Photo

Jacksonville Jaguars


  • Please log in to reply
291 replies to this topic

#1 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,474 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 30 May 2012 - 09:44 PM

http://profootballta... ... ult-claim/

This is a very odd story. Odd and confusing.

#2 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 30 May 2012 - 11:25 PM

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/05/30/khan-accuses-jacksonville-of-violating-lease-seeks-swift-resolution-of-default-claim/

This is a very odd story. Odd and confusing.

Bravo Mr. Tagliabue. Fine choice you made there.
  • Nuclear Dish likes this

#3 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 31 May 2012 - 02:53 PM

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/05/30/khan-accuses-jacksonville-of-violating-lease-seeks-swift-resolution-of-default-claim/

This is a very odd story. Odd and confusing.

Bravo Mr. Tagliabue. Fine choice you made there.

That's really easy to say in hindsight. If the Jaguars had continued their early progress, it could be like the NFL's version of Oklahoma City(Green Bay is sort of that).

Tagliabue's biggest mistake by far was letting two teams leaving LA and if this continues, look like they'll get this one.
@levineps

#4 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,474 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 31 May 2012 - 03:45 PM

That's really easy to say in hindsight. If the Jaguars had continued their early progress, it could be like the NFL's version of Oklahoma City(Green Bay is sort of that).

Tagliabue's biggest mistake by far was letting two teams leaving LA and if this continues, look like they'll get this one.


On the one hand, you're right. Jacksonville did a really nice job building their franchise and their fanbase. However, it really is a small city (even though the city population is ~200K more than Baltimore, the metro population is ~1.4M less), and the franchise fell into mediocrity after the Brunell years.

On the other hand, Baltimore and St. Louis should have won the franchises. If so, the Rams probably don't leave Los Angeles and the Browns may not have left Cleveland, ridding the NFL of two embarrassments.

Also, the success of Oklahoma City looks good now, but what happens when that team stinks?

#5 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 31 May 2012 - 04:06 PM

That's really easy to say in hindsight. If the Jaguars had continued their early progress, it could be like the NFL's version of Oklahoma City(Green Bay is sort of that).

Tagliabue's biggest mistake by far was letting two teams leaving LA and if this continues, look like they'll get this one.


On the one hand, you're right. Jacksonville did a really nice job building their franchise and their fanbase. However, it really is a small city (even though the city population is ~200K more than Baltimore, the metro population is ~1.4M less), and the franchise fell into mediocrity after the Brunell years.

On the other hand, Baltimore and St. Louis should have won the franchises. If so, the Rams probably don't leave Los Angeles and the Browns may not have left Cleveland, ridding the NFL of two embarrassments.

Also, the success of Oklahoma City looks good now, but what happens when that team stinks?

When the Colts left, they were a floundering franchise, they drew really lousy to the final game. I know, I know, they would've been well supported if the product on the field was good... yeah that's what they all say and they did fail to sell out a playoff game in the late 70s.

Modell would've left for Jacksonville or Charlotte(or another city). I think in Baltimore case, it took losing the Colts to appreciate a new franchise.

A lot of "ifs" but I do agree with you on OKC, logic points to Seattle being the better market.
@levineps

#6 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,474 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 31 May 2012 - 05:51 PM

When the Colts left, they were a floundering franchise, they drew really lousy to the final game. I know, I know, they would've been well supported if the product on the field was good... yeah that's what they all say and they did fail to sell out a playoff game in the late 70s.


Hold on. The Colts were a foundering franchise because their owner ran the team into the ground, acted like a complete buffoon at every opportunity, and when the fans started to get fed up openly shopped the team. Nothing that Peter Angelos has done to the Orioles over the years remotely compares to the active destruction of a franchise that Bob Irsay performed for a decade.

Between the stadium plan, the Colts Band, the Hurricane Bowl, and the multiple flirtations with teams post-1984, plus the history with the Colts, it was obvious that Baltimore could and would support a team that wasn't run by a raging a------. The CFL team drove that point home even more, which is why Modell decided to move to Baltimore in the first place.
  • Dr. FLK likes this

#7 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 117,849 posts

Posted 31 May 2012 - 06:18 PM

When the Colts left, they were a floundering franchise, they drew really lousy to the final game. I know, I know, they would've been well supported if the product on the field was good... yeah that's what they all say and they did fail to sell out a playoff game in the late 70s.

