Jaguars State of the Franchise 2018

[JaxAvondale]

It is interesting that VyStar looking into move by the stadium with Kahn's plan. I understand that the project is probably a long way off but the prospect of business moving to that area doesn't seem so far fetched.

[Kerry]

Wonder why they rejected the Khan plan.

[thelakelander]

Probably timeline but I'm glad they did. DT needs as much infill and density in its heart as possible.

[KenFSU]

^Agreed.

It was also very important to Vystar to select a location that would have the most immediate impact on downtown revitalization efforts. And they wanted to do it with no public incentives, as they felt it wouldn't be right to try to fund their move using the tax dollars of their customers.

All around good-guy move by Vystar, that not only puts 600 new workers downtown, but also eliminates a lot of the city's lease liability to Southeast for the new Trio garage.

[Kerry]

Too long at Lot J and wanted to make an impact downtown...yet didn't build a suburban campus because of price.

[JaxAvondale]

^Agreed.

It was also very important to Vystar to select a location that would have the most immediate impact on downtown revitalization efforts. And they wanted to do it with no public incentives, as they felt it wouldn't be right to try to fund their move using the tax dollars of their customers.

All around good-guy move by Vystar, that not only puts 600 new workers downtown, but also eliminates a lot of the city's lease liability to Southeast for the new Trio garage.

Agreed! No incentives from the city was a big time move by VyStar. I hope they can influence others to do the same.

[JBTripper]

How many NFL teams would be willing to play one of their "home" games in Khan's stadium? Financially it could make sense, but if the Jags develop a real crowd advantage, then I don't see other owners agreeing to that.

Wembley could be a good thing for Jax and the Jags. However, if the team does not meet financial goals locally, I could see this creeping toward more than one home game in London.

The Jaguars would have a very difficult time selling additional home games in London to the fans in Jacksonville. If fans begin to see this venture as a gradual creep across the Atlantic, they'll stop supporting the team altogether. If that happens, so much for increasing local revenue.

But if Khan owns Wembley, he might have the leverage to lure other NFL teams to give up home games to play the Jaguars in London. From a competitive standpoint, home-field advantage matters a lot less in the NFL than it does in college, particularly during the regular season. A Jaguar-heavy crowd would not be as much of an issue with getting another team to come play in London.

In college football, we've had a huge increase in these "neutral site" games early in the year. They're so lucrative that Florida and Michigan get more money by splitting the revenue from a game in Dallas than they do by keeping all of the money from a game in Gainesville/Ann Arbor. Since Khan doesn't have to rent the facility, the financials of a "neutral site" game between the Chargers and Jaguars might begin to look more attractive for both teams than a game in LA, where they can't even fill an MLS stadium. The Chargers, or many other small-market teams, could do better with half the money from a London game than all of the money from a home game. And obviously the Jags would be happy to take half the money from a London game than none of the money from a traditional road game.

And the fans in Jacksonville don't care a lick how many road games the Jaguars play in London.

Hmmmm....

He said the team's annual home game in London remains crucial for the franchise, and Jaguars owner Shad Khan would like to play a second game in London in a future season if it could be done through back-to-back games. Lamping emphasized that if the Jaguars played a second London game, it would be for one of the team's road games so it wouldn't take another home game from Jaguars fans.

"Shad would like to see that, I think, if it made sense for us," he said.

Smart guy.

[Kerry]

Here is what we know:

Khan awarded Shipyards rights in 2015 - never built anything.

Khan awarded development rights again in April 2017 - year later and all we have is a new set of drawings.

One company we know of expressed interest in anchoring Khan development ultimately said No Thanks.

[KenFSU]

He said the team's annual home game in London remains crucial for the franchise, and Jaguars owner Shad Khan would like to play a second game in London in a future season if it could be done through back-to-back games. Lamping emphasized that if the Jaguars played a second London game, it would be for one of the team's road games so it wouldn't take another home game from Jaguars fans.

"Shad would like to see that, I think, if it made sense for us," he said.

Smart guy.

Nice sentiment from Lamping, but I don't buy it.

What NFL owner at all concerned with winning is going to agree to sacrifice one of their own home games in order to fly overseas and play a well-rested Jags team in London, in a stadium that has been their second home field since 2013?

Nobody is going to agree to this, it puts the Jags at too much of an advantage.

The only way a second London game possibly makes sense is as a home game.

[Steve]

Here is what we know:

Khan awarded Shipyards rights in 2015 - never built anything.

Khan awarded development rights again in April 2017 - year later and all we have is a new set of drawings.

One company we know of expressed interest in anchoring Khan development ultimately said No Thanks.

I think that's a slanted look at it. You then also have to consider

- The Scoreboards and Pools
- The Stadium Club Renovations
- Daily's Place and the Flex Field

Those have all been completed.

Plus, is the fact that VyStar decided on the downtown core a knock on Khan?

[Steve]

He said the team's annual home game in London remains crucial for the franchise, and Jaguars owner Shad Khan would like to play a second game in London in a future season if it could be done through back-to-back games. Lamping emphasized that if the Jaguars played a second London game, it would be for one of the team's road games so it wouldn't take another home game from Jaguars fans.

"Shad would like to see that, I think, if it made sense for us," he said.

Smart guy.

Nice sentiment from Lamping, but I don't buy it.

What NFL owner at all concerned with winning is going to agree to sacrifice one of their own home games in order to fly overseas and play a well-rested Jags team in London, in a stadium that has been their second home field since 2013?

Nobody is going to agree to this, it puts the Jags at too much of an advantage.

The only way a second London game possibly makes sense is as a home game.

A team that wants to make much more from The Gate in Wembley (remember the home team gets the ticket sales and revenue as if it was in their main stadium). The Money Khan is getting doesn't come from that; Khan would get the money that the FA currently gets every time a home game is there, which is separate.

For about 1/3 of the teams in the NFL, they make considerably more in London than they do at their main stadium, regardless of who owns the stadium.

[JBTripper]

He said the team's annual home game in London remains crucial for the franchise, and Jaguars owner Shad Khan would like to play a second game in London in a future season if it could be done through back-to-back games. Lamping emphasized that if the Jaguars played a second London game, it would be for one of the team's road games so it wouldn't take another home game from Jaguars fans.

"Shad would like to see that, I think, if it made sense for us," he said.

Smart guy.

Nice sentiment from Lamping, but I don't buy it.

What NFL owner at all concerned with winning is going to agree to sacrifice one of their own home games in order to fly overseas and play a well-rested Jags team in London, in a stadium that has been their second home field since 2013?

Nobody is going to agree to this, it puts the Jags at too much of an advantage.

The only way a second London game possibly makes sense is as a home game.

I think you underestimate the willingness of sports administrators to trade a competitive advantage for a big payday. Look at college football: Auburn opens 2018 with Washington in Atlanta. They could easily play Eastern Washington at Jordan-Hare and still make the College Football Playoff, but they'll make more money playing in the Chick-Fil-A Kickoff game. So that's what they're going to do.

I'm not sure why you think an NFL owner wouldn't make that same deal, in a league where winning each week is FAR less important to his bottom line. NFL owners in Cincinnati, Tampa, Indianapolis, Cleveland, Detroit, Arizona, Tennessee, Minnesota, Buffalo, Miami and Los Angeles would be lining up for the opportunity to play the "visiting" Jaguars in London.

[Wacca Pilatka]

^ I'm not sure I agree that every team on that list would be willing to play a home game against the Jaguars in London, but certainly some will.

Within the next few years, it's going to become clear that smaller market teams without secondary market support and/or strong investment from ownership are going to be the ones struggling to compete financially.  Cincinnati and Buffalo in particular come to mind - the Bengals' ownership has always been notoriously cheap, and fan support seems to be dwindling, while Buffalo has an aging stadium and fans who aren't willing to accept a ticket price bump.  The L.A. Chargers, as a distant second fiddle in a big market, following a badly handled relocation process, could be disadvantaged as well.  And so could Indianapolis if its fortunes on the field don't improve, because years of mismanagement and over-reliance on the security blanket of quarterbacking are taking their toll on ticket sales, plus its owner is insane.

Jacksonville's lack of secondary market support could have put the Jaguars in the same tenuous situation.  I increasingly think the London game is a coup for the team and the city, particularly if Khan is able to purchase Wembley and add rental revenues from teams that are going to be in a more precarious situation in their home markets.

[Kerry]

Here is what we know:

Khan awarded Shipyards rights in 2015 - never built anything.

Khan awarded development rights again in April 2017 - year later and all we have is a new set of drawings.

One company we know of expressed interest in anchoring Khan development ultimately said No Thanks.

I think that's a slanted look at it. You then also have to consider

- The Scoreboards and Pools
- The Stadium Club Renovations
- Daily's Place and the Flex Field

Those have all been completed.

Plus, is the fact that VyStar decided on the downtown core a knock on Khan?

Typical Khan mode of operation: I'm going to do great things for Jax but do these 3 things for me first.

[Steve]

Here is what we know:

Khan awarded Shipyards rights in 2015 - never built anything.

Khan awarded development rights again in April 2017 - year later and all we have is a new set of drawings.

One company we know of expressed interest in anchoring Khan development ultimately said No Thanks.

I think that's a slanted look at it. You then also have to consider

- The Scoreboards and Pools
- The Stadium Club Renovations
- Daily's Place and the Flex Field

Those have all been completed.

Plus, is the fact that VyStar decided on the downtown core a knock on Khan?

Typical Khan mode of operation: I'm going to do great things for Jax but do these 3 things for me first.

Make no mistake: they are ALL for Khan. He's not a charity, he's not doing this unless he can make money. Plus, how can you say that the public doesn't benefit from Daily's place. I'll grant you that the Jaguar fans are the beneficiary of the first two, but Daily's Place is critically important to the area