Jump to content

NFL 2023 Changes


DCarp1231

Recommended Posts

 

58 minutes ago, PlayGloria said:

 

Oh trust me, my revisionist history is definitely looking at the situation through St. Louisan colored glasses 😂

The Dome sucked at the end, but the city passed a bill for a new stadium before the Rams left. And that was for a team that had no desire to stay. I'm sure working together with an expansion franchise like the Stallions that would have wanted to be here would have been even more constructive. But that's an entirely different conversation. And I have no doubt that our garbage political atmosphere would have screwed up that hypothetical situation as well. 

 

As far as the other teams moving, sure anything could have happened. I just always wondered where we would be if STL would have gotten the Stallions.  Relocations suck. It just never feels right. Especially when you've lived through two of them 🥺

 

It all worked out in the end. 

 

St. Louis got football back... they just wear CITYRED now. 😎

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
  • Applause 2

*Disclaimer: I am not an authoritative expert on stuff...I just do a lot of reading and research and keep in close connect with a bunch of people who are authoritative experts on stuff. 😁

|| dribbble || Behance ||

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, tBBP said:

Memphis specifically, but also the whole of West Tennessee, is the red-headed stepchild of the Volunteer State in that the heads who run the state keep forgetting that they exist...and it's evident in the overall lack of infrastructure development out there. Seriously, once you get past oh, say, Hurricane Mills, and at any rate west of the Tennessee River, whatever niceness you may perceive of the state seems to drop right off a cliff...along with the topography turning flatter and not-as-scenic (trying to be nice here). It's really an [unfortunate] tale of two Tennessees...and Memphis has long borne the brunt of that neglect among other things, still does to this day. (Oh and the vitriol in Memphis toward Nashville is still all the way real.)


I don't want to get overly political but if anyone is interested and wants to look into this outside of this board, there is a racial element to this: Nashville is 53% white, Memphis is 61% black.

  • Like 4
  • WOAH 1
  • Meh 1
  • Huh? 1
  • Dislike 1
  • Facepalm 2
  • Eyeroll 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

 

Help me understand the logic here.  The Stallions would have been playing in the same lousy TWA Dome that the Rams eventually abandoned (albeit they had established an agenda towards the end).  It's not safe to assume that the city would have maintained it any better than they did when the Rams were there.

 

The Rams could have still left, as there were a few open markets at that time (Nashville for example).  I get that Georgia Frontiere had St. Louis roots, but if they wanted to move, they still could have.

 

The Chargers were never going to "figure out something" in San Diego, and may have ended up being the first team to return to LA.  In this scenario, the only way history is dramatically different is that it may have been the Raiders and Chargers sharing LA.

The Rams relocation back to LA had more to do with Kroenke wanting to move to LA than the stadium itself. True it wasn't up to the standards that the Rams eventually added to the lease, terms that may never have been in there with the Stallions. If the Stallions had been brought into the league as an expansion team, there's no guarantee that that ownership, or any after, would have a target market like LA to move to, especially since there's a strong change the Rams had stayed put to begin with and LA never lost both teams. I mean, yeah, they still could've been sold and moved elsewhere, but it's not a stretch to think this scenario could've wound up with both markets keeping their teams.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, fouhy12 said:

So this confirms the Jets will wear the black uniforms with the one remaining alternate slot, and they will wear them at home, both as expected. Looking at the schedule, I'm assuming those will be worn either on Monday Night Football against the Chargers in week 9 or on Black Friday against Miami in week 12. 

 

The Jets have hosted MNF three times since this new uniform set was unveiled, with two against the Patriots. They wore all black with green helmets in 2020 in week 9 and all green with white socks in 2019 in week 7 against New England and wore the all black with green helmets in 2019 against the Browns in week 2. 

 

Obviously, the Black Friday game is new. If I got to pick, I'd wear the black uniform then. It just makes too much sense. 

 

I'm curious if they'd use the black logo if/when they go white over black at home. 

I agree it will almost certainly be one of those two games, and then white over black could be worn Week 3 vs. New England or Week 6 vs. Philly, depending on how much white they wear at home this year. I think it would work okay against Philly in green over white.

 

I would much rather see the black uniform on Black Friday against the Fins than for a rare matchup against the Chargers. I don't want to see the Chargers in all-white vs. the Jets in all-black.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fouhy12 said:

Obviously, the Black Friday game is new. If I got to pick, I'd wear the black uniform then. It just makes too much sense. 

 

I'm curious if they'd use the black logo if/when they go white over black at home. 

 

39 minutes ago, Pigskin12 said:

I agree it will almost certainly be one of those two games, and then white over black could be worn Week 3 vs. New England or Week 6 vs. Philly, depending on how much white they wear at home this year. I think it would work okay against Philly in green over white.

