Can More Franchises Join The NFL?

[DallasEast]

Television contracts balloon every few years, so the money's there to support more clubs. Fan interest is at an all-time high. That's an added plus. The inability of small-market teams to compete has been made obsolete, years ago. So, what's stopping fans in, say, Albuquerque, Honolulu, Memphis, Oklahoma City, Omaha, Portland, Sacramento, San Antonio or Little Rock, from enjoying good, old, American pro football in their own backyards? Are fans without franchises getting stiffed in the process?

 

[CowboyJeff]

no. no

 

[Yeagermeister]

There are already too many teams.

 

[DallasEast]

There are already too many teams.

I agree.

 

[5Stars]

Television contracts balloon every few years, so the money's there to support more clubs. Fan interest is at an all-time high. That's an added plus. The inability of small-market teams to compete has been made obsolete, years ago. So, what's stopping fans in, say, Albuquerque, Honolulu, Memphis, Oklahoma City, Omaha, Portland, Sacramento, San Antonio or Little Rock, from enjoying good, old, American pro football in their own backyards? Are fans without franchises getting stiffed in the process?

If there were more teams...football would really sink into an all time low. There are not enough quality players as it is, much less have to add another 500 or so...the product would be greatly diminished...

 

[DallasEast]

If there were more teams...football would really sink into an all time low. There are not enough quality players as it is, much less have to add another 500 or so...the product would be greatly diminished...

Why? With all the teams having relatively equal talent, all teams would be equally competitive. That's good football.

 

[5Stars]

Why? With all the teams having relatively equal talent, all teams would be equally competitive. That's good football.

Admit it, you just want one in Northeastern Louisiana...

 

[theebs]

Television contracts balloon every few years, so the money's there to support more clubs. Fan interest is at an all-time high. That's an added plus. The inability of small-market teams to compete has been made obsolete, years ago. So, what's stopping fans in, say, Albuquerque, Honolulu, Memphis, Oklahoma City, Omaha, Portland, Sacramento, San Antonio or Little Rock, from enjoying good, old, American pro football in their own backyards? Are fans without franchises getting stiffed in the process?

How watered down do you want the league to be. I wish they could eliminate two teams. The quarterback play is horrendous.

The last two superbowls have been two of the all time worst ever, because of the nature of the league right now, more teams would make it awful.

 

[DallasEast]

Admit it, you just want one in Northeastern Louisiana...

That would be nice. A good coach, one or two drafts, and it's a good chance we'll be able to match the Saints total for NFC championship game appearances.

 

[DallasEast]

How watered down do you want the league to be. I wish they could eliminate two teams. The quarterback play is horrendous.

The last two superbowls have been two of the all time worst ever, because of the nature of the league right now, more teams would make it awful.

I feel that it's too watered down right now also and would eliminate 5-6 teams. To be fair, another team's fan would probably echo my sentiments and add Dallas to their list. You also won't get any argument from me about the last few Super Bowls.

 

[THUMPER]

The league is way too watered down now. I would love to see us back down to 24 teams again. Get rid of teams that aren't committed to winning: Cardinals, Lions, Browns, Texans, etc. Any team that doesn't have at least 4 winning seasons in the last 10 years.

Allow rosters to be at 64 players plus a practice squad of 10-12 guys.

Let's get the very best players playing in the NFL and send the scrubs to the arena league or the CFL.

Of course this is blasphemy to the NFL as they are all about the benjamin and would NEVER agree to get rid of teams.

 

[GlitzCowboy]

Honolulu would be quite a trek for that team or any team having to make that travel. I'm not sure in the long run it'd be worth a team there. Plus they already have the traditional Pro Bowl, which a team being there could take something from that.

Those other cities, I'd pass.

Millwaukee wouldn't be a bad place though. They used to host half the packer home games so we know they can handle it. Not to mention NBA and MBA already present. There's room and want in this city and state. The Packers are FAR from a WI Monopoly, of course they'd sure like you to think otherwise though. In the end, larger than a big portion of the cities already hosting teams.

