Jump to content

Jaguars considering playing some games in Orlando


B-Rich

Recommended Posts

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (AP) -- Following a model once used in Green Bay and now seen in Buffalo, the Jacksonville Jaguars are considering playing home games elsewhere.

Owner Wayne Weaver said Wednesday that the Jaguars would consider playing in Orlando if the NFL expands its regular season to 17 or 18 games.

"We know that we can't be a viable NFL city if we only sell 46,000 seats in a 66,000-seat stadium," Weaver said.

The Jaguars (1-2) have struggled to sell tickets in recent years and are looking for ways to boost attendance in a difficult economy. About 17,000 season-ticket holders decided not to renew in 2009, and the Jaguars had less than 40,000 for their home opener.

With the NFL closing monitoring the franchise's ticket woes, Weaver is looking for ways to keep the Jaguars in Jacksonville. Orlando could be key. It's close, has a growing population and has long been considered a football-starved region.

more

Less than 40,000 for a home opener? I think we now have a front runner in the "relocate to the new stadium in Los Angeles" sweepstakes...

I don't see this working out. First of all, what difference does it make whether or not the regular seaon expands-- the ideas bandied about involve taking games from the pre-season slate anyway, not adding more games. There will still be 10 home games, just one pre-season and nine regular season games instead of two pre-season and eight regular season games. Also, I don't see the Buccaneers, who are just as close (if not closer)to Orlando, and experiencing an attendance drop-off of their own, going along with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 409
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Uh-oh. This could be the start of something ugly. It's never a good thing to hear "this city's not viable" coming straight from the owner's mouth.

This Orlando experiment could end up saving the team's future in Florida (wether it's Jacksonville or Orlando), but it almost seems too little, too late when you factor in Weaver's comments.

He'll have one of those signs that says "Los Angeles--2460 Miles" hanging heavy in his head; it's gonna be a long drive down I-10 to the West Coast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suburban Kissimmee is 74 miles from downtown Tampa, which if I understand correctly would put all of greater Orlando in the Buccaneers' blackout range. (See also, outer parts of Sacramento's television market being 75 miles from the Oakland Coliseum, which knocks out the entire Sacramento market from watching a Raiders game.) I'd have to think the Glazers would heavily contest this (though not as heavily as the NHL fought to keep a hockey team in Phoenix, because nothing in sports history was fought with that much passion), which could mean "We're considering playing two of our home games in Orlando" is going to morph into "We're considering playing ten of our home games in Los Angeles."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait a second.

I always thought of Orlando being closer to Tampa. This can not make the Bucs too happy.

Tampa to Orlando is 85 miles, from city center to city center, but Kissimmee/Disney World is just 71 miles.

Jacksonville to Orlando is 162 miles. I'd have to say the Bucs would have a problem with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure the precedent would hold up, but Orlando has been used as a secondary market for Tampa-St. Pete's baseball team. Also, Orlando is a designated secondary market for the Buccaneers.

That the NFL is "monitoring ticket sales" leads me to believe that the end is drawing near for the dear old Jags, and this commissioner isn't going to save them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While both Tampa Bay and Jacksonville consider Orlando a secondary market for TV purposes, the NFL appears to consider Orlando to be Jacksonville's secondary market more than Tampa Bay's.

According to everybody's favorite NFL TV map website, there was an instance in 2005 where Orlando was forced to show a Jaguars game over a Dolphins-Bucs game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Los Angeles really shouldn't be in a position to take on an NFL team for 2010, seeing as how the state is so bankrupt it can't even afford to fall into the sea, but the prospect of hosting the National Football League makes powerful people do silly things. It's plutocratic catnip. (You should've seen the crazy things they did in this one little southern backwater.) They'll make some ridiculous deal, offer the Rose Bowl or Coliseum in the meantime, and then Jacksonville/St. Louis/San Diego/Minnesota won't have a team anymore. 50% chance Jacksonville doesn't make it to next year. It's bad business, but they're getting their stupid Los Angeles team. Resign yourselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Los Angeles really shouldn't be in a position to take on an NFL team for 2010, seeing as how the state is so bankrupt it can't even afford to fall into the sea, but the prospect of hosting the National Football League makes powerful people do silly things. It's plutocratic catnip. (You should've seen the crazy things they did in this one little southern backwater.) They'll make some ridiculous deal, offer the Rose Bowl or Coliseum in the meantime, and then Jacksonville/St. Louis/San Diego/Minnesota won't have a team anymore. 50% chance Jacksonville doesn't make it to next year. It's bad business, but they're getting their stupid Los Angeles team. Resign yourselves.