 

I would much rather see the black uniform on Black Friday against the Fins than for a rare matchup against the Chargers. I don't want to see the Chargers in all-white vs. the Jets in all-black.

 

They said in the throwback release write-up that the black jerseys will be worn for the Black Friday game.

 

The black endzones were used last season for the second of two games they wore white over black at home, so I wouldn't be surprised if the black field designs show up if they do go with that uniform combo again.

 

They also used the black endzones last season during the single game they wore the green jerseys. I assume that was because that game was the Sunday preceding their TNF game where they wore black and it was less work for the stadium crew in a short turnaround.

 

Per the Jets jersey schedule, I think there are five games set in stone. There are the two throwback games, the Black Friday black jerseys, they'll have to wear green @Cleveland because Cleveland is going to wear their new all-white look and I would have to assume they'll be in green @Dallas.

  • Like 2

IbjBaeE.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, McCall said:

The Rams relocation back to LA had more to do with Kroenke wanting to move to LA than the stadium itself. True it wasn't up to the standards that the Rams eventually added to the lease, terms that may never have been in there with the Stallions. If the Stallions had been brought into the league as an expansion team, there's no guarantee that that ownership, or any after, would have a target market like LA to move to, especially since there's a strong change the Rams had stayed put to begin with and LA never lost both teams. I mean, yeah, they still could've been sold and moved elsewhere, but it's not a stretch to think this scenario could've wound up with both markets keeping their teams.

 

I think you summed up exactly what I was trying to say in all of my mumbling. Totally agree

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:


I don't want to get overly political but if anyone is interested and wants to look into this outside of this board, there is a racial element to this: Nashville is 53% white, Memphis is 61% black.


“I don’t want to get overly political…”

 

[Pulls the Race Card]

  • Like 1
  • Applause 3
  • Dislike 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, McCall said:

The Rams relocation back to LA had more to do with Kroenke wanting to move to LA than the stadium itself. True it wasn't up to the standards that the Rams eventually added to the lease, terms that may never have been in there with the Stallions. If the Stallions had been brought into the league as an expansion team, there's no guarantee that that ownership, or any after, would have a target market like LA to move to, especially since there's a strong change the Rams had stayed put to begin with and LA never lost both teams. I mean, yeah, they still could've been sold and moved elsewhere, but it's not a stretch to think this scenario could've wound up with both markets keeping their teams.

 

Yeah, we'll never know.  Maybe if STL is blocked, then Kroenke eventually gets the Rams that are still in LA, builds his new stadium, and their history never changes.  Raiders probably still go back to Oakland, but I don't see any scenario in which San Diego resolves its situation, so there's actually the chance that we'd have the Las Vegas Chargers in the event that the Raiders either stayed in LA or were enticed back (which would be possible since in this timeline, those discussions would occur long before LV even entered the picture.)

  • Like 1

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MCM0313 said:

 

Admittedly, I don’t know when Adams’ feud with the city began, but the whole ultimatum, then disbanding the team, seems in hindsight like a calculated move to disengage the team’s fans and further strengthen the argument for getting out of town. Ultimately, they would leave Houston after the 1996 season; the city wouldn’t host a playoff game again until the Texans’ first division title (2011, I think?). 

From what I've read comparing Modell's antics vs the Oilers' move, the City of Houston had just put millions into renovating the Astrodome in the late 80's, but Bud Adams wanted a more modern stadium with more money generating amenities. The city was hesitant to go for a new stadium after pouring money into the Astrodome and it became apparent a new stadium wasn't going to happen in Houston for the Oilers.  

AmPJ0Ty.png 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MCM0313 said:

Looking at what Bud Adams did in hindsight, it’s very clear that he was the unreasonable one. 
 

The 1987-93 Oilers made the playoffs seven consecutive seasons. Seven! That’s a lot. But they never got farther than the divisional round. 
 

After the embarrassment of the 1992 team’s playoff meltdown in Buffalo, Adams basically issued a Super Bowl-or-bust ultimatum for the 1993 season. 
 

The 1993 Oilers started 1-4, but then hit their stride, winning 11 straight to close the season. They tied with Dallas and Buffalo for the league’s best record, and earned the AFC’s second seed and a first-round bye. Unfortunately, that was the year Joe Montana came to the Chiefs, and he orchestrated one of his patented comebacks in the divisional round to sink the Oilers. 
 

Adams had threatened to break up his very good team, and he was true to his word. Most significantly, HoF QB Warren Moon, the heart of the run-and-shoot offense that had made the team so much fun to watch, was shipped to Minnesota. A demoralized Oilers crumbled to a league-worst 2-14 record in 1994, and by the end of that season Jeff Fisher had begun his long stint as the team’s head coach. 
 

