Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

Another issue is what a single new team does to the scheduling. While I am sure they would figure something out, the current league structure makes for a pretty good scheduling system that enhances divisional rivalry and is pretty equitable w/in the divisional system, but still allows for fans to see every team in the league play their team over the course of four seasons.

32 teams and a 16 game season seems to be a pretty good congruence of numbers. Not sure it would work so well with 33, 34 or 35. Not even sure if 36 would work but that's where I think you would have to go to get the formulaic scheduling we have now. (which I like BTW).

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

IMO, Rak was poised for a breakout season in 2012, but got injured week 2. He dominated the New Orleans game, I remember Keim and others marveling about it. Last year he played very well, but I think this year he is poised for another "breakout" year. Hopefully he stays on the field. If he does, he's going to be worth every penny they pay him in the off season.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=Giantone;1075891]Chris Snee will announce his retirement from football tomorrow ,opens up a spot and cap room on the Giants .[/quote]

I was expecting improvement along that line, but Snee retiring leaves a large hole.


JoeRedskin: for what it's worth, in the PFT article that Matty posted it was mentioned that Goodell has previously said that if the league were to expand it would do so by two teams, not just one.

If there is indeed an expansion, I think adding one team to each division would be better than having some divisions with more teams than others, but that would be a [I]huge[/I] expansion. Not sure how well that would work.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

Oh wow an eight team expansion....not gonna happen but...

1. Los Angeles

2. Chicago (build the stadium near Joliet)

3. Toronto

4. Portland

5. Salt Lake City

6. Grand Rapids

7. Birmingham.

8. Vancouver

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

Of those Toronto, Portland, and LA are the only teams I could see working. Adding a second Chicago team would be a failure due to the Bears dominating that market. Birmingham is only a 2 1/2 hr drive to ATL and isn't that big of a city. That would be like putting a team in charleston Sc. It just wouldn't work.

Salt lake possibly, and if the league was expanding by 8 teams I am sure London and Mexico City would be on that list.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1075901]Oh wow an eight team expansion....not gonna happen but...

1. Los Angeles

2. Chicago (build the stadium near Joliet)

3. Toronto

4. Portland

5. Salt Lake City

6. Grand Rapids

7. Birmingham.

8. Vancouver[/quote]

You left out three markets I've heard mentioned a lot (in order): Oklahoma City, Louisville, Honolulu

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;1075889]In fact they (Portland) only had a team for one year (1985) that averaged 19K/game (in fairness, the arena only held 20K max). The were 7th out of 14 in terms of total attendance behind (among others) Birmingham, Orlando, and Memphis.

Thank you google:

[url=http://www.awesome80s.com/Awesome80s/Sports/USFL/Attendance.asp]USFL Attendance: Awesome80s Sports[/url]

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Breakers]Portland Breakers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]


[Side note: What a wonderful thing the internet is, almost any purely factual question can be answered by the simple inquiry "hmmm, I wonder if I can find it on google?][/quote]

So if their stadium held 20k and they got 19k a game, doesn't that seem like a good loyal fanbase?

On a side note, putting a team in Portland also could develop a rivalry with Seattle if you put them in the NFC West. To me it just makes the most sense, even though it probably would not happen.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1075872]The commissioner wants teams in LA and London. We may think those cities are bad fits for the NFL but it's pretty much a sure thing that one or both of those cities will get a team before any other city.[/quote]

Sadly I do agree but to me it's just a terrible idea. NFL Europe is proof that it won't work in London as it was a money loser and poorly attended. I think San Diego, the Rams or maybe even the Raiders will eventually go to LA.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1075915]Sadly I do agree but to me it's just a terrible idea. NFL Europe is proof that it won't work in London as it was a money loser and poorly attended. I think San Diego, the Rams or maybe even the Raiders will eventually go to LA.[/quote]

And yet NFL Europe games had a higher average attendance than Portland's "record breaking" USFL numbers.

It's not fair to compare to NFL Europe to an NFL team in London. It would be like telling a city that they wouldn't support an NBA team because they didn't support the local NBA D League team. It's a misconception that fans internationally will just accept any football. They know that the best players are in the NFL so that's who they want to see.

To me, the biggest hurdle for a team in London will really be the TV contract. I don't know how that will work because European TV deals are much more complicated than in the US

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1075922]And yet NFL Europe games had a higher average attendance than Portland's "record breaking" USFL numbers.

It's not fair to compare to NFL Europe to an NFL team in London. It would be like telling a city that they wouldn't support an NBA team because they didn't support the local NBA D League team. It's a misconception that fans internationally will just accept any football. They know that the best players are in the NFL so that's who they want to see.

[B]To me, the biggest hurdle for a team in London will really be the TV contract. I don't know how that will work because European TV deals are much more complicated than in the US[/B][/quote]

Wait ... are you saying this all about money??? I am soooooo disillusioned.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1075922]And yet NFL Europe games had a higher average attendance than Portland's "record breaking" USFL numbers.

It's not fair to compare to NFL Europe to an NFL team in London. It would be like telling a city that they wouldn't support an NBA team because they didn't support the local NBA D League team. It's a misconception that fans internationally will just accept any football. They know that the best players are in the NFL so that's who they want to see.

To me, the biggest hurdle for a team in London will really be the TV contract. I don't know how that will work because European TV deals are much more complicated than in the US[/quote]

That's because they were playing in MUCH larger stadiums. I believe a NFL Eurpore game averaged around 25,000. I think London would suppport it at first but the novelty would soon wear off. It's just not part of the culture over there and in my opinion never will be.

IDK the soccer schedules over there. Do the leagues play in the fall on Sunday? I assume they don't. If they do then that's obviously a major issue.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

So I'm wondering why Tony Dungy says he wouldn't have singed Michael Sam because he would be a distraction. Yet when Michael Vick got out of jail he lobbied for him. I'm starting to think Tony isn't for gay people.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1075901]Oh wow an eight team expansion....not gonna happen but...

1. Los Angeles

2. Chicago (build the stadium near Joliet)

3. Toronto

4. Portland

5. Salt Lake City

6. Grand Rapids

7. Birmingham.

8. Vancouver[/quote]

You forgot the expansion Hattiesburg Heretics.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1075928]So I'm wondering why Tony Dungy says he wouldn't have singed Michael Sam because he would be a distraction. Yet when Michael Vick got out of jail he lobbied for him. I'm starting to think Tony isn't for gay people.[/quote]

He's of course entitled to his opinion, but that was a pretty damning statement to make in my opinion.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1075946]He's of course entitled to his opinion, but that was a pretty damning statement to make in my opinion.[/quote]

I agree. You expect to the media to give him a pass today?