LA and Toronto will both have teams within 5 years. It's only a matter of how soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LA and Toronto will both have teams within 5 years. It's only a matter of how soon.

And who.

Barring a quick turnaround (on the field and in the stands) and/or Dave Checketts' purchase of the team (as he seems to be the only serious "local" buyer), the Rams will leave St. Louis. The way things are going, however, it looks like the Jaguars will beat them to Los Angeles. While leases can be bought out (remember Clay Bennett vs. Seattle?), the very earliest the Rams can leave is 2012, with 2014-15 being the end of their lease at Edward Jones Dome.

The stadium is privately financed, and the development group just cleared its last major obstacle, a settlement with neigboring city Walnut. Unlike other proposed LA-area stadiums, this one looks like it's going to be built. It's just a matter of how soon. The developer, Ed Roski, has said that a team that moves to LA would take up temporary housing in either the Rose Bowl or the Coliseum for a year or two while the City of Industry stadium is built.

There is a chance that two teams could share the stadium, but I only see one team (wether it be Jacksonville, St. Louis, Oakland, San Diego, Minnesota, Buffalo, or San Francisco) making the move to Los Angeles in the next 2-3 years. A possible 2nd team moving there could happen in the area of 5-10 years, but to me it seems unlikely. We'll have to see what cookie (or in this case, fan base) crumbles first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LA and Toronto will both have teams within 5 years. It's only a matter of how soon.

And who.

Barring a quick turnaround (on the field and in the stands) and/or Dave Checketts' purchase of the team (as he seems to be the only serious "local" buyer), the Rams will leave St. Louis. The way things are going, however, it looks like the Jaguars will beat them to Los Angeles. While leases can be bought out (remember Clay Bennett vs. Seattle?), the very earliest the Rams can leave is 2012, with 2014-15 being the end of their lease at Edward Jones Dome.

The stadium is privately financed, and the development group just cleared its last major obstacle, a settlement with neigboring city Walnut. Unlike other proposed LA-area stadiums, this one looks like it's going to be built. It's just a matter of how soon. The developer, Ed Roski, has said that a team that moves to LA would take up temporary housing in either the Rose Bowl or the Coliseum for a year or two while the City of Industry stadium is built.

There is a chance that two teams could share the stadium, but I only see one team (wether it be Jacksonville, St. Louis, Oakland, San Diego, Minnesota, Buffalo, or San Francisco) making the move to Los Angeles in the next 2-3 years. A possible 2nd team moving there could happen in the area of 5-10 years, but to me it seems unlikely. We'll have to see what cookie (or in this case, fan base) crumbles first.

I'd say let LA support one team for the time being, and if the situation allows, the consider a 2nd team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rams are another one of those "going to happen eventually", since I don't see St. Louis renovating the entire place by 2015. They have reportedly struggled to gain a foothold outside of the city.

Personally, I'd like to see the Rams move back to Los Angeles. St. Louis could then pursue the Jags, and use that as an excuse to build the new park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'd like to see the Rams move back to Los Angeles. St. Louis could then pursue the Jags, and use that as an excuse to build the new park.

Hadn't thought about that, but that's probably the best possible outcome to this scenario. Only thing is, would a city that lost two teams in the past quarter-century still be more attractive than, say, a Birmingham or a San Antonio?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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