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)

jaga185 Jan 6, 2007 8:19 PM

If there was to be a stadium, it would probably have to be in San Marcos, because that is mid-way point between Austin and San Antonio.

SAguy Jan 7, 2007 12:38 AM

Remember San Antonio is the one chasing after another Pro Team not Austin. Any stadium built would be in or around S.A. not Austin.

Double L Jan 7, 2007 2:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaga185 (Post 2549824)
If there was to be a stadium, it would probably have to be in San Marcos, because that is mid-way point between Austin and San Antonio.


Well if they did that then nobody would go there because it's too far away. I agree with JAM, connect the Alamodome to sunset station and then everybody will use the commuter rail.

21bl0wed Jan 7, 2007 7:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by texastarkus (Post 2549733)
Why not put the stadium in Kyle or Buda?

Hence the two :D ...The ideal spot would be just south of san marcos. But then again maybe not since round rock has some good population i'm not sure they'd want to drive out that far.

TexasBoi Jan 8, 2007 5:41 AM

the NFL is the best shot. 8 games out of the season. San Antonio can support that. I do not believe they combined with Austin can support 81 games in MLB. And once the newness wears off and the team starts to consistently struggle, it will be like KC.

In fact, bringing up KC, Cincinatti, and Milwaukee does not help your argument. KC barely gets attendance anyway. Milwaukee is 90 miles away from Chicago and Cincinatti is a historic franchise that's been around for decades.

SAguy Jan 9, 2007 6:28 AM

Leaders Look at Plan for Pro Sports Teams
 
Leaders Look at Plan for Pro Sports Teams

Local leaders met Monday to put together a plan to elevate San Antonio to the top of the list for professional sports, officials told News 4 WOAI.
“It's just a question of time until we get one or more, professional franchises here, either in baseball, football or both,” San Antonio Mayor Phil Hardberger said Monday. He met with Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff to construct a game plan.

“The whole idea is not to just go for one team, but to establish a climate that will be appealing to all teams, and the commissioners,” Hardberger said.

They were looking at a change in strategy after failed attempts to bring both the NFL and Major League Baseball to San Antonio, officials said.

“First, sitting down with the comissioners, getting a clear reading from them,” Wolff said of the strategy, “what they want, what they expect and what they're willing to do and then work with the individual teams.”

By building relationships with the commissioners, Hardberger said chances of San antonio scoring the NFL or Major League Baseball will only get better.

“From the top down, establish San Antonio as a sports-minded town, that it would make some sense to come here,” Hardberger said.

Hardberger, Wolff, and other area leaders plan to meet with the NFL and MLB commissioners within the next three months.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
KSAT is reporting that S.A. will be meeting with the Chargers in the coming months.

JAM Jan 9, 2007 6:41 AM

I don't think it would be a good idea to put a stadium inbetween SA and ATX. Even if it means it is personally more difficult for me to make it to a game. I probably wouldn't enjoy going to Buda for a game as much as I would SA, even though I might not make it as often. I don't even like the fact that Dallas is putting it's stadiums inbetween Ft. Worth and Dallas, although that example is less of a stretch. I feel like stadiums belong in the city center where the bulk of the poplulation can enjoy the game and do other things before/after the game. This brings in additional business, and creates a culture. If a stadium is put in the middle of no where or somewhere inbetween, then little culture is created. No dense housing would be built around it, no museums, ect.... The point of getting a stadium is to bring in dollars to the community, and hopefully, those dollars will get regenerated into other areas that other people of other interests will enjoy, even if they don't like professional sports. IMHO.

matttwentyeight Jan 9, 2007 7:19 AM

Amen Jam, Amen!!!

Trae Jan 9, 2007 2:51 PM

The Cardinals Stadium is doing just fine in Glendale. I have heard that some "urban developments" are going up around it..like the new Cowboys Stadium. I wish San Antonio good luck with that new NFL team there are trying to get. Los Angeles will give you all a run for your money.

Back when the new franchise was awarded to Houston, Bob McNair came up with more money and had a better stadium proposal. Also, Houston had already had a sports franchise for 40 years at that time before they moved, so that helped.

satsuchan Jan 11, 2007 11:33 PM

Above #19, every market has football and MLB save LA...

19 Sacramnto-Stktn-Modesto 1,345,820 1.221
20 Orlando-Daytona Bch-Melbrn 1,345,700 1.221
21 St. Louis 1,222,380 1.109
22 Pittsburgh 1,169,800 1.061
23 Portland, OR 1,099,890 0.998
24 Baltimore 1,089,220 0.988
25 Indianapolis 1,053,750 0.956
26 San Diego 1,026,160 0.931
27 Charlotte 1,020,130 0.926
28 Hartford & New Haven 1,013,350 0.919
29 Raleigh-Durham (Fayetvlle) 985,200 0.894
30 Nashville 927,500 0.842
31 Kansas City 903,540 0.820
32 Columbus, OH 890,770 0.808
33 Milwaukee 880,390 0.799
34 Cincinnati 880,190 0.799
35 Greenvll-Spart-Ashevll-And 815,460 0.740
36 Salt Lake City 810,830 0.736
37 San Antonio 760,410 0.690
38 West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce 751,930 0.682
39 Grand Rapids-Kalmzoo-B.Crk 731,630 0.664
40 Birmingham (Ann and Tusc) 716,520 0.650
41 Harrisburg-Lncstr-Leb-York 707,010 0.641
42 Norfolk-Portsmth-Newpt Nws 704,810 0.640
43 New Orleans 672,150 0.610
44 Memphis 657670 0.597
45 Oklahoma City 655,400 0.595
46 Albuquerque-Santa Fe 653,680 0.593
47 Greensboro-H.Point-W.Salem 652,020 0.592
48 Las Vegas 651,110 0.591
49 Buffalo 644,430 0.585
50 Louisville 643,290 0.584

So, Sacramento seems to have a bigger chance than SA...

On this list, Austin comes in 54th, just after Jacksonville FL and Albany and before Scranton.

http://www.digitalsyndicate.tv/markets.html

Something to consider about Cincinnati - it also has the large Dayton Market (ranked about 56th); Milwaukee can count on Madison and Green Bay...

BSofA04 Jan 12, 2007 4:52 AM

^^Sacramento can't even get a new arena built for the Kings, good luck on a football stadium for an NFL team lol! As you can see, small DMA markets such as Milwaukee, New Orleans and Buffalo have successful. profitable franchises. You can have one of the biggest markets around, but if no one cares and local leaders arn't able to provide a viable stadium plan smaller progressive markets become a great alternative. Sacramento is about to lose the Kings to KC or LV.....they have NO SHOT WITH THE NFL.

Schertz1 Jan 12, 2007 4:59 AM

I do not think the San Antonio DMA represents San Antonio's true Market/Media Area. First, the DMA is smaller than the Metro. Second, the DMA excludes many small towns, in all directions, which are closer to San Antonio than any other small or medium market. The recent changing to Austin Media from San Antonio Media in Kerr County is only one example. Victoria, Corpus, and Laredo also play a part in this. If you look at smaller metros and compare the DMA to the census data you will really start to question how they are derived. Raleigh and Fayetteville North Carolina is one market with about 65 miles distance between the two. Fayetteville Metro is over 300K and defiantly large enough to support it's own affiliates. Rocky Mount, about 45 miles from Raleigh, has 150K+ and is also included in Raleigh DMA as it should be. If San Antonio plans to market itself to the NFL or MLB it will first need to downplay the DMA system. I don't think it really matters if you can not sellout your games anyway.

Schertz1 Jan 12, 2007 5:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by satsuchan (Post 2560416)
Above #19, every market has football and MLB save LA...

19 Sacramnto-Stktn-Modesto 1,345,820 1.221
20 Orlando-Daytona Bch-Melbrn 1,345,700 1.221
21 St. Louis 1,222,380 1.109
22 Pittsburgh 1,169,800 1.061
23 Portland, OR 1,099,890 0.998
24 Baltimore 1,089,220 0.988
25 Indianapolis 1,053,750 0.956
26 San Diego 1,026,160 0.931
27 Charlotte 1,020,130 0.926
28 Hartford & New Haven 1,013,350 0.919
29 Raleigh-Durham (Fayetvlle) 985,200 0.894
30 Nashville 927,500 0.842
31 Kansas City 903,540 0.820
32 Columbus, OH 890,770 0.808
33 Milwaukee 880,390 0.799
34 Cincinnati 880,190 0.799
35 Greenvll-Spart-Ashevll-And 815,460 0.740
36 Salt Lake City 810,830 0.736
37 San Antonio 760,410 0.690
38 West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce 751,930 0.682
39 Grand Rapids-Kalmzoo-B.Crk 731,630 0.664
40 Birmingham (Ann and Tusc) 716,520 0.650
41 Harrisburg-Lncstr-Leb-York 707,010 0.641
42 Norfolk-Portsmth-Newpt Nws 704,810 0.640
43 New Orleans 672,150 0.610
44 Memphis 657670 0.597
45 Oklahoma City 655,400 0.595
46 Albuquerque-Santa Fe 653,680 0.593
47 Greensboro-H.Point-W.Salem 652,020 0.592
48 Las Vegas 651,110 0.591
49 Buffalo 644,430 0.585
50 Louisville 643,290 0.584

So, Sacramento seems to have a bigger chance than SA...

On this list, Austin comes in 54th, just after Jacksonville FL and Albany and before Scranton.

http://www.digitalsyndicate.tv/markets.html

Something to consider about Cincinnati - it also has the large Dayton Market (ranked about 56th); Milwaukee can count on Madison and Green Bay...

Sacramento has no chance of getting NFL or MLB with San Francisco less the 90 miles away. Oakland is even closer.

JAM Jan 12, 2007 8:59 AM

^^^^ These numbers don't look representative of real populations. Metro #'s would be more revealing for determining pro-teams. TV markets count as well. So do corporation purchasing power.

BSofA04 Jan 14, 2007 8:33 PM

Jam,
You're absolutly right. Corporate purchasing power is why owners consider San Antonio. With AT&T, USAA and Valero to name a few, those are some significant heavyweights. Throw in a little Red McCombs with Peter Holt (who privatley has expressed intrest in being a potential minority owner), and you have a very promising opportunity. Oh yeah, and football is also KING in Texas.

kornbread Jan 14, 2007 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BSofA04 (Post 2564826)
Jam,
You're absolutly right. Corporate purchasing power is why owners consider San Antonio. With AT&T, USAA and Valero to name a few, those are some significant heavyweights. Throw in a little Red McCombs with Peter Holt (who privatley has expressed intrest in being a potential minority owner), and you have a very promising opportunity. Oh yeah, and football is also KING in Texas.

That is the problem; naming a few. I think the Alamodome only has 16-32 suites. However, most NFL teams have significantly more suites available (about 100 for newer stadiums). So when you start naming corporate support you need to be able to fill in those kinds of numbers. Obviously the dome falls short here, but the corporate environment is also tight.

You could add HEB, Tesoro, The Capital Group, Clear Channel, Toyota, Frost, IBC, Rackspace... It's starting to get tight. I'm sure there are a few more banking, drug, law related companies. US Global Investors made a bunch this past year, but NFL interest is far from a sure thing just because of the presence of at&t.

Also, to me, I didn't think SA's flirtation with the NFL last year showed a fierce interest in the game. They really should have sold out the 3 games as soon as they went on sale. That really shows something about disposable income for the city. An NFL ticket is expensive and just because football is king, it doesn't mean it sells tickets. They had to give some 10,000 tickets away before the last game on Christmas Eve to get the sellout. Not the strongest showing of support.

In the past the NFL said the roadblock for SA was the stadium, but it was really much more. That resulted in an empty stadium. Sure, it has been put to other use. People have enjoyed college basketball and football, and who could forget the memorial day miracle? But it has not been used for what is was built for and is already likely not suitable for the game today.

Hopefully the leagues willl give the city an honest assesment so they can move on to other things that will help to improve quality of life. When the environment of the city is improved it can start to draw corporate interest and everything else after that will fall into place.

METALMiKE Jan 14, 2007 11:38 PM

Good post.:)

SAguy Jan 15, 2007 12:36 AM

Quote:

Also, to me, I didn't think SA's flirtation with the NFL last year showed a fierce interest in the game. They really should have sold out the 3 games as soon as they went on sale. That really shows something about disposable income for the city. An NFL ticket is expensive and just because football is king, it doesn't mean it sells tickets. They had to give some 10,000 tickets away before the last game on Christmas Eve to get the sellout. Not the strongest showing of support
Remember, the Saints were a mediocre team last year and this is Cowboys country. As for corportate support, I don't see it as a big problem. San Antonio corporate base continues to expand. Also the Alamodome is in the process of adding more suites however; it's still below the 100 mark. If San Antonio does land an NFL team it will likely need to build a new stadium or dome. Perhaps, use the Alamodome temporary until a new one is built.

Schertz1 Jan 15, 2007 4:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kornbread (Post 2565012)
That is the problem; naming a few. I think the Alamodome only has 16-32 suites. However, most NFL teams have significantly more suites available (about 100 for newer stadiums). So when you start naming corporate support you need to be able to fill in those kinds of numbers. Obviously the dome falls short here, but the corporate environment is also tight.

You could add HEB, Tesoro, The Capital Group, Clear Channel, Toyota, Frost, IBC, Rackspace... It's starting to get tight. I'm sure there are a few more banking, drug, law related companies. US Global Investors made a bunch this past year, but NFL interest is far from a sure thing just because of the presence of at&t.

Also, to me, I didn't think SA's flirtation with the NFL last year showed a fierce interest in the game. They really should have sold out the 3 games as soon as they went on sale. That really shows something about disposable income for the city. An NFL ticket is expensive and just because football is king, it doesn't mean it sells tickets. They had to give some 10,000 tickets away before the last game on Christmas Eve to get the sellout. Not the strongest showing of support.

In the past the NFL said the roadblock for SA was the stadium, but it was really much more. That resulted in an empty stadium. Sure, it has been put to other use. People have enjoyed college basketball and football, and who could forget the memorial day miracle? But it has not been used for what is was built for and is already likely not suitable for the game today.

Hopefully the leagues willl give the city an honest assesment so they can move on to other things that will help to improve quality of life. When the environment of the city is improved it can start to draw corporate interest and everything else after that will fall into place.

You know, one thing I hate is a pessimistic attitude. The San Antonio nays Sayers alway pull the same cards and fail to mention the NFL cities that contradict the theories. When you look at Corporation bases look at Buffalo, Kansas City, Nashville, Tampa, Jacksonville, New Orleans, and Green Bay. There are several other Fortune 500s in San Antonio, Washington Mutual, MCI, Microsoft, Home Depot and Lowe’s operations are a few. We also have Zachary, Cordell, Rush, Koontz McCombs, West, Garden Ridge, and KCI. Austin is less than an hour, depending on where you live, so it is only logical may Austin companies would have suites. If Austin had an NFL team San Antonio companies would surly support it. NFL attendance is historically low for Christmas Eve games. Should San Antonio be any different? Basically, you do not know very much about South Central Texas.

kornbread Jan 15, 2007 5:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAguy (Post 2565150)
Remember, the Saints were a mediocre team last year and this is Cowboys country.

I went to the Saints-Falcons game and people were cheering for this mediocre team and having fun. I think the people that want the NFL and are willing to support it went to the games. To what extent would/could they support it? They had 3 games to audition for the NFL.

I heard some say people were mad about what Tagliabue said, or that it was Christmas Eve. But if you're trying to land a job and your potential employer expresses doubts you could either try to convince them that you are worth the risk or be offended and not care. How bad do you really want it? If it's the only game in town (like the NFL) you have to swallow your pride (on their schedule) or decide you don't need it.

Of course there are many reasons why people could not go to a game, but SA is a city of over 1 million. If this was the city's chance to prove it could support a team, it was interesting to see what transpired.


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:24 AM.

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