SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/index.php)
-   San Antonio (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=447)
-   -   Local: S.A. to discuss ways to lure pro franchises (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=122986)

Trae Feb 27, 2007 1:23 AM

It is still 20 million. That 12 million you gave out does not include Riverside-San Bernardino. That area alone can support its own NFL team (according to a news report published a while back). The whole Los Angeles area (income and population wise) can support seven.

You are also exaggerating a bit on the hundreds of miles. The counties may be large, but the LA area does not skip over land (unless a mountain range is in the way), like SA does (and really any southern city).

NBTX11 Feb 27, 2007 1:27 AM

^^OK, I won't argue that point, I'll admit LA is absolutely huge, and can support more than one team obviously. I just get upset to those who say SA CAN'T do it, when I know that is not true.

Trae Feb 27, 2007 1:34 AM

San Antonio can definitely do it (especially with support from the Austin metro), but Los Angeles can really do it.

bresilhac Feb 27, 2007 9:00 AM

Los Angeles has had its chances
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Trae (Post 2653727)
San Antonio can definitely do it (especially with support from the Austin metro), but Los Angeles can really do it.

If Los Angeles can "really" do it why did two franchises vacate that city for other locations in your opinion?

Trae Feb 27, 2007 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bresilhac (Post 2654562)
If Los Angeles can "really" do it why did two franchises vacate that city for other locations in your opinion?

We have been back and forth on this. Just read pages six-seven. :rolleyes:

NCB Feb 27, 2007 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bresilhac (Post 2654562)
If Los Angeles can "really" do it why did two franchises vacate that city for other locations in your opinion?

Old stadium. That, however, isn't a problem for L.A. because the NFL will simply build one themselves in order to get a team there. It's pitiful for that to have to happen in a metro that rich and that large, but it looks like that will be the case. The City of Los Angeles doesn't really care about having an NFL team, the people of Los Angeles don't really care about having an NFL team, it's the NFL that wants Los Angeles to have a team. That's proven by the fact that the NFL is willing to pretty much compeltely fund a new state of the art stadium themselves. Again, it's sad, but it's the truth.

bresilhac Feb 28, 2007 4:01 AM

Los Angeles lacks enthusiasm for the NFL
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Trae (Post 2654638)
We have been back and forth on this. Just read pages six-seven. :rolleyes:

I've read pages six and seven and you're still off the mark on Los Angeles. You and others who think that LA is the default relocation spot for the Saints should they move seem to be unaware that the Los Anegeles citizenry is almost if not totally apathetic when it comes to NFL football. The question I posed was a rhetorical one more than anything else. Of course LA is a huge market. Would they support yet another team in their midst? Probably so, if only marginally. But that doesn't take away from the fact that they have not built any new stadiums in decades and have no group ready to finance a team should one choose to relocate there. San Antonio has all of the above and except for being only a fraction of the size of LA has everything else necessary to succeed as an NFL city. :)

Trae Feb 28, 2007 12:30 PM

How old is the Alamodome, and when was it last renovated? Looks like when SA built a new stadium, the NFL turned away, still.

sakyle04 Feb 28, 2007 3:37 PM

Quote:

How old is the Alamodome, and when was it last renovated? Looks like when SA built a new stadium, the NFL turned away, still.
The Alamodome is a spry teenager at 14 years old.
It has been consistently kept up, but I don't think I'd say it has been renovated. Little improvements are made from time to time to keep it as current as possible (video boards, paint).

Honestly, it's like having a well kept up 1993 Toyota Corolla. With tune-ups, paint jobs, replacement parts, etc. the car can be kept running and quite useful. But put up against a 2007 Corolla, it would look like a piece of junk no matter how well it was kept up.

The average NFL stadium lasts about 30 years, so the Alamodome has reached it's half-life. Texas Stadium, Astrodome, Silverdome, Giants Stadium, Veterans Stadium, and on and on... All of these were once state of the art and are now relics, either replaced are being replaced.

The NFL rejected (rightly) SA in '94 because we weren't an NFL city. We resembled Austin of today - vibrant and dynamic, but not quite to NFL standards. Certainly there were some politics involved as well.

bresilhac Feb 28, 2007 3:41 PM

Alamodome information
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Trae (Post 2656849)
How old is the Alamodome, and when was it last renovated? Looks like when SA built a new stadium, the NFL turned away, still.

The Alamodome was completed in 1993. Various renovations have been done including the adding of some 13 luxury boxes to the original 39 and a new paint job begun last year. The Alamodome is a beautiful structure that should be the home of an NFL team. Imo this will happen within five years. Maybe sooner if Benson opts out of the current contract he has with Louisiana.

bresilhac Feb 28, 2007 3:46 PM

Alamodome information
 
I'm a real believer when it comes to NFL in San Antonio. Passed over numerous times in the past decades San Antonio has now what it takes to be a viable NFL city. More than what is necessary actually. The key is convincing the league and other owners what we already know to be true down here.

NBTX11 Feb 28, 2007 9:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bresilhac (Post 2657037)
The Alamodome was completed in 1993. Various renovations have been done including the adding of some 13 luxury boxes to the original 39 and a new paint job begun last year. The Alamodome is a beautiful structure that should be the home of an NFL team. Imo this will happen within five years. Maybe sooner if Benson opts out of the current contract he has with Louisiana.


I agree. The Alamodome gets knocked by those in other cities who have never set foot in it. It is actually a VERY nice facility, but just lacks the luxury boxes NFL teams are looking for. Other than that, it is a very nice stadium, and not a thing wrong with it. Although certainly not on par with stadiums being built now like Jerry Jones' 1 billion dollar stadium. I think it cost about 186M back in 93 when built, whatever that equates to in today's standards.

LouisianaRush Feb 28, 2007 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NBTX11 (Post 2657716)
I think it cost about 186K back in 93 when built, whatever that equates to in today's standards.

There is no way the Alamodome cost 186k in 1993. :koko:

KevinFromTexas Feb 28, 2007 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisianaRush (Post 2657824)
There is no way the Alamodome cost 186k in 1993. :koko:

I believe he meant $186 million. I've seen that price listed before at Wikipedia.

NBTX11 Feb 28, 2007 10:20 PM

Yes, sorry. 186 MILLION not thousand.


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:16 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.