Admittedly, I don’t know when Adams’ feud with the city began, but the whole ultimatum, then disbanding the team, seems in hindsight like a calculated move to disengage the team’s fans and further strengthen the argument for getting out of town. Ultimately, they would leave Houston after the 1996 season; the city wouldn’t host a playoff game again until the Texans’ first division title (2011, I think?). 

To add on to this, in the late 80's Bud Adams demanded the Astrodome be updated to add more seating as the Astrodome previously sat 50,000 as it seating layout was more similar to Shea Stadium with the baseball outfield being the giant scoreboard. He siad if the county didnt update the stadium , he would look into moving the team. Harris County spent $67 Million to renovate the Astrodome by ripping out the scoreboard to add upper deck seating that wrapped around the entire stadium and to bring seating capacity around 60,000. 6-years later, the local area was still coming out of a oil market recession and at the same time he just dismantled the team he goes to local leaders demanding a brand new stadium. This time they told him no and he instantly had a deal struck with Nashville which resulted in the 1995 and 96 lame duck seasons where people didnt want to come watch a last place team that was leaving town. Harris County still hasnt fully paid of the $67 Million bond for the renovations to this day. In hindsight, perhaps if Adams just would have waited a few more years he probably would have gotten his new stadium as the Astros also were unhappy with the dome. I don't know any details about the financials with the Astrodome. Since the stadium was owned by the county and managed by the Astros, I wouldnt be surprised if the Oilers didn't get to keep as much ticket and concession revenue as their peers in the NFL. So financially, I get why Adams wanted his own place. But his timing and personality wore thin here in Houston.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:


That's something to keep in mind was the Cleveland fought really hard to keep the Browns in Cleveland. I remember a big push in the press trying to keep the Browns.
 

The Oilers sort of left with a whimper. They'd been at or near the bottom in home attendance the three seasons prior to the move.

Then there was the weird limbo where they were based and practiced in Nashville but played the games in Memphis, which despite being in the same state are two very different towns. 

And then they moved from the Liberty Bowl to Vanderbilt in 1998 so that they could sell alcohol on Sundays as well, if I remember correctly. 

 

Also of note (per Wikipedia):

"On July 23, 2023, the Titans unveiled the throwback powder blue Oilers uniforms based on the set the team wore from 1982 to 1998. As the then-Tennessee Oilers never wore this set at home during the two years the franchise was named as such, this would mark the first time the iconic powder blues would be worn on the Titans' home field.[15]

km3S7lo.jpg

 

Zqy6osx.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HOOVER said:


“I don’t want to get overly political…”

 

[Pulls the Race Card]

 

Hard to tell the whole story about the issues between Memphis and Nashville without bringing that up. 

There's a lot more to the Oilers saga and when it comes to football its hardly the main event, but can't leave it out.

  • Like 7
  • Yawn 1
  • Facepalm 1
  • Eyeroll 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

So you're vindictive against a community where 1) nobody under 25 ever even saw the Oilers, and nobody under 30 even remembers them, and none of them had anything to do with the move, and 2) the owner was strongarming the city to pay 75% in public money for a new stadium?  Not sure what you would have had them do.  Unlike the A's situation, Houston basically said F-off to Adams after it leaked that he was in bed with Nashville, and I find it hard to blame them - or wish any ill will on them.


Who said I was vindictive? 😂 I was just stating the truth. Houston didn’t want to cave to Adams, but then basically did the exact same thing to bring in the Texans (Public money was still like 65% of the funding for NRG). I’m just saying it seems a little foolish to take such a hardline stance that you lose the team, and still end up on the hook for nearly that much for a new franchise with no fan history. 
 

Also why am I getting piled on for throwing a little friendly trash talk Houston’s way? That’s been en vogue since like 2017. Don’t blame me, blame the Astros. 

  • Like 4
  • Dislike 2

spacer.png

On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said:
She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:


I don't want to get overly political but if anyone is interested and wants to look into this outside of this board, there is a racial element to this: Nashville is 53% white, Memphis is 61% black.


Unfortunately, this is probably true.

  • Like 3
  • Love 1
  • Facepalm 1
  • Eyeroll 2

spacer.png

On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said:
She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

Should I bring up the Satanic Panic-fueled railroading of the West Memphis Three or is that not really relevant to the soicioeconomic analysis of Memphis and its suburbs?

The main economics that Tennessee was worried about was gameday revenue. And not being able to sell beer, and keep getting those people drunk in the stadium affected that bottom line. The NFL already priced out lower income families, this was when they were just amping it up to the next level. 

km3S7lo.jpg

 

Zqy6osx.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

Should I bring up the Satanic Panic-fueled railroading of the West Memphis Three or is that not really relevant to the soicioeconomic analysis of Memphis and its suburbs?

Given prior issues crossing lines, probably not😁

  • Like 1

It's where I sit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.