New Orleans Saints To Relocate To San Antonio?

[houstonsemipro]

Mayor hopefuls want to see Saints march in

Web Posted: 05/11/2005 12:00 AM CDT

Tom Orsborn

Express-News Staff Writer

A local attorney representing New Orleans Saints owner Tom Benson said Tuesday that Benson is interested in relocating the franchise, possibly to San Antonio.

***Edited to remove copyrighted content***

Please provide links where possible.

Edited May 12, 2005 by Subdude

[MidtownCoog]

Don't do it SA.

It's like dealing with the devil.

Faust

[WestGrayGuy]

Dream On!

No way San Antonio gets it over LA. Houston had a hard enough time winning over LA with a brand new stadium. A spruced up Alamodome won't cut the mustard.

I wonder if this means a new stadium for New Orleans isn't going to happen?

[Sunstar]

Cool, another big rivalry for Texas. SA has needed a team for a long time. I'm a little surprised that they will need to spend so much money to bring the Alamo dome up to par. It's kind of funny to think that they built that stadium specifically to woo an NFL team, and now they finally get a team and they already have to update it.

[houstonsemipro]

To me. I think SA have a great shot bringing a NFL team to the city. The owner for the Saints been talking about moving away from New Orleans to SA about 5 years ago when Ricky Williams was there, and I remembered Ricky talking about the Saints moving to SA then. New Orleans is a cool place, but just don't have the money. Saints franchise best bet is SA or L.A.

I think the Saints should move to SA, and also the Vikings is looking for another home. I think they should go to L.A.

[kjb434]

I think the taxpayers are hesitant to build a new stadium in New Orleans. Also, there isn't much room in that city for new construction unless the raze some delapidated neighborhoods like the baseball team in Washington D.C. is doing. Being from Louisiana, I really don't want the Saints to leave. It's like the Utah Jazz (whoever heard of Jazz in Utah?). If they move, I would like the name to change like when the Oilers moved to Tennessee.

The Superdome is also like the Astrodome with history. I don't think anybody can let it go. It still hold the record for largest reinfored concrete roof span. The main problem is the facility is just too big. It can be modified on the inside for anything since the most of the internal structure doesn't support the roof. The big problem is competing against stadiums that can be built like Reliant where the flexibility of indoor outdor exists. I really don't want to see the Superdome go for a new stadium, but I wouldn't want a new stadium built outside of New Orleans because of lack of space in the city. One concept was placing a stadium between Baton Rouge and New Orleans or the Mississippi Gulf Coast and New Orleans. This would enlarge the population for the market. It would be similar to the New England Patriots.

[WestGrayGuy]

The owner of the Minnesota Vikings, Red McCombs has ties to SA. Wouldn't it make more sense for them to move to SA?

[houstonsemipro]

Well, by reading the article. The Saints could move by the end of the 2005 season by paying an $81 million penalty. By the sound of the Saints owner, he really want to move away from New Orleans. Believe me, the city of New Orleans is not going to built another stadium, that's more taxes to be rasied, and the people there already doing bad then on top of it building a new stadium? More tax increase? Hell, they rather the franchise to relocate.

People already suffering for money, not only louisiana, but nationwide. I'm not an Orleans fan, nor a Saints fan, so my guess is to relocate to a better state. Besides, Texans love to spend money. We love to travel. We support our teams, and it's alot of money here in Texas.

I say either Saints or Vikings to move to SA.

[jpcampbell]

Well, by reading the article. The Saints could move by the end of the 2005 season by paying an $81 million penalty. By the sound of the Saints owner, he really want to move away from New Orleans. Believe me, the city of New Orleans is not going to built another stadium, that's more taxes to be rasied, and the people there already doing bad then on top of it building a new stadium? More tax increase? Hell, they rather the franchise to relocate.

People already suffering for money, not only louisiana, but nationwide. I'm not an Orleans fan, nor a Saints fan, so my guess is to relocate to a better state. Besides, Texans love to spend money. We love to travel. We support our teams, and it's alot of money here in Texas.

I say either Saints or Vikings to move to SA.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I hate when teams move, but having the Cowboys as the third best team in their own state would be fun to see.

Go Texans

[citykid09]

We need another NFL Team in this state. California, Floridia, and New York get all of the teams, and Texas is the 2nd most populated State.

[jpcampbell]

We need another NFL Team in this state. California, Floridia, and New York get all of the teams, and Texas is the 2nd most populated State.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's all about concentration of population. Houston may be #4 in population, but it's like the 11th media market. Dallas is like #7 because of Ft. Worth, Arlington, Grand Prarie, etc, etc.

Even though San Antonio is a larger city than Dallas, it ranks 37th in market size. Granted, that's larger than New Orleans (43), but jumping up to LA (#2) is probably more appealing.

link

[houstonsemipro]

I agree. Texas needs one more NFL team, and that's SA. I always wanted to see SA to have a pro NFL team. Remember, SA is rennovating the Alamodome anyway for a potential MLS franchise, so might as well spend couple more millions of dollars to attract a NFL franchise too. But, SA will have to deal with L.A. for the next home NFL franchise team.

Here is an article which Anaheim, CA (35 miles away from downtown L.A.) have plans for a NFL stadium...

Anaheim unveils plans for potential NFL stadium

NFL.com wire reports

ANAHEIM, Calif. (May 10, 2005) -- The city of Anaheim outlined plans for a football stadium near the home of the Angels that could house an NFL franchise by 2008.

"We have an economic impact report approved for a 70,500-seat state-of-the-art stadium," said John Nicoletti, the city's external affairs manager. "We are working with the NFL to finalize our term sheet for their upcoming owners meeting May 24-25 in Washington, D.C.

"We would love to be able to host NFL games in 2008."

Anaheim is one of four sites in the greater Los Angeles area being considered for an NFL franchise. The others are the Los Angeles Coliseum, the Rose Bowl in Pasadena and a proposed stadium in Carson.

Nicoletti, joined by several other city officials at the presentation, said the plan included a grand parkway that would link the stadium with Disneyland and other sports venues.

"If called upon, we are ready to make our presentation to the NFL owners at the meetings in two weeks," Nicoletti said.

David Carter, principal of The Sports Business Group, a marketing consultant, said after months of study he believes Anaheim is the best site for an NFL owner.

Anaheim hired the Sports Business Group last fall to ascertain the best site from an owner's perspective for an NFL franchise in the greater Los Angeles area. The proposed stadium in Anaheim is about 35 miles south of downtown Los Angeles.

"If I'm an NFL owner, I think I can make more money and build my franchise value more in Anaheim than at the other sites," Carter said.

But, Carter added, there are other elements to consider.

"We came back with the fact that each of the four competing sites has some real attributes and each has shortcomings," he said. "Ultimately, Anaheim's biggest shortcoming is the real estate values continue to escalate rapidly and the city believes there are additional uses for that land.

"(Anaheim) may be the optimal site if you're an NFL owner, but it's very expensive, almost so attractive it could be tough to justify putting an NFL stadium in there."

The area has been without an NFL franchise since the Rams left Anaheim for St. Louis and the Raiders left Los Angeles for Oakland before the 1995 season.

[jpcampbell]

There was a lot of talk last year of the Colts owner wanting to move to LA. Maybe if that happens, SA will have a better shot at getting the Saints.

[flatline]

I'm afraid San Antonio is just being used as leverage against New Orleans and the state of Louisiana to get a new stadium/upgrades to Superdome/lease concessions. As the article notes, it's happened before. . .in fact, I'm pretty sure that Benson was doing the flirting that went a long way towards S.A. building the Alamodome in the first place.

Semipro makes a good point about the renovations. Now, since 15+ years have past since the 'MoDome was built, the NFL would assuredly demand upgrades and/or a new stadium to have a team there.

While the NFL desperately wants to be in LA, the key considerations will always be (1) ownership group and (2) stadium. The proof of that being that two small market towns -- Jacksonville and Charlotte-- got the expansion teams ten years ago, and that McNair and H-Town beat out LA, who just couldn't get its s--t together on an ownership group or a publicly financed stadium deal like H-Town did.

[kjb434]

Yes, Benson has played this game many of times before and received upgrades. He often flirts with moving the team to the Mississippi Gulf Coast. And the Biloxi-Gulport area really wants them and had the money to build a stadium easily.

This is the first time I see Benson flirting with SA.

[houstonsemipro]

I'm glad he's just flirting with Mississippi, cause moving a NFL team there is like moving a cargo full of junk. Mississippi? Good lord! That place is twice as bad as it in louisiana. Moving a pro team there is like telling the NFL go f*** y'all selves without KY.

You know. I was thinking about this whole deal, and I came to a conclusion. Benson, the owner of the Saints. If he's really serious about moving away from New Orleans, he will do it after this 2005 season. Gone ahead and pay for the $81 million penalty, and move to SA, or L.A. We will see after this season. However, if they decide to stay in Orleans the contract will extend to 2010.

[kjb434]

The location to Mississppi would make a regional team. This would exten the Market from Mobile to New Orleans.

What is so bad about Mississippi and Louisiana? Please don't knock places down from stereotypes and lack of knowledge.

[houstonsemipro]

I don't want to get off topic talking about Mississippi. But to answer your question about Mississippi. If I was an owner of a NFL franchise team do you think I would think of Mississippi before Texas? What Mississippi have to offer? Casinos? Hell, Louisiana got them too. Ummmm, the answer would be NO. Hell, in that case get a NFL team in Alabama, or Arkansas. I had my experience in Mississippi, beleive me I know.

Besides, Mississippi media market is not even ranked in the top 25. A pro team will lose money there faster then in Louisiana. Before you know it they be relocating somewhere else.

Texas is the best place for another NFL team. SA is a rapidly growing city. Hell, it out did Dallas and now SA is the second largest city in Texas. SA desires a NFL team.

[houstonfella]

I think the San Antonio - Austin area could very well support the NFL. I won't say that N.O. will go there, but in the future, it would be AWESOME to have that third Texans NFL team. I love the local rivalries. Dall-Hou SA-Hou SA-Dall etc.

[kjb434]

I think they could make a regional central texas team and place it is New Braunfels. SA and Austin markets will be served. It will just be like the New England Patriots serving Boston and Providence.

There has been a trend of development growing to the point where SA and Austin suburbs will meet each other. It'll be kind of like Silicon Valley between San Fransisco-Oakley and San Jose. With the metros kind of merging in the next 20 years, I think placing a Team between the two will be great. The only problem would be that SA wants the team in their city, in downtown. Austin I think really doesn't care.

[houstonsemipro]

We will see if the Saints owner is for real when the 2005 season ends. Now think about this. How if the Saints go to the playoffs this year? What will happen then? Will they continue to stay in N.O.? or continue with their relocation package? The city might fund the money to renovate the superdome if they go to the playoffs. Something to think about.

[J.A.S.O.N.]

I for one wouldn't like to see the Saints stay in New Orleans, or any renovations to the Superdome. Houston could take New Orleans' spot in the Superbowl rotation.

[houstonsemipro]

Well Jason. That's good you wanna see Houston in the superbowl rotation, but let's be realistic here. If Houston is not awarded for the 2009 superbowl, houston will be in limbo for another super bowl.

But, you know what. I have a funny feeling about this whole relocation deal. To me, the Saints will stay marching in New Orleans. But, who knows. The Saints might be marching in San Antