Jacksonville Jags Sold

[Just the facts]

While sitting in a restaurant tonight I found out the Jags were sold today. I overheard two guys speculating that they were moving to OKC. Of course, once I heard OKC mentioned it perked my interest. They based their prediction on the logical answer to a simple question; if you were going to relocate a team to any other city in the US (other than LA which was ruled out by ESPN) what city would you move them to? Only one city made their list - OKC.

[MDot]

I read that they were staying in Jacksonville so I don't know. I don't see why they'd move here when we don't even have a stadium.

[Just the facts]

They aren't staying in Jacksonville - I promise you that. Jacksonville is a dead-end market and the NFL should have never expanded there in the first place. We still have to sell 9,000 tickets to the Monday night game or it will be blacked out locally. How sad is it that Jax can't even sell enough tickets for Monday Night Football? Jax is only getting about 40,000 people per game.

The team was sold for one reason - they have to move and Weaver said he wouldn't be the one to do it.

http://www.news4jax.com/news/Goodell...z/-/index.html

Commissioner Roger Goodell says he's had several talks with Jaguars owner Wayne Weaver about the ongoing issue. The Jaguars often played before a half-filled stadium this season, and Goodell says with attendance around 40,000 per game, "you can't continue to have an NFL franchise."

To get out of the contract with the City the Jags have to lose money 3 years in a row. I think they have done that after this season.

[MDot]

That's just what I heard, that they were staying in Jacksonville, but I don't see them staying in Jacksonville either. I mean Oklahoma City does seem like one of the more expectable choices outside of Los Angeles, and I know I'm beating a dead horse but, I still don't think we're big enough to support the Jags any better than Jacksonville has. The same thing was said about the Thunder before they came and look how that turned out but I honestly can't state any other reasons besides we don't have a stadium which can be built and we're not a big enough city to support an NFL team but we're still growing. I don't want to imagine something that is highly unlikely at this point.

[dankrutka]

OKC doesn't have the numbers or cash flow to merit a 2nd pro team. Not even close. How about... Hmmm, I don't know... Los Angeles!

[Laramie]

OKC doesn't have the numbers or cash flow to merit a 2nd pro team. Not even close. How about... Hmmm, I don't know... Los Angeles!

We currrently don't have the numbers or cash flow to merit a 2nd pro team; however, if the Jags were to relocate here--Gaylord Family Oklahoma Memorial Stadium would be a temporary option.

Our numbers and corporate support would be better than New Orleans, a city we currently mirror in population and media market.

The city would have to start making plans to build some type of NFL ready facility (something with a roof or retract-roof) for our weather. OU would not approve a temporary home for an NFL franchise without some type of assurance that a stadium would be built in OKC in the future. Gaylord Family Oklahoma Memorial Stadium seats approximately 85,000 - that's 15,000-seats above the 70,000-seat NFL average.

We would need to build a facility capable of seating 70,000 - 75,000.

New Orleans currently supports the NFL and NBA. Our market is growing and much stronger; however, you would have to convert some college fans to the NFL product.

We did it with NCAA & minor league basketball; this would be much easier to do with major professional football.

Texas already has two NFL franchises; San Antonio would be a big risk.

Omaha is too small to surport an NFL franchise and wouldn't have the backing of the city or voters to build an NFL stadium.

Norfolk, Virginia Beach & Hampton Roads (Tidewater area) would be a big risk and I don't think they could get a stadium built.

Portland voters would never approve a stadium. Paul Allen recently sold the Portland Rose Garden; I'm sure he would want to incur the debts of an NFL stadium in Portland.

California is in debt and Los Angeles is having a problem getting stadium financing.

MLB, NFL, NBA & NHL would never approve Las Vegas because of the GAMBLING.

Orlando is too close to Tampa-St. Petersburg to place an NFL franchise.

Columbus would be a nice market; however, with team in Cleveland and Cincinnati--it's not going to happen.

Oklahoma City is growing and by 2015 our numbers will be even stronger. This is a can-do city and in my estimation, OKC is primed for relocation. The question remains, could we support OU football, NFL footbal and NBA basketball? Our growth is moderate and by 2020 at the rate we are growing, we could have 1.6 -1.8 million in our metro area by 2020.

I personally think that markets like Los Angeles & Portland would be much more attractive than OKC; however, I do feel that OKC would get the stadium completed before a city like Portland.

[Just the facts]

Actual relocation withstanding, my main point was that two random guys in Philadelphia picked OKC based on what they know of OKC. So for all those self-loathing Oklahoman's out there, they can stop worrying about what the rest of the country thinks of OKC.

Also, for some reason ESPN thinks LA is out of the picture.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/72...-rio-sell-team

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- The Jacksonville Jaguars are headed in a completely new direction.

And Los Angeles doesn't appear to be the destination.

[mcca7596]

Actual relocation withstanding, my main point was that two random guys in Philadelphia picked OKC based on what they know of OKC. So for all those self-loathing Oklahoman's out there, they can stop worrying about what the rest of the country thinks of OKC.

Also, for some reason ESPN thinks LA is out of the picture.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/72...-rio-sell-team

The story says the new owner (Shadid Khan) is committed to Jacksonville and Chris Mortensen reported that the current owner said that Khan was looking for a house in Jacksonville. Of course, Clay Bennett said he was committed as well, so take Khan's sentiments for what their worth...

[MikeOKC]

Actual relocation withstanding, my main point was that two random guys in Philadelphia picked OKC based on what they know of OKC. So for all those self-loathing Oklahoman's out there, they can stop worrying about what the rest of the country thinks of OKC.

Also, for some reason ESPN thinks LA is out of the picture.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/72...-rio-sell-team

That was just a way to say they are committed to Jacksonville. The different direction is the new owner and they fired the head coach. In other words, "Calm down, LA...not yet." There's no way OKC would get an NFL team before Los Angeles. It is just assumed the next move will go to LA, with good reason - it will!

[rcjunkie]

That was just a way to say they are committed to Jacksonville. The different direction is the new owner and they fired the head coach. In other words, "Calm down, LA...not yet." There's no way OKC would get an NFL team before Los Angeles. It is just assumed the next move will go to LA, with good reason - it will!

So true, and remember how the Thunder owners were committed to staying in Seattle ?

[semisimple]

Outside of LA, San Antonio seems to be the best fit. SA alone has the population base needed to support a team, plus it will inevitably draw from the Austin market just an hour away. (Austin itself will probably never host an NFL team for a variety of reasons.) All told, the San Antonio-Austin region is home to over 4 million people with more than enough money to support a franchise.

[redrunner]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/4...and-team-names
This is over a year old but I think there are plenty of other reasonable choices besides OKC.

[Just the facts]

I could see SLC and maybe even Omaha before OKC.

Orlando, Sacramento, Portland, Las Vegas, Norfolk, Columbus - no way, and not because they aren't big enough, but because they are all too close to other NFL teams or have other issues,

[Just the facts]

1) Once again, I wasn't making the arguement that the Jags would come to OKC. I was making the point that the image of OKC has improved based on an unscientific sampling.

2) Of course the new owner is going to say he is committed to Jacksonville. The NFL still needs to approve the deal. But make no mistake, if Jax was a good market for the NFL the team wouldn't have been for sale to begin with. Plus, no requirement to keep the team in Jax was in the deal. This guy didn't pay $760 million to keep a team in a market that averages 40,000 people per game.

[Hawk405359]

LA already has trademarks on team names if they were to get another one, so I wouldn't count them out even if ESPN does

I think there are other cities that I'd pick before OKC. I don't know if the city has the population and money base to handle two sports teams right now. But I'd guess Vegas. They have the money, they have the population, they have no other pro teams.

The only flaws are the gambling, which is going to lead wary owners, and the fact that the economy hit them particularly hard. However, I think they'd be the ideal choice.

[MDot]

I've heard multiple times that there won't or atleast shouldn't be any professional sports teams in Vegas because of that very reason (gambling).

[Snowman]

I've heard multiple times that there won't or atleast shouldn't be any professional sports teams in Vegas because of that very reason (gambling).

I doubt that distance from Vegas is all that effective a deterrent.

[MikeLucky]

Coincidentally, there was a similar story out of... California, I think, where one of the top High School teams in the country was on a huge win streak but was having a close game. Their opponents had momentum, but IIRC, were behind. There was apparently a power outage to the stadium that postponed the game for quite a while, which killed the momentum.

However, I think the fact that it was a "meaningless college game" actually hurts the idea that that sort of thing would happen in a pro game in my mind, honestly. UNLV doesn't have a tenth of the eyes on it as an NFL game. The leash around a Vegas team would be so tight that you'd have to be Danny Ocean to really pull anything off. If that had happened during an NFL or NBA Playoff game, it'd be so huge that no one would be able to escape from under the microscope. And I would imagine that if any team was in Vegas, the league would figure out a way to add restrictions to the gambling on that team.

I understand why there are worries about gambling, I just think it's an obsolete argument in this day and age since you don't have to be anywhere near Vegas to bet on sports anymore. It'd be just as likely for someone at a Philadelphia game to try something than for someone in actual Vegas to do so.

I doubt that distance from Vegas is all that effective a deterrent.

You guys completely miss the point...

The problem with having the games in vegas isn't that it is where the gambling is happening... it's not the GAMBLERS that are running cars into power stations. The problem is that vegas is where the LINES ARE SET. The gamblers aren't the ones that are losing enough to alter the game, it's the HOUSE.

And if you think that somehow there aren't still shady things going on with the people that are running vegas... I'd like to talk to you about an EXCITING real estate opportunity in Arizona. lol

[MDot]

You guys completely miss the point...

The problem with having the games in vegas isn't that it is where the gambling is happening... it's not the GAMBLERS that are running cars into power stations. The problem is that vegas is where the LINES ARE SET. The gamblers aren't the ones that are losing enough to alter the game, it's the HOUSE.

And if you think that somehow there aren't still shady things going on with the people that are running vegas... I'd like to talk to you about an EXCITING real estate opportunity in Arizona. lol

That's what it was that I heard!!! Not because of gambling but because of the lines being set there. Easy to get confused.

[Hawk405359]

You guys completely miss the point...

The problem with having the games in vegas isn't that it is where the gambling is happening... it's not the GAMBLERS that are running cars into power stations. The problem is that vegas is where the LINES ARE SET. The gamblers aren't the ones that are losing enough to alter the game, it's the HOUSE.

And if you think that somehow there aren't still shady things going on with the people that are running vegas... I'd like to talk to you about an EXCITING real estate opportunity in Arizona. lol

Disagreeing with what you say is not the same thing as missing the point. We just believe that distance is no longer the barrier it used to be to have those concerns, and repeating the concerns over and over again isn't doing anything to actually counter that. If you disagree, very well, but no one here is oblivious to the fact that Vegas is at the center of sports wagering in this country.

And no one said shady things still aren't going on in Vegas... but do you really think they are confined to Vegas? Do you really think that, if the power brokers were going to alter a game, that it'd have to be one within an hour drive of a casino? Again, I believe it's a completely obsolete argument now. Those setting the lines don't have to be in Vegas to do so, those who might be interested in manipulating the games don't have to be in Vegas to do so, and the their ability to hire people or make deals or act doesn't suddenly vanish beyond the city's limits. In this day and age, where you could coordinate simultaneous actions with someone on 5 different continents, why should anyone believe that the owners of the Bellagio wouldn't be able do make sure something is done in New Jersey or Seattle?

[Hawk405359]

Honestly, I think if they threw enough money at the league, then they'd get over their "moral" objections. The city has all the traits of a pro-sports team, it just happens to have more casinos than the average one.

[Just the facts]

Honestly, I think if they threw enough money at the league, then they'd get over their "moral" objections. The city has all the traits of a pro-sports team, it just happens to have more casinos than the average one.

It isn't a moral objection. The concern is a team in Vegas would be too tempting for game manipulation - whether it be refs effecting the final score or players shaving points.

[bluedogok]

Honestly, I think if they threw enough money at the league, then they'd get over their "moral" objections. The city has all the traits of a pro-sports team, it just happens to have more casinos than the average one.

Most cities that have casinos don't have sports betting, does Atlantic City have sports books as well?

I remember a story years ago about how NCAA tournament games taking place in Las Vegas or including UNLV were off the sports books, you couldn't bet on them (legally).

[Hawk405359]

Ten years ago, I might be able to understand those objections. Nowadays though? It's not like being in Jacksonville made it impossible to bet on games. You can place bets from a laptop one of the 30 nearby wi-fi hotspots around every stadium.

It's not like it stopped it in the NBA, afterall.

[Just the facts]

It's not like it stopped it in the NBA, afterall.

Yep - but it was still a gambling issue. Imagine how it would be if a team was actually playing in Las Veags and a player missed an easy shot that chaged the over/under or point spread of a big playoff game. There would also be a question if he missed on purpose. No professional league wants to deal with that. Slot machine and roulette tables are not the problem - sports betting is.