NFL in OKC

[Hawk405359]

what the nfl wants is not really relevant ... all we need is a multi billionaire that buys a team and wants to move it to okc

The owners approve team sales, so what the NFL wants is still relevant. Even if a multi-billionaire popped into existence, bought a team, and wanted to move it to OKC against what the NFL wanted, an unlikely prospect to begin with, Al Davis is pretty good proof that that doesn't work out in the long run. He had to move back to Oakland not that long after strongarming his team to LA.

[Laramie]

The owners approve team sales, so what the NFL wants is still relevant. Even if a multi-billionaire popped into existence, bought a team, and wanted to move it to OKC against what the NFL wanted, an unlikely prospect to begin with, Al Davis is pretty good proof that that doesn't work out in the long run. He had to move back to Oakland not that long after strongarming his team to LA.

Ownership groups are relevant in the NFL. That's why Jacksonville & Charlotte ended up with expansion franchises. They beat St. Louis and several other markets during the year they were admitted to the league.

The NFL looks at these three items:

1. Ownership
2. Market (Population)
3. Market (TV households)

The ownership group can make the difference. Market (Population) has to meet or exceed minimum. They prefer markets where there are a lot to TV households.

In the four major leagues (MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL) expansion and/or relocation franchises have to pay a pretty hefty fee and the existing owners all share that revenue.

Places like London, Paris & Madrid are all attractive and would be a feather in any leagues' cap--travel & time zones would be the biggest concerns; especially with TV. The NFL had a division over in that area and it didn't work:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_L...rican_Football


NBA was suppose to go global back in the late 90s; that's why Nashville pursued the NHL instead of the NBA.

[bluedogok]

The NFL didn't have an "NFL Division" in Europe, they had a minor league setup over there and at first played during the spring/summer. They dropped the American teams from the World League of American Football and called it NFL Europe, it was still minor league football and started after the Superbowl. It was one of the leagues that Kurt Warner played in before landing with the Rams. That would be like the International league placing some baseball teams in Europe, it would not have the draw of the MLB of the NBA DL placing teams over there, minor leagues aren't going to get the same attention as the top level league.

As far as travel, a London team would have to be in an East division, Miami-Seattle (the shortest flight is 2,724 miles) or San Diego-Boston (2,588 miles) is pretty long, Boston-London is 3,281 miles, NYC-London is 3,466 miles, so roughly an hour longer than a domestic cross country flight. London is also 5 hours ahead of Eastern Time, so there is not that much difference than an east coast/west coast time difference. When they do have London games they start at 1:00 PM eastern or 6:00 PM London time. The only issue would be the late time slot games but then many teams don't play many of those. You are also talking about a maximum of 10 games (2 pre-season/8 regular season) plus any playoff games.

[Laramie]

The NFL didn't have an "NFL Division" in Europe, they had a minor league setup over there and at first played during the spring/summer. They dropped the American teams from the World League of American Football and called it NFL Europe, it was still minor league football and started after the Superbowl. It was one of the leagues that Kurt Warner played in before landing with the Rams. That would be like the International league placing some baseball teams in Europe, it would not have the draw of the MLB of the NBA DL placing teams over there, minor leagues aren't going to get the same attention as the top level league.

As far as travel, a London team would have to be in an East division, Miami-Seattle (the shortest flight is 2,724 miles) or San Diego-Boston (2,588 miles) is pretty long, Boston-London is 3,281 miles, NYC-London is 3,466 miles, so roughly an hour longer than a domestic cross country flight. London is also 5 hours ahead of Eastern Time, so there is not that much difference than an east coast/west coast time difference. When they do have London games they start at 1:00 PM eastern or 6:00 PM London time. The only issue would be the late time slot games but then many teams don't play many of those. You are also talking about a maximum of 10 games (2 pre-season/8 regular season) plus any playoff games.

My Bad! Thanks for your clarification on the NFL 'division' vs. 'minor league'; believe me there is a difference.

[hoya]

I think 2020 is too early for us to have any realistic shot at the NFL. We would need to be in the 2025-2030 range. By that point the Thunder would be very well established and nobody would blink that we were pursuing a second pro team.

[Laramie]

I think 2020 is too early for us to have any realistic shot at the NFL. We would need to be in the 2025-2030 range. By that point the Thunder would be very well established and nobody would blink that we were pursuing a second pro team.

