Welcome, stranger! Please log in or register. - Did you miss your activation email?

Author Topic: Las Vegas Raiders?  (Read 801 times)

1 Member and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline chittlins

  • Once got busy in a Burger King bathroom
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 6707
  • It's a two sniff league
Las Vegas Raiders?
« on: April 29, 2016, 01:48:00 PM »
If we can get back the Pirate's show, why not:
Mark Davis was beaming as he posed with fans behind a black and silver “Las Vegas Raiders” banner. He made a few jokes before delivering a $500 million commitment to a new stadium in the city for his team.

Then the owner of the Raiders got serious about the prospects of getting fellow NFL owners to allow him to move from Oakland to a city the league has long shunned because it has legal sports betting.

“Let’s give them an offer they can’t refuse,” Davis said. “They’re going to approve it based on that.”

Little more than an idea a few months ago, the possibility of the Raiders moving to Las Vegas inched a bit closer to reality Thursday when Davis appeared before a stadium commission to not only pledge to move the Raiders to the city, but put $500 million into the $1.4 billion facility that would house the team.

Offline papermill

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 9990
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2016, 10:06:27 PM »
Xfl style entertainment finally integrated into the league!

Offline notaslibro

  • Super Mod
  • Administrator
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 18881
  • Strict No Tolerance Palsy
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2016, 10:56:22 PM »
The NFL never approved their move to Los Angeles but they sure played there a long time.

Online Boar Bidet

  • Swahili Steve
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 10909
  • Formerly known as Swahili Steve
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #3 on: April 30, 2016, 10:59:00 PM »
Do you really need permission to move the team when it's your team not the NFL?
I often wear adult diapers just so I can feel the secret release of my warm body stuff in public, apart from my support of ISIS,  I hate your food.

Online GolfingHog

  • Tush Hog
  • ***
  • Posts: 1775
  • Calmer than you are.
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2016, 12:54:42 AM »
Do you really need permission to move the team when it's your team not the NFL?

Really?

An NFL team is Vegas would be amazing for everything but their home field. It will be like a neutral field for every game when you factor in the tourist factor.

Offline chittlins

  • Once got busy in a Burger King bathroom
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 6707
  • It's a two sniff league
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #5 on: May 01, 2016, 08:14:01 AM »
Really?

An NFL team is Vegas would be amazing for everything but their home field. It will be like a neutral field for every game when you factor in the tourist factor.

Who gives a shit, money is money to NFL owners. Just means better pricing power with more demand.
Hell, sometimes I think JerrahWorld is a neutral site for the Cowboys.

 The gambling issue is a pile of bullshit with all the online shit and the ol' local bookie.

Offline TexZilla

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 7834
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #6 on: May 01, 2016, 10:36:38 AM »
Really?

An NFL team is Vegas would be amazing for everything but their home field. It will be like a neutral field for every game when you factor in the tourist factor.

The Raiders in Vegas would pull their old fan base in LA, and it solves a big problem for the league in having a team in a shithole like Oakland.  Looks like it will play out with single team cities in SF, LA and SD.

Offline chittlins

  • Once got busy in a Burger King bathroom
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 6707
  • It's a two sniff league
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #7 on: May 01, 2016, 03:03:54 PM »
The Raiders in Vegas would pull their old fan base in LA, and it solves a big problem for the league in having a team in a shithole like Oakland.  Looks like it will play out with single team cities in SF, LA and SD.

Excellent.
LA has one baseball team too many, New York City has one football, one baseball, one basketball and one hockey team too many and Chicago has one baseball team too many. Now for Oakland to lose that baseball team, Giants are enough for the Bay.

Offline big_pig

  • stealer of Chop's avatar
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 15369
  • Avatars were made to be broken, but not this one!
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #8 on: May 01, 2016, 04:10:39 PM »
Excellent.
LA has one baseball team too many, New York City has one football, one baseball, one basketball and one hockey team too many and Chicago has one baseball team too many. Now for Oakland to lose that baseball team, Giants are enough for the Bay.

Couldn't agree more. Where would you like to see the Giants end up?
I am not claiming I am right, I am saying I don't get it.

Offline chittlins

  • Once got busy in a Burger King bathroom
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 6707
  • It's a two sniff league
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #9 on: May 01, 2016, 04:52:28 PM »
Couldn't agree more. Where would you like to see the Giants end up?

Tough one, I got no qualms about smaller market but they should ship it to London gotta go big with another mega city.

Here's one the NFL goes nuts and expands by 4 teams, where would you put them.

I've already said I'm a fan of a spring Triple A level NFL league in markets like Memphis, OKC, Columbus, Birmingham, Salt Lake City, Raleigh Durham, Orlando, Portland, Albuquerque, Louisville. Vancouver, Toronto, a German team,  Paris, Spain. Mexico City, Monterrey, Ect, Ect, Ect.

Offline Pumpkin Escobar

  • Rocky Mountain High
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 11927
  • An image of excellence.
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #10 on: May 01, 2016, 05:03:43 PM »

LA has one baseball team too many, New York City has one football, one baseball, one basketball and one hockey team too many and Chicago has one baseball team too many.
 

No they don't.
An té nach leigheasann im nó uisce beatha, ní aon leigheas ar.
 
Tiocfaidh ár lá! Éireann go brách!

Offline Stephen Colboar

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 21613
  • savage
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #11 on: May 02, 2016, 08:55:11 AM »
Why the hell does Anaheim get to have a hockey team but not a baseball one?
WTF

Offline TexZilla

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 7834
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #12 on: May 02, 2016, 09:27:21 AM »
Excellent.
LA has one baseball team too many, New York City has one football, one baseball, one basketball and one hockey team too many and Chicago has one baseball team too many. Now for Oakland to lose that baseball team, Giants are enough for the Bay.

this makes zero sense.  Jets fans won't support the Giants, and typically they segregate into two groups.  Giants Yankees Rangers Knicks and then Jets Mets Nets Devils or Islanders.  Teams only move when they aren't satisfied in their market for various reasons, like being stuck in broke as Oakland.

