AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: NFL in Austin, TX  (Read 4072 times)

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 960
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 04:24:18 PM
NFL in Austin, TX
« on: December 15, 2020, 01:42:19 PM »

[Split from the Austin thread in Mid-South. -S.]

In the Austin area they're going to have to get more serious about upgrading certain roads, like I-35 through the middle of Austin and US-290 going out the West side of Austin. Tesla's Gigafactory 5 is going to be built near TX-130 and Harold Green Road, which is one exit North of the TX-71/TX-130 interchange. That will add to the traffic load. I think there is a good chance an NFL team will relocate to the Austin-San Antonio region within the next 10 years.

Austin hates roads I agree they need upgraded, but the no-build option often wins there.

NFL- Not if Jerry Jones has anything to do with it.  As far as that goes, the McNairs, and the Bidwells are not wanting any new blood in their regions.

Jerry Jones has been on record of being supportive of San Antonio getting an NFL team.  I know he has a hold of the market and all, but that's what he said, and maybe because he sees a chance to profit share with said expansion team.  The McNairs have no control in Texas, and the Bidwells don't have any at all.  The Cardinals don't even register a blip here.  Hell, the Saints are geographically closer still barely register a fan base in this state. 
« Last Edit: December 22, 2020, 03:04:44 AM by Scott5114 »
Logged

TXtoNJ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 629
  • Last Login: Today at 05:18:19 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #1 on: December 15, 2020, 03:35:36 PM »

It's less Jerry and more lack of big HQs (read: luxury boxes) in SA/Austin. UT is certainly in no hurry to compete with an NFL team in trying to fill its 100k stadium, either.

As more HQs move to/are founded in the region, momentum for an NFL team will likely grow along with it.
Logged

CoreySamson

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 664
  • Buc-ee's Fanboy

  • Age: 17
  • Location: Greater Houston, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 07:05:08 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2020, 03:54:52 PM »

^
Well, with Oracle and potentially Tesla moving to Austin along with some others, I'd say that area deserves an NFL team.
Logged
Houston-area teenage roadgeek.
Amateur guitarist and keyboardist.

Fix Baton Rouge's traffic!!!

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3327
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: Today at 12:13:47 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2020, 04:05:32 PM »

san antonio had the saints for a bit too. also it looks like austins road system is decent, but perhaps east west connectivity could use some work.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2407
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 01:23:18 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2020, 09:04:12 PM »

Austin is a mixed bag. They've made progress on highways well outside the downtown area. Toll roads like TX-130 have room to grow. But I-35 near downtown remains a serious bottleneck. And I'm pretty concerned the expansion projects TX DOT and others are planning are falling way behind the pace of new development in the Austin region.

Quote from: TXtoNJ
It's less Jerry and more lack of big HQs (read: luxury boxes) in SA/Austin.

There is plenty of money in Austin. Not only is the tech sector growing there, along with everything else, but Austin is a magnet for celebrities too. I don't think an NFL team serving the Austin-San Antonio region would have any trouble filling sky boxes.
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1398
  • Age: 56
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: March 02, 2021, 10:59:05 AM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #5 on: December 16, 2020, 03:51:56 AM »

The Saints only moved to San Antonio for one year: 2005, following the devastation of Hurricane Katrina in NOLA and the disastrous use of the Superdome there as a last minute evacuation shelter for those who couldn't get out of Katrina's way. They moved their front office facilities to SA, and played some "home" games there (along with one or two at LSU's Tiger Stadium in Baton Rouge, IIRC.

Then new Saints owner Tom Benson did put out the idea of permanently moving the team to San Antonio, as a means of blackmailing the state of Louisiana for more assistance in either building a new stadium in Metarie close to where the current team practice/office complex stands, or totally rebuilding the Superdome. The NFL brass, then led by Paul Tagliabue, however, came in with full boots on and nixed that effort, possibly due to fear of losing all that tourist revenues from all the Super Bowls played there. Ultimately, the NFL, Benson, and the state of LA agreed to completely rebuild the Superdome and add some extra baubles to keep the team there.