Another concern we are going to have to address around 2017-2020:

1. The Cox Convention Center Arena (Old Myriad) will have to be gutted and that space will become exhibition halls.

2. The Chesapeake Energy Arena will enter stage 1 of becoming obsolete about this time--we will be thinking about downsizing it.

3. A new arena is going to cost at least $500-$600 million by then; where will we build it?

The Thunder are here to stay for now. Don't be surprised if cities like Seattle, Louisville, Albuquerque, Norfolk-Virginia Beach, Richmond and Las Vegas begin aggressively seeking to acquire an NBA franchise by expansion or relocation.

We want to be well ahead and established by then with plans for keeping the Thunder here.

Who will be in trouble by then:

Sacramento (if no new arena is available).

Atlanta
Detroit
Indianapolis
Memphis
Milwaukee
Minneapolis
New Orleans
Salt Lake City
San Francisco-Oakland
(if attendance isn't strong in any of the above and the lease on these arenas aren't secured.)

Cities like Norfolk-Virginia Beach (largest metro area without any professional sports) and others have looked at what having an NBA franchise has done for some of these cities and they want in on the action. The Thunder's success in Oklahoma City is the current 'poster city' for this model.

Note: These aggressive cities could also be used as pawns...

[Snowman]

Another concern we are going to have to address around 2017-2020:

1. The Cox Convention Center Arena (Old Myriad) will have to be gutted and that space will become exhibition halls.

2. The Chesapeake Energy Arena will enter stage 1 of becoming obsolete about this time--we will be thinking about downsizing it.

3. A new arena is going to cost at least $500-$600 million by then; where will we build it?

1) has there been any serious talk about converting the arena to exhibition halls, most everything I have heard is leveling the entire building eventually. Then returning that to to the grid, with the emphasis on attracting some sort of vertical development.

2) this may be overly optimistic thinking but the reasons that made renovations bad in the last few decades for basketball were arenas had previously been expanding to include more seats or more options at the area to promote spending money. Well at this point basketball arenas capacities have pretty much peaked since any new seats are getting pretty low quality, so unless new the space for retail & dining for similar sized audiences outside the arena continues upward (which really we could build out if necessary), then the cycle for completely replacing may not be as short as the last set of NBA arenas was.

[Laramie]

1) has there been any serious talk about converting the arena to exhibition halls, most everything I have heard is leveling the entire building eventually. Then returning that to to the grid, with the emphasis on attracting some sort of vertical development.



2) this may be overly optimistic thinking but the reasons that made renovations bad in the last few decades for basketball were arenas had previously been expanding to include more seats or more options at the area to promote spending money. Well at this point basketball arenas capacities have pretty much peaked since any new seats are getting pretty low quality, so unless new the space for retail & dining for similar sized audiences outside the arena continues upward (which really we could build out if necessary), then the cycle for completely replacing may not be as short as the last set of NBA arenas was.

1. Good observation! Arenas have peaked; more speciality seating (priced); note those in the Peake at one end. Our Arena's capacity went from 19,300 to 18,203 in just one season. Our original blueprints for the Indoor Sports Arena
was to seat 19,599 for basektball and around 17,979 for hockey.

When the 1993 MAPS I passed; if I recall they wanted to downsized the Great Arena (inside old Myriad) to accommodate 7,300 and put an exhibition hall below or above. Anyone who can recall this and the plans--please chime in.


It was delayed. About $50 million of the original MAPS targeted improvements to the Old Myriad.


2. Example: Seattle had just renovated KeyArena around 1996 and within 10-years it was obsolete. The NBA stressed that they build a new building and you know the rest of the story....

[Snowman]

2. Example: Seattle had just renovated KeyArena around 1996 and within 10-years it was obsolete. The NBA stressed that they build a new building and you know the rest of the story....

One thing about it not being the last generation of arenas, was it had been either the smallest building footprint or one of the smallest at the time and could not hold the secondary streams of revenue that were being built into the other arena years before it's renovation.

[Laramie]

1) has there been any serious talk about converting the arena to exhibition halls, most everything I have heard is leveling the entire building eventually. Then returning that to to the grid, with the emphasis on attracting some sort of vertical development.


One thing about it not being the last generation of arenas, was it had been either the smallest building footprint or one of the smallest at the time and could not hold the secondary streams of revenue that were being built into the other arena years before it's renovation.

1. I do remember them talking about leveling the whole building... That would have been a 'black eye' for future MAPS projects' renovations. That's why they backed off.

Having two buildings really factored in for hosting the Big 12 basketball men & womens' tournaments for OKC. Now they have split them up with bids going out separately for each. Kansas City's upgrade with the beautiful Sprint Center was the crown jewel to bring about this change.

Seattle KeyArena renovation is one reason why buildings are becoming so dysfunctional--revenue streams.

It would be a mistake to level the Cox Convention Center; considering the $50 million allocated to improve it from MAPS I. It would seem like a waste--surely they could work it into the convention center plan. Whenever I go there for various events, I can't see where $50 million was spent to upgrade it as opposed to the $50 million spent to improve
Civic Center Music Hall and restore it back to its days of the Minicipal Auditorium look and decor.

Gut the Cox Convention Center Arena, we will eventually need the exhibition space.

My apologies for expanding this thread into other areas; however this needed to be addressed as we move forward...

[PhiAlpha]

Hey EA Sports seems to think an OKC NFL relocation is at least 1 of 17 possibilities haha.

Madden 25 will let you move to 17 different cities, revive historic teams - JoyStiq

[Richard at Remax]

Just for grins lets say the NFL expands here in 15 years, but highly suggest that a stadium be located near the I-35/I-44 Turnpike interchange in NE OKC for logistical reasons (numerous highway access, fans from Tulsa have easy access, virgin area to develop, cheap land, ect). It would create a sports area comparable to the Glendale complex in suburban Phoenix. Would most be okay with it or would you guys say no since it isn't in the immediate downtown area?

[traxx]

Just for grins lets say the NFL expands here in 15 years, but highly suggest that a stadium be located near the I-35/I-44 Turnpike interchange in NE OKC for logistical reasons (numerous highway access, fans from Tulsa have easy access, virgin area to develop, cheap land, ect). It would create a sports area comparable to the Glendale complex in suburban Phoenix. Would most be okay with it or would you guys say no since it isn't in the immediate downtown area?

I don't think an NFL stadium makes sense in downtown. They require so much surface parking, plus, as you stated, you'd need easy access from the interstates and there's just not readily available space downtown. If we're trying to get DT to be more dense, then putting a stadium downtown goes against that. You're talking a 65K to 85K seating capacity for an NFL stadium. That parking will take up a lot of space.

[SoonerDave]

Just for grins lets say the NFL expands here in 15 years, but highly suggest that a stadium be located near the I-35/I-44 Turnpike interchange in NE OKC for logistical reasons (numerous highway access, fans from Tulsa have easy access, virgin area to develop, cheap land, ect). It would create a sports area comparable to the Glendale complex in suburban Phoenix. Would most be okay with it or would you guys say no since it isn't in the immediate downtown area?

Personally think TPTB would do everything they could behind the scenes politically (in the proverbial smoke-filled room) to prevent, through all means available, any such project from ever seeing the light of day, as it would almost certainly draw development interest away from downtown.

[adaniel]

Just for grins lets say the NFL expands here in 15 years, but highly suggest that a stadium be located near the I-35/I-44 Turnpike interchange in NE OKC for logistical reasons (numerous highway access, fans from Tulsa have easy access, virgin area to develop, cheap land, ect). It would create a sports area comparable to the Glendale complex in suburban Phoenix. Would most be okay with it or would you guys say no since it isn't in the immediate downtown area?

I would disagree that this would work. It would likely be a dead space with just a stadium and nothing else save for the occasional gas station and fast food joint.

Looking at you example of Glendale, I have friends who went to the last Super Bowl out in the Valley partied in Scottsdale and DT Phoenix. They hardly spent a dime in Glendale outside of the stadium.

Another suburban stadium, Jerryworld of Arlington (or ATT field or whatever they are calling it these days) will likely not host another Super Bowl anytime soon because it is too far out in the suburbs and nowhere close to public transportation. A lot of people who went down there complained loudly of having to drive everywhere during the SB of 2011, which was made even worse by a freak ice storm.

On the flip side, Indy got high marks last year because the stadium is located downtown and very walkable to most restaurants, hotels, etc.

[Snowman]

Just for grins lets say the NFL expands here in 15 years, but highly suggest that a stadium be located near the I-35/I-44 Turnpike interchange in NE OKC for logistical reasons (numerous highway access, fans from Tulsa have easy access, virgin area to develop, cheap land, ect). It would create a sports area comparable to the Glendale complex in suburban Phoenix. Would most be okay with it or would you guys say no since it isn't in the immediate downtown area?