The league isn't going to expand beyond 32.  TV money doesn't increase, nflpa doesn't want to dilute the pie.  smaller cities usually can't scratch up $1b for a stadium, plus the league is so old that fans have their teams.  In Minnesota the Packers still rule over the Vikes in many areas,  Seahawks in Portland. 

Offline chittlins

  • Once got busy in a Burger King bathroom
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 6707
  • It's a two sniff league
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #13 on: May 02, 2016, 10:44:17 AM »
Why the hell does Anaheim get to have a hockey team but not a baseball one?
WTF

Ok, so I forgot about the NHL dou in LA.

this makes zero sense.  Jets fans won't support the Giants, and typically they segregate into two groups.  Giants Yankees Rangers Knicks and then Jets Mets Nets Devils or Islanders.  Teams only move when they aren't satisfied in their market for various reasons, like being stuck in broke as Oakland.

The league isn't going to expand beyond 32.  TV money doesn't increase, nflpa doesn't want to dilute the pie.  smaller cities usually can't scratch up $1b for a stadium, plus the league is so old that fans have their teams.  In Minnesota the Packers still rule over the Vikes in many areas,  Seahawks in Portland. 

Please, did I say move Green Bay of Minnesota? I would like to see two team city combos broke up. I didn't say anything about expanding either , I said make a legit a tempt at a legit high level spring league to be used for dumbasses like Denver Kirkland to have more than one, two seasons tops to develop. Lord knows they need it for QBs. It's programing for the NFL network and the plethora of sports networks like FS1, CBSSN, NBCSN

I'm sure there were Brooklyn Dodger fans that were never going to support the Yankees or StL. Browns fans that were never going to support the Cardinals too.

Offline Stephen Colboar

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 21613
  • savage
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #14 on: May 02, 2016, 11:25:58 AM »
So one team per sport per tv market?

Why?

Online Boar Bidet

  • Swahili Steve
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 10909
  • Formerly known as Swahili Steve
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #15 on: May 02, 2016, 01:27:37 PM »
So one team per sport per tv market?

Why?
why have so many football or baseball teams in the same town? There's other towns that could be a sufficient base that don't have any teams. Like LR Lolz
I often wear adult diapers just so I can feel the secret release of my warm body stuff in public, apart from my support of ISIS,  I hate your food.

Offline TexZilla

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 7834
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #16 on: May 02, 2016, 01:41:04 PM »
Ok, so I forgot about the NHL dou in LA.

Please, did I say move Green Bay of Minnesota? I would like to see two team city combos broke up. I didn't say anything about expanding either , I said make a legit a tempt at a legit high level spring league to be used for dumbasses like Denver Kirkland to have more than one, two seasons tops to develop. Lord knows they need it for QBs. It's programing for the NFL network and the plethora of sports networks like FS1, CBSSN, NBCSN

I'm sure there were Brooklyn Dodger fans that were never going to support the Yankees or StL. Browns fans that were never going to support the Cardinals too.

Woody Johnson and the league have no intention of leaving New York for OKC or Portland, and the Cowboys and Seahawks have no interest in that either.  It's a business and no one is going to move a successful franchise.  You missed my point regarding the Packers; expansion teams or moved teams have to work very hard to get new markets to accept them over established loyalties.  The Vikings have been in Minnesota since 1960 and still have many locals that remain Packer fans.

Offline chittlins

  • Once got busy in a Burger King bathroom
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 6707
  • It's a two sniff league
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #17 on: Today at 07:32:30 AM »
So one team per sport per tv market?

Why?

Not what I said but there are gaps. I didn't say, there's only one rwo te ciy in the NFL left. I suggested one of those move to London.

I simply don't like the existance of two team cities in a single sport in this day and age of a much more urban America.

Buffalo is on the clock.








Online The Pig in Black

  • Woopig
  • Wild Hog
  • **
  • Posts: 528
  • woopig.net
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #18 on: Today at 08:41:42 AM »
Not what I said but there are gaps. I didn't say, there's only one rwo te ciy in the NFL left. I suggested one of those move to London.

I simply don't like the existance of two team cities in a single sport in this day and age of a much more urban America.

Buffalo is on the clock.

If more people are moving to cities, then it stands to reason there are sufficient numbers to support more than one team.

 I can't even read you first sentence.  Did one of you kids type that? 

Offline Stephen Colboar

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 21613
  • savage
Re: Las Vegas Raiders?
« Reply #19 on: Today at 08:53:54 AM »
Not what I said but there are gaps. I didn't say, there's only one rwo te ciy in the NFL left. I suggested one of those move to London.

I simply don't like the existance of two team cities in a single sport in this day and age of a much more urban America.

Buffalo is on the clock.
I guess I don't even understand your point any more.
You're advocating one team each, per sport, in NYC and LA.  That's one team per TV market and it's ridiculous.

Multi-team cities isn't something that's new in this day and age, either.
Baseball has had multiple teams in cities since the 1800's.

The fact of the matter is, that these aren't public entities, for the most part. They're privately owned ballclubs that make their own deals separately with players, media and fans, alike. If they feel they can make more money in NYC as a third team over say Portland or San Antonio... guess where they're going to go? Just because it doesn't fit your vantage point from rural america doesn't mean it is wrong or right or anything like that. It just means that you need to take a deep breath and accept reality.
« Last Edit: Today at 09:02:21 AM by Stephen Colboar »

 

Page created in 1.58 seconds with 34 queries.