The rebuild was completed before the next season (2006), and the Saints reopened with a new attitude, a new coach (Sean Payton), a relatively young gunslinger QB (Drew Brees, acquired from the then San Diego Chargers), and a prime time Monday Night Football game against their hated rival Atlanta Falcons. One Steve Gleason blocked punt recovery for a TD, and the rest is history.

That aside, San Antonio would make for a excellent location for an NFL franchise. They certainly have the population base (San Antonio/Austin), they have reach into the Latin/Mexican communities of South Texas (which is a required tingle up the spine of current commish Roger Goddell for "diversity"), and the facilities are already there. They'll probably have to wait until either an existing franchise (Jacksonville?) asks to pull the trigger and move, or the league decides to twin them with another city in an expansion move (probably San Diego as consolation for losing the Chargers to Los Angeles).

Sorry for the diversion, just wanted to add the history and context here.




Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 960
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 04:24:18 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #6 on: December 16, 2020, 01:53:07 PM »

It's less Jerry and more lack of big HQs (read: luxury boxes) in SA/Austin. UT is certainly in no hurry to compete with an NFL team in trying to fill its 100k stadium, either.

As more HQs move to/are founded in the region, momentum for an NFL team will likely grow along with it.

As stated, yes there are corporations headquartered in Austin, and many more to come.  Many big ones coming that are game changers.

The Saints only moved to San Antonio for one year: 2005, following the devastation of Hurricane Katrina in NOLA and the disastrous use of the Superdome there as a last minute evacuation shelter for those who couldn't get out of Katrina's way. They moved their front office facilities to SA, and played some "home" games there (along with one or two at LSU's Tiger Stadium in Baton Rouge, IIRC.

Then new Saints owner Tom Benson did put out the idea of permanently moving the team to San Antonio, as a means of blackmailing the state of Louisiana for more assistance in either building a new stadium in Metarie close to where the current team practice/office complex stands, or totally rebuilding the Superdome. The NFL brass, then led by Paul Tagliabue, however, came in with full boots on and nixed that effort, possibly due to fear of losing all that tourist revenues from all the Super Bowls played there. Ultimately, the NFL, Benson, and the state of LA agreed to completely rebuild the Superdome and add some extra baubles to keep the team there.

The rebuild was completed before the next season (2006), and the Saints reopened with a new attitude, a new coach (Sean Payton), a relatively young gunslinger QB (Drew Brees, acquired from the then San Diego Chargers), and a prime time Monday Night Football game against their hated rival Atlanta Falcons. One Steve Gleason blocked punt recovery for a TD, and the rest is history.

That aside, San Antonio would make for a excellent location for an NFL franchise. They certainly have the population base (San Antonio/Austin), they have reach into the Latin/Mexican communities of South Texas (which is a required tingle up the spine of current commish Roger Goddell for "diversity"), and the facilities are already there. They'll probably have to wait until either an existing franchise (Jacksonville?) asks to pull the trigger and move, or the league decides to twin them with another city in an expansion move (probably San Diego as consolation for losing the Chargers to Los Angeles).

Sorry for the diversion, just wanted to add the history and context here.

That is all true.  The only thing I would change was calling it a year.  It was a few games during Katrina cleanup, and then gone.  I know you kinda pointed that out, but it was a big deal here that it was extremely short and even more temporary feeling.  Not nearly enough to consider them a permanent fixture in Texas for fan base purposes.  I remember when Tom Benson first made some noise about moving to San Antonio, then Ray Nagy (then mayor of New Orleans) went on a tirade about how he wanted the Cleveland Browns treatment (when they "moved" to Baltimore, and the city was promised a franchise) guaranteed.  Paul Tagliabue then squashed it, saying that moving to San Antonio was "a step backward."  It was very obvious then, that if one of the major four sports leagues want something to happen a certain way, they will see to it that it does.  They love having the Super Bowl in New Orleans.  Although the rules don't specifically prohibit cities without an NFL team to host the Super Bowl, it sure looks bad for the league to love hosting the Super Bowl in a city that couldn't even keep their team.  The same thing went on in Los Angeles, and is why the league tried for 20 years to get someone to move there.  They loved hosting the Super Bowl there, but the stadiums in LA weren't modern enough to do so. 

