NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

[Gothamite]

The US televesions would not really be an issue since there have been west coast teams in the London game.

I'm not talking about television broadcasts (although that's a factor too), I'm talking about players having to acclimate to playing with an eight-hour time difference jet lag.

We already talk about West Coast teams being at a disadvantage when they come all the way East - this is more than doubled.

As a one-off, buttressed by a bye week, it's not a problem. But as part of a regular schedule? And conversely, with the London team having to play half their games in the early morning or middle of their night? No.

[dfwabel]

The US televesions would not really be an issue since there have been west coast teams in the London game.

I'm not talking about television broadcasts (although that's a factor too), I'm talking about players having to acclimate to playing with an eight-hour time difference jet lag.

We already talk about West Coast teams being at a disadvantage when they come all the way East - this is more than doubled.

As a one-off, buttressed by a bye week, it's not a problem. But as part of a regular schedule? And conversely, with the London team having to play half their games in the early morning or middle of their night? No.

I mentioned the current UK televison deals in an effort to assist this thread to realize the current situation.

I have posted the NFL's goal to have $25B in revenue by 2025 within our 2012-13 offseason thread.

However, expanding the NFL would make some items more apporiate to the current and future owners. Think about it...

1- Expansion fees = free money to the current 32 teams + they could hold off a percentage of TV money like football conferences

2- More teams = The 18 game regular season Goodell wants

3- 18 game regular season = Longer time for rookies to be "vested" in the NFLPA/NFL retirement and pension system

4- More teams = More young players

5- More young players = More players at a lower cost

6- More young players at a lower cost = Keeps your cap number down

7- More young players who quit/cut and are not "vested" = Lower long-term cost for NFL owners

Honestly, the Simmons podcast with investigative reporter Don Van Natta and Van Natta's ESPN Magazine story on Goodell is what could football's tipping point since the NFL wants to be the governing body.

[zpqmaowl]

These guys are standing outside of Staples Center:

But, they have a lot of competition from the Bring Back Jesus group:

[STL FANATIC]

Do they always do that, or are they trolling St. Louis?

[IceCap]

Do they always do that, or are they trolling St. Louis?

Why does it have to be one or the other?

It's not out of the ordinary for people to want a relocated team back. Even if they just started expressing it publicly.

[nuordr]

These guys are standing outside of Staples Center:

But, they have a lot of competition from the Jesus will return one day group:

Fixed it for ya!

[OnWis97]

I think 32 is the best number to keep in the NFL. If they are in dire need of a LA team then they will find a way for a current team to move. Jacksonville or Oakland are the only ones that makes sense (just b/c Al Davis isn't around to keep them there). There is no need in taking teams away from big cities that just leaves a void for another expansion. The CFL isn't going anywhere, so that negates three possible markets (Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal). If any other team came into the league now it would just be another Jacksonville story.

Portland, OR - most are probably Seahawks fans

Sacramento, CA - 49ers fans?

Salt Lake City, UT - Broncos?

Las Vegas, NV - Broncos or Cardinals

San Antonio - Cowboys, Texans, and even Saints

Memphis - Rams, Titans

Birmingham - Titans, Falcons

Orlando - Jaguars, Bucs

Columbus - Bengals, Browns

Milwaukee - Packers

Hartford - Patriots, Giants, Jets

The league is just saturated with too many teams. If anything, just focus on making the USFL the developing league and let these cities go there.

I am not advocating expansion, but I don't think the existence of a predominant "out of town team of choice" often makes stops a market from working. In the case of Milwaukee, it certainly does. Maybe in Columbus as well. But I don't think the fact that people in Vegas follow the Cardinals or Broncos matters at all...no more than the fact that Minnesotans followed the Packers in the pre-Vikings days.

That all said, I really hope they don't expand. 34 teams will be hard to find a nice division structure with. 36 works better but I am not sold on the ability to find four great markets. Vegas, would be one, since it's a huge and growing city with no pro sports (if there is any will there to put a ton of money into an air-conditioned facility, which I have no idea about). LA, obviously. Then, most of the above cities (most likely exception = Portland or San Antonio, I suppose) are not necessarily viable markets. They'd have to go out of the country. Maybe Toronto. I agree that it's not going to be London...Too much travel. London would be at a huge disadvantage for free agents. So I think we'd be looking at something like LA, LA, Vegas, Toronto.

