(02-18-2020, 12:53 AM)Corriewf Wrote:

(02-17-2020, 06:47 PM)Senor Fantastico Wrote: So the desired results were to have the Kansas City market size (#32) make the Super Bowl over Houston's market (#8)? 

And then in the Super Bowl #32 goes on to beat San Francisco (#6 market size) in order to reap all the benefits of merchandising that come with one of the smallest NFL markets becoming champions? 

What about the #3 market Chicago? They getting their turn every 5-6 years? 

Why pick the #9 market in Boston to enjoy the greatest dynasty in league history when it could've been either team in the #1 NY market. One of which plays in the same division as Boston and has been basically terrible forever. The Jets getting their turn every 5-6 years?

#32 my butt!

https://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-co...06489.html

Look at Jacksonville on that map. My original post is basically stating Kahn is looking to level the playing field by adding the UK to our area of influence. Hence winning the favor of the nfl.

That article is stating that the top 3 teams in popularity in the whole NFL are 1) Cowboys, 2) Vikings (lololol) and 3) Chiefs?????  

My guy.

First, if you click the link to the info this article is citing, (https://seatgeek.com/tba/articles/where-...s-the-u-s/) it's stating these are the teams with the most U.S. Counties in greatest number of ticket searches. Completely irrelevant to what were discussing.

Second, even if that was true, then what you're claiming is the number 2 market has never won a Super Bowl and it's most famous moment over the last decade was a last second playoff win over the Saints. And yes the Chiefs are the champs... for the first time in 5 decades. That's info you want to cite to support that the league colludes to have bigger markets be more successful? 

Here is where I'm pulling the info for TV market size, which was the discussion. https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/nba-mar...n-ratings/ . It's the same website you linked in your first response to me, so if you still want to go ahead and claim it's incorrect then I'm not sure why I should respond further. 

Also, I wasn't responding to your original post, you responded to me, and keep responding to me with completely terrible information.

---