Charlotte feels Jacksonville's pain as speculation arises that Panthers may move

[thelakelander]

Interesting....

Carolina Panthers stadium could gain state interest
http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/queen_city_agenda/2012/11/carolina-panthers-stadium-could-gain.html?page=3

Charlotte Chamber chief: Potential Panthers relocation 'scares the hell out of me'
http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/queen_city_agenda/2012/11/chamber-chief-says-nfl-exit-scares.html

[fsujax]

Interesting. We have an owner who has already made investments in our stadium, without local or state help, with more to come.

[fsquid]

unless they are sold, they ain't moving since Richardson has ties to the area.

[duvaldude08]

People can say what they will but weve done a darn good job at keeping our stadium up to date. IF Im not mistkane, it has already been renovated twice right? ( when attel bought naming rights and for the superbowl.) And of course more renovations to come. Its actually good that our city owns the stadium. No owner can just walk out of here without jumping over a shit load over hurdles and millions of dollars spent.

[John P]

Bufalo, minnesota, st louis ect all have the same so called fears. It is very expensive to move a team. All bluster. LA will expand with London in 2020.

[Seraphs]

LA is a big place perhaps capable of two teams.  However, why didn't they hold on to the teams they had.  Now they want to probe the landscape for other cities teams.

[I-10east]

unless they are sold, they ain't moving since Richardson has ties to the area.

Richardson isn't exactly a spring chicken, plus he has heart trouble.

[Dapperdan]

I can't stand NFL owners who hold cities hostage. Invest some dam money in your stadium. I am very happy That Kahn is updating the locker room, the sound, and next year the video. This tells me that he means that he is committed to Jacksonville.

[fsquid]

unless they are sold, they ain't moving since Richardson has ties to the area.

Richardson isn't exactly a spring chicken, plus he has heart trouble.

true and I have no idea if his kids can take the team and afford it (he's fired two of them from the Panthers).

[tufsu1]

Bufalo, minnesota, st louis ect all have the same so called fears. It is very expensive to move a team. All bluster. LA will expand with London in 2020.

Minnesota now has a new stadium plan in place...design is underway and construction will begin in 2013

[spuwho]

LA is a big place perhaps capable of two teams.  However, why didn't they hold on to the teams they had.  Now they want to probe the landscape for other cities teams.

LA Metro area refused to spring tax dollars for a new stadium. Felt the Olympic Coliseum was good enough. It was for general spectators but not for corporate skyboxes. Rosenbloom's took the team where the stadium was being built, St Louis where there was more revenue sharing. FWIW, the current Ram's ownership (Krohnke) is also threatening to move the Rams back to LA, Says the EJ Dome is no longer a "top ten" locale. St Louis has put millions in and completely replaced the digital scoreboards and signage. Even after spending millions, the new owners still came back and said "it needs a retractable roof" to be top ten. Just pure greed.

Al Davis tried to take advantage of the situation by moving the Raiders to LA in the hope that they would get the dollars for a stadium deal. When that didn't happen, Alameda County made him a decent offer to come back to Oakland. He bit on it, but then didn't back it up with good teams on the field. Revenue suffered and he tried to go back to LA and the courts and the NFL blocked him.

The issue of stadium "one upmanship" has really gotten out of hand. Exacerbating the situation is Jerry Jones and that Taj Mahal in Irving called "Cowboys Stadium".  Jerry gets a significant cut of the event revenue for the locale and other owners are seeing that and want it too. The issue in Minnesota is indirectly related to the opening of Cowboys stadium.

Team Owners want the revenue, but not the risk. So that is why they want taxpayers to foot stadium costs.

There are 4 metro areas in the US that could easily support 2 teams each. NYC, Chicago, SF and LA. For years the City of Chicago said they would not invest in a new stadium unless the NFL allowed a second team to play there otherwise it wasn't worth building it. The NFL had to personally kick in the seed money to make the current deal work. However, only 55,000 seats for 10 games annually for a metro area covering 6 million people. It makes for some very expensive seats and Bears made no haste dropping some season ticket holders who had been renewing for some 40 years!!

We are in an opposite situation like Charlotte. More seats in a smaller metro area. When the teams suffer, the effects are more pronounced.

Fortunately in Jax we have a new owner who understands the market and is taking a long term view.

