Sorry, winning isn't fixing this. Stadium revenue (tickets, concessions, parking, etc) is a small part of the total revenue pie, less than 10%. Plus the difference in winning and losing is only a small fraction of the stadium capacity anyway. I'd bet that the difference in team revenue between a winning and losing Jaguars team is 2-3%, if that.

That minuscule amount of revenue is not the deciding factor between Jacksonville keeping the team or not. If Shad wants to keep the team here he will, if he wants to move it he will...there's very little that winning will do to change that.

---

Sorry, winning isn't fixing this. Stadium revenue (tickets, concessions, parking, etc) is a small part of the total revenue pie, less than 10%. Plus the difference in winning and losing is only a small fraction of the stadium capacity anyway. I'd bet that the difference in team revenue between a winning and losing Jaguars team is 2-3%, if that.

That minuscule amount of revenue is not the deciding factor between Jacksonville keeping the team or not. If Shad wants to keep the team here he will, if he wants to move it he will...there's very little that winning will do to change that.

This comment is spot on. Ultimately its upto Khan and what he wants to do. Lamping has been hitting the drum of new stadium and the London games making significan't more revenue for a long time. In truth, our stadium is 25 years old. Most NFL stadiums do get replaced at that age. I don't want it to be because of the history we have had there, but it is the truth.

---

Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 

Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.

 

Just as long as we are aware shad is making a lot of profit simply by being an owner. So what needs to be "fixed" in his view is simply to make more money.

The franchise is sustainable in Jacksonville. However the city may not be sustainable for how much money Shad wants to make while delivering a league worst product

---

He used a one year sample of winning as evidence for the market being not able to support a winning team. 

That seems extremely illogical to me. If he said it after a 5 years of even slightly competitive football maybe we could draw actual conclusions

Have you ever watched any of his presentations from the "state of the franchise" events? 

He says this at every single one of them. He illustrates it with 17 graphs and pie charts. 
Even when this team is winning and selling out games their revenue projects to be below the league average because our ticket prices are so low. 

They've been ramping up this point year after year as they prepare to ask for higher ticket prices, a new stadium, downtown development subsidies, and an additional UK game.  

O just see it as more of the same old talk from Lamping trying to drum up justification for charging more and now shipping off another game.

And what exactly is wrong with being below the average as a small market team in a revenue shared business? The city is going to foot the majority of the bill on the stadium too, so again, why does any of this matter? You want the 41st largest US tv market to perform at average in a 32 team league? That’s borderline insane. It’s one thing if we are the packers, have a rich history of hof players and championships from day 1 of the nfl. We are the exact opposite, no titles, newest franchise besides Houston(and Carolina) and we have been a dumpster fire for most of our history. To expect this team to perform anywhere near top 16 in attendance or revenue is flat out wrong to ask of Jacksonville IMO.

---

The Jacksonville market is extremely small compared to other markets.  We've overachieved to get to where we are.  Some, it seems, just aren't willing to see things for how they truly are.

If it weren't for Khan, an owner going strictly by the numbers likely would have packed up and moved the team by now.

It takes both.  It takes winning AND it takes a large enough fanbase to sustain comfortably in times when the team isn't winning.

To get this market where it needs to be, there must be population and job growth that outpaces comparable cities.  Without a healthy school system, I don't see how that happens in Jax.  It's just not competitive enough to pull in the employers to put the city where it needs to be to more comfortably support our NFL franchise.

Otherwise, the club is going to continue to look at ways to more comfortably keep the team here - such as adding a second game to London.  It may hurt some folks pride, but the city is as marginal an NFL city today as it was when we were narrowly awarded the franchise.  There must be new, sustainable growth in the market and improved schools to support it.

There is some nuance here. Jax is a small market by NFL standards but it is comparable to other NFL small markets. It's the 40th largest MSA in the country, ahead of New Orleans and Buffalo and a bit behind Milwaukee (Green Bay), Nashville, Indianapolis, etc. What Khan wants is to get the Jacksonville revenue model to a point where there's never any danger of the team *having* to move due to being non-competitive financially. Implicit in some of what Lamping has been saying is that the other small market teams that fall into the same category *aren't* necessarily financially stable and so could be at risk for moving due to factors not having to do directly with their fan-base.

---

I'm condescending. That means I talk down to you.

Have you ever watched any of his presentations from the "state of the franchise" events? 

He says this at every single one of them. He illustrates it with 17 graphs and pie charts. 
Even when this team is winning and selling out games their revenue projects to be below the league average because our ticket prices are so low. 

They've been ramping up this point year after year as they prepare to ask for higher ticket prices, a new stadium, downtown development subsidies, and an additional UK game.  

O just see it as more of the same old talk from Lamping trying to drum up justification for charging more and now shipping off another game.

And what exactly is wrong with being below the average as a small market team in a revenue shared business? The city is going to foot the majority of the bill on the stadium too, so again, why does any of this matter? You want the 41st largest US tv market to perform at average in a 32 team league? That’s borderline insane. It’s one thing if we are the packers, have a rich history of hof players and championships from day 1 of the nfl. We are the exact opposite, no titles, newest franchise besides Houston(and Carolina) and we have been a dumpster fire for most of our history. To expect this team to perform anywhere near top 16 in attendance or revenue is flat out wrong to ask of Jacksonville IMO.

The problem with being below average as a small market team in a revenue shared business?  The problem is that the large market teams don't like sharing money they earned in their markets.  So they will eventually force a move, if we don't pull our own weight.  It's like socialism.  Poor people love it; rich people hate it.

---

Have you ever watched any of his presentations from the "state of the franchise" events? 

He says this at every single one of them. He illustrates it with 17 graphs and pie charts. 
Even when this team is winning and selling out games their revenue projects to be below the league average because our ticket prices are so low. 

They've been ramping up this point year after year as they prepare to ask for higher ticket prices, a new stadium, downtown development subsidies, and an additional UK game.  

O just see it as more of the same old talk from Lamping trying to drum up justification for charging more and now shipping off another game.

And what exactly is wrong with being below the average as a small market team in a revenue shared business? The city is going to foot the majority of the bill on the stadium too, so again, why does any of this matter? You want the 41st largest US tv market to perform at average in a 32 team league? That’s borderline insane. It’s one thing if we are the packers, have a rich history of hof players and championships from day 1 of the nfl. We are the exact opposite, no titles, newest franchise besides Houston(and Carolina) and we have been a dumpster fire for most of our history. To expect this team to perform anywhere near top 16 in attendance or revenue is flat out wrong to ask of Jacksonville IMO.

I'm not justifying Khan and Lamping's motives. (which appear to be greed and power) I'm pointing out that they've been saying this stuff or years. The imminent threat of 2 games in London is really the only "new" element and that's been floated before as well, technically. 

Lamping literally spent 20 minutes at each of the past three SOTF presentations comparing Jags revenue to the league median and discussing how low we'd be on that list even if we sold out every game.  His comments published yesterday were just more of that. 

As I mentioned earlier - Khan's desire to revitalize the downtown area around the stadium is noble even if it has a self serving element. 
His desire to (apparently) move the Jags revenue above the bottom quarter of the league is overly ambitious for the market and ultimately greedy. Especially if it costs fans 2 home games. 

The next question you have to ask is: Are you surprised that a billionaire NFL owner is acting out of greed? 
Personally, I am not. Ideally he'd tone down his monetary ambition for the Jags, but I don't see any sharp change of course on the horizon.

---

With a snap of his fingers Shad can raise the franchise value from ~1.3b to 3B+ by moving the team to another city, probably double that or more if it's to London. Until that happens we can't really say that he's operating purely out of greed.

I think maybe Shad and Lamping thought that they would bring their business expertise and be able to grow revenue by a large amount, and now they are realizing that that's probably just not possible...so there has been a shift in tenor lately.

---

With a snap of his fingers Shad can raise the franchise value from ~1.3b to 3B+ by moving the team to another city, probably double that or more if it's to London. Until that happens we can't really say that he's operating purely out of greed.

I think maybe Shad and Lamping thought that they would bring their business expertise and be able to grow revenue by a large amount, and now they are realizing that that's probably just not possible...so there has been a shift in tenor lately.

Did anyone say that?

---

With a snap of his fingers Shad can raise the franchise value from ~1.3b to 3B+ by moving the team to another city, probably double that or more if it's to London. Until that happens we can't really say that he's operating purely out of greed.

I think maybe Shad and Lamping thought that they would bring their business expertise and be able to grow revenue by a large amount, and now they are realizing that that's probably just not possible...so there has been a shift in tenor lately.

Did anyone say that?

Lots and lots of people.

---

Did anyone say that?

Lots and lots of people.

So - by "we" , you mean "twitter?"

---

Lots and lots of people.

So - by "we" , you mean "twitter?"

We means the fanbase, which includes far more than just the few handfuls of regulars who post on here. Twitter yes, and reddit, and I don't check facebook but I'm sure they're saying the same.

---

As long as we keep Wash we are screwed. Offenses will keep decimating our vanilla bland scheme every week. His scheme paired with never making adjustments might work in pee wee, but not in the NFL.

---

JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS
FLORIDA STATE SEMINOLES 
ATLANTS BRAVES 

I understand the arguments made by Lamping about financial viability. But if they are shooting for league average revenue as the benchmark on the business side, should they also be shooting for league average wins, points, offense, and defense on the football side? Shouldn't that be the floor of expectations? Shouldn't they be pulling out all the stops to achieve that rather than trying the same thing one more time hoping for different results?

We ARE the Browns. Except that we are mirror images. Their owner is trigger happy. Our owner can't find the trigger.

---

I understand the arguments made by Lamping about financial viability.  But if they are shooting for league average revenue as the benchmark on the business side, should they also be shooting for league average wins, points, offense, and defense on the football side?  Shouldn't that be the floor of expectations?  Shouldn't they be pulling out all the stops to achieve that rather than trying the same thing one more time hoping for different results?

We ARE the Browns.  Except that we are mirror images.  Their owner is trigger happy.  Our owner can't find the trigger.

How can you possibly say this with all of the money that he's spent on FAs over the last several years?

Making the wrong moves doesn't mean he's making no moves.

---

I understand the arguments made by Lamping about financial viability.  But if they are shooting for league average revenue as the benchmark on the business side, should they also be shooting for league average wins, points, offense, and defense on the football side?  Shouldn't that be the floor of expectations?  Shouldn't they be pulling out all the stops to achieve that rather than trying the same thing one more time hoping for different results?

We ARE the Browns.  Except that we are mirror images.  Their owner is trigger happy.  Our owner can't find the trigger.

How can you possibly say this with all of the money that he's spent on FAs over the last several years?

Making the wrong moves doesn't mean he's making no moves.

I think the trigger illustration was referring to the coaching staff. The browns are quick to fire coaches who don’t perform. The jags keep them beyond what is reasonable

---

How can you possibly say this with all of the money that he's spent on FAs over the last several years?

Making the wrong moves doesn't mean he's making no moves.

I think the trigger illustration was referring to the coaching staff. The browns are quick to fire coaches who don’t perform. The jags keep them beyond what is reasonable

Yeah, but how has that worked for them?

I'm not saying the coaches (in our case) should have been kept.  But the better teams aren't constantly recycling coaches.

---

If the Jaguars are so concerned about finances....why do they do so many dumb moves overpaying FAs and
extending BB5 with ridiculous money ?

---

"Stay tight, stay close. Great things are going to continue to happen for this football team."  - Doug Peterson

From Vic today:

Josh from Jacksonville, FL
So this week Mark Lamping said, “To sit back and say winning is going to cure everything -- not in this market." He also said it's possible two home games would be played in London. Vic, you wrote back in November a London team would be based in Florida and (could) play games in a two-home, two-away routine between London and the U.S. Obviously, there are still a lot of moving parts to make a move to London, but red flags should be waving for Jaguars fans. Shad Khan is already on record stating there is "limited demand" for football in Jacksonville. You're right, the owner is the steward of the franchise and Khan has made it clear what he wants long term.
Would a four-and-four, shared-franchise plan be a bad thing? A connection to London would drive a lot of growth in Jacksonville. Think about it.

---

From Vic today:

Josh from Jacksonville, FL
So this week Mark Lamping said, “To sit back and say winning is going to cure everything -- not in this market." He also said it's possible two home games would be played in London. Vic, you wrote back in November a London team would be based in Florida and (could) play games in a two-home, two-away routine between London and the U.S. Obviously, there are still a lot of moving parts to make a move to London, but red flags should be waving for Jaguars fans. Shad Khan is already on record stating there is "limited demand" for football in Jacksonville. You're right, the owner is the steward of the franchise and Khan has made it clear what he wants long term.
Would a four-and-four, shared-franchise plan be a bad thing? A connection to London would drive a lot of growth in Jacksonville. Think about it.

I have a suspicion that shared franchises may be the small market model of the future. Shad is just a little ahead of the game.

What that will do for fan support/loyalty is anyone's guess.

---

I'm condescending. That means I talk down to you.