Anyway, back to the topic, I think a huge NFL stadium between Kyle and San Marcos would be perfect.  It would draw both Austin and San Antonio.  The NFL and college football play on different days specifically so they don't compete head to head.  The same people that pile in to see the Longhorns on Saturday will pile into the new stadium on Sunday to watch the NFL team, I promise.  I am a diehard Cowboy fan, I mean like generations, and even I would love to see a new team here.  As huge as football is in Texas, I think it is an embarrassment there are only two NFL franchises in the state, where California has four. 

I don't think it will come to a team moving.  I think it will all start rolling in  the next CBA talk in 2022.  That has been the earmarked "let's put a team in London" discussion time, since the owners have been happy with the current 32 team format.  The powers that be feel that "happiness" will come to an end in 2022 and the London team might become a reality. If you are gonna add a team, you have to add another to keep the balance in the divisions (in theory).  The NFL is a different cat in that you can have an odd number of teams so long as you have a bye week every week, including opening week.  They have done that in the past.  It all comes down to how unique football is.  They play once a week, almost the same time on the same day.  As long as the odd man out has a bye on that day, no harm no foul.  It's not like having an odd amount of MLB teams where one team has to sit out for an entire three game series. 
« Last Edit: December 16, 2020, 07:08:49 PM by ethanhopkin14 »
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2407
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 01:23:18 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #7 on: December 16, 2020, 09:29:56 PM »

Quote from: ethanhopkin14
I don't think it will come to a team moving.  I think it will all start rolling in  the next CBA talk in 2022.  That has been the earmarked "let's put a team in London" discussion time, since the owners have been happy with the current 32 team format.  The powers that be feel that "happiness" will come to an end in 2022 and the London team might become a reality. If you are gonna add a team, you have to add another to keep the balance in the divisions (in theory).

If the NFL were to add new teams to the existing 32 they would have to add at least four teams in order to maintain balanced conferences and divisions. And even in that scenario the league would have to go through a re-alignment, cutting the number of divisions from 8 to 6. They would have to go from 32 teams to 40 in order to have 8 balanced divisions across 2 conferences.

In the near term I think it's more possible for an existing team in an under-performing market to pull up stakes and move to a new location. Jacksonville is definitely at some risk of losing the Jaguars, even though the Jaguars organization has been innovative at entertaining its fans in Jacksonville. Buffalo has been on the bubble for a long time at either keeping or losing the Bills. Buffalo is small for an NFL market, but the team has a storied history and also draws football fans from Canada. A while back the Carolina Panthers seemed in danger of moving, but with Triangle area in NC booming the Panthers seem less likely to move.

Of course, when an NFL team demands a new stadium from local taxpayers (currently at a cost upwards of $2 billion) that can decide the issue quickly. City leaders and taxpayers in San Diego said "well...bye" when the Chargers organization made its stadium demands. The same went for Oakland. Are the locals in Jacksonville, Buffalo or Charlotte willing to open their wallets big time to subsidize a live sport whose costs to see games in-person are just flat out insane?

I think it's easier to sell locals on live sports that don't require such giant size stadiums, such as professional basketball or hockey. Oklahoma City scored the Thunder (which used to be the Seattle Supersonics) based on how well they supported the New Orleans Hornets following the Hurricane Katrina disaster. OKC already had a new NBA/NHL sized arena ready for such a team. Now with the Thunder in full-on tear-down mode we'll see how well OKC supports the team while it stinks for a number of years.

