Raiders look at move to... San Antonio?

http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=11838270

Somehow, I think LA is more likely. Besides, San Antonio should hold out for a pro team. LOL

Right jerseys for a move a move to San Antonio!

San Antonio, LA and another team somewhere in the North West should all get teams before the league even considers coming over here to England with a team.

The two most attractive cities from a metropolitan size for an aspiring franchise is San Antonio and Los Angeles. The Bay area is really too small to merit two franchises.
Even New York doesn't really need two teams anymore, with the universality of TV exposure.

Baseball's two city arrangements date back to the National and American league wars, at the turn of the 19th century. But over time most of those dual or even triple team areas have been reduced to only a few multiple team cities.

I can see it now: The Raiders lured into Texas by The Corporate Raider



Now California will really be mad.

Big-T said:

Right jerseys for a move a move to San Antonio!

San Antonio, LA and another team somewhere in the North West should all get teams before the league even considers coming over here to England with a team.

Click to expand...

Yes

Mexico City and Toronto make sense before moving across the pond.

RecoveringCowboy said:

Yes

Mexico City and Toronto make sense before moving across the pond.

Click to expand...

Agreed. To me, Toronto is not a big deal at all. It is one of the three cities often mentioned: LA, San Antonio and Toronto.

IMHO, Toronto/Buffalo is one market as is Detroit/Windsor. So, Buffalo could move to Toronto, or Detroit to Windsor with relatively minor impact.

I don't under why folks are considering cities like Toronto or Windsor in the same category as Mexico City or London.
===
With regard to Oakland, I think that LA or San Antonio both make sense. I suspect that it is more likely that Texas can support three NFL teams than Southern California can support two. LA is always mentioned as lucrative venue. I just don't see it. I see a lot of empty seats.

LA seems like a much bigger market than San Antonio. Add to that there is a Raiders following there, but SA is in the Cowboys backyard and Jerry Jones will fight to keep it from happening.

Mexico City will never be able to field an NFL team.

Anyone who can run, jump, or juke & jink is already over here.

Hell that would work out great. With the Spurs in town fans would never have to change colors.

I hope the Raiders don't come back to LA. I live in the South Bay region, just 20 miles south of Los Angeles. There's enough traffic and craziness in LA as it is. I would prefer the Raiders go to San Antonio or something.

I think SA is a great town, I have a blast down there. Think They would have great fans and all. The Spurs are the only game in town so it might be a great move.

Toronto would be a terrible city for the NFL. We have some of the worst fans in North America, and corporate suits would kill any atmosphere or ambiance at games. When the Bills came to town regularly, they wouldn't even allow tail-gating, though you could pay extra to go into a special zone that was cordoned off with expensive ****ty beer and food. Only in Toronto could they **** up tail-gating.

was an article on this this on PFT a few months ago..texas has too many teams...even though OAK sucks..texas doesn't need another team when cowboys and texans rule that state/area

Toronto should really get a team in my opinion. It's the fourth biggest city in North America, behind only NYC, LA, and Mexico City.

Not sure why Buffalol deserves a team over them.

Long term (think 7-15 years), I think there will be a multi-step expansion to get the league to first 36 and then 40 teams.

2 teams in LA, Toronto and London are already 4 slots. I am sure that there 4 more metropolitan areas that would further increase overall revenue.

This will go hand in hand with an overhaul of the league schedule (subtract 1-2 pre season games, add a second BYE and 1-2 games per year, expand playoffs)

this way the league year is prolonged by an entire month and the owners and the league can cash in even more.

The NFLPA will not be happy but will be swayed by a rising cap which means more money for their players, more employment opportunity and the additional BYE.

I am not sure how to feel about all of that but I am not sure if there is a way to prevent all of that.

There's to me only 3 teams that really has to move. That's the Raiders, Rams, Jaguars.

The Raiders make perfect sense in LA. The heart of Raider nation is still in SoCal. Whenever they play the Chargers in SD, Raiders fans always fill the stadium, but I don't think the league trusts the Davis family with their last chance at LA. Let's see what happens.

The city of St. Louis is truly a one sport town. Rams get no love, I can see them heading to LA, maybe more than Oakland. Especially considering the fact their owner owns chunks of land that being looked at to build a stadium their.

I know the Jaguars to London is always what's being brought up, but I can really see them being the ones that head to San Antonio. It makes the most sense. They can keep them in the AFC south, and they can make a state war rivalry with the Texans, in what's probably the most dullest division in football.

luuked said:

2 teams in LA, Toronto and London are already 4 slots. I am sure that there 4 more metropolitan areas that would further increase overall revenue.

I am not sure how to feel about all of that but I am not sure if there is a way to prevent all of that.

Click to expand...

The London piece will be the hardest to get through the union most likely. The novelty will (has) wear off and the scheduling component for the Western teams (most likely some sort of East Coast game, to London the next week so they just travel from there, then the bye) sucks. Then divisionally, they'll most likely be placed in the AFC and NFC East for the same travel reduction considerations. Jerry Jones...London Calling!

LA has two different former NFL teams, both on the short list to be moved, each playing in a Western Division. Why would one consider taking any OTHER franchise there?

The money in the SF area is now in the tech industry. They see to identify with the Giants and, secondarily, 49ers. I'm optimistic the Warriors' move to SF will work out. The Athletics are staying. That leaves the Raiders as the fifth pro team in the area. Yeah, moving is likely to make sense.

Gwedd said:

Mexico City will never be able to field an NFL team.

Anyone who can run, jump, or juke & jink is already over here.

Click to expand...

Oh man I'm probably a terrible person for laughing at this as much as I did. Well done good sir.

convertedpatsfan said:

Toronto would be a terrible city for the NFL. We have some of the worst fans in North America, and corporate suits would kill any atmosphere or ambiance at games. When the Bills came to town regularly, they wouldn't even allow tail-gating, though you could pay extra to go into a special zone that was cordoned off with expensive ****ty beer and food. Only in Toronto could they **** up tail-gating.

Click to expand...

I doubt that man. Toronto goes ****ing nuts for the Toronto Raptors. Basketball IN Canada. They would be a great place for an NFL team. Toronto might have the most passionate fans in North America, they are a terribly annoying fan base as well. One of my least favorite.