NFL: Raiders to Las Vegas

[cyhiphopp]

depends on how you measure it. From a financial standpoint, it's almost certainly not a bad move. They're going to make more money in Vegas. With a giant new stadium and lots of wealthy companies in the area to buy up those PSLs and luxury boxes? They'll crush it financially compared to Oakland before a single game is played.

From an optics perspective, though? Yeah, it's a bad move.

From an optics perspective? So you mean it looks bad?
I guess that's true from a certain standpoint.
Everyone was mad at the Rams for leaving St Louis, but after one season, not many outside STL care that much.
They will gain new fans from the move as well though, just like the Rams did.

Cities can't expect to keep teams if they can't upgrade the stadiums. It sucks, but it's the way the NFL works now.

 

[CYCLNST8]

At least they didn't move to San Antonio...

 

[Desiigner]

RIP the Black Hole. The fan base definitely wont be the same in Las Vegas.

 

[Mr Janny]

From an optics perspective? So you mean it looks bad?
I guess that's true from a certain standpoint.
Everyone was mad at the Rams for leaving St Louis, but after one season, not many outside STL care that much.
They will gain new fans from the move as well though, just like the Rams did.

Cities can't expect to keep teams if they can't upgrade the stadiums. It sucks, but it's the way the NFL works now.

I'll agree that it's the way the NFL has worked, and is currently working, but it's less effective of a tactic than it has been, and the shine is continuing to come off the apple. The NFL is cashing in all of it's big bargaining chips on these most recent moves. LA was a big one. That bogeyman is gone. The Rams moved but no public money was used for their stadium. San Diego stood up to the league and said no way to public money. And yes the Raiders found a city that was willing to do it, but Vegas comes with its own set of problems, which is why it took so long to get a team there. Now, the league has very few slam dunk destination cities to threaten other communities with. London? That's a logistical nightmare. Toronto? For Buffalo, maybe. I doubt anywhere else is going to be threatened by Toronto. Mexico City? Believe it when I see it. Cities that already had teams like San Diego and St. Louis have bad tastes in their mouth when it comes to the NFL right now. They'll be in no hurry to foot the bill for big stadiums again. So, the landscape is a little different than it was.

Yeah, the NFL maintained the status quo in this most recent round of moves, but cashed in a large number of their bargaining chips to do it. Cities have more leverage than they did 2 years ago. Maybe nothing will come of it, but if there were ever a time for things to change, this might be it.

 

[NWICY]

As soon as these cities stop funding these teams stadiums their citizens will be better off. I guess I don't see the allure of having a major sports franchise in town. It probably provides a few jobs but nothing in comparison to the cost of the tax incentives they get. Oh well to each their own.

 

[boone7247]

All I know is the other owners are laughing on their way to the bank. Appox $45 per team that didn't move. No wonder they don't vote against it. Well Miami did, but I am guessing they were hoping for less competition for Super Bowls.

 

[The_Architect]

Just don't touch the uniforms!

 

[Buster28]

49ers now get the 6th largest tv market all to themselves without having to lift an finger or spend a dime. Now if they can just figure out how to win a game at Levi's Stadium.

 

[Diggame]

As soon as these cities stop funding these teams stadiums their citizens will be better off. I guess I don't see the allure of having a major sports franchise in town. It probably provides a few jobs but nothing in comparison to the cost of the tax incentives they get. Oh well to each their own.

You must live in a city without a pro team...

 

[cyhiphopp]

I'll agree that it's the way the NFL has worked, and is currently working, but it's less effective of a tactic than it has been, and the shine is continuing to come off the apple. The NFL is cashing in all of it's big bargaining chips on these most recent moves. LA was a big one. That bogeyman is gone. The Rams moved but no public money was used for their stadium. San Diego stood up to the league and said no way to public money. And yes the Raiders found a city that was willing to do it, but Vegas comes with its own set of problems, which is why it took so long to get a team there. Now, the league has very few slam dunk destination cities to threaten other communities with. London? That's a logistical nightmare. Toronto? For Buffalo, maybe. I doubt anywhere else is going to be threatened by Toronto. Mexico City? Believe it when I see it. Cities that already had teams like San Diego and St. Louis have bad tastes in their mouth when it comes to the NFL right now. They'll be in no hurry to foot the bill for big stadiums again. So, the landscape is a little different than it was.

Yeah, the NFL maintained the status quo in this most recent round of moves, but cashed in a large number of their bargaining chips to do it. Cities have more leverage than they did 2 years ago. Maybe nothing will come of it, but if there were ever a time for things to change, this might be it.

Very true. Now owners can't threaten to move to LA or LV. We'll see how that affects future stadium negotiations.

 

[cycloner29]

From the news this morning, word must have leaked out about the vote.

http://abc7news.com/news/firefighters-battling-4-alarm-structure-fire-in-oakland/1820235/

 

[jdoggivjc]

Bad move by the Raiders imo

Why?

If there was ever a team in the NFL that needed a new stadium, it's the Raiders (and, by exension, the A's in MLB since they share a stadium). That stadium looks terrible on TV - anyone that has actually been to the Oakland Coliseum summarily says it's 1000X worse. The Raiders have been trying to get Oakland to build them a new stadium for years, probably since they moved back to Oakland 20+ years ago. Sure, the Davis family could probably build the stadium themselves and have stayed in Oakland, but considering the Raiders are one of the "it" franchises in the NFL (not necessarily performance-wise until last year, but certainly in brand recognition) so they have no incentive to do so - they can go to whichever city wants them.