Even though it's likely London could support an NFL team very well, I think it's a long shot for London to get a team full time. It all has to do with the TV scheduling and the ocean-hopping flights. Mexico City is another international expansion possibility, but that place has its issues too. Canada already has its own pro football league.

Austin-San Antonio remains as a giant, untapped market for the NFL. I didn't even think about South Texas as an additional draw. Corpus Christi is about 130 miles away and Laredo about 140. The Rio Grande Valley is another 2 hours drive farther South. But there is over 1 million people living down there.
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3041
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Kyle, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 04:48:42 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #8 on: December 17, 2020, 12:05:45 AM »

Austin has no major sports team.  Baseball would be the most logical fit.  With Austin & San Antonio metro areas both on the cusp of large enough  San Antonio is 24th largest MSA and Austin is 29th.  Austin is larger than Cincinnati, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Cleveland, Nashville, New Orleans, Buffalo, and Green Bay (as well as being the fastest largest growing city in the country).  SA is also larger than Pittsburgh and Las Vegas.  The downtowns are 80 miles apart so put a stadium between San Marcos and New Braunfels halfway.  Combined it would serve the 12th largest area in the NFL.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2407
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 01:23:18 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #9 on: December 17, 2020, 12:35:58 AM »

I do not see the Austin-San Antonio region as an either-or scenario for a Major League Baseball team or an NFL team. The market is big enough to support any pro sports franchise, be it pro football, baseball, hockey or soccer. For now San Antonio has the only top level pro sports franchise (the Spurs NBA team).

Austin does have a AAA baseball team, the Round Rock Express -which is currently the AAA team for the Texas Rangers. Oklahoma City used to be home to the Rangers' AAA team (the Redhawks). The affiliations between the Redhawks went back and forth between the Rangers and Houston Astros. IIRC, Nolan Ryan had something to do with the Round Rock Express taking over as the Rangers' AAA team. The OKC AAA team is now the Dodgers, obviously affiliated with the LA Dodgers. I think OKC should have kept the Redhawks name.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2020, 12:40:45 AM by Bobby5280 »
Logged

rte66man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1440
  • Location: Warr Acres, OK
  • Last Login: March 02, 2021, 08:17:51 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #10 on: December 17, 2020, 09:24:49 AM »

Austin does have a AAA baseball team, the Round Rock Express -which is currently the AAA team for the Texas Rangers. Oklahoma City used to be home to the Rangers' AAA team (the Redhawks). The affiliations between the Redhawks went back and forth between the Rangers and Houston Astros. IIRC, Nolan Ryan had something to do with the Round Rock Express taking over as the Rangers' AAA team.

He made that happen when he was president of the Rangers. There was a time when major league teams were trying to get their AAA and AA franchises closer to home so the execs could pop in more frequently to watch prospects.

Quote
The OKC AAA team is now the Dodgers, obviously affiliated with the LA Dodgers. I think OKC should have kept the Redhawks name.

Agreed. I understand the Dodgers' desire to cross-brand but I miss the names with local flavor. Bring back the 89ers!!
Logged
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2407
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 01:23:18 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #11 on: December 17, 2020, 11:38:28 PM »

Quote from: rte66man
He made that happen when he was president of the Rangers. There was a time when major league teams were trying to get their AAA and AA franchises closer to home so the execs could pop in more frequently to watch prospects.

The Houston Astros sure followed that formula. Its AAA team is now in Sugarland (the Skeeters). OKC is a long way from LA. Nolan Ryan's nickname "The Express" was the inspiration for the Round Rock Express name.
Logged

Finrod

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 283
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Atlanta GA
  • Last Login: March 03, 2021, 03:39:52 AM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #12 on: December 21, 2020, 08:59:45 PM »

Quote from: ethanhopkin14
I don't think it will come to a team moving.  I think it will all start rolling in  the next CBA talk in 2022.  That has been the earmarked "let's put a team in London" discussion time, since the owners have been happy with the current 32 team format.  The powers that be feel that "happiness" will come to an end in 2022 and the London team might become a reality. If you are gonna add a team, you have to add another to keep the balance in the divisions (in theory).

