<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bears#1Fan)</div><div class='quotemain'>and the 72 dolphins played all but 2 winning teams all year and they were 8-6 so there u have it i am not trying to take away from miami at all don't get me wrong.. i just think like u said with glaring holes and all that makes it harder to do it todays nfl</div> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bA)</div><div class='quotemain'>And this years Bears have had such a quality schedule to this point. I agree w/ Dale on things being watered down these days. It would not bother me in the least to see the NFL go back to 28 teams.</div> It IMO will never happen and here are 5 reasons why; M O N E Y! From the pop those corks thread, Which 4 teams should be retracted?
The first two are no-brainers, Arizona and Detroit. Both teams have had time to become competitive and have failed miserably for far too many years. That's a shame. I don't think anyone would miss the Cardinals, but the Lions are one of the older franchises of the NFL. However, if your looking to retract the league, I think the top two considerations have to be fan support and ownerships' commitment to winning. Before the hiring of Marvin Lewis, I would have added the Bengals to the list for the same reason, but they are off the list. I might cut those two teams and see how the league fares before cutting any other teams.
Before Katrina...New Orleans would have been cut. Now the natural disaster makes them too much of a sympathy case to extract them.
I'd give Arizona a chance with the new stadium and Leinart starting to come into his own. In the AFC, I'd go with Jacksonville and ? in the NFC.
Jacksonville, Tennessee, Arizona, and Houston - these are teams without much history (unless you count Tennessee's former life as the Oilers). I'm actually more in favor of moving some teams around. Move the Cardinals to Las Vegas, and the Raiders back to Los Angeles. Moving Jacksonville to Columbus would also be a good move as Ohio is such a big football state that they could get the fan support there.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vikingfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>I'm actually more in favor of moving some teams around. Move the Cardinals to Las Vegas, and the Raiders back to Los Angeles. Moving Jacksonville to Columbus would also be a good move as Ohio is such a big football state that they could get the fan support there.</div> I like the relocation idea but think Ohio getting Fla's third team is silly. I had heard the league wants to expand into Mexico. Thoughts? The Raiders could move to Mexico City and the Bills to Andorra.
Jacksonville is the only clear cut case that I see. They don't sell out any of their games and they don't get any media attention either. Arizona won't/can't because of their new stadium. Ditto the Texans. Detroit is one of the oldest franchises in the NFL, they won't go anywhere. I'm also not sold on the idea that retracting to 28 teams is a good idea, either. I think the current 32 are fine. I just hope the NFL doesn't get any bigger.
PA are you sure the Jags don't sell out? I heard after week 6 this was the first year up till that point that every team had every seat sold out prior to gameday. That tells me it is hard to retract any team. As for the Lions they just need to retract Millen. 32 teams is perfect. No more no less.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'>oakland and buffalo + green bay come to mind</div> haha...you never stop trying to piss people off...
Detroit, Arizona, Houston, the 4th franchise is up to personal thinking.. but those 3 for sure are on my list
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cubuffsman78)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'>oakland and buffalo + green bay come to mind</div> haha...you never stop trying to piss people off...</div> cuz i choose 3 small markets to retract?
No team is going to be retracted....every NFL team either makes money or could make money if they moved, and I dont believe any team operates in the red on a yearly basis(some teams have red years occasionally, like the Colts the year they paid out $40 million to Manning in a single check)....the Cardinals certainly arent going anywhere after they built that $600 million palace....I think the Jags to L.A. make sence though....
I don't know if LA can hold a team (historically they haven't been able to). I don't know what's wrong with the people there, they just can't seem to support the NFL. I think having 3 teams in Florida is absolutely silly - Ohio is a huge football state and could actually support three teams. Columbus is a big enough town to support a team... BF1, obviously retracting on market size doesn't work. Green Bay is a fixture and always will be. The franchise is too historic to move or retract...
buffalo supports their team pretty well as does GB obviously. I can only think of 2 teams for possible retraction even though it will never happen & that's Houston & Arizona. I know both have new stadiums but neither city is supporting their franchise very well & it's only a matter of time before these owner's look to sell. New Orleans I could still see being moved, but I think it would be a slap in the face after all they spent to repair the Superdome.
I guess I thought this discussion of retraction was spawned due to the watered down NFL. If so, I'm not sure I understand the discussion surrounding Jacksonville. During the life of the franchise, they have put competitive teams on the field for the most part. I won't disagree that maybe they don't have the fan and media support, but that is a separate matter? Do you think the league is watered down because there are not enough high-caliber athletes, or the inability of a franchise to select those players, or both? Seems to me that the Cardinal franchise has been unable to field a highly competitive football team for decades, regardless of the number of teams. Why is that? I think that question needs to be answered. Taking away Jacksonville will potentially make for a better pool of players, but will that pool necessarily migrate to the Cardinals and Detroit? Moving Jacksonville to a better market won't help - they are already fielding a good team. This move may make the more profitable, but it wont help improve their players. Remember, we can all feel sorry for small market teams, but there is more to fielding a winning team than money. Ask Danny Snyder.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vikingfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>I don't know if LA can hold a team (historically they haven't been able to). I don't know what's wrong with the people there, they just can't seem to support the NFL. I think having 3 teams in Florida is absolutely silly - Ohio is a huge football state and could actually support three teams. Columbus is a big enough town to support a team... BF1, obviously retracting on market size doesn't work. Green Bay is a fixture and always will be. The franchise is too historic to move or retract...</div> Makes sense to me. If you have enough talent for 32 teams, you might as well put them in the best 32 markets. If you have enough for 28 teams, put them in best 28 markets. Good bye Packers
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bakes781)</div><div class='quotemain'>I can only think of 2 teams for possible retraction even though it will never happen & that's Houston & Arizona. I know both have new stadiums but neither city is supporting their franchise very well</div> Arizona sold out its season tickets before the season even started, so I dont see how they arent supporting that team....
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vikingfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>I don't know if LA can hold a team (historically they haven't been able to). I don't know what's wrong with the people there, they just can't seem to support the NFL. I think having 3 teams in Florida is absolutely silly - Ohio is a huge football state and could actually support three teams. Columbus is a big enough town to support a team... BF1, obviously retracting on market size doesn't work. Green Bay is a fixture and always will be. The franchise is too historic to move or retract...</div> Makes sense to me. If you have enough talent for 32 teams, you might as well put them in the best 32 markets. If you have enough for 28 teams, put them in best 28 markets. Good bye Packers</div> You can wish that all you want. GB is owned by the city and they even have stocks. So really everyone is capable of owning the Packers to some extent. Heck I have some shares. I'm part owner of the Packers. So because of that the Packers can never move unless they go bankrupt. Considering their season tickets are sold out for the next 50 years that's not likely to happen in our lifetime. So go with 28 teams. Just take the 27 best markets and then the Pack. Frankly I think it's find the way it is. L.A. seems to be more of a college city anyways..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vikingfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>I think having 3 teams in Florida is absolutely silly</div> Why? Enquiring minds want to know. Well, I do anyway. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vikingfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>Ohio is a huge football state and could actually support three teams. Columbus is a big enough town to support a team...</div> Last I checked, Florida was a big football state too. I'm no Rainman when it comes to Demographics... yeah definitely. definitely not. But, I believe that J'ville is larger than Columbus There has to be some rationale. Please share or is this an instance when you said on the barbershop, <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vikingfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>Everything is told with a bias, but that doesn't mean that we should be pessimistic about it.</div> I am not being a pessimist rather a skeptic.