I like the current 32-team set up. It's nice and symetrical, but if you (the greater you that is) think the NFL would not ruin that if it thought it could make more money, you're kidding yourself.

I am starting to think the NFL may have overplayed it's LA hand. I think we all believe they've been using LA as leverage and it looks like it may be working too well. I think they were thinking of one team from California (Raiders/Chargers) and one from elsewhere (Vikes, Bills, Jags, Rams). It's looking like the "elsewhere" teams are getting less likely to contribute. I don't think they want both California teams, which would lead to still only three in the state and no more geographic spread than today. I fear they are going to therefore move the Chargers, get an expansion team (Necessitating a second expansion team) and come up with new alignment for 34 teams.

[Gothamite]

I don't think anybody seriously thought that the Vikings or Bills would ever move to LA (or that the NFL ever wanted them to), so I'm not sure I agree with that premise.

I'm also not convinced that the NFL would mourn the loss of Oakland as a market, keeping a solid presence in Northern California and expanding in the Southland.

[OnWis97]

I don't think anybody seriously thought that the Vikings or Bills would ever move to LA (or that the NFL ever wanted them to), so I'm not sure I agree with that premise.

I'm also not convinced that the NFL would mourn the loss of Oakland as a market, keeping a solid presence in Northern California and expanding in the Southland.

For the Vikes, I did always think the NFL wanted them to stay for a few reasons. However, if Minnesota would have held strong with not building a stadium, it would have probably happened eventually.

[STL FANATIC]

Do they always do that, or are they trolling St. Louis?

Why does it have to be one or the other?

It's not out of the ordinary for people to want a relocated team back. Even if they just started expressing it publicly.

I didn't mean it in any kind of rude or unbelieving tone. I was legitimately curious.

The Blues were in town that night, so I didn't know if that was the motivation.

I know there's a significant (if not massive) organized group of fans looking to bring the Rams back to LA.

Maybe trolling was too strong a word, but I was just really curious if they were always out in public like that or if they saw it as a chance to push some St. Louis buttons so to speak. It was almost more a question prompted by hockey rather than the actual NFL situation.

I wouldn't care if the answer was that they were just there because St. Louis was in town, I was just wondering.

[Magnus]

I, for one, agree with the sentiment that 32 teams works perfectly for the NFL, and that if the league wants to milk other cities for the sake of growing their profits, that they should figure out an NHL-AHL form of agreement with leagues like the UFL.

As far as Los Angeles goes, I think they should get a team back if there is the market for it, but right now, with two storied FBS teams in the city, I think the market for American football is too saturated. I would also be fine with the Raiders moving to LA (if it made sense financially, as stated), as they would not have to change the alignment of the divisions at all.

[nuordr]

one correction...Memphis is Cowboys and Steelers country, with some liking the Titans but others resentful that they used Memphis as a stopover on the way to Nashville and didn't play the 2nd year as planned at the Liberty Bowl...The then Oilers also made no effort to market to Memphis as the state's team during their stay, only coming to Memphis for games and practicing in Nashville.

Interesting map below shows NFL loyalties based on most facebook likes.

This is an interesting map as I thought there would be more Steelers fans in Kentucky.

[bosrs1]

These guys are standing outside of Staples Center:

But, they have a lot of competition from the Jesus will return one day group:

Fixed it for ya!

His way was better...

Those guys show up at every major SoCal event with their yellow signs and bullhorn trying to convince us we're all doomed to hell if we don't accept Jesus, and implying that we're somehow bad people for going to a mass gathering that doesn't star their Lord and Savior.

[IceCap]

I don't understand how going to a sporting event is a sin. If you try to claim it is, then you probably deserve to be mocked. Not because of your religious convictions, but by how stupidly you try to present them.

I, for one, agree with the sentiment that 32 teams works perfectly for the NFL, and that if the league wants to milk other cities for the sake of growing their profits, that they should figure out an NHL-AHL form of agreement with leagues like the UFL.

That will never happen. Like it or not NCAA football, more specifically the FBS teams, operate as a de facto minor league. No one's abandoning their NCAA loyalties to watch a bunch of washed up scrubs in the UFL or whatever version of NFL Lite you parade out there.