If the NFL were to add new teams to the existing 32 they would have to add at least four teams in order to maintain balanced conferences and divisions. And even in that scenario the league would have to go through a re-alignment, cutting the number of divisions from 8 to 6. They would have to go from 32 teams to 40 in order to have 8 balanced divisions across 2 conferences.

Yep.  As interesting as it would be seeing the NFL expand from 32 to 40, consider that in the 50+ years since the AFL/NFL merger, the NFL has gone from 26 to 32 teams.

Where would those 8 additional NFL cities come from?

Outside the Lower 48: London, Mexico City, Honolulu
Previous NFL cities: St. Louis, Oakland, San Diego
Major metro areas without a team: San Antonio/Austin, OKC/Tulsa

Where else could a team go?  Memphis?  Less likely if St. Louis gets a team back.  Sacramento?  Less likely if Oakland gets a team back.  A second team in Chicago?  Portland OR?  Salt Lake City?  Birmingham AL?  Columbus OH?  Little Rock?  Des Moines?  None of those seem any more likely than the first eight I listed.

I'd love to see the NFL go to 40 teams,  I just don't see it happening any time soon.
Logged
Internet member since 1987.

Hate speech is a nonsense concept; the truth is hate speech to those that hate the truth.

People who use their free speech to try to silence others' free speech are dangerous fools.

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2407
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 01:23:18 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #13 on: December 21, 2020, 10:56:33 PM »

I don't think there would be any problem finding 8 metro areas worthwhile in supporting an expansion NFL team. The real trick is finding adequately large metro areas whose citizens are willing to foot much of the bill for a new, modern football stadium. And then there's the headaches involved figuring out the season schedules and travel plans.

Wikipedia has San Diego ranked as the largest MSA without an NFL team. But that's only because they separate San Antonio and Austin into two distinct MSAs (both of which have 2.5 and 2.2 million people respectively). The citizens and city government of San Diego were willing to let the Chargers move to LA. But we've seen this movie at least a couple times before. The original Cleveland Browns organization packed up and moved to Baltimore in the middle of the night 25 years ago. Baltimore was the original home to the Indianapolis Colts. The Houston Oilers moved to Nashville. Both Cleveland and Houston have NFL teams once again. San Diego will go only so many years without its own NFL team. Someone just has to make the right deal.

Are there any other cities besides St Louis who have lost two different NFL teams (the Cardinals and the Rams)? St Louis ranks larger in population (#20) than 13 other MSAs who do have NFL teams. Something will have to give on that front too. The Dome in St Louis opened in 1995. It's still worthwhile as a football venue, but unlikely to attract an expansion team. Nevertheless St Louis is a major metro without an NFL team (the city does have successful MLB and NHL teams).

Orlando has a 2.6 million MSA population (ranked 23 in the US). But it is just too close to Tampa, Jacksonville and even Miami to justify a 4th NFL team in Florida. San Antonio-New Braunfels is ranked #24 and Austin #29. If you combine the San Antonio-Austin region into one big MSA it jumps Phoenix into the top 10.

Portland and Sacramento are "honorable mentions." Both have MSA populations over 2 million, which is higher than a decent number of existing NFL markets. But both are within reasonable proximity to the 49ers and Seahawks markets. I doubt Portland's taxpayers would go for funding an NFL stadium, considering the politics of the region.

Honolulu is a no-go. It's a great site for the Pro Bowl. But not for a full time NFL team. The market is too small in population (MSA ranked #56). And it's way too far West and isolated in terms of time zone. Birmingham's MSA ranks #50. Des Moines ranks #83. Boise is growing fast, but ranks #78. Columbus, OH ranks #32, but is halfway between Cleveland and Cincinnati; so that's pushing it.