[fsquid]

The LA collesium is a horrible place to watch a game.

[Ocklawaha]

There are several other cities that could easily support a team. El Paso is the largest metro area on the U.S./Mexican border and the region constitutes the largest bi-national metropolitan area encompassing an estimated population of 2.7 million.  Austin metropolitan area with a population of: 1.7 million. And as of 2012, San Antonio Metro Area's population is 2,142,508 people. A team placed anywhere in west Texas would have a huge market both real and televised. Further west Salt Lake City has: 1.2 million while the entire metro called the Wasatch Front has: 1.8 million ( From Ogden to Provo ). Lastly Portland is Oregon's most populous city, and the third most populous city in Oregon with approximately 2,260,000 people living in the Portland metropolitan area. Birmingham? Memphis? Hell's bells there is enough for another entire division if they would allow it. 

[I-10east]

I think that whole "two teams in LA" thing is ludicrous. With the bureaucratic red tape among other things, it's a challenge just to get one team in LA right now never the less two; Talk about putting the cart before the horse.

IMO NYC will be the only metro area with two NFL teams in the foreseeable future. All of the other big cities (Chicago etc) already are loyal fans of their existing teams, so I don't see them having any competition. Notice that all of the sports cities with two teams (in the four major sports) is that both city rivals have good amount of tradition, and have been in those cities for a considerably long time. As of recent history, you never see one old team, and a new expansion team playing in the same city, there's a reason for that.

[Ocklawaha]

A second expansion team in Southern California wouldn't likely be "in" LA.  Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irvine, CA  (3,026,968 population 2010) at 42 miles distance, and San Bernardino (4,225,000 population in 2010 ) 68 miles away, could both easily support teams on their own. But would they? Los Angeles had some pretty abysmal attendance over the years, supporting neither the NFL or the NSL (Odd since the metro has a massive Hispanic population). Otherwise it is likely to come down to "Television Market Size" in which case we're toast. Jacksonville is the 50Th largest TV market in the nation, but there are only 32 teams. As an example of the constant threat hanging over our heads here are a few of the TV markets.

TELEVISION MARKET SIZE:

I've underlined cities without teams that could be putting pressure on the league.


Rank       Metropolitan Market Regions / Areas
1   New York
2   Los Angeles
3   Chicago
4   Philadelphia
5   Dallas-Ft. Worth
6   San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose
7   Boston
8   Atlanta
9   Washington, DC
10   Houston
11   Detroit
12   Phoenix
13   Tampa-St. Petersburg
14   Seattle-Tacoma
15   Minneapolis-St. Paul
16   Miami-Ft.Lauderdale
17   Cleveland-Akron
18   Denver
19   Orlando-Daytona Beach-Melbourne
20   Sacramento-Stockton-Modesto
21   St. Louis
22   Portland, OR
23   Pittsburgh
24   Charlotte, NC
25   Indianapolis
26   Baltimore
27   Raleigh-Durham
28   San Diego
29   Nashville
30   Hartford-New Haven
31   Kansas City
32   Columbus, OH
33   Salt Lake City
34   Cincinnati
35   Milwaukee
36   Greenville-Spartanburg-Asheville-Anderson
37   San Antonio
38   West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce
39   Grand Rapids-Kalamazoo-Battle Creek
40   Birmingham
41   Harrisburg-Lancaster-Lebanon-York
42   Las Vegas
43   Norfolk-Portsmouth-Newport News
44   Albuquerque-Santa Fe
45   Oklahoma City
46   Greensboro-High Point-Winston-Salem
47   Jacksonville, FL
48   Memphis
49   Austin
50   Louisville
51   Buffalo



Cities that have lost teams, before LOS ANGELES:
• Canton Bulldogs
• Columbus Panhandles
• Dayton Triangles
• Decatur Staleys
• Hammond Pros
• Muncie Flyers
• Rochester (N.Y.) Jeffersons
• Rock Island Independents
• Evansville Crimson Giants
• Louisville Brecks
• Tonawanda Kardex
• Marion Oorang Indians
• Milwaukee Badgers
• Racine Legion
• Columbus Panhandles
• Columbus Tigers
• Duluth Kelleys
• Marion Oorang Indians
• Frankford Yellow Jackets
• Kenosha Maroons
• Providence Steam Roller
• Pottsville Maroons