Nfl in okc

[ck76]

Man it would be awesome,but we all know jerry jones would never allow for that to happen....

[dmoor82]

Not going to happen for decades upon decades,OKC just doesnt have The population base to support The NFL or the base to fill up an NFL stadium and then fill up OU's stadium all in one weekend!

[venture]

Be happy with the NBA and the amazing college schools we have here. The more people try to make us like a major city, the more this city will become like a major city with all the "fun" extras. Thankfully for those that want to live in a city with several major league teams can take a 2-3 hour drive south and move to Dallas.

[MustangGT]

Never happen. Too few people/companies with enough money to make it a going operation.

[Soonerus]

OKC cannot support an NFL team but can pack 85,000 plus for decades in Norman ??? Right, OKC could easily support an NFL team and would !!!

[ljbab728]

OKC cannot support an NFL team but can pack 85,000 plus for decades in Norman ??? Right, OKC could easily support an NFL team and would !!!

That's hardly on the same economic level. It doesn't equate. Filling a stadium is not all that it takes for an NFL team to be successful.

[MustangGT]

OKC cannot support an NFL team but can pack 85,000 plus for decades in Norman ??? Right, OKC could easily support an NFL team and would !!!

Not even apples and oranges. The cost structure is TOTALLY different. Kinda like making the mistake of comparing state fairgrounds dirt track racing and NASCAR. No legitimate comparision.

[Soonerus]

Ok, Green Bay can support an NFL team and not OKC, I believe not...NFL would be a huge success in OKC despite the doubting Thomas's...

[venture]

Ok, Green Bay can support an NFL team and not OKC, I believe not...NFL would be a huge success in OKC despite the doubting Thomas's...

Do you even know the background about the Packers? I would suggest researching how that community manages their team compared to other NFL cities. It is a completely different operation up there when compared to other NFL cities.

NFL would be a huge success at the expense of everything else. It is great to want big things for our community, but enough is enough. The minute we start adding additional professional sports team, is the minute they start eating into each others income.

[Laramie]

Ok, Green Bay can support an NFL team and not OKC, I believe not...NFL would be a huge success in OKC despite the doubting Thomas's...

So true, continue to believe, everybody thinks that the NFL couldn't survive in OKC. It's surviving in New Orleans where the per capita income is slightly higher; yet comparable to that in OKC in demographics where OKC is larger in Population, TV Households and could find ownership investors. Oklahoma City has more Fortune 500 companies than New Orleans. The NFL is surviving in Jacksonville, FL.

I remember the year we were awarded the Olympic Festival in 1989. We orginially were trying to land a World's Fair. Oklahomans were so misinformed; they thought that our current 400 acres at Fair Park wasn't big enough to host an event of that magnitude. Knoxville, TN's World's Fair was held on 66 acres. Had we hosted the World's Fair in 1989, it would have been held on the largest acerage for any World's Fair. We assume that Oklahoma is too small for anything big without doing some research. We are our own worst enemies when it comes to selling and promoting our city and state.

Many thought that Oklahoma City would never get an NBA or NHL franchise and if we did--we couldn't support. Those days are the kind we need to put behind us. It's not a pipedream--it can become reality with a chance of materializing in seven to ten years if we have a facility financed or in place.

Think big, plan for the next level.

I said this on several forums in 1996 that OKC would get an NHL or NBA franchise with in the next decade and I was hearing these same ole stale comments then, that I am hearing now...

[venture]

I said this on several forums in 1996 that OKC would get an NHL or NBA franchise with in the next decade and I was hearing these same ole stale comments then, that I am hearing now...

An NBA or NHL franchise is much easier to support than an NFL team. Apples and oranges. Why is it so hard to understand that? Yes it would be amazing to get a large franchise like that...but OKC has tons of growing up to do first.

[Laramie]

An NBA or NHL franchise is much easier to support than an NFL team. Apples and oranges. Why is it so hard to understand that? Yes it would be amazing to get a large franchise like that...but OKC has tons of growing up to do first.

What is so difficult for you to understand about 2017-2020(?):
Time will tell! I'm not taking this personal; I gave my opinion and you gave yours! Thank you!

[MustangGT]

Exactely the point venture79. Soonerus the number of dollars to support the NFL and other things is pretty finite and fixed. It is not unlimited. When you look at Green Bay they have the packers and NOT MUCH ELSE of a civic/cultural nature. They have all their eggs in ONE basket. Again you are making the mistake of comparing two things that are not even similiar. Apples vs Oranges. That is a stupid way for OKC to do business.

[bluedogok]

Green Bay is supported by all of Wisconsin and Milwaukee, they are also pretty much one of the founding members of the NFL and therefore hold a special place in the league. The fact that it is a community owned team (and the only one allowed to be by league rules) keeps them in Green Bay and was incorporated that way in 1923 and grandfathered into the NFL as the only team not majority owned by a single individual. If they had been owned in the conventional way more than likely they would have relocated in the 70-80's when they were bad, in any other market attendance would've probably declined to the point where they would have moved. In fact their games were split between Green Bay and Milwaukee until Miller Park was built to replace the old Milwaukee Stadium in 1995.

Green Bay and Buffalo would never have a chance to get an expansion franchise or relocation in the modern NFL, the only reason why they have them is because of the time they got teams. The Packers have been there since 1921 (my grandfather played for them in the 40') and Buffalo was one of the original AFL franchises. At the time (1959) Buffalo was a major industrial city and one of the more populous cities in the country (ranked 20th).

The NFL is driven by television money and the desire is to locate in the largest TV markets to maximize ad revenue even though it is truly a national sport now that goes well beyond MSA/TV market boundaries. The NFL has never hidden that fact and the main reason why they want a team in LA, the second largest television market. The other league owners would probably block a team moving to OKC because of television market size. The sad fact is that many advertisers only look at those numbers, not a "catchment" area which would move OKC up a little on the list after some of the other areas that are relatively closed to each other would be combined. There also isn't the corporate infrastructure in OKC to be able to support two major league franchises, especially one with the expenses of NFL football. Many multi-team markets are struggling to support the teams they do have, KC struggles some with both the Chiefs and Royals because of corporate defections over the years. Look into ticket and suite price differences between the Dallas Cowboys (pretty much at the high end of the NFL) and what OU tickets/suites cost. The per ticket cost at OU is a fraction of Dallas and when you add up the difference between 6-7 home games versus 10 home games (8 regular season, 2 preseason) PLUS the personal seat licenses that are required at most stadiums the cost differential is staggering. Even a lower cost ticket like KC offers is about the cost of a comparable OU ticket and donation.

The other sports are more dependent upon that and their regional sports network contracts, especially baseball with limited revenue sharing through the player payroll luxury tax. There is a reason why teams like the Yankees and Red Sox have the payrolls they do, in the case of the Yankees and Red Sox they own the RSN's that broadcast their games so they receive all ad revenues from those networks. The Phillies and Giants have very lucrative contracts with their RSN's which allow them to be in the upper echelon of payrolls.

I think it could be successful in terms of attendance, I don't think it could be very successful in the "other revenues" that the teams actually live on. The premium items are what makes the difference in a successful franchise and I don't think that OKC has enough of the types of buyers willing to pay for the premium level of everything that the teams need to survive. not a knock on OKC, I don't think San Antonio or Austin could support an NFL team much better even though DKR is over 100,000 seats. As MustangGT posted, they are completely different cost structures and really business worlds.

[betts]

Green Bay is supported by all of Wisconsin and Milwaukee, they are also pretty much one of the founding members of the NFL and therefore hold a special place in the league. The fact that it is a community owned team (and the only one allowed to be by league rules) keeps them in Green Bay and was incorporated that way in 1923 and grandfathered into the NFL as the only team not majority owned by a single individual. If they had been owned in the conventional way more than likely they would have relocated in the 70-80's when they were bad, in any other market attendance would've probably declined to the point where they would have moved. In fact their games were split between Green Bay and Milwaukee until Miller Park was built to replace the old Milwaukee Stadium in 1995.

Green Bay and Buffalo would never have a chance to get an expansion franchise or relocation in the modern NFL, the only reason why they have them is because of the time they got teams. The Packers have been there since 1921 (my grandfather played for them in the 40') and Buffalo was one of the original AFL franchises. At the time (1959) Buffalo was a major industrial city and one of the more populous cities in the country (ranked 20th).

The NFL is driven by television money and the desire is to locate in the largest TV markets to maximize ad revenue even though it is truly a national sport now that goes well beyond MSA/TV market boundaries. The NFL has never hidden that fact and the main reason why they want a team in LA, the second largest television market. The other league owners would probably block a team moving to OKC because of television market size. The sad fact is that many advertisers only look at those numbers, not a "catchment" area which would move OKC up a little on the list after some of the other areas that are relatively closed to each other would be combined. There also isn't the corporate infrastructure in OKC to be able to support two major league franchises, especially one with the expenses of NFL football. Many multi-team markets are struggling to support the teams they do have, KC struggles some with both the Chiefs and Royals because of corporate defections over the years. Look into ticket and suite price differences between the Dallas Cowboys (pretty much at the high end of the NFL) and what OU tickets/suites cost. The per ticket cost at OU is a fraction of Dallas and when you add up the difference between 6-7 home games versus 10 home games (8 regular season, 2 preseason) PLUS the personal seat licenses that are required at most stadiums the cost differential is staggering. Even a lower cost ticket like KC offers is about the cost of a comparable OU ticket and donation.

The other sports are more dependent upon that and their regional sports network contracts, especially baseball with limited revenue sharing through the player payroll luxury tax. There is a reason why teams like the Yankees and Red Sox have the payrolls they do, in the case of the Yankees and Red Sox they own the RSN's that broadcast their games so they receive all ad revenues from those networks. The Phillies and Giants have very lucrative contracts with their RSN's which allow them to be in the upper echelon of payrolls.

I think it could be successful in terms of attendance, I don't think it could be very successful in the "other revenues" that the teams actually live on. The premium items are what makes the difference in a successful franchise and I don't think that OKC has enough of the types of buyers willing to pay for the premium level of everything that the teams need to survive. not a knock on OKC, I don't think San Antonio or Austin could support an NFL team much better even though DKR is over 100,000 seats. As MustangGT posted, they are completely different cost structures and really business worlds.

Revenue sharing in the NFL is far better than the NBA, and the television contract is far more lucrative. That's why smaller cities can support the NFL. While I see your point, I don't see any of them as insurmountable obstacles, although I'm not sure who lives here who would spend the money to buy a team. What I do, however, see as an obstacle is the fact that there are bigger cities than OKC without NFL teams. Los Angeles and Portland are two of them, San Antonio/Austin is another direct competitor. Unless there were at least four teams looking to move, I don't think it will happen. And I am quite sure expansion is over for the forseeable future.

[Laramie]

Same ole nay-sayer crap I heard on the boards all the time--"Oklahoma will never get an NFL team." In the early 1990s, the NBA would never come to Oklahoma. THUNDER! THUNDER! THUNDER!

Wake up people, get your feet out the sand and quit sitting on your own face; you might accidentally expell gas!

What's Jerry Jones got to do with it? The same was said about Mark Cuban.

Have a facility plan or a facility in place and your chances of getting an NFL franchise just might increase.

Look at Indianapolis, Nashville & Jacksonville; they either had a facility or a planned facility in place. Oklahoma City has bigger advantages than those cities as far as facilities are concerned--we're on a MAPS roll. 2017 MAPS IV will include some king of stadium; do we think BIG or small?

You want an NFL franchise(?); or do you want to keep supporting Dallas, Kansas City, St. Louis, Denver or Houston's teams and their economies.

[BB37]

You want an NFL franchise(?); or do you want to keep supporting Dallas, Kansas City, St. Louis, Denver or Houston's teams and their economies.

I don't support any of them now, so what's your point?

[dmoor82]

The NBA is NOT the NFL,let's set that straight!Indy and Nashville have more of a population base to draw from not only in their metro's but in their regions,and both these metro's have a much higher GDP than OKC and would help for corporate sponsers,now Jacksonville is the odd ball out and while it has a larger city and metro population it is closer to OKC's,but Jacksonvilles decline in attendance and low media market is hurting it and may ultimately end up in LA.I say that "never" is too strong of a word but I think OKC could support an NFL franchise in about 20-30 years,then our population and media markets will be much larger but for now OKC cannot support an NFL franchise.Let's just focus on the one we allready have!

[SoonerBoy18]

It would be awsome to have an NFL team in Oklahoma, Im sure it will happen in like 3 decades from now or when ever, everybody knows Oklahomans love football. I think we can sell out every game night, just think of OU and OSU combined, The entire State would support it. Thats why Nebraska's college stadium is the way it is because the entire state loves them huskers.

[Just the facts]

The NFL in OKC will have all the excitement and drama of the NFL in Atlanta. Both are college football cities and it doesn't matter how many millions of people you have. Atlanta has 3 kinds of sports fans: Georgia, Gerogia Tech, and Braves - in that order. OKC has OU, Thunder, and OSU - and probably in that order.

[SoonerDave]

I'm stunned at the number of people who don't understand some basic facts about economics and population.

Let's get the basics out of the way. Oklahoma City cannot support an NFL franchise. Period. Why?

First, the underlying costs for establishing/transferring/getting (fill in your favorite word) an NFL franchise are on the order of $1 billion. We have some very nice emerging industrial/corporate presence in this city, and they're great for supporting the NBA, but don't have that kind of scratch.

Second, population is ABSOLUTELY a vital element of the equation, because that's your fan base. You have to do the math that estimates how much discretionary income people have to spend on things like football tickets - and, mind you, not just six or seven home games a year, but a minimum of ten, not including playoffs. Eight regular season games, plus (generally) two home pre-season games which virtually every franchise in the league forces you to purchase as part of a season ticket package. Given that the average NFL ticket price is around $100-$125, that means a pair of season tickets is going to run right at $2500 - to say nothing of parking, and then concessions that will be priced at a level to make OU home games look like fast-food prices.

Third, we have no facility. An NFL-caliber facility hosting a minimum of 60-65K people plus luxury suites is going to be - again - a venture on the order of $1 billion, and guess who's going to get hit up to finance it - OKC taxpayers. Most people here don't realize we got the current arena on the drastically cheap, and the fact that it's completely paid for is a huge advantage in landing our NBA team. But there's no way on earth anyone can front that kind of money when Jerry World is three hours away. You think OKC folks are prime for a MAPS 4, 5, or 6 to pay for an NFL football stadium? Not hardly. And, no, we can't use OU or OSU's stadiums because you can't sell beer at either location, and the NFL and beer are married like white on a polar bear.

There was a story a few weeks ago about a city that sold bonds and raised various taxes to build a new stadium, and the project has turned sour for the city with huge debt and the slow economy drying up revenues. It was a model of what not to do. In a word, it was a mess.

Believe me, the notion of the NFL in OKC is a fun and dreamy prospect. I don't like to shoot down the idea. But I'm also compelled to view such a project with reality, and the reality is that our fandom for OU and OSU at the college level does not, in any way, shape, or form, translate into NFL-caliber financial support. It just isn't going to happen.

[Laramie]

I'm stunned at the number of people who don't understand some basic facts about economics and population.

Let's get the basics out of the way. Oklahoma City cannot support an NFL franchise. Period. Why?

First, the underlying costs for establishing/transferring/getting (fill in your favorite word) an NFL franchise are on the order of $1 billion. We have some very nice emerging industrial/corporate presence in this city, and they're great for supporting the NBA, but don't have that kind of scratch.

Second, population is ABSOLUTELY a vital element of the equation, because that's your fan base. You have to do the math that estimates how much discretionary income people have to spend on things like football tickets - and, mind you, not just six or seven home games a year, but a minimum of ten, not including playoffs. Eight regular season games, plus (generally) two home pre-season games which virtually every franchise in the league forces you to purchase as part of a season ticket package. Given that the average NFL ticket price is around $100-$125, that means a pair of season tickets is going to run right at $2500 - to say nothing of parking, and then concessions that will be priced at a level to make OU home games look like fast-food prices.

Third, we have no facility. An NFL-caliber facility hosting a minimum of 60-65K people plus luxury suites is going to be - again - a venture on the order of $1 billion, and guess who's going to get hit up to finance it - OKC taxpayers. Most people here don't realize we got the current arena on the drastically cheap, and the fact that it's completely paid for is a huge advantage in landing our NBA team. But there's no way on earth anyone can front that kind of money when Jerry World is three hours away. You think OKC folks are prime for a MAPS 4, 5, or 6 to pay for an NFL football stadium? Not hardly. And, no, we can't use OU or OSU's stadiums because you can't sell beer at either location, and the NFL and beer are married like white on a polar bear.

There was a story a few weeks ago about a city that sold bonds and raised various taxes to build a new stadium, and the project has turned sour for the city with huge debt and the slow economy drying up revenues. It was a model of what not to do. In a word, it was a mess.

Believe me, the notion of the NFL in OKC is a fun and dreamy prospect. I don't like to shoot down the idea. But I'm also compelled to view such a project with reality, and the reality is that our fandom for OU and OSU at the college level does not, in any way, shape, or form, translate into NFL-caliber financial support. It just isn't going to happen.

Good point, Sooner Dave.

[venture]

Fantasy and wishful thinking sometimes cloud judgement and hard realities of something as loft as this. Oklahoma is just not that big of a state or that rich of a state.

[Okie Yorker]

I think it would fly! Would take a lot of infrastructure changes to build a stadium, etc., however, think about places like Kansas City (which has two pro franchises) or Buffalo (which is a dying rust belt city). KC is not far off in its demographic from OKC and Buffalo, in my opinion, is way behind OKC. OKC has the benefit of a close proximity to Tulsa & Wichita that it could draw off of for attendance & fan support also. Dallas, of course, would have major opposition to this as it would cut into their fan base.

[SoonerDave]

I think it would fly! Would take a lot of infrastructure changes to build a stadium, etc., however, think about places like Kansas City (which has two pro franchises) or Buffalo (which is a dying rust belt city). KC is not far off in its demographic from OKC and Buffalo, in my opinion, is way behind OKC. OKC has the benefit of a close proximity to Tulsa & Wichita that it could draw off of for attendance & fan support also. Dallas, of course, would have major opposition to this as it would cut into their fan base.

Buffalo is one of those old-timer franchises that would simply not exist were it granted under contemporary terms. Kansas City's core population is approx 485,000, with a greater metropolitan count of 2.1 million. Oklahoma City's core population is slightly higher (580,000), but its core metropolitan population is barely half that of KC at 1.2 million. That gives KC a huge built-in advantage for the support of one or more pro sports franchises.

I read somewhere in a discussion about growing cities that those who would aspire to have professional sports can generally estimate that they can support one pro franchise per 1 million in area population - that lines up perfectly with KC and OKC; KC at 2 million with 2 franchises, OKC at just over 1 million with 1 franchise.

Again, even if we had a franchise, we have no place to put them. How do we pay for a $1B stadium?