Considering the business and population growth of the Research Triangle in North Carolina, it could actually be a shrewd play to locate an NFL team in the Virginia Beach-Norfolk area. That's a big tourism center. And it would be about the same distance from the Triangle as Charlotte. But then again, the Panthers could just end up moving into a brand new stadium closer to Raleigh. They wouldn't even have to change the "Carolina Panthers" team name. Convenient.

While I wouldn't mind seeing an NFL team in Oklahoma, neither the OKC or Tulsa MSAs are big enough to support such a thing (OKC is ranked #41 and Tulsa #55). I don't think OK taxpayers would be willing to foot the expense of an insanely expensive NFL stadium. Besides, Oklahoma's idea of "pro football" is the Oklahoma Sooners and OK State Cowboys.

Europe is an interesting situation. London has proved very well they are willing to fully support an NFL team full time. But if the NFL expands to Europe London cannot be the only location. I think the NFL would need at least 4 teams in Europe (2 in the AFC and 2 in the NFC) to make the situation manageable. London is an easy choice. I don't think the UK has any other cities large enough to support an NFL franchise (and the pricey stadium that goes with it). So I think it comes down to other cosmopolitan cities such as Paris, Berlin, Madrid, Rome or Stockholm.

Long story short: to get to 40 NFL teams, I think you put 4 new teams in the US and 4 in Europe. In Europe, I think it should be London, Paris, Berlin and Madrid. Stockholm and Rome would be alternates. If it was my call the 4 new US markets would be Austin-San Antonio, San Diego, St Louis and...crap. The last one is a difficult choice. I think the Virginia Beach area would be worthwhile -especially for the huge military population there. Salt Lake could be a slim possibility due to how far it is from any other existing NFL market. I don't know for sure, but it seems like Salt Lake is closer to Boise than it is to Las Vegas. Salt Lake could have a lot of regional reach into Idaho, Montana as well as much of Utah.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2020, 11:13:56 PM by Bobby5280 »
Logged

amroad17

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1290
  • Age: 59
  • Location: Northern Kentucky
  • Last Login: March 02, 2021, 01:26:43 AM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #14 on: December 22, 2020, 04:35:21 AM »

If a Hampton Roads team could draw like the old Norfolk Neptunes did in the Continental Football League back in the 1960's (avg. home attendance in 1968 & 1969: a little over 13,000 in a league where the avg. attendance was 5,700/game), then great.  The stadium is there (Virginia Beach Sportsplex) which could be expanded to accommodate an NFL team along with some land available for more parking (the field hockey area southwest of the stadium would have to go to achieve this).

On the other hand, this area has long been, yes I am going to use the term, "Redskin Country", and I am not sure that (a) the residents of the area would support an expansion team or (b) the Washington team would vote in favor of a new team playing nearly 200 miles away from them.  The area is very diverse and I do not believe there would be a strong support for a team.  Also, in reality, a new stadium would have to be built.  Where?  I really do not know.  The area near downtown Norfolk is very crowded and if a stadium were to be built, many residents would be displaced.  Stumpy Lake area?  No, not good enough infrastructure.  Greenbrier/Great Bridge?  Too built up now--25 years ago it may have been plusible.  Bowers Hill area?  Kind of out of the way--similar to where the Virginia Beach Sportsplex is located.  Plus, would residents from Newport News and Hampton make the trek to the Southside to attend an NFL game?  Maybe, however, it depends on where the stadium would be.

This has been a subject that has been discussed on and off in the Hampton Roads area for around 35 years.  At one time, someone had a rendering of a stadium that was supposed to be built in Hampton Roads, yes the water.  It was to be built on a man-made island with a causeway built from Newport News or Hampton to get to the stadium parking area.  I also believe there was supposed to be some parking areas on the shore and the fans could walk along the causeway (pedestrian walkway) to attend the game.  That was a crazy idea.

There are just so many cons that seem to outweigh the pros in this subject.  If anyone has an opinion on this, I am more than willing to read it.

I believe that if a 36th US NFL team came to fruition, the market would be at the saturation point.  There would not be any area to place another NFL team that would be profitable to that team or the NFL.  Hampton Roads would be a good choice, however, many things would have to align for this to happen.  Some larger areas are unfeasible because of location (Columbus, Orlando, Sacramento--too close to existing NFL teams).  Portland is a case of its own.  So, the NFL may have to look at areas that are above 35 in the MSA's if they want a 36th US team.

I have two cities to suggest other than Hampton Roads.  Oklahoma City, even though it is 41st in MSA, or Memphis, even though the city is 210 miles from where the Tennessee Titans play.
Logged
I don't need a GPS.  I AM the GPS! (for family and friends)

thspfc

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1684
  • I-180 in Wyoming >>>>> I-70 in Colorado

  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Madison, WI metro area
  • Last Login: March 04, 2021, 12:44:52 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #15 on: December 22, 2020, 09:52:18 AM »

NFL is fine where and how it is. Ratings are declining across the board for pro sports. Now is not the time to be splurging on expansion teams, especially in cities that already have a strong association with existing teams. If you put an NFL team in Austin I bet they would be the fourth most popular football team among people in Austin, after the Longhorns, Cowboys, and Texans.
Logged
Donate today to support the construction of I-19 from Ocean City, MD to Portland, OR.

thspfc

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1684
  • I-180 in Wyoming >>>>> I-70 in Colorado

  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Madison, WI metro area
  • Last Login: March 04, 2021, 12:44:52 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #16 on: December 22, 2020, 10:04:53 AM »

^
Well, with Oracle and potentially Tesla moving to Austin along with some others, I'd say that area deserves an NFL team.
It's not a matter of whether the area deserves an NFL team. It's a matter of whether or not there is a market for a brand new team. Are there people in Austin that would support an NFL expansion team instead of teams that they've been rooting for their whole lives (see: Cowboys, largest fanbase in the league and most valueable sports franchise in the world; Texans, 160 miles away; Longhorns, 3 miles away, largest fanbase in college football)? There probably are. Are there enough of them? Heck no. Austin is about the 107th place I would start an NFL franchise right now. I would rather have one in London or Mexico City. Plus, what happens when the Austin team inevatibly stinks their first few years in the league? That shininess will wear off really fast, especially if the Cowboys or Texans are good.
Logged
Donate today to support the construction of I-19 from Ocean City, MD to Portland, OR.

RobbieL2415

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1571
  • Location: Hartford County, CT
  • Last Login: Today at 02:51:20 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #17 on: December 22, 2020, 10:28:54 AM »

I'd put a team back in St. Louis before Austin.

Other cities where they could put one:

OKC
Salt Lake City
Memphis
Omaha
Wichita
San Juan

Logged

thspfc

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1684
  • I-180 in Wyoming >>>>> I-70 in Colorado

  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Madison, WI metro area
  • Last Login: March 04, 2021, 12:44:52 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #18 on: December 22, 2020, 10:35:25 AM »

I'd put a team back in St. Louis before Austin.

Other cities where they could put one:

OKC
Cowboys.
Quote
Salt Lake City
They might run into problems with attendance at Sunday games due to the heavily Mormon population.
Quote
Memphis
Titans.
Quote
Omaha
Not enough people.
Quote
Wichita
Chiefs.
Quote
San Juan
Lol  :-D
Logged
Donate today to support the construction of I-19 from Ocean City, MD to Portland, OR.

cabiness42

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2605
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Munster, IN
  • Last Login: Today at 04:01:21 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #19 on: December 22, 2020, 10:44:03 AM »

There is not enough player talent to warrant an expansion beyond 32 teams. We already have a pretty big talent gap between the best and worst teams, but it's at least close enough to where a team like the Jets can pull off an upset of a team like the Rams every now and then.

If you expand the NFL, you'll be guaranteed to have at least one 0-16 team every year, and nobody wants that.