The location has pretty much been up to the owners and cities, the main thing they might suggest is allocating public funds to build and maintain it.

[Laramie]

Just for grins lets say the NFL expands here in 15 years, but highly suggest that a stadium be located near the I-35/I-44 Turnpike interchange in NE OKC for logistical reasons (numerous highway access, fans from Tulsa have easy access, virgin area to develop, cheap land, ect). It would create a sports area comparable to the Glendale complex in suburban Phoenix. Would most be okay with it or would you guys say no since it isn't in the immediate downtown area?

Alternative 2

If you're going to go to the Turner Turnpike Junction why not just go all the way to Stroud (midway) and let it be a venture taken on by the State of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City and Tulsa.

Alternative 3

Why not Fair Park?

This 400-acre complex has parking, a view of the skyline and utitlties in place to erect a 70,000-plus seat facility. This is were future expansion of commuter rail (in propcess) could come into play.

Alternative 4

Far Norfthwest Oklahoma City near Lake Hefner.


You know this 'NFL thing' is a pipedream; howeever, it doesn't hurt to lay a little pipe until football & basketball seasons come into play.

Praedure, I bet you didn't think your thread would would produce this many trout lines...

[Richard at Remax]

Only one I don't agree with is Alternative 2. First of all high speed trains would have to be put in place along with the turnpike being widened to 3 lanes. Second, if the team is just mediocre or just not good, are people going to want to drive 45-1 hour from both metros to watch the team? Probably not.

[Laramie]

Same with any of the four major leagues--true, we want to see the home team win--fans also come to see the stars. The local team becoming the giant slayer.

Tell me the Dallas Cowboys, Green Bay Packers, New York Giants, Minnesota Vikings, Houston Texans, Denver Bronchos, New England Patriots to name a few would generate interest from both Tulsa and Oklahoma City?

We supported losing NBA franchises New Orleans (2), Thunder (2) before we had a winning season. Now you can't buy a ticket. We are past that 5 to 7 year window--one major professional sport the state can handle.

The future (12-15 years)? Do we plan now or wait for the last minute and put out a route with no concrete base or foundation on which to build. Paper foundations aren't very attractive...

Would love to see the NFL in 12-15 years? Who knows what might happen...

[SoonerDave]

Same with any of the four major leagues--true, we want to see the home team win--fans also come to see the stars. The local team becoming the giant slayer.

Tell me the Dallas Cowboys, Green Bay Packers, New York Giants, Minnesota Vikings, Houston Texans, Denver Bronchos, New England Patriots to name a few would generate interest from both Tulsa and Oklahoma City?

We supported losing NBA franchises New Orleans (2), Thunder (2) before we had a winning season. Now you can't buy a ticket. We are past that 5 to 7 year window--one major professional sport the state can handle.

The future (12-15 years)? Do we plan now or wait for the last minute and put out a route with no concrete base or foundation on which to build. Paper foundations aren't very attractive...

Would love to see the NFL in 12-15 years? Who knows what might happen...

Very easy to predict. 95% chance of *zero* NFL interest in another small market city, 100% chance of NFL interest in *other*, larger, even non-domestic markets.

NBA financial dynamics < > NFL financial dynamics. By several orders of magnitude.

[bluedogok]

I would disagree that this would work. It would likely be a dead space with just a stadium and nothing else save for the occasional gas station and fast food joint.

Looking at you example of Glendale, I have friends who went to the last Super Bowl out in the Valley partied in Scottsdale and DT Phoenix. They hardly spent a dime in Glendale outside of the stadium.

Another suburban stadium, Jerryworld of Arlington (or ATT field or whatever they are calling it these days) will likely not host another Super Bowl anytime soon because it is too far out in the suburbs and nowhere close to public transportation. A lot of people who went down there complained loudly of having to drive everywhere during the SB of 2011, which was made even worse by a freak ice storm.

On the flip side, Indy got high marks last year because the stadium is located downtown and very walkable to most restaurants, hotels, etc.

Jerryworld will host many Superbowls, it also isn't "way out in the suburbs" as it sits between Dallas and Fort Worth and has the Ballpark and Six Flags in the area. Eventually they will run a train (whatever they call the one that runs between Dallas and Fort Worth) to the site, between 81 baseball games, 10 football games, Six Flags and other venues there the need will almost demand that it occur. The odds of another ice storm like that hitting at the same weekend is not all that likely to happen again.

