First NFL Blackout of the season...

[cutelittlecaramelkid]

.....belongs to Jacksonville! Their home game vs. Arizona this Sunday (9/20) has been blacked out (about 17,000 tix were left at the game). Since FOX has a single game this week, they will show the Carolina/Atlanta game in Jacksonville.
The other 2 potential markets for blackout (San Diego, home vs. Baltimore and Detroit, home vs. Minnesota) have been lifted.

 

[azumanga]

.....belongs to Jacksonville! Their home game vs. Arizona this Sunday (9/20) has been blacked out (about 17,000 tix were left at the game).

Has the economy been THAT bad in Jacksonville?

 

[KML0224]

I still don't think Jacksonville deserves that team. It also should be noted that the Jacksonville airport is quite out of the way, when compared to places like Tampa. I recently visited Tampa and can say that TPA is 1 1/2 miles tops from Raymond James Stadium (home of the Buccaneers). My brother went to a Jaguars game against Seattle in 2005 and had nothing but negative comments about the area once he got home. As for Miami, I've heard that Miami Gardens, where Landshark Stadium sits, isn't exactly the nicest neighborhood either. I have yet to visit that part of Florida, so I will hold off on further judgment.

As for Detroit, had Bret Favre not been in the equation, do you think Detroit would've been blacked out? I'd say yes.

 

[mleach]

I still don't think Jacksonville deserves that team. It also should be noted that the Jacksonville airport is quite out of the way, when compared to places like Tampa. I recently visited Tampa and can say that TPA is 1 1/2 miles tops from Raymond James Stadium (home of the Buccaneers). My brother went to a Jaguars game against Seattle in 2005 and had nothing but negative comments about the area once he got home. As for Miami, I've heard that Miami Gardens, where Landshark Stadium sits, isn't exactly the nicest neighborhood either. I have yet to visit that part of Florida, so I will hold off on further judgment.

Yeah I don't think Jacksonville needs the NFL either, funny for years when I thought of Jacksonville I would be thinking COLLEGE sports.

If you ever get a chance check out city-data.com, talk about DRAMA !! Every so often the subject of "blackouts", "who deserves a team and who doesn't", etc..is brought up there. OMG !! Some of the stuff they say !! I remember one post from someone in Louisville who said his city "must have a team"..even if Kentucky and Louisville would cut such services to get one such as "Meals on Wheels" and throw the eldery and those with down syndrome out onto the streets because "..they will soon be dead anyway..why not"? . One man was willing to go hungry, cancel his health insurance and pay TRIPLE taxes because he felt Major League Baseball is needed in Indianapolis.

Or that post I can remember about Oklahoma City saying they were "under federal law" to have pro-sports in that city and had the NBA went someplace else they would be in serious trouble witht he Feds and Buffalo needed the Bills & Sabers in place because one day Buffalo will be the Phoenix, AZ of the northeast..as a city YOU would want to live in...and so on and so and so on....

What people say ( and say what they do ) in order for their city to get major league sports is really something.

 

[KeithE4]

.....belongs to Jacksonville! Their home game vs. Arizona this Sunday (9/20) has been blacked out (about 17,000 tix were left at the game).

I think this ties the record for the least number of affiliates (3) that will carry an NFL game: KSAZ Phoenix, KMSB Tucson, and KECY El Centro/Yuma. There have been a few other games with only three affiliates, but I can't think of any with less. Folks in Jacksonville will have to drive a bit to get the game in a bar via Sunday Ticket.

 

[Tim from Springfield IL]

Just a suggestion--IIRC the NFL had set a goal of returning a team to Los Angeles by 2012 (unless that's just an urban legend). If the Jaguars continue their recent trend of no sellouts (and many TV blackouts as a result), what about moving that team from Jacksonville to El Lay?

 

[mleach]

Just a suggestion--IIRC the NFL had set a goal of returning a team to Los Angeles by 2012 (unless that's just an urban legend). If the Jaguars continue their recent trend of no sellouts (and many TV blackouts as a result), what about moving that team from Jacksonville to El Lay?

I have heard something about that ( NFL to LA by 2012 ) but at the same time over the years I have also read stories and seen polls that were done were a good many of folks in and around Los Angeles really couldn't care less if their city gets an NFL team or not.

 

[Mediafrog+]

I still don't think Jacksonville deserves that team.

Keep in mind that the only reason Jacksonville got the Jaguars in the 1995 expansion was because the bidders for the proposed team in St. Louis (who would have been called the "Stallions") couldn't get their act together. Memphis (Hound Dogs) and Baltimore (Bombers) were also in the running.

And being in Houston, I have not forgotten that the only reason we got the Texans in 2002 was because Los Angeles fell on its face in their expansion effort.

So both markets in a sense got their teams by default.

It has been stated on the radio boards that Los Angeles would now be a poor market for the NFL due to the huge demographic changes that have taken place in the past few decades. And they don't really seem to miss the NFL, something that has irked the league brass for years now.

 

[justthenumbers]

And they don't really seem to miss the NFL, something that has irked the league brass for years now.

They can probably at least partially thank the USC Trojans for that.

 

[DToTheJ]

Apparently, there is buzz that if the Jaguars draft college quarterback Tim Tebow, that could bring in fans and thus justify the "Jagwires" sticking around in J-ville...

Looking ahead at the rest of their home schedule, following Tennessee, they host: St. Louis, Kansas City, Buffalo, Houston and Miami! These times, provided the Dolphins lose tonight's game, will be a combined 2-8!

 

[DToTheJ]

By the way, for a reference, here is the slightly revised NFL maps page:
http://www.the506.com/nflmaps/

 

[ixnay]

Didn't they have to rent cruise ships to provide extra lodging during SB week a few years ago in Jax?

ixnay

 

[ShawnHill1]

Didn't they have to rent cruise ships to provide extra lodging during SB week a few years ago in Jax?

ixnay

They did indeed. According to many who attended that Super Bowl, it wasn't a pleasant experience logistically. In fact, IIRC, the NFL declared that will never put another Super Bowl in Jacksonville again.

I live in Los Angeles area, and I tell you there's kind of a "take it or leave it" attitude in regards to having a NFL team here. It'll be nice to have one, but if we don't...well hell, at least we'll get three games every Sunday morning/afternoon. The San Diego Chargers, whether some like it or not, are our default NFL home team just by the virtue of being an official secondary market; KCBS carries all Chargers games available from CBS. Of course, you still the crowd of Raiders fans, plus there's plenty of Cowboys and Steelers followers, and any other "flavor of the month" team. Heck, one of my neighbors is a Denver Broncos fan. One of the owners of the Los Angeles Kings hockey team has this plan to build a privately-financed stadium about 30 miles east of Downtown L.A., where if a team should decided to the area, the stadium would be build within two years. Since the Chargers are having a hard time getting a new stadium built in San Diego County, so I can see them being the first line making the move northward.

 

[BRNout]

Didn't they have to rent cruise ships to provide extra lodging during SB week a few years ago in Jax?

ixnay

They did indeed. According to many who attended that Super Bowl, it wasn't a pleasant experience logistically. In fact, IIRC, the NFL declared that will never put another Super Bowl in Jacksonville again.

I live in Los Angeles area, and I tell you there's kind of a "take it or leave it" attitude in regards to having a NFL team here. It'll be nice to have one, but if we don't...well hell, at least we'll get three games every Sunday morning/afternoon. The San Diego Chargers, whether some like it or not, are our default NFL home team just by the virtue of being an official secondary market; KCBS carries all Chargers games available from CBS. Of course, you still the crowd of Raiders fans, plus there's plenty of Cowboys and Steelers followers, and any other "flavor of the month" team. Heck, one of my neighbors is a Denver Broncos fan. One of the owners of the Los Angeles Kings hockey team has this plan to build a privately-financed stadium about 30 miles east of Downtown L.A., where if a team should decided to the area, the stadium would be build within two years. Since the Chargers are having a hard time getting a new stadium built in San Diego County, so I can see them being the first line making the move northward.

The thing with LA is that it's such a HUGE metro area now that all an NFL team would need is a relatively small percentage following to be successful. I totally agree that nobody will mistake LA's football fans for the likes of those in Green Bay or Pittsburgh or even Denver. However, with such a potentially huge audience available, it only takes a relatively small, yet loyal, core group to make it work. Look at the Dodgers and Angels. Neither team causes a huge buzz over the population as the Red Sox do in New England. However, both are still among MLB's largest drawing teams in attendance on an annual basis. And that's true despite the fact that both teams play in old, outdated stadiums that are some of the least attractive in the league.

The same could be true of a football franchise, if handled correctly. One suggestion: don't build the new stadium with any more than 65,000 seats. That will reduce the likelihood of blackouts.

Also, I truly hope that the Chargers DO NOT move to the LA area. They have become a fixture in San Diego, which is a large enough metro area in its own right to deserve a team. They've supported the franchise for decades and deserve better than to be jilted for a larger neighbor with a ho-hum attitude.

 

[ShawnHill1]

Didn't they have to rent cruise ships to provide extra lodging during SB week a few years ago in Jax?

ixnay

They did indeed. According to many who attended that Super Bowl, it wasn't a pleasant experience logistically. In fact, IIRC, the NFL declared that will never put another Super Bowl in Jacksonville again.

I live in Los Angeles area, and I tell you there's kind of a "take it or leave it" attitude in regards to having a NFL team here. It'll be nice to have one, but if we don't...well hell, at least we'll get three games every Sunday morning/afternoon. The San Diego Chargers, whether some like it or not, are our default NFL home team just by the virtue of being an official secondary market; KCBS carries all Chargers games available from CBS. Of course, you still the crowd of Raiders fans, plus there's plenty of Cowboys and Steelers followers, and any other "flavor of the month" team. Heck, one of my neighbors is a Denver Broncos fan. One of the owners of the Los Angeles Kings hockey team has this plan to build a privately-financed stadium about 30 miles east of Downtown L.A., where if a team should decided to the area, the stadium would be build within two years. Since the Chargers are having a hard time getting a new stadium built in San Diego County, so I can see them being the first line making the move northward.

The thing with LA is that it's such a HUGE metro area now that all an NFL team would need is a relatively small percentage following to be successful. I totally agree that nobody will mistake LA's football fans for the likes of those in Green Bay or Pittsburgh or even Denver. However, with such a potentially huge audience available, it only takes a relatively small, yet loyal, core group to make it work. Look at the Dodgers and Angels. Neither team causes a huge buzz over the population as the Red Sox do in New England. However, both are still among MLB's largest drawing teams in attendance on an annual basis. And that's true despite the fact that both teams play in old, outdated stadiums that are some of the least attractive in the league.

The same could be true of a football franchise, if handled correctly. One suggestion: don't build the new stadium with any more than 65,000 seats. That will reduce the likelihood of blackouts.

Also, I truly hope that the Chargers DO NOT move to the LA area. They have become a fixture in San Diego, which is a large enough metro area in its own right to deserve a team. They've supported the franchise for decades and deserve better than to be jilted for a larger neighbor with a ho-hum attitude.

I pretty much agree with all of your points. Definitely San Diego should keep the Chargers; they've been there for 48 years and have a fairly large loyal following. I've always wanted to make it a point to attend a Charger home game one of these days. However, the thing that's not helping the Chargers (and San Diego in regards to the Super Bowl rotation), is that they play in one of the oldest stadiums in the NFL. In fact, discounting the renovated Lambeau and Solider Fields, California has the oldest stadiums in the league--San Francisco's Candlestick Park opened in 1960 (although the 49ers didn't move in until '71), the Oakland Coliseum (1966), and San Diego's Qualcomm Stadium (1967). The NFL stated that San Diego will never host another Super Bowl game until a new stadium, and a renovated stadium wouldn't be suffice. There's really no public money available in San Diego or statewide, plus after the controversy of the Padres' Petco Park, the taxpayers might still be leery of funding another $400 million-plus stadium.

The potential NFL stadium in the L.A. suburbs that I mentioned earlier would between 75,000 and 80,000 people, and its location is pretty central to the southern and eastern suburban areas (such as Orange, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties). It would be location near the intersections of two highways and there's a commuter rail station adjacent to the stadium site. If it won't the Chargers won't be up here, could be the Jaguars or even the Vikings (even though I could never see really leave Minnesota).

 

[DToTheJ]

Didn't they have to rent cruise ships to provide extra lodging during SB week a few years ago in Jax?

ixnay

They did indeed. According to many who attended that Super Bowl, it wasn't a pleasant experience logistically. In fact, IIRC, the NFL declared that will never put another Super Bowl in Jacksonville again.

I live in Los Angeles area, and I tell you there's kind of a "take it or leave it" attitude in regards to having a NFL team here. It'll be nice to have one, but if we don't...well hell, at least we'll get three games every Sunday morning/afternoon. The San Diego Chargers, whether some like it or not, are our default NFL home team just by the virtue of being an official secondary market; KCBS carries all Chargers games available from CBS. Of course, you still the crowd of Raiders fans, plus there's plenty of Cowboys and Steelers followers, and any other "flavor of the month" team. Heck, one of my neighbors is a Denver Broncos fan. One of the owners of the Los Angeles Kings hockey team has this plan to build a privately-financed stadium about 30 miles east of Downtown L.A., where if a team should decided to the area, the stadium would be build within two years. Since the Chargers are having a hard time getting a new stadium built in San Diego County, so I can see them being the first line making the move northward.

The thing with LA is that it's such a HUGE metro area now that all an NFL team would need is a relatively small percentage following to be successful. I totally agree that nobody will mistake LA's football fans for the likes of those in Green Bay or Pittsburgh or even Denver. However, with such a potentially huge audience available, it only takes a relatively small, yet loyal, core group to make it work. Look at the Dodgers and Angels. Neither team causes a huge buzz over the population as the Red Sox do in New England. However, both are still among MLB's largest drawing teams in attendance on an annual basis. And that's true despite the fact that both teams play in old, outdated stadiums that are some of the least attractive in the league.

The same could be true of a football franchise, if handled correctly. One suggestion: don't build the new stadium with any more than 65,000 seats. That will reduce the likelihood of blackouts.

Also, I truly hope that the Chargers DO NOT move to the LA area. They have become a fixture in San Diego, which is a large enough metro area in its own right to deserve a team. They've supported the franchise for decades and deserve better than to be jilted for a larger neighbor with a ho-hum attitude.

I pretty much agree with all of your points. Definitely San Diego should keep the Chargers; they've been there for 48 years and have a fairly large loyal following. I've always wanted to make it a point to attend a Charger home game one of these days. However, the thing that's not helping the Chargers (and San Diego in regards to the Super Bowl rotation), is that they play in one of the oldest stadiums in the NFL. In fact, discounting the renovated Lambeau and Solider Fields, California has the oldest stadiums in the league--San Francisco's Candlestick Park opened in 1960 (although the 49ers didn't move in until '71), the Oakland Coliseum (1966), and San Diego's Qualcomm Stadium (1967). The NFL stated that San Diego will never host another Super Bowl game until a new stadium, and a renovated stadium wouldn't be suffice. There's really no public money available in San Diego or statewide, plus after the controversy of the Padres' Petco Park, the taxpayers might still be leery of funding another $400 million-plus stadium.

The potential NFL stadium in the L.A. suburbs that I mentioned earlier would between 75,000 and 80,000 people, and its location is pretty central to the southern and eastern suburban areas (such as Orange, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties). It would be location near the intersections of two highways and there's a commuter rail station adjacent to the stadium site. If it won't the Chargers won't be up here, could be the Jaguars or even the Vikings (even though I could never see really leave Minnesota).

We all know Buffalo will be the next team that moves when the owner either sells the team or passes on.

 

[mleach]

We all know Buffalo will be the next team that moves when the owner either sells the team or passes on.

If the Buffalo Bills do move, wonder what are the odds of that team moving to Toronto? Of course Toronto has the CFL but doesn't the Bills already have a large following there? Besides if Toronto has no problem supporting the MLB & NBA why not the NFL?

 

[ixnay]

Just a suggestion--IIRC the NFL had set a goal of returning a team to Los Angeles by 2012 (unless that's just an urban legend).

Well, at last year's "State of the League" press confab on Super Bowl Friday, Mr. Goodell was asked something akin by one of the L.A. reporters (he's asked something about L.A.'s NFL chances every year, as was Tagliabue before him), something along the lines of, "Los Angeles was the site of Super Bowl I. Will it be the site of Super Bowl L, or is that contingent upon L.A. getting a team?"

The possibility of the Bolts bolting to L.A. was mentioned on this thread. I doubt if it will happen, but you may recall that the Chargers did indeed call Los Angeles home in their maiden season (1960, when they won the AFL West with Jack Kemp at QB and lost the championship to the Houston Oilers [same thing happened again in 1961, after the Bolts moved to S.D.]) So the Chargers can ask Al Davis for advice. Of course, if Davis wants to return HIS team to L.A....

ixnay

 

[KeithE4]

So the Chargers can ask Al Davis for advice. Of course, if Davis wants to return HIS team to L.A....

Bank on The Undead to sue the pants off the NFL if any AFC team tries to move to LA. He claims his Raiders still own territorial rights to the LA market (then why doesn't the league consider them a Raider secondary market?).

I hope he does sue. He'll lose big-time. He can no more keep another team out of LA than the Irsays could keep Art Modell from moving the (old) Browns to the Colts' former home in Baltimore even if they'd wanted to.

 

[BRNout]

We all know Buffalo will be the next team that moves when the owner either sells the team or passes on.

If the Buffalo Bills do move, wonder what are the odds of that team moving to Toronto? Of course Toronto has the CFL but doesn't the Bills already have a large following there? Besides if Toronto has no problem supporting the MLB & NBA why not the NFL?

The NFL scheduling a Bills "home game" in TO last year was the first little experiment to see if such a thing was possible. I'm sure they're thinking about it. One of their stated goals is to build an international following. Moving the Bills from Buffalo to Toronto would be a first step. It's certainly plausible - Toronto is a huge and very wealthy metropolis and a Toronto team can draw a national following (as the Jays do). Moving there opens the door to all of Canada and not just Toronto. I'm sure the NFL is aware of this.

As for the Jags, if they move it could be to LA or it could also be to a place like Monterrey or Mexico City. The NFL is quite interested in having a presence in Mexico. They see it as a great growth opportunity. Games they've played in Mexico City have generated huge crowds. I specifically mentioned Monterrey and Mexico City because those are the two most prosperous metros in the country and the only ones likely to generate enough revenue to make such an idea viable.