Jacksonville is really the only market that has an NFL team but shouldn't, so I could see San Antonio/Austin being a candidate for relocation.
Logged

1

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 9421
  • UMass Lowell student

  • Age: 22
  • Location: MA/NH border
  • Last Login: Today at 08:16:46 PM
    • Flickr account
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #20 on: December 22, 2020, 10:44:59 AM »

Quote
Omaha
Not enough people.

Have them play in Council Bluffs, name them Iowa instead of Omaha or Nebraska (such as the New England Patriots covers six states), and you'll get the entirety of Iowa, the eastern half of Nebraska (which is almost all of its population), and Sioux Falls, SD.
Logged
Clinched

Traveled, plus
US ⒔50
MA ⒐2⒉40.9⒐10⒎10⒐1⒒1⒘1⒚14⒈159
NH 27,38,111A(E); CA133; NY366; GA 42,140; FL A1A; CT32; VT 5A; QC 16⒉16⒌263

Flickr: Click the globe under my avatar

RobbieL2415

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1571
  • Location: Hartford County, CT
  • Last Login: Today at 02:51:20 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #21 on: December 22, 2020, 10:46:17 AM »

I'd put a team back in St. Louis before Austin.

Other cities where they could put one:

OKC
Cowboys.
Quote
Salt Lake City
They might run into problems with attendance at Sunday games due to the heavily Mormon population.
Quote
Memphis
Titans.
Quote
Omaha
Not enough people.
Quote
Wichita
Chiefs.
Quote
San Juan
Lol  :-D
Titans play in Nashville.
Wichita and Omaha each have a larger population than New Orleans and comparable metro area populations.
With regards to Salt Lake City, perhaps Congress could eliminate the Sports Broadcast Act of 1961 so the Big 3 could regularly broadcast pro football on Saturdays. And with more people streaming sports, this may not be an issue going forward.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2020, 10:56:41 AM by RobbieL2415 »
Logged

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11796
  • Age: 46
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 07:57:18 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #22 on: December 22, 2020, 10:55:59 AM »

Quote
Omaha
Not enough people.

Have them play in Council Bluffs, name them Iowa instead of Omaha or Nebraska (such as the New England Patriots covers six states), and you'll get the entirety of Iowa, the eastern half of Nebraska (which is almost all of its population), and Sioux Falls, SD.

Only if they become fans of the team though.
Logged

webny99

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5682
  • Left lane is for passing, not camping!

  • Age: 21
  • Location: Rochester, NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:48:26 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #23 on: December 22, 2020, 11:36:24 AM »

It's definitely possible for a team named after its home city (as opposed to the state or region, like the Titans or Patriots) to still have a large fanbase in another city. Bills and Packers are the most prominent examples.

On the other hand, I don't think it's possible to start another team in a state that already has a team named after that state. That rules out all locations in the New England states, Arizona, the Carolinas, Minnesota, and Tennessee, unless the existing team changes its name.
Logged

webny99

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5682
  • Left lane is for passing, not camping!

  • Age: 21
  • Location: Rochester, NY
  • Last Login: Today at 03:48:26 PM
Re: NFL in Austin, TX
« Reply #24 on: December 22, 2020, 11:37:55 AM »

To go to 36 teams, I'd add (note the focus on the South and West):
-Oklahoma City, OK
-Portland, OR
-San Antonio, TX
-Salt Lake City, UT

To go to 40 teams, I'd add:
-Sacramento, CA
-St. Louis, MO
-Omaha, NE (likely located in IA, as 1 suggests)
-Boise, ID (market would include MT and WY)

Other suggestions would include Hampton Roads, Richmond, Lexington or Louisville, KY, or Birmingham, AL. Technically, Alabama is the most populous state with no connections to an existing NFL team, but college football is much bigger there.

If you think San Diego should be on the list, just move the Chargers back to LA. We don't need 3 teams in SoCal, but that's a separate conversation. And ultimately, the whole exercise is just theoretical, because the NFL doesn't really need more teams.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.