Modell would've left for Jacksonville or Charlotte(or another city). I think in Baltimore case, it took losing the Colts to appreciate a new franchise. A lot of "ifs" but I do agree with you on OKC, logic points to Seattle being the better market.


It did not take losing the Colts for Baltimore to appreciate the NFL. It did take the ridiculous antics of Irsay, to set into motion the events that cause the Colts to leave.

#8 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 31 May 2012 - 11:14 PM


When the Colts left, they were a floundering franchise, they drew really lousy to the final game. I know, I know, they would've been well supported if the product on the field was good... yeah that's what they all say and they did fail to sell out a playoff game in the late 70s.

Modell would've left for Jacksonville or Charlotte(or another city). I think in Baltimore case, it took losing the Colts to appreciate a new franchise. A lot of "ifs" but I do agree with you on OKC, logic points to Seattle being the better market.


It did not take losing the Colts for Baltimore to appreciate the NFL. It did take the ridiculous antics of Irsay, to set into motion the events that cause the Colts to leave.

The attendance was pretty bad at the end, there's no two ways about it. Bad ownership always seems to be the root of that -- it's really another excuse. It's like if you say the Orioles have great fans, but a terrible owner, so that's why attendance is low. It may be true and all, but it's true about many teams and an excuse.
@levineps

#9 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 31 May 2012 - 11:15 PM



It did not take losing the Colts for Baltimore to appreciate the NFL. It did take the ridiculous antics of Irsay, to set into motion the events that cause the Colts to leave.

The attendance was pretty bad at the end, there's no two ways about it. Bad ownership always seems to be the root of that -- it's really another excuse. It's like if you say the Orioles have great fans, but a terrible owner, so that's why attendance is low. It may be true and all, but it's true about many teams and an excuse.

Look at Houston, they drew likewise dreadfully, but have sold out every game as the Texans, is that all ownership there?
@levineps

#10 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 117,849 posts

Posted 31 May 2012 - 11:16 PM

The attendance was pretty bad at the end, there's no two ways about it. Bad ownership always seems to be the root of that -- it's really another excuse. It's like if you say the Orioles have great fans, but a terrible owner, so that's why attendance is low. It may be true and all, but it's true about many teams and an excuse.


When you have an alcoholic owner making in-game decisions, and acting irrationally - hurting the product on and off the field - I don't know how you can blame the fan-base for not supporting that product.

#11 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 31 May 2012 - 11:21 PM


The attendance was pretty bad at the end, there's no two ways about it. Bad ownership always seems to be the root of that -- it's really another excuse. It's like if you say the Orioles have great fans, but a terrible owner, so that's why attendance is low. It may be true and all, but it's true about many teams and an excuse.


When you have an alcoholic owner making in-game decisions, and acting irrationally - hurting the product on and off the field - I don't know how you can blame the fan-base for not supporting that product.

The fans stopped showing up. I always like to say regarding owners, when this comes up with fans demanding Angelos sell the team(and no he's not as irrational as Irsay), you can't fire your boss. The owners can and have held cities hostage before it's an unfortunate part of sports. We discussed with the Vikings case, have to give into those fat cats sometimes or risk losing a team.
@levineps

#12 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 31 May 2012 - 11:23 PM

By the way I knew when I argued these points, I knew I would be in the minority, knowing the sensitivity of this issue. But I have no problem speaking my mind.
@levineps

#13 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 117,849 posts

Posted 01 June 2012 - 07:20 AM

By the way I knew when I argued these points, I knew I would be in the minority, knowing the sensitivity of this issue. But I have no problem speaking my mind.


You are of course entitled to have a dissenting opinion Madison, we encourage you to express it when you do.

I think it is reasonable to come to the bottom-line conclusion of 'the fans stopped showing up' and that is what cost Baltimore the Colts. No problem with that at all.

However, saying that decline in attendance was not directly attributable to Irsay; and calling that an excuse, seems odd to me.

#14 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 01 June 2012 - 09:01 AM

By the way I knew when I argued these points, I knew I would be in the minority, knowing the sensitivity of this issue. But I have no problem speaking my mind.


You are of course entitled to have a dissenting opinion Madison, we encourage you to express it when you do.

I think it is reasonable to come to the bottom-line conclusion of 'the fans stopped showing up' and that is what cost Baltimore the Colts. No problem with that at all.

However, saying that decline in attendance was not directly attributable to Irsay; and calling that an excuse, seems odd to me.


I never said the decline in attendance was not directly attributable to Irsay, it clearly was, but that's true with many owners, this wasn't the first or last case. I'm sure the fans in Oakland (not sure how Mark Davis will do) and Cincinnati, among other cities would tell you they are "loyal fans" but that ownership is the root of the problem on why fans have stopped "showing up." Since there's revenue sharing in the NFL, which gives Green Bay the same TV revenue as the Giants; fair or unfair, attendance matters more than other sports with the 60/40 split(home/road).
@levineps

#15 Adam Wolff

Adam Wolff

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,280 posts
  • LocationWaynesboro, PA

Posted 20 June 2012 - 12:47 PM

Living in Jacksonville now, at least not from what I can tell, nobody here cares about the team. The NFL plays second fiddle to the Florida-Georgia college football rivalry down here, and really to SEC football in general. I'm sure if the team was better they could garner some more support, but typically everyone I have met says, 'Well, my favorite team is so and so, but I'll casually root for the Jags'. They're just not a very big deal around here.

@AdamWolff


 


#16 Mike B

Mike B

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,210 posts
  • LocationTowson Md.

Posted 22 June 2012 - 12:46 PM

That's really easy to say in hindsight. If the Jaguars had continued their early progress, it could be like the NFL's version of Oklahoma City(Green Bay is sort of that).

Tagliabue's biggest mistake by far was letting two teams leaving LA and if this continues, look like they'll get this one.



Respectfully disagree. There was plenty of doubt at the time about Jax as a viable location. At one point as I recall jacksonville was considered out of the mix but when St. Louis was not ready for the teaqm Tags had to go to plan B to keep Baltimore out. Jax was then ushered back into the process and was given the second franchise. Tagliabue should have had visited the museum himself and not screwed Baltimore. That said we got the Ravens and got Ozzie and what has become a model franchise.
@mikeghg

#17 Chris B

Chris B

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 21,377 posts
  • LocationBaltimore, MD

Posted 22 June 2012 - 01:14 PM

So let's say this whole thing comes to fruition and the Jags move. The obvious choice is Los Angeles.

What would be the second or third option cities for the next NFL franchise/relocation?

#18 NewMarketSean

NewMarketSean

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,978 posts

Posted 22 June 2012 - 01:24 PM

San Antonio, Oklahoma City, Las Vegas.
I never had friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?

#19 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 22 June 2012 - 01:59 PM

San Antonio, Oklahoma City, Las Vegas.

I think San Antonio is the most logical spot of those, given that they already have a facility in place and had a test run with the Saints.

I think Oklahoma City is hurt for two reasons. First, one of the same reason, pro football isn't working in Jacksonville, the collegiate game is bigger. Second, can they really support two major pro sports teams? You would have to think the Thunder wouldn't be thrilled with this move(not that they can block it).

Vegas is hurt be the fact, it's Vegas. And the reason it's been passed over every other time this topic comes up. The leagues are bit hypocritical in this aspect, but it poses an image problem.

I'm trying to think of any other cities besides Toronto(the Bills relocating there would make the most sense), doubt they get a team as long as Buffalo stays in place. Portland, a long shot but I'm just throwing that out there. Salt Lake City would even make less sense. Anyone else think of another one?
@levineps

#20 Chris B

Chris B

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 21,377 posts
  • LocationBaltimore, MD

Posted 22 June 2012 - 02:05 PM

I think between you and NMS, you've named the obvious candidates.

Many years down the road, I'm sure Goodell is thinking internationally. Toronto of course, but also maybe Mexico City or London. I just don't know if the citizens would be interested in American football. They certainly have the populations and media markets necessary, though.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners