Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Quote:I'm not gonna lie if the Jags left Jax I wouldn't support them anymore. For me it's "root for the home team". I grew up loving the Jacksonville Jaguars. Put them anywhere else and they can lose every game for all I care. They wouldn't represent the place I know and love anymore so I'd have no emotion or feelings attached.
Gotta feel for Raider fans right now.
Exactly, I'd be done. Turn your back on 'us'....I turn mine
Quote:If I could take us back to 09, tell everyone 3 teams would re-locate in the next decade, and bet whoever $1 million the Jags wouldn't be one of those teams, majority of the people in Jacksonville would've taken that bet.
Now let's talk about shocking. 3 teams, 1 year, one of those had a 55 year history.
Team ain't movin folks.
The Jags weren't available in the correct time frame for LA thanks to Weaver, so that wasn't a realistic option. We didn't have the same stadium issues that Chargers and Oakland had or the connection the Rams had.
As I have said repeatedly, we will not know how serious the Jags/Khan are committed to Jacksonville until someone tries to 'steal' our London home games by moving there. If Khan starts buying huge parcels of land in London, then we need to be very suspicious. I don't believe any team will go before 2025 anyway.
The easiest way to prevent the Jags leaving is to build a new stadium, or extensive renovations to Khans liking. We need to get it done in the next 5-10 years or we will actually be at risk.
Quote:How long do ya think Kim Jong Un would put up with pick 6's?
http://www.newsweek.com/north-korean-soc...lure-74239
Actually, it would be kind of funny to see this happen to Bradley. This is what happened to the soccer manager after they got blown out 0-12 in their last three matches in the World Cup.
"The players were then asked to step up in turn and publicly criticize manager Kim Jong-hun, who had apparently been singled out for punishment. He has been forced into a construction job because, it is thought, his team's failure is seen as a personal betrayal of Kim Jong-un, the son of current leader Kim Jong-il."
Quote:Let me clarify.
"If the NFL approves a team to move to London"
Because the Jaguars just are the most logical option.
Think of it this way, say another team (BILLS) move to London. Would the NFL allow other teams to have 1 "home game" in London in addition to the already established home team?
The answer would be NO because that would dig into the established teams fan base/ local revenue, which would be to entire/sole reason a team would move there in the first place.
Do you think the Jaguars are to remain profitable in Jacksonville without a "home" game in London? The Jags would take a HUGE hit in Local revenue if they don't have that home game in London.
The other scenario would be to play in different areas in London which would have different teams having a "home game" every year. But if this happens, we should just have a couple of expansion team over there IMO.
Quote:The reasoning Khan would to move have is highlighted. Or did you not read that far?
Do you really think Khan would take that revenue hit? If a team is able to move to London, and the state of the jaguars remains consistent with the last few years, you don't think Khan would feel pressure to move before any others? This would sacrifice local revenue which is essentially what makes the Jaguars able to stay in Jacksonville. But as Khan has stated, the local revenue NEEDS to increase in order to remain stable in Jacksonville.
At the end of the day, when we are talking about profitability, owners do NOT care about you. Especially small markets. Moving to a bigger market for an owner would make them forget about you real quick.
I am sorry that this is such a touchy topic. But am i saying anything false? PS I want the Jags to remain in JAX.
I agree. This is why its important to make sure our Stadium deal is much tighter with the next round of renovations/rebuilding.
Quote:http://www.jaguars.com/media-gallery/vid...a76c0f4088
Forward ahead to the 56:00 minute mark. Since the Jags have entered the league, only the Jags and Bills are teams that have not gotten a new stadium, have a plan in place for a new stadium, or have gone through 300 million in stadium renovations.
Pay attention!
Yep, new stadium, need it soon.
We do NOT need a new stadium in the next 5 to 10 years. If that's the case, you can kiss the team goodbye right now, although I imagine the time it will take to have all the politicians squeeze the local community for money, combined with the actual time it would take to plan and build the thing would take right around 5 to 10 years id think. Eventually Khan will want a shiny new toy for his team, but I think we're more like 15 to 25 years away from that. Our stadium is so much nicer than the Bills too.
Quote:We do NOT need a new stadium in the next 5 to 10 years. If that's the case, you can kiss the team goodbye right now.
2nd oldest in the league (going by major renovations), one of the smallest markets. I disagree, we need either:
A. Significant Upgrades to Khans liking with a much higher penalty lease (no 100M, more like 1 Billion)
B. Build a new stadium, which will keep us in the clear for at least 15-20 years.
Quote:We do NOT need a new stadium in the next 5 to 10 years. If that's the case, you can kiss the team goodbye right now, although I imagine the time it will take to have all the politicians squeeze the local community for money, combined with the actual time it would take to plan and build the thing would take right around 5 to 10 years id think. Eventually Khan will want a shiny new toy for his team, but I think we're more like 15 to 25 years away from that. Our stadium is so much nicer than the Bills too.
Your thinking closer to right than your original comment indicated. Your correct that we would only need the deal for the new stadium in the next 5-10 years. But if we don't start having that conversation soon, and another team starts trying to go to London, we will be on shifting soil.
If I am Jacksonville Mayor, and I want the Jags to stay, I would start talking to Khan right now about whether 300 mil in upgrades would convince him to sign a stricter lease (i.e. with a significantly higher penalty for leaving, no less than 500 mil). If he said yes, I would be hustling down to city hall that day, cause thats probably the lowest cost deal we can get.
Edit: Actually 500 mil might be too low. It has to be high enough to make the valuation difference for moving to London not worth it. Should stick to the guns and go for 1 billion. But even 500 would be much more secure than the current penatly of 100m.
Quote:The Jags weren't available in the correct time frame for LA thanks to Weaver, so that wasn't a realistic option. We didn't have the same stadium issues that Chargers and Oakland had or the connection the Rams had.
As I have said repeatedly, we will not know how serious the Jags/Khan are committed to Jacksonville until someone tries to 'steal' our London home games by moving there. If Khan starts buying huge parcels of land in London, then we need to be very suspicious. I don't believe any team will go before 2025 anyway.
The easiest way to prevent the Jags leaving is to build a new stadium, or extensive renovations to Khans liking. We need to get it done in the next 5-10 years or we will actually be at risk.
Ill be honest with you buying huge parcels of land in london just isnt feasible. The easiest way is to twin with an existing stadium. There are tonnes of stadiums for football clubs that would listen to a deal to take a slice of the nfl cake for 8 sundays a year not to mention twickenham for rugby.
Truth be told if the jags were too do a stadium deal i would expect them to do it with the olympic stadium or twickenham .
Nfl organisers have used wembley for years but there are some complaints due to the small amount of space around wembley for tailgates etc (hence the split with twickenham this year)
The olympic stadium doesnt have that problem and twickenham though slightly smaller does have car parks all around the stadium itself that could be used accordingly with limited rennovation
I honestly think finding a home would be the easiest part. Filling it and getting players to play in it. Different story
Quote:Personally, I think it's the opposite.
STUPID people write articles about the Jaguars moving to London.
IGNORANT people believe these articles.
I disagree. The articles tend to be written by people who have a good general understanding of things, but are ignorant of the specifics of the situation in Jacksonville, and of the nature of the UK market. Based on their misunderstanding of the situation, what they write might seem logical, but reality doesn't quite match up with what they think they know.
People who read those articles but as fans of the team are aware of what's going on in Jacksonville and the way Shad Kahn has both spoken and acted have no such excuse.
Quote:http://www.jaguars.com/media-gallery/vid...a76c0f4088
Forward ahead to the 56:00 minute mark. Since the Jags have entered the league, only the Jags and Bills are teams that have not gotten a new stadium, have a plan in place for a new stadium, or have gone through 300 million in stadium renovations.
Pay attention!
Pay attention.
From the article:
"PHOENIX -- That oughta do it. The NFL's two-decade blitz of stadium development largely ended this week with the granddaddy of them all: a nearly $1 billion gift from the tax coffers of Nevada to lure the Oakland Raiders to Las Vegas for the 2020 season.
With the Raiders' future settled, there are no more NFL stadium flashpoints on the near horizon and -- more importantly -- no obvious cities to be used as leverage against municipalities that refuse to provide public assistance. Perhaps the only team with a looming issue is the Buffalo Bills, who might soon push to replace 44-year-old New Era Stadium, but they have a lease through 2023 and are just three years removed from $130 million in taxpayer-funded renovations."
And, since mentioned for Buffalo above, our lease runs through
2030.
Quote:
Pay attention.
From the article:
<div>"PHOENIX -- That oughta do it. The NFL's two-decade blitz of stadium development largely ended this week with the granddaddy of them all: a nearly $1 billion gift from the tax coffers of Nevada to lure the Oakland Raiders to Las Vegas for the 2020 season.
With the Raiders' future settled, there are no more NFL stadium flashpoints on the near horizon and -- more importantly -- no obvious cities to be used as leverage against municipalities that refuse to provide public assistance. Perhaps the only team with a looming issue is the Buffalo Bills, who might soon push to replace 44-year-old New Era Stadium, but they have a lease through 2023 and are just three years removed from $130 million in taxpayer-funded renovations."
And, since mentioned for Buffalo above, our lease runs through 2030.
</div>
Rico, cmon man, this doesnt mean much. Sure there are no stadium flashpoints on the near horizon.
The stadium issue is currently not an issue. But where will we be 5 years from now when NFL teams can start using London as leverage?
This is the whole point of my statements.
Breaking a lease is easy for owners to do. Especially if there are clauses in them.
I know you are thinking with your heart. But can you honestly say that you guarantee the Jags to be in JAX for another 15 years?
You need to be skeptical about this London thing.
Khan is a business man.
With all his investments in JAX, if he feels he is not getting the support from the fans in return (local revenue/potential stadium funding), then he is going to bounce.
Im sorry.....
"London as leverage"
lol
The NFL simply can't afford to "home" a team in London.
They can support a handful of games only. A "full time" team wouldn't work.
You can't fly teams back and forth on a weekly basis. There's enough clamor now about east coast/west coast within the states. There's no other way around it, since otherwise you'd start to have the London team playing longer stretches of home and away back to back (half here, half there "solutions" that also wouldn't make sense.)
It simply doesn't make sense when you move from the fantasy pie in the sky idea, and honestly look at the logistics of trying to make the fantasy a reality.
The only thing any team or city has to "lose" is a game or two max. Not a "team."
Quote:"London as leverage"
lol
The NFL simply can't afford to "home" a team in London.
They can support a handful of games only. A "full time" team wouldn't work.
You can't fly teams back and forth on a weekly basis. There's enough clamor now about east coast/west coast within the states. There's no other way around it, since otherwise you'd start to have the London team playing longer stretches of home and away back to back (half here, half there "solutions" that also wouldn't make sense.)
It simply doesn't make sense when you move from the fantasy pie in the sky idea, and honestly look at the logistics of trying to make the fantasy a reality.
The only thing any team or city has to "lose" is a game or two max. Not a "team."
People don't understand this. You would literally be fighting a losing battle by having a full time team overseas. There are literally pages of cons to this idea and only a few pros. It's not going to happen.
Quote:Khan is a business man.
With all his investments in JAX, if he feels he is not getting the support from the fans in return (local revenue/potential stadium funding), then he is going to bounce.
Im sorry.....
In 5 years I could see that happening.
Couple that with the fact that his Fulham Soccer Team getting closer to making it to the Premier League. With the increase in value that the Jags would have in London, he could leverage that to invest in some top players to take the Fulham Soccer team to the Premier League build his new soccer stadium and rake in all kinds of $$.
Quote:"London as leverage"
lol
The NFL simply can't afford to "home" a team in London.
They can support a handful of games only. A "full time" team wouldn't work.
You can't fly teams back and forth on a weekly basis. There's enough clamor now about east coast/west coast within the states. There's no other way around it, since otherwise you'd start to have the London team playing longer stretches of home and away back to back (half here, half there "solutions" that also wouldn't make sense.)
It simply doesn't make sense when you move from the fantasy pie in the sky idea, and honestly look at the logistics of trying to make the fantasy a reality.
The only thing any team or city has to "lose" is a game or two max. Not a "team."
If this is the case, then London wont be approved when the vote comes around.
But knowing the greediness of the NFL's owners, there is a chance it might. If there was ZERO chance, then a vote wont even be scheduled.
The fact that this is even a discussion means there is even a slight possibility.
Quote:People don't understand this. You would literally be fighting a losing battle by having a full time team overseas. There are literally pages of cons to this idea and only a few pros. It's not going to happen.
People DO understand this.
Not one person here is fighting your comments.
The NFL is going to look into this and vote on it. You and me can come up with a bunch of cons, and maybe only one Pro. But that one Pro is $$$. That is what most owners see.
Quote:If this is the case, then London wont be approved when the vote comes around.
But knowing the greediness of the NFL's owners, there is a chance it might. If there was ZERO chance, then a vote wont even be scheduled.
The fact that this is even a discussion means there is even a slight possibility.
When is this "vote" scheduled? You did say "when."
I can discuss when your murder trial will begin, but that doesn't make it real. I guess we could discuss it, making it a "slight possibility" by your standards until it's disproven by not "being scheduled."
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10