(07-25-2019, 12:11 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: We don't really have a SUPPORTED NFL team near us here ; everyone in Canada is a bandwagon Pats or Stoolers fan, Broncos or Cowboys fan.

Hard-pressed to find fans of any other team here, outside of randos like myself.

 If you guys get an NFL team I know there is a worry that it would hurt CFL support. The bigger issue would be wether or not Canada would be willing to use public money on a stadium. That was a big issue when there was talk about the Bills moving to Toronto.

I don't know how much Canadians love the NFL( I know you do) but from everything I have heard it seems like you guys could support at least one team if not two.

(07-25-2019, 01:21 AM)Jakeypoo Wrote:  If you guys get an NFL team I know there is a worry that it would hurt CFL support. The bigger issue would be wether or not Canada would be willing to use public money on a stadium. That was a big issue when there was talk about the Bills moving to Toronto.

I don't know how much Canadians love the NFL( I know you do) but from everything I have heard it seems like you guys could support at least one team if not two.

Most-definitely!

But yeah, I'm not sure that public dollars would fly; we already get taxed more than you guys do (wouldn't have it any other way!), so an additional expense/tax would have people going nuts.

(07-24-2019, 11:31 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: That wouldn't play a factor there many horrible run teams that make money look at the Redskins and Kincks.
The bigger problem would be finding a city that would pay for a stadium and at the same time finding a team that would not cut into another teams  fan base. Thats why San Antonio /Austin doesn't have a team because Jerry Jones doesn't want to lose that section of the Fan Base.
There is probably 8 to 10 cities that could logistically get a new team via Expansion or relocation. Toronto, Portland, Northern California, Austin/ San Antonio, St.louis, London, Orlando, Montreal, Vancouver, and San Diego.  All of those locations have one of two problems 1.) Financing a stadium and 2.) An NFL team too close to them.

Could you imagine if the Bengals moved the team to Las Vegas? That would have been spectacular.

I think that London or Toronto seem to make the most sense.

Portland and San Antonio in the US. Maybe Oklahoma City or Omaha.

(07-24-2019, 10:52 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: He is going to have a hard time finding a market that would pay and he would need 3/4 of owner permission to leave the area.

Cincy is the 29th metro area in the country right behind lasvegas and ahead of Austin. The actual city population doesn't really matter.

The Cinci metro area also includes counties in Indiana, which is Colts territory.  

No owner is going to block someone trying to move the Bengals.  Are the other 31 owners really going to tell somebody that they have to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build a stadium in a market that doesn't sell our even in playoff years and has one of the lowest dollars spent/fan ratios in the league?  

(07-24-2019, 10:54 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: The problem is if you move this team to basically any major city, the way the team is run will alienate the fan base quickly. And bigger cities generally have more intense media coverage.

If we're talking about the Brown family moving the team, you have to remember that the team is their lone business.  There's going to be a honeymoon period whenever a team moves into a new market.  That means full stadiums no matter how bad the team is and higher ticket prices.  Right now, the average NFL ticket is $100 and the average Bengals ticket is $78, so you're basically losing $22 on every ticket you sell, not to mention the empty seats.  A new market also means a TON of merchandise sales.  That makes the team more profitable and makes it easier to reinvest in stuff like practice bubbles, increased scouting department, etc.

Mike Brown could never mnove the team - what city would accept him knowing what little he brings to the table? It would be outright foolish for any City to want him - they may want the team but leave the Brown's behind

(07-25-2019, 12:54 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Could you imagine if the Bengals moved the team to Las Vegas? That would have been spectacular.

I think that London or Toronto seem to make the most sense.

Portland and San Antonio in the US. Maybe Oklahoma City or Omaha.

San Antonio's never getting an NFL team. Jerry Jones would throw a fit and you'd be swimming uphill trying to convert Cowboys fans anyways. The Bengals won't be the team to move to England as long as other owners (see: Jacksonville and Tampa Bay) have huge investments of their own over there. I think Oklahoma City has a good chance to prove that they're not a professional sports town now that their basketball team has been stripped of all talent and is likely to struggle for the first time since they moved there.

The Bengals are leased at PBS until 2026, with two options that can extend that another ten years. They're not going anywhere any time soon, and why would they even want to when Cincinnati's politicians have proven they'll basically give the Bengals whatever they want even though they'll whine and cry about it publicly.

(07-26-2019, 12:15 PM)I_C_DeadPeople Wrote: Mike Brown could never mnove the team - what city would accept him knowing what little he brings to the table? It would be outright foolish for any City to want him - they may want the team but leave the Brown's behind

I think you are completely fooling yourself if you think Mike Brown would stop cities from falling over themselves to get an NFL team to come there. Especially as old as he'd be when any move would ultimately happen.

There will never be a lack of local politicians more than willing to delude themselves into believing they could and should have an NFL franchise even if it means evicting half of a section of the cities residents to install all new parking lots not to mention a stadium itself. After all, what city wouldn't want to go deeply in debt for a few decades at least, put up with protests from non-football fans, go under the microscope of legal investigations, bribes and such to land one of the worst run franchises in the modern era? What a win-win for everyone, huh?   

(07-26-2019, 04:00 PM)grampahol Wrote: There will never be a lack of local politicians more than willing to delude themselves into believing they could and should have an NFL franchise even if it means evicting half of a section of the cities residents to install all new parking lots not to mention a stadium itself. After all, what city wouldn't want to go deeply in debt for a few decades at least, put up with protests from non-football fans, go under the microscope of legal investigations, bribes and such to land one of the worst run franchises in the modern era? What a win-win for everyone, huh?   

Think about what downtown Cincinnati was like before the stadium was built, and then think about what it is now. Over the last 20 years Cincinnati's become revitalized IMO. While I don't pretend to know the ins-and-outs of Cincinnati and Hamilton County politics, from the outside looking in on the Kentucky side of the river it kind of looks like what they've done has been working (outside of losing the Promowest music venue to Newport). Hell, even Kentucky's riverfront (Covington/Newport/Bellevue) have cleaned up in that timespan.

(07-26-2019, 06:35 PM)NKURyan Wrote: Think about what downtown Cincinnati was like before the stadium was built, and then think about what it is now. Over the last 20 years Cincinnati's become revitalized IMO. While I don't pretend to know the ins-and-outs of Cincinnati and Hamilton County politics, from the outside looking in on the Kentucky side of the river it kind of looks like what they've done has been working (outside of losing the Promowest music venue to Newport). Hell, even Kentucky's riverfront (Covington/Newport/Bellevue) have cleaned up in that timespan.

I definitely think that putting a new stadium in a city leads to a revitalization of that area that results in millions of dollars being spent in that area too. It's just who's pockets does that money go in?

So you buy a stadium with public funds and the results go in private pockets. In general.

(07-26-2019, 10:10 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I definitely think that putting a new stadium in a city leads to a revitalization of that area that results in millions of dollars being spent in that area too. It's just who's pockets does that money go in?

So you buy a stadium with public funds and the results go in private pockets. In general.

Which in turn goes into pockets of the people that develop construct and work in those new jobs.