Which city needs a NFL team?

[HitmanCapone]

 
 
????? California has 4 teams, Texas can definitely handle 3. Austin? Since it's only an hour away from San Antonio, I guess it's not as huge a deal, but there's not enough corporate money in Austin to support a pro team on their own. Dell is nice, but there's more corporate money and population in San Antonio. Plus, any team in San Antonio would be well supported by the Austin area as well. Texas has a population of 26 million which is more than all the other states those cities belong to altogether (except Toronto/MC). Come on, Birmingham and Omaha are a joke right? I was born and partially raised in Alabama. NOBODY there wants an NFL team. They have the Tide and the Tigers. There's a reason the state has ZERO pro teams: Low population/low interest. The economy in Omaha and Nebraska as a whole is depressed and has been for some time. There's no way a farming state has the corporate support to run an NFL franchise. 
 
You cant just look at the largest city in a state and say they can have an NFL team. I'll give you Vegas and Mexico City as viable options (I know the NFL has it's eye on Europe too). But San Antonio is a viable location and should have a franchise ahead of most of the cities on your list. 

I guess you missed the part where I said it's the reason I left them and a few other states off my list.  I personally don't care how big your state is I think there should be a cap of 2 teams at most before a 3rd or even 4th team is awarded.
 
As for Birmingham & Omaha just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it's a joke the only joke here is you trying to downplay where I think a good place for a football team would be.   
 
Oh and I know quite a few people from Alabama that would love a pro team so next time you try speaking for an entire state simply because you were born there (what a fuk'n joke) maybe you should actually get some facts.  And to finish pouring the gasoline on your fire Green Bay would like to say Hi so tell me again how a farming state can't support a NFL Franchise.

 

[HitmanCapone]

Reguarding Alabama:

A study last year by American City Business Journals found Birmingham was ‘underextended’ when it came to professional sports teams and more importantly, that it had sufficient financial capacity to support an NFL team. The study was based on total personal income in the city, and matched against revenue data and ticket prices from other NFL teams to see if the economy was big enough.
The numbers were favorable, so how would it work in practice? Well football is huge in Alabama. The state’s famous Crimson Tide football team claims 15 national titles, the most across America in the history of college football. Just imagine what they could do if given time to build an NFL franchise.
While Tuscaloosa will always belong to the Tide, there’s enough room in the state for an NFL team and Birmingham would make a good city for it.
 

 
 
Reguarding Oklahoma:

Oklahoma is a prime destination for an NFL team. The city embraced its foray into the NBA back in 2008 when Seattle relocated and became the Thunder. They built a strong NBA team in Oklahoma City with a passionate fan base, and there’s no reason the same couldn’t happen with an NFL franchise. Between them, Oklahoma State and Oklahoma University have produced a staggering six Heisman Trophy winners.
This state breathes football. This would just work.

 

[brett05]

With the fan base that they have, Chicago needs a NFL team.

 

[bosoxlover12]

With the fan base that they have, Chicago needs a NFL team.

they have a team...?

 

[BwareDWare94]

they have a team...?

I think he's being facetious

 

[CoachAF]

I guess you missed the part where I said it's the reason I left them and a few other states off my list.  I personally don't care how big your state is I think there should be a cap of 2 teams at most before a 3rd or even 4th team is awarded.
 
As for Birmingham & Omaha just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it's a joke the only joke here is you trying to downplay where I think a good place for a football team would be.   
 
Oh and I know quite a few people from Alabama that would love a pro team so next time you try speaking for an entire state simply because you were born there (what a fuk'n joke) maybe you should actually get some facts.  And to finish pouring the gasoline on your fire Green Bay would like to say Hi so tell me again how a farming state can't support a NFL Franchise.

Look, don't get upset. I wasn't sure how well you understood the economics of the business and the country in general. This whole ordeal is very simple, the NFL (and any prospective owner) is going to follow the money. The money simply does not lie in the locations that you mentioned. Can Birmingham support an NFL franchise? Maybe. Whoever wrote that article hasn't spent much time there. I have, in fact I leave for Birmingham later today for a funeral. The city is a reflection of the state, a case of haves and have nots. The haves make up 90% of the city's economy and the have nots make up 75% of the city's population. That's just the way things are. That's how most the southern states work. So, while the money may be there, only 25% of the population has it, and they won't fill an NFL stadium the way a major metro area would. Most the people I know there are happy to follow the Titans, Falcons or Saints. They already have a pro football team that plays in Tuscaloosa.
 
Again, this is all about money. Alabama, being one of the greatest states in the union (opinion), falls in the lower half of all 50 states when it comes to state GDP (They rank 26th). But that's actually good compared to Oklahoma (29th), Nebraska (35th), and even Utah (32). The last thing an owner wants is to have a multi-million dollar stadium that they will never fill (Hello Jacksonville). They want to go to a place with financial security. 
 
Population can matter, but isn't a requirement. Put a team in the middle of a state, and people will travel. Heck, Lincoln is the most populated city in the state on gameday. But people have to have the money to do so and the willingness to do so. Beyond that, there has to be a large corporate buy-in. That's where the REAL money comes from. Not joe schmo, but Corporate Joe who will buy a suite and sets of tickets to schmooze their clients to go along with the large bulletin board in the southwest corner of the endzone. That's how teams make the real money. Then the season ticket holders and casual fans fill in the rest. 
 
Like it or not, there's a reason that California has 4 teams, Florida has 3, and New York has 3. They have the money. Texas has the money too, and only has 2 teams. Any owner would see that as a good opportunity, which is why the Raiders have continually been linked with San Antonio. Vegas is another good option based on the amount of money that flows through that city. I'm just telling you that Birmingham, Omaha, and Portland are pipe dreams. The NFL is more likely to expand into Europe than they are to go to those markets because that's where the money is. It's an untapped market.
 
And Green Bay...You could look all around sports and not find another team that is so ravenously supported by the fans and the community. Still, Dairy Farming is quite a bit more profitable than grains, not to mention predictable adding 26.5 billion dollars to the Wisconsin GDP yearly. Wisconsin is different from those other states because it has more money and more people than they do. Follow the money...

 

[Senators26]

Toronto in theory is a good idea. Big market, would attract fans from other parts of Canada, etc. They don't have a stadium though. The Toronto Argonauts(CFL) played at Rogers Center(Blue Jays stadium) for the longest time and it caused a lot of conflict and it was kind of just an awkward place for football. The building is also looking to grow natural grass, which would be impossible to maintain and bring back to perfection for baseball in time for the Jays to play. The Argos now play at a different stadium but it only sits 26,000 for football. Toronto would need a new stadium for NFL football, and that's a long way off I would think.

 

[CoachAF]

Toronto in theory is a good idea. Big market, would attract fans from other parts of Canada, etc. They don't have a stadium though. The Toronto Argonauts(CFL) played at Rogers Center(Blue Jays stadium) for the longest time and it caused a lot of conflict and it was kind of just an awkward place for football. The building is also looking to grow natural grass, which would be impossible to maintain and bring back to perfection for baseball in time for the Jays to play. The Argos now play at a different stadium but it only sits 26,000 for football. Toronto would need a new stadium for NFL football, and that's a long way off I would think.

 
Do the CFL and NFL seasons overlap at all? Including pre-season workouts and stuff...

 

[Senators26]

 
Do the CFL and NFL seasons overlap at all? Including pre-season workouts and stuff...

Preseason started this year on June 8th, with the official season starting June 23rd. Season end November 5th with the Grey Cup game being November 27th. However CFL games are mostly played on Thursdays and Fridays, with some Wednesday and Saturday games scattered in. So there wouldn't be a scheduling conflict if a CFL and NFL team shared a building.

 

[Shaggy]

I'm just tired of seeing California, Texas, Florida, or any other state that has more then 2 teams when there are other states/cities that can easily house a NFL team.  If you were to add yet another team to California, you aren't really adding more money to the NFL.  Your basically moving it from one team to another.  For example, if you were to add a team in Fresno Cali, all you will be doing is stealing San Fran/San Diego fans away.  Just the same fans, just cheering for another team, no new money.
 
If you were to move to a state that doesn't have a team at all, you will gain a lot new fans with new money.

 

[CoachAF]

I'm just tired of seeing California, Texas, Florida, or any other state that has more then 2 teams when there are other states/cities that can easily house a NFL team.  If you were to add yet another team to California, you aren't really adding more money to the NFL.  Your basically moving it from one team to another.  For example, if you were to add a team in Fresno Cali, all you will be doing is stealing San Fran/San Diego fans away.  Just the same fans, just cheering for another team, no new money.
 
If you were to move to a state that doesn't have a team at all, you will gain a lot new fans with new money.

 
There's merit to that statement, which is why the NFL has shown such an increased interest in Europe and now Mexico. They are trying to expand their footprint to get new money. Wherever the money is, the NFL will go. It's a business, not just a sport.