News:

UFL Schedule comes out 2-5-2024

Main Menu

A view on NFL expansion

Started by rollntider, May 23, 2015, 11:39:25 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rollntider

The portland one is hideous.  But agree Portland, London, LA and LV should get a team. Mexico city ..... maybe.





http://247sports.com/Article/5-cities-NFL-needs-to-expand-to-36827193



Crewe

LA- absolutely not. Theyve blown it time and again. No soup for you.
Vegas- i doubt Vegas would support a team, seriously. As geographically sound as the selection is, i think Vice City is not the spot for an NFL team.
Portland- i think thats as good of a suggestion as there is on this list.
London-no way, unless someone can explain the logistical parameters that are fair.
Mexico City-i just think this is not a great idea. Despite what the article says, im not sure a team would be supported there.
As for the also mentions...
Oklahoma City-can the NCAA and NFL co-exist. I dont know but i wouldnt be too much against it except that i hate everything Oklahoma.
Orlanda-i guess, but i could see the NFL intergrating with Disney and it would be the stupidest thing ever.
Austin-no way a team would fly there, trust me.
San Antonio-worth looking into. The team would be supported and you would drive a wedge between the Texans and Cowboys, but, they would definately be the stepchild for a decade or two.
Montreal- i think that might be the best option for expanding outside the US.

TheNorm

I cast my vote for none of the above, to hell with expansion-I truly don't think the league needs it (or can handle it). But since we're pretty certain Los Angeles is getting a team (I keep hearing relocation, not just a straight up new franchise), I don't know about the name. And I disagree with you Crewe on this city-I think things are a bit different this time than they were the last two times...but I've been wrong before. Ultimately though, I think if there really is expansion coming you can't leave LA off the list.
Also: Ann Arbor Aces > Las Vegas Aces. ;D And I think Vegas gets an NHL franchise before they get an NFL one (although I'd rather see an NHL franchise in Seattle instead of there).

Other than that...ugh, that article hurt my eyes. They came up with some really stupid names for teams and also reminded me that Washington still has an idiotic one.
"But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity." - Martin Luther King, Jr

Crewe

So we agree on most of them then? 😎
I think youre right LA certainly will get a team but personally i dont think they deserve it, at least not yet.
And i too think expansion on the whole is not good.
Until you can fill stadiums consistently, forget it

rollntider

I like the montreal suggestion, what about toronto?



Crewe

So im not really giving a shit about this SD Oakland thing.
Someone wanna bullet point it for me?