Witch city would be your 1st choice or a new NFL or moved team and why???
2006-11-28 14:15:58 · 9 answers · asked by barrie108 1 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
mesquitemachine your wrong New York City dose not have a NFL team and there population is twice the size of LA. Both the Giants and Jets play in New Jersey......lol
2006-11-28 15:27:44 · update #1
Frankly I agree that the 32 team number is great. At fifty years old I remember when there were half that number. I would, however, move teams. The southeast has far too many teams in the conferences. With the large NCAA and NASCAR schedules move one of the Florida teams to Nebraska or Oklahoma. I would then move the NO Saints to Arizona, and Arizona to NO. Neither owner deserves a team. Bidwell can't do anything right and Benton is a disgrace. Notice Benton's been so quiet since his problem plagued city sold-out his stadium? If they want to own them, fine, make them move them!!
2006-11-29 03:46:18 · answer #1 · answered by jerry g 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't believe the NFL is expanding any time soon. 32's a really nice number. If they do expand, it will probably be by 4 (either all at once or within a couple of years of each other) but that would be at least 7-10 years away.
Moving a team is more likely, and I'd say LA is the spot, with San Antonio a close second. Considering Giants Stadium is now pushing 30 years old, good chance that either the Giants or the Jets or both will move back to NYC within the next decade.
2006-11-29 00:55:35 · answer #2 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Albequerque New Mexico. Los Angeles California. Orlando Florida San Antonio Texas Oklahoma City Oklahoma Virginia Beach Virginia Portland Oregon El Paso Texas Yes, they could expand into all of these markets, and still do well. The NFL is King.
2016-05-23 00:00:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, I'm sure people will say LA but Los Angelenos could give a toss when they have USC and UCLA and have no desire to fund a new stadium. Good for them, I say as the NFL should fund their own stadiums and not be so cheap.
I'd say there are few cities to choose from as after all there is a team in Jacksonville and who would ever go there ever unless for a game.
How about Birmingham, Alabama? Great football tradition and being the only major pro team in town would work.
2006-11-28 14:19:13 · answer #4 · answered by fugutastic 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably Los Angeles or San Antonio.
Los Angeles because it's the largest city in the country without a professional football team.
San Antonio because it proved it could sell out a stadium consistently when the Saints played there.
*EDIT*
Well, then since you said that about New York...the Dallas Cowboys don't play in Dallas, but a suburb...the Redskins don't play in Washington DC, but in Maryland...
LOL...we could go on and on about teams that don't actually play in the cities in their name.
2006-11-28 14:18:27 · answer #5 · answered by mesquitemachine 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Mexico deserves a team, all the games played here so far have been sold out above the 100,000 mark. The problem would be that we don't have enough money to build a state of the art stadium. Well, we do but our government is so tight-fisted.
2006-11-28 16:22:02 · answer #6 · answered by ramz 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its time for Las Vegas to get an NFL team,It would give the citizens something else to do besides gamble.
2006-11-28 14:19:33 · answer #7 · answered by eddyintn 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Los Angeles. Its one of the biggest markets in the U.S.
2006-11-28 16:40:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Montreal Quebec. we love football here and football was invented in this city.
2006-11-28 14:25:09 · answer #9 · answered by teddybear 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