[TheOldRoman]

I don't think anybody seriously thought that the Vikings or Bills would ever move to LA (or that the NFL ever wanted them to), so I'm not sure I agree with that premise.

I'm also not convinced that the NFL would mourn the loss of Oakland as a market, keeping a solid presence in Northern California and expanding in the Southland.

There were no serious rumors about the Bills moving to LA, and I think the league wants them in Buffalo, but I always figured they were a team which had a strong possibility of moving in a few years. Ralph Wilson isn't long for this world. It will be really hard for the league to find a local owner for the Bills, let alone one who could build a stadium, too. There is no public money to be had in Buffalo. I really hope the Bills stay, but I think at this point it would take something close to a miracle to get a new owner who builds a new stadium out of the goodness of his heart instead of taking free money in LA.

[nuordr]

I don't think anybody seriously thought that the Vikings or Bills would ever move to LA (or that the NFL ever wanted them to), so I'm not sure I agree with that premise.

I'm also not convinced that the NFL would mourn the loss of Oakland as a market, keeping a solid presence in Northern California and expanding in the Southland.

There were no serious rumors about the Bills moving to LA, and I think the league wants them in Buffalo, but I always figured they were a team which had a strong possibility of moving in a few years. Ralph Wilson isn't long for this world. It will be really hard for the league to find a local owner for the Bills, let alone one who could build a stadium, too. There is no public money to be had in Buffalo. I really hope the Bills stay, but I think at this point it would take something close to a miracle to get a new owner who builds a new stadium out of the goodness of his heart instead of taking free money in LA.

I guess I always thought that if the Bills moved it would be to Toronto as that would be the best geographical location for the team due to the surrounding fan base. Now there is a report on ESPN saying that the state of Florida as turned down the Dolphins stadium reconstruction plans and even though they said Stephen Ross has said in the past that he will not relocate the team, the chances of selling the team to a new owner and playing in the old Joe Robbie Stadium would be slim. However, I don't believe the Dolphins would ever move, but who knows these days: http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9246386/miami-dolphins-pay-stadium-fixes-ceo-mike-dee

[TheOldRoman]

Toronto seemed logical before the Bills started having home games there. It's now considered a disaster. Not only would they still need a new billion dollar stadium (Rogers Centre wouldn't do), but this experiment has shown that people in Toronto don't really care enough to have an NFL team. Maybe Torontans (Torontonians?) would care more if the team was exclusively theirs, but I don't think any owners would be willing to risk it at this point.

[IceCap]

Toronto seemed logical before the Bills started having home games there. It's now considered a disaster. Not only would they still need a new billion dollar stadium (Rogers Centre wouldn't do), but this experiment has shown that people in Toronto don't really care enough to have an NFL team. Maybe Torontans (Torontonians?) would care more if the team was exclusively theirs, but I don't think any owners would be willing to risk it at this point.

Maybe, but you have to be realistic about this sort of thing. If you want a team in your city, and a team commits to a couple home games a year in your city, you need to make those undeniable successes to show the league that your city is viable as a market. Toronto didn't do that. People can say "oh, the tickets were to expensive" or "the city won't support a team that's not really theirs" but they're empty excuses when you get right down to it. If the endgame was a NFL team in Toronto then the fans needed to turn out regardless, and they didn't.

On top of that there's no political will or money to build a truly NFL calibre stadium. The city all but said "that's it" after BMO Field was built.

[Mac the Knife]

And now, introducing a new player in the "We may move to Los Angeles" competition: the Miami Dolphins.

The Florida state legislature today declined to vote on a bill that was aimed at providing the Dolphins with $379,000,000 with which it would upgrade Joe Robbie Stadium (sorry, the damned place has changed its name more often than some people change underwear, so I'm calling it Joe Robbie). Despite owning both the team and the stadium, southern Florida media outlets are already reporting that in addition to (in all likelihood) losing the battle to host the 50th Super Bowl (which now, presumably, will go to the 49ers new stadium in Santa Clara, California), Stephen Ross may now put the Dolphins either on the block for a sale to Los Angeles interests or just move the team himself.

Damned Florida legislature... refusing to give $379 million to a guy to fix his own stadium... the nerve of them. Sheesh.

[The_Admiral]

Goodell won't let the NFL not be in Miami. yawn