One near downtown is still a better option, Mile High is on the other side of I-25 but of course it is where the original Mile High and McNichols Arena were located so the land was available. There are not as many parking spaces there as Jerryworld or Texas Stadium had. When we went to games before we moved up here we usually stayed downtown and took the Broncos Ride bus over to the stadium, now we go to the Park-N-Ride by our house and take the train to the stadium.

[adaniel]

Jerryworld will host many Superbowls, it also isn't "way out in the suburbs" as it sits between Dallas and Fort Worth and has the Ballpark and Six Flags in the area. Eventually they will run a train (whatever they call the one that runs between Dallas and Fort Worth) to the site, between 81 baseball games, 10 football games, Six Flags and other venues there the need will almost demand that it occur. The odds of another ice storm like that hitting at the same weekend is not all that likely to happen again.

I was referencing the complaints many had, and the city of Arlington itself realizes. Lots of people have complained about the location, not just during the Super Bowl. Sorry, but Arlington is not an urban area or some sexy suburban area on the lines of Scottsdale, unless partying up at On the Border is your definition of a wild time.

They messed up by not building in either Dallas or Ft Worth's urban centers or by putting in near transit. Jerry Jones could have moved the stadium 5 miles to the north and been right off the TRE train line. The only way suburban stadiums work is if they are near some sort of public transportation. I have to think that Jerry Jones's influence (and cash) is probably keeping the stadium booked up, but he is no spring chicken and won't be around forever. And about that time owners and their giant ego's will certainly construct bigger, more elaborate stadiums with better access to amenities. Suddenly Jerryworld won't look so good. So they are going to need to address the transit thing fairly quickly.

Here's a good read on the whole thing: Is Arlington ready for the next big event at Cowboys Stadium? | Dallas Cowboys | Latest news ...

[Harvey Hudson]

How long can the Detroit Lions hang on in bankrupted Detroit?

Or, What about the Detroit Tigers?

[bluedogok]

I was referencing the complaints many had, and the city of Arlington itself realizes. Lots of people have complained about the location, not just during the Super Bowl. Sorry, but Arlington is not an urban area or some sexy suburban area on the lines of Scottsdale, unless partying up at On the Border is your definition of a wild time.

They messed up by not building in either Dallas or Ft Worth's urban centers or by putting in near transit. Jerry Jones could have moved the stadium 5 miles to the north and been right off the TRE train line. The only way suburban stadiums work is if they are near some sort of public transportation. I have to think that Jerry Jones's influence (and cash) is probably keeping the stadium booked up, but he is no spring chicken and won't be around forever. And about that time owners and their giant ego's will certainly construct bigger, more elaborate stadiums with better access to amenities. Suddenly Jerryworld won't look so good. So they are going to need to address the transit thing fairly quickly.

Here's a good read on the whole thing: Is Arlington ready for the next big event at Cowboys Stadium? | Dallas Cowboys | Latest news ...

Jerry Jones wanted to build it in Dallas on Fair Park as a replacement to the Cotton Bowl, the City of Dallas balked and Jerry went to Arlington. The massive amount of debt from the American Airlines Center and the fact that Mayor Laura Morrison was not interested in more sporting venues (along with the many mayors of Dallas looking for something for their own districts) effectively killed the chances of it being in Dallas. He wanted it back in Dallas but Dallas (at the time) didn't want it. The amount of money he received from the City of Arlington (bonds to be repaid pack through facility/hotel taxes) was about equivalent to the AAC, he was still on the hook for upwards of $750 million. It isn't like he was looking for it to be paid by the City of Dallas or Arlington.

I do think they need to run a spur down between the Ballpark and the stadium from the TRE (I just drew a blank on the name before) which would make it easier to get there. Of course when I lived in Dallas there was talk of the ballpark being built in the east side of Downtown Dallas (Farmers Market area) but it ended up in Arlington instead.

[Snowman]

How long can the Detroit Lions hang on in bankrupted Detroit?

Or, What about the Detroit Tigers?

Probably the vast majority of ticket holders were already in the suburbs. In some ways it will make it easier to pay debt after the fall out is over of the case. Longer term though their bigger problem is that things like migration out of town, low housing prices, crime, unusually low income of tax base, corruption and slow job creation still have a lot of work after the bankruptcy process is over if they are to be solved. Though there is also a chance one of the wealthier suburbs or the state may pick up the tab on the next stadium.