JonSnow4President Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 Backups are typically expected to be $3-5 mil for a half decent one, right? That would mean I'd have a fairly hard cap on what I'm willing to pay Kaep at around $8. He's worth more than your run of the mill average backup, but I just don't trust him unless I'm a team already built to succeed. The more I think about it, the more open I am to Houston spending on him if they don't get Romo. They have a better O-line than Denver, and BOB is supposed to be a decent offensive coach. If Kaep is the way, I'd hope they'd grab someone like Mahomes (or however you spell it) for him to compete with though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 15 hours ago, sperry said: I disagree. Again, there are 2 million people in the metro, and it's the only pro franchise in town. In fact, I think the locals will embrace it big time because it gives them something that's not the gambling/nightclubs/hookers to be known for. That's more than enough to support an NFL team. Then, you have tons of tourists that can pick up any slack in gate sales as well as Two million people isn't that many though, especially since that's not just the city that's the whole metropolitan area. There are very few NFL teams in metropolitan areas that small, and the list isn't pretty; its teams like Jacksonville and Buffalo, which are always threatening to move. As for tourists, there's not really any evidence that from other teams that there's that many tourists interested in going to NFL games. And even if there was an exception here, they'd be fans of the other team playing. Which means the Raiders are giving up home field advantage and, more importantly, these aren't attendees that'll be spending money on the various Raiders merchandise available for sale at the stadium. Its not the only pro franchise in Vegas either. The NHL approved an expansion team for Vegas last year, and the Las Vegas Golden Knights are starting play in the 2017-18 season. And unlike the Raiders, the Golden Knights' stadium and expansion fee was entirely privately-financed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 On 3/27/2017 at 6:14 AM, dbunting said: If you are the rightful winner then why do I wear the crown???!?!?!!! I am gonna have to make up a fake crown and come across Lake Michigan to taunt you with it! Your's is a false crown for a false champion. And go ahead, you can't get to me that way. On 3/27/2017 at 6:22 AM, dbunting said: Actually, since you last posted, I am now slightly ahead of you! YOU LIKE THAT? Looks like we each have one team left..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbigski Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 18 hours ago, James Arryn said: It's not a 'split' according to that article. It quotes GM's saying that 20% think the issue is his play, 20% are worried about blowback/Trump etc. because of the anthem thing and 60% just plain 'hate' him for the anthem thing and want to 'punish' him. Meaning 80% of the teams are primarily deciding this on the anthem thing. Its all off the record quotes and probably fake news. Most GMs probably realize that 80%+ of teams have established QBs rostered all ready. But that option came in at 0% in the author's estimate. That article seemed fishy from the start to me just based on that. I really dont get why he thought it was a good idea to opt out either. He'll probably end up signing a much smaller contract after the draft. On an unrelated note, the Jets now have my email because I bought a parking pass for a game at MetLife. Getting offers from them as a dolphins fan instead of self loathing jets fan is amusing. No I dont want to send a young girl to junior flight crew camp and teach her to cheer for a bunch of losers. I have some ethical standards when it comes to child abuse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 16 hours ago, sperry said: I disagree. Again, there are 2 million people in the metro, and it's the only pro franchise in town. In fact, I think the locals will embrace it big time because it gives them something that's not the gambling/nightclubs/hookers to be known for. That's more than enough to support an NFL team. Then, you have tons of tourists that can pick up any slack in gate sales as well as It's not the only pro franchise in town, they have an NHL team starting next year (two years before the Raiders arrive). And while 2 million sounds like a lot, there are only 6 NFL teams in a metro region smaller than that: KC, CLE, IND, JAX, BUF, and GB. All of those teams are either living with the threat of being moved (JAX), have an intense local fanbase with decades of tradition (KC, CLE, IND, GB) or both (BUF). While it's possible a strong Raiders fanbase will grow in LV, there isn't one now. They're lucky that the Raiders are on the upswing, it's possible they'll be contenders for a while with Carr+Mack. They'll need that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Walker Texas Ranger Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 I don't get it. Sports franchises rely on the irrational loyalty of their fanbases. But how can you have that if you keep changing cities? Also, from https://theringer.com/case-for-oakland-raiders-moving-to-las-vegas-nfl-c1df3f27218d: Quote “The main reason that full private financing is not more common is that stadiums do not generate enough income to justify their costs — the net profit of a new stadium is not enough to provide a reasonable return on investment,” Noll says. “Stadiums are financially attractive to a team only if the team gets something else, such as development rights and tax breaks on other property (as the Rams did in Inglewood).” Then why bother building all these stadiums with all the bells and whistles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbunting Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 13 minutes ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said: I don't get it. Sports franchises rely on the irrational loyalty of their fanbases. But how can you have that if you keep changing cities? Also, from https://theringer.com/case-for-oakland-raiders-moving-to-las-vegas-nfl-c1df3f27218d: Then why bother building all these stadiums with all the bells and whistles? Exactly. If new stadiums were truly profitable, all that and a bag of chips, then these savvy business people would do it themselves. They know it isn't so they rely on threats of moving to get people to pay for their playgrounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonSnow4President Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 57 minutes ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said: I don't get it. Sports franchises rely on the irrational loyalty of their fanbases. But how can you have that if you keep changing cities? Financially, they (or at least the Packers, whose information is made public) make more money from their portion of TV, sponsorship, and jersey sales. Competitively, it's hard to say how big the home field advantage for the Raiders is because they've sucked the last 10 years, so they're at a 38.75% win percentage at home vs a 31.25% win percentage on the road. The NFL as a whole over that period is 57.24% vs 42.78% (gotta be a case of rounding because those should add to 1). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 2 hours ago, Maithanet said: It's not the only pro franchise in town, they have an NHL team starting next year (two years before the Raiders arrive). And while 2 million sounds like a lot, there are only 6 NFL teams in a metro region smaller than that: KC, CLE, IND, JAX, BUF, and GB. All of those teams are either living with the threat of being moved (JAX), have an intense local fanbase with decades of tradition (KC, CLE, IND, GB) or both (BUF). While it's possible a strong Raiders fanbase will grow in LV, there isn't one now. They're lucky that the Raiders are on the upswing, it's possible they'll be contenders for a while with Carr+Mack. They'll need that. Vegas is larger than 8 metro areas that currently have teams (Jax, Cle, Ind, Buff, GB, KC, NO, Nash). It's also right on the heals of and will soon surpass Cinci and Pittsburgh, and is basically in line with Charlotte. So when you consider that there are only 30 NFL markets, it's a middle third market. That's not considering the tourists, who I think you are underestimating. Going to a football game is much more in line with the agenda of a typical tourist to Vegas than it is to other tourist destinations that have NFL teams like Miami or New York. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted March 28, 2017 Author Share Posted March 28, 2017 2 hours ago, mcbigski said: I really dont get why he thought it was a good idea to opt out either. He'll probably end up signing a much smaller contract after the draft. The 49ers would've likely cut him had he not opted out.Kind of a distinction without a difference. They weren't going to keep him on for what they paid him last season at any rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockroi Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 The Patriots are good at something, so lets ban it. A rule to bar teams from winning 5 Superbowls in 16 seasons narrowly lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonSnow4President Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 45 minutes ago, Rockroi said: The Patriots are good at something, so lets ban it. A rule to bar teams from winning 5 Superbowls in 16 seasons narrowly lost. What is it next season? Banning teams from trading away quality players that you think might decline soon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockroi Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 22 minutes ago, JonSnow4President said: What is it next season? Banning teams from trading away quality players that you think might decline soon? GOOD NEWS! The Raiders and Jets will never give up their God given right to trade for players to huge contracts whom will immediately suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 2003 Patriots kick the hell out of the Colts. Colts