Vegas. Gambling for that team would go through the roof. They'd send this same mania nation-wide.

Then maybe it could be time for a Canadian team? Toronto comes to mind. Afterall we are the National Football League, playing for the World Championship each year.

Continuing with the stretch out, Mexico City, which seems to go pretty nutz anytime one of our teams plays down there. I'd bet there'd be a market.

 

[iceberg]

Television contracts balloon every few years, so the money's there to support more clubs. Fan interest is at an all-time high. That's an added plus. The inability of small-market teams to compete has been made obsolete, years ago. So, what's stopping fans in, say, Albuquerque, Honolulu, Memphis, Oklahoma City, Omaha, Portland, Sacramento, San Antonio or Little Rock, from enjoying good, old, American pro football in their own backyards? Are fans without franchises getting stiffed in the process?

i would think the smaller towns just couldn't compete. maybe it's me, but i think i'd rather see the NFLE have say 4 major teams and we just concord around. ok, maybe travel would make this not really feasable on an ongoing basis, but it would be more cool to me than to see the little rock incestualites or something.

 

[iceberg]

The league is way too watered down now. I would love to see us back down to 24 teams again. Get rid of teams that aren't committed to winning: Cardinals, Lions, Browns, Texans, etc. Any team that doesn't have at least 4 winning seasons in the last 10 years.

Allow rosters to be at 64 players plus a practice squad of 10-12 guys.

Let's get the very best players playing in the NFL and send the scrubs to the arena league or the CFL.

Of course this is blasphemy to the NFL as they are all about the benjamin and would NEVER agree to get rid of teams.

OOO - LIKE SURVIVOR of the NFL!!!!

can you imagine if we said the team that finishes last in the next 4 years get booted from the league????

no longer are you rewarded for sucking with the 1st overall pick, but you're OUT OF HERE!!!

heh, now that would be some cool motivational games towards the end of the season!

 

[DallasEast]

Allow rosters to be at 64 players plus a practice squad of 10-12 guys.

Do it now! Do it now! Do it now!

 

[DallasEast]

Honolulu would be quite a trek for that team or any team having to make that travel. I'm not sure in the long run it'd be worth a team there. Plus they already have the traditional Pro Bowl, which a team being there could take something from that.

All true, but if there was enough fan support in Honolulu and someone was willing to buy a franchise for the city, what's stopping it from becoming reality? Travel can't be an obstacle. In the upcoming season alone, the University of Hawaii's football team travels to the continent for five games. They host six teams from the states. If college teams can overcome this hardship, what's stopping PRO teams???

 

[DallasEast]

i would think the smaller towns just couldn't compete. maybe it's me, but i think i'd rather see the NFLE have say 4 major teams and we just concord around. ok, maybe travel would make this not really feasable on an ongoing basis, but it would be more cool to me than to see the little rock incestualites or something.

Still, the current system employed by the NFL insures that all teams will be competitive. How is traveling not feasable? In a physical or psychological way on the players? Or in a financial way for the teams? I believe with billion dollar television contracts alone, it's definitely not a cost factor.

 

[iceberg]

Still, the current system employed by the NFL insures that all teams will be competitive. How is traveling not feasable? In a physical or psychological way on the players? Or in a financial way for the teams? I believe with billion dollar television contracts alone, it's definitely not a cost factor.

time mostly. it can take a full day to get to europe and now you're in a different timezone and it's like "homefield advantage" would take on a whole new meaning - i would think. but since i've never made the trek, i can't really say for sure.

 

[5Stars]

All true, but if there was enough fan support in Honolulu and someone was willing to buy a franchise for the city, what's stopping it from becoming reality? Travel can't be an obstacle. In the upcoming season alone, the University of Hawaii's football team travels to the continent for five games. They host six teams from the states. If college teams can overcome this hardship, what's stopping PRO teams???

Which island would you put the team on? Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, Kahoolawe, etc.

 

[DallasEast]

Which island would you put the team on? Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, Kahoolawe, etc.

Oahu.