The Raiders will have no problems attracting fans. As I said, they're one of the "it" franchises, plus it's real easy to get from LA to Vegas. As far as I'm concerned, this move makes it that much harder for the Chargers to build a fan base in LA.

 

[jdoggivjc]

As soon as these cities stop funding these teams stadiums their citizens will be better off. I guess I don't see the allure of having a major sports franchise in town. It probably provides a few jobs but nothing in comparison to the cost of the tax incentives they get. Oh well to each their own.

I'm assuming you have no idea how awesome it is living ~20 miles away from pro sports teams (well, if you want to consider the Detroit Lions a pro sports team, anyway).

 

[jbindm]

Why?

If there was ever a team in the NFL that needed a new stadium, it's the Raiders (and, by exension, the A's in MLB since they share a stadium). That stadium looks terrible on TV - anyone that has actually been to the Oakland Coliseum summarily says it's 1000X worse. The Raiders have been trying to get Oakland to build them a new stadium for years, probably since they moved back to Oakland 20+ years ago. Sure, the Davis family could probably build the stadium themselves and have stayed in Oakland, but considering the Raiders are one of the "it" franchises in the NFL (not necessarily performance-wise until last year, but certainly in brand recognition) so they have no incentive to do so - they can go to whichever city wants them.

The Raiders will have no problems attracting fans. As I said, they're one of the "it" franchises, plus it's real easy to get from LA to Vegas. As far as I'm concerned, this move makes it that much harder for the Chargers to build a fan base in LA.

I agree with the post, but at some point the bolded part is going to become a major sticking point whenever teams start making noise about a new stadium. It's going to get tougher for teams to hold their city's feet to the fire because if the city balks, then where else is there for the franchise to go? Owners are going to find themselves with fewer options for relocation, less leverage, and more pressure on them to finance a new stadium with their own money if they want one that badly. Which is how it should be. The billionaire wants a new stadium? Let them cut the check.

 

[Desiigner]

Why?

If there was ever a team in the NFL that needed a new stadium, it's the Raiders (and, by exension, the A's in MLB since they share a stadium). That stadium looks terrible on TV - anyone that has actually been to the Oakland Coliseum summarily says it's 1000X worse. The Raiders have been trying to get Oakland to build them a new stadium for years, probably since they moved back to Oakland 20+ years ago. Sure, the Davis family could probably build the stadium themselves and have stayed in Oakland, but considering the Raiders are one of the "it" franchises in the NFL (not necessarily performance-wise until last year, but certainly in brand recognition) so they have no incentive to do so - they can go to whichever city wants them.

The Raiders will have no problems attracting fans. As I said, they're one of the "it" franchises, plus it's real easy to get from LA to Vegas. As far as I'm concerned, this move makes it that much harder for the Chargers to build a fan base in LA.

We'll see. I won't be surprised if the raiders are near the bottom of attendance for the next couple years

 

[jbindm]

RIP the Black Hole. The fan base definitely wont be the same in Las Vegas.

I'll be extremely curious to see what a Las Vegas Raiders home game looks like attendance- wise. I suspect that a lot of diehards from the visiting team's fanbase will make the easy trip to Vegas for a long weekend built around the game, and it's going to essentially become a weekly neutral field matchup for whoever is in town.

But I don't know much about the Vegas population. I had always assumed that it's a mostly transient community without a lot of civic pride or fan loyalty. Is that not the case? Maybe they'll be more gung ho about having a pro franchise than I'm giving them credit for.

 

[stormchaser2014]

 

[jbindm]

We'll see. I won't be surprised if the raiders are near the bottom of attendance for the next couple years

I think you're way wrong there. First and foremost, they're going to be the newest thing in town. The city will find a way to market the hell out of the team and get butts in the seats. And they're a good, ascending team. It would be one thing if they were trash, but if Derek Carr doesn't break his leg late last year that team was good enough to challenge the Pats.

Plenty of people are going to show up. i just wonder how many of them are going to be "Raider fans". Gonna be interesting.

 

[Mr Janny]

We'll see. I won't be surprised if the raiders are near the bottom of attendance for the next couple years

If you're looking at attendance as your measuring stick for success, you're not looking in the right place. Attendance doesn't really matter anymore. I mean, it matters, but it's about 10th on the list of the things that do. Getting butts in the seats is not nearly as important as it used to be. It's all about those seat licenses, luxury boxes, and naming rights. That's where the money is made for the teams, in addition to TV revenue. And that money comes from businesses and the wealthy. Your average Joe Blow, buying tickets for his family is almost an afterthought, in this day and age. Attendance revenue is a comparative drop in the bucket.

 

[jdoggivjc]

We'll see. I won't be surprised if the raiders are near the bottom of attendance for the next couple years

Well, considering Kansas City is a smaller metropolitan area than Las Vegas is, I think your statement is way off base. Not to mention the metro areas of Cleveland, Indianapolis, Nashville, Milwaukee/Green Bay, Jacksonville, New Orleans and Buffalo. Further, Cincinnati only has 10K more people in its metro area, and Pittsburgh 200K, and Charlotte 300K. How many of those struggle with attendance?

And then, just as I got done saying, I wouldn't be surprised at all if people in Los Angeles are more willing to drive to Las Vegas to go to Raiders games than to stay local and go to Chargers games.