 Indians/10 Browns games sells a lot better than just 10 Browns games. And the corporate money followed to Jacobs Field to get luxury boxes. So, not only did his lose his 'free money' in the Indians, he lost the luxury box money he had.

 

Then, by the time he realized what was happening, he demanded a new stadium and the city/county/state told him to wait his turn. They'd renovate Municipal Stadium for him (it was on the ballot and still approved even AFTER he agreed to move), but with Gateway, they wanted those two stadiums finished first. But, then he wanted a 'moratorium' on stadium talks while privately talking to Baltimore, and then demanded a new stadium even after he had agreed to the deal in Baltimore in principle.

 

And what makes it worse, he still had several years to play at Memorial Stadium in Baltimore where he lost so much money he had to sell 49% of the team to Biscotti, and then even with the new stadium was losing so much money he sold all but 1% to Biscotti. So, the team he 'didn't want to lose' he lost because he failed spectacularly.

 

And that 1% he didn't sell? That was because he tried to sell the team back in the 80s and had hired a broker for the deal who would get a commission whenever Modell sold the team in the future. No matter whether that broker was involved in the transaction or not. So, in order to avoid paying the commission, Modell kept 1% and argued in court that he didn't sell the team since he still owned a partial interest.

 

 

All around, Modell was a horrible businessman who couldn't make money with one of the most popular teams in the NFL playing in one of the biggest stadiums in the NFL while having an MLB team as a tenant with a horrible team-unfriendly lease that he benefited in almost every possible way. And his saving grace still forced him to sell.

 

And yet somehow people wanted that schmuck in the hall of fame. For what?

[DustDevil61]

I'm a Panthers fan from Utah, so if they were to leave Carolina, I wouldn't care too much as long as they remained the Panthers, as I've decided to stick with them since I was 10 years old.

 

If I may confess, a small part of me wanted them to leave for Los Angeles if Jerry Richardson didn't get the Bank of America Stadium renovation money a few years back (more empty a threat than not), as the LA Panthers would at least be a regional team in terms of drivability and watchability. But, I'm also glad that they've stayed true to the Carolinas (as far as public money goes), much like a lot of things they've done.

 

I'd probably stay with the Panthers even if they were renamed (keeping the general color scheme, a la the Oilers/Titans), but I may root for someone else (probably Denver, who has been my 2nd team for as long, or Cleveland, my 3rd team ever since v2.0 of the Browns have been around) if I found the new identity and location too different from that of the Carolina Panthers.

 

Contrast that with my brother who's a Broncos fan, who would follow the Broncos if they ever left Denver but kept the name but wouldn't follow them if they went the Browns (v1.0)/Ravens route.

 

[johnnysama]

Being a Seahawks fan, I can remember when the team moved to Los Angeles in 1996, but the NFL put the kibosh on the move. Had the move gone through, I would've likely.. oh, geez, became either a Raider or 49er fan. Yikes. That's rather unthinkable.

[bucknut42]

Being a young Colts fan, I've benefited from a team leaving town. But if the Colts left Indy, I would probably follow them and stick with them. My other alternative would be to become a Browns fan because that's who my dad likes

 

...yikes. The Colts better never leave Indiana.

[bosrs1]

On 3/28/2017 at 11:30 AM, EvilChameleon said:

Would you follow them to that new city? Would you pick another team? Would you just stop watching the NFL?

 

I've never been a local Patriots fan (root for them due to familial connections). That said, if they ever left New England I'd likely dump the NFL completely and stick with the CFL and BC Lions.

 

On the slight off chance I didn't stop watching the NFL completely I'd find a new team or just watch as a general viewer with no team. Which team that would be I'm not sure, but likely one I'd also have a familial or geographic link to. That would have been the Chargers before they betrayed the city I live in and love this off season. Now... who knows.

 

No way I'd follow a Pats team who turned traitor and abandoned New England though that's for sure.

[2001mark]

8 hours ago, bosrs1 said:

 

No way I'd follow a Pats team who turned traitor and abandoned New England though that's for sure.

Zero chance of the NFL leaving Boston for a quick buck...

 

yet if they were in a losing funk, relocated to London or whatever, I'd go to my NFC backup Tampa Bay Bucs - just because every single f'n NFC team & city hates to lose the the mother f'n Bucs.They still to this day have a fun underdog dna to them.

[DTConcepts]

I could not care less about the Broncos, or football in general.

[TBGKon]

I think of any of the big 4 sports, the NFL is the one that feels like you could get away without being local to the team itself.

 

I would likely still support the Buccaneers if they remained the Buccaneers.  if a name change occurred, I would default to the city of my heritage, the Lions.

 

As for baseball and hockey, the same rule states, but I'm sure I'd adopt the Detroit teams as my own.

[bosrs1]

On 4/13/2017 at 8:46 PM, 2001mark said:

Zero chance of the NFL leaving Boston for a quick buck...

 

yet if they were in a losing funk, relocated to London or whatever, I'd go to my NFC backup Tampa Bay Bucs - just because every single f'n NFC team & city hates to lose the the mother f'n Bucs.They still to this day have a fun underdog dna to them.

 

Oh I agree, they're one of the teams that has almost no chance of ever abandoning their home market in NE. Thankfully.

 

I've seen what having to go through just such a scenario first hand did to myself and my fellow San Jose Earthquakes fans when the team "went on hiatus" (ie: moved to Houston). Luckily in that case we got a quick and agreeable solution when the league stripped the Houston franchise of their name and records. I've also seen what similar scenarios have done to my friends and family who are Chargers fans here in San Diego and my friends in the Bay Area who are Raiders fans this off season. It's not a position I ever want to see myself in again.

[Still MIGHTY]

The Rams left the first time before I really started following NFL football. I tried being Charger fan, taking the train down to games once a year, during the Doug Flutie and early Brees years, but they never stuck with me. When I started playing high school football, I got into the NFL and chose the Colts because of uniforms and Peyton Manning. I stuck with the Colts post-Manning until the Rams came back. I probably would've stuck with the Colts even if they moved.

 

Now that I have the Rams and have a local team and have become a little bit more emotionally invested, I'd probably react harsher if they left again. Because with growing up and knowing all I know now about the NFL machine and even just seeing the Chargers carpetbag their way up here, if the Rams were to move a second time, that'd probably be my last straw with NFL football. There's no way I'd jump to the Chargers, and I was never going to the Raiders had they shown back up. If the Rams left again, I'd be done with the NFL.

 

As it is, I enjoy college football a hell of a lot, and like Hedley said early, I'd just focus all my attention on Saturdays. I can get all of my football fix and more by covering high school football on Fridays and watching college football on Saturdays. I'd be good.

[2001mark]

3 hours ago, bosrs1 said:

Oh I agree, they're one of the teams that has almost no chance of ever abandoning their home market in NE. Thankfully.

 

As a complete outsider, part of their appeal on me as a kid was actually their New England branding.  I've always liked the Golden States, California Angels, etc.  Thus even if they had moved to Hartford in the 90's, I'd still be where I am today - born a Patriots fan once Parcells & Bledsoe made it the funnest video game team to root for.

[worcat]

Once Kroenke took over in St. Louis and the product went to high hell, it wasn't so bad seeing them leave. It was fun to see the St. Louis Rams win a Superbowl and experience the Greatest Show on Turf but years and years of disappointing local football left a sour taste in alot of peoples mouths. Then add the smear campaign that Kroenke led St. Louis through was just the icing on the cake. I'm happy that LA has their Rams back, I don't follow them but I also don't harbor any ill feelings toward the team/players (Kroenke can choke on a hot dog for all I care). 

 

As for following the NFL, I'll watch games on Thanksgiving and the Superbowl but other than that, I only follow loosely for Fantasy purposes. Even before the Rams came to St. Louis, a majority of the city was already divided up following several different teams. You have passionate fans still rooting for the St. Louis Arizona Cardinals, a large following of Kansas City Chiefs fans, Chicago Bears, Pittsburgh Steelers, Green Bay Packers and Indy Colts. The Rams just sort of collected the left overs and younger crowd that hadn't had a chance to choose what club to follow. 

 

It is very strange to drive past the old dome almost every day and see all the signs taken down and an empty vessel just sitting there unoccupied. 

[PackMan]

I'm a Green Bay fan in Lions country so I wouldn't be exactly devastated if they moved. If they're gone for good, then I might as well root for Minnesota (I don't hate them as much as Chicago and *seethes* Detroit)

[Discrim]

I know one thing, going slightly off topic, if the Bucks had moved, I wouldn't have followed unless they moved to Seattle, and maybe not even then.  I've loathed the Bulls for too long to consider going to them, so I'd probably either quit watching basketball altogether, or follow the Knicks.  But then I repeat myself.

[Gothamite]

8 hours ago, Kaz said:

No way, it's totally the NBA.

 

I agree.  Location seems very unimportant in the NBA.  Team identity itself is secondary to the stars wearing the jerseys, and location a distant third. 

[wildwing64]

On 17/04/2017 at 4:39 PM, AstroBull21 said:

I think of any of the big 4 sports, the NFL is the one that feels like you could get away without being local to the team itself.

 

14 hours ago, Kaz said:

No way, it's totally the NBA.

 

This NHL fan from Britain - seperated from his favourite team by about 5,450 miles - says hi

 

I don't have a team in the NFL (save for my brief time as a Texans fan) but if it were me, as long as they still had an identity that appealed to me I'd probably stick with them. Also for what it's worth, in spite of the constant media sensationalism of an NFL team coming to London, I don't think I could see myself supporting them. Especially if they try too hard to play up the "Cor blimey, look at us!! We're jolly good proper British, innit!!!" thing.

[OnWis97]

20 hours ago, 2001mark said:

As a complete outsider, part of their appeal on me as a kid was actually their New England branding.  I've always liked the Golden States, California Angels, etc.  Thus even if they had moved to Hartford in the 90's, I'd still be where I am today - born a Patriots fan once Parcells & Bledsoe made it the funnest video game team to root for.

I definitely think moves like that are easier for "off-site" fans to swallow than for people who's teams are actually moving away from them.  Given the once-a-week event nature of football, Boston/Massachusetts fans may have stuck with the Pats anyway.  I think that why the Raiders will continue to have somewhat of a national following without missing a beat.  Bay Area fans may not continue to cheer for the Raiders, but they have so many fans from wherever...I suspect many of them will stick around.  I know we have one recent Raider fan from Illinois jumping ship, so the rule's not absolute, but I do think a move (particularly if the name/branding are kept the same) is easier on a distant fan.

 

Now that teams tend to do a total rebrand (i.e., name/colors, etc.), It may be less likely that, say a Sonics fan from Kentucky stayed a Thunder fan.

 

However, our three recent NFL relocations all kept the name and essential brand.  So I'm curious about what "off-site" fans are thinking. @Ice_Cap? @rams80? (though you are from Illinois, so maybe you were more of an "on-site" fan?)  Anyone else?

[OnWis97]

On 3/28/2017 at 5:44 PM, Bruins said:

Wherever Tom Brady and Bill Belichick go, yeah, I'm gonna root for that team. I would root for the Iceland Patriots if it came down to it.

Interesting.  But what about in a few years when they are gone and the Pats are 8-8?

[rams80]

@OnWis97 Stayed with them, but I was functionally an out-of-market fan my entire life.