lobby to have defensive contact rules tightened. Pretty much changed the QB game for this generation of QB from 2004 on. 2014 Patriots exploit and eligible receiver designation rule in a playoff game against the Ravens. Harbaugh lobby's to have rule changed. It is. 2016 after the Seahawks had been doing it for years, the Patriots start utilizing a leaper and it gets noticed in high profile games. Rule changed next season. Patriots win Super Bowl in overtime. Now the rules committee is talking about toying with the overtime rule. Tuck rule eventually got repealled. You have journalists saying owners won't change rules if the Patriots propose it because they are afraid it is an advantage for them. But the Patriots are the one's who have an issue with the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted March 28, 2017 Author Share Posted March 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, lancerman said: 2003 Patriots kick the hell out of the Colts. Colts lobby to have defensive contact rules tightened. Pretty much changed the QB game for this generation of QB from 2004 on. 2014 Patriots exploit and eligible receiver designation rule in a playoff game against the Ravens. Harbaugh lobby's to have rule changed. It is. 2016 after the Seahawks had been doing it for years, the Patriots start utilizing a leaper and it gets noticed in high profile games. Rule changed next season. Patriots win Super Bowl in overtime. Now the rules committee is talking about toying with the overtime rule. Tuck rule eventually got repealled. You have journalists saying owners won't change rules if the Patriots propose it because they are afraid it is an advantage for them. But the Patriots are the one's who have an issue with the rules. Yes, and this has really hampered the Pats efforts over the past decade and a half. Jesus Christ. I swear if I have to listen to this shit after another Superb Owl winning season I'm going to eat a fucking shotgun. The Tuck Rule got repealed? REALLY? A piece of shit rule that never should've been on the books in the first place? You're going to piss and moan about that? http://s1336.photobucket.com/user/Lumpy67/media/George c Scott Dr Strangelove_zpsn5arhoab.gif.html?sort=3&o=9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted March 28, 2017 Author Share Posted March 28, 2017 In related news, I just came across this. 3/28/17 is Falcon's Day... Messed up, but I had to laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 6 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: Yes, and this has really hampered the Pats efforts over the past decade and a half. Jesus Christ. I swear if I have to listen to this shit after another Superb Owl winning season I'm going to eat a fucking shotgun. The Tuck Rule got repealed? REALLY? A piece of shit rule that never should've been on the books in the first place? You're going to piss and moan about that? http://s1336.photobucket.com/user/Lumpy67/media/George c Scott Dr Strangelove_zpsn5arhoab.gif.html?sort=3&o=9 Besides the point. And singling out the tuck rule, as if the pattern isn't the more relevant point, is also missing the mark, for the record nobody gave a shit about the tuck rule in the 2001 season when the Patriots were on the wrong end of it in the Jets game. If most fan bases could cite multiple explicit rule changes because their team was utilizing it, they would be screaming bloody murder. If this happened in another sport and rules were being constantly changed in response to what one team was having success with, it would put into question the legitimacy of the league. The fact that they still win is beside the point. It shouldn't happen to any team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted March 28, 2017 Author Share Posted March 28, 2017 ^^^^ Please, just stab me in the face. It would be less painful than having to listen to this "we're martyrs" bullshit. Cut yourself down off the cross.You were gifted a fucking AFC Championship on the back of that shitty fucking rule, but somehow you're the victims? Please stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted March 29, 2017 Author Share Posted March 29, 2017 Oakland City Council Fires Back... http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/03/27/will-oakland-kick-the-raiders-out-of-the-coliseum/ /Threaten to kick the Raiders out of their lease early! This going to be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Pesci Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 32 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: Oakland City Council Fires Back... http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/03/27/will-oakland-kick-the-raiders-out-of-the-coliseum/ /Threaten to kick the Raiders out of their lease early! This going to be good. Gotta love 'Sting' in the background of the first picture. And also this line from Schaaf “The manly thing for him to do is at least admit we had a viable plan,”. It's too bad Al Davis isn't around to see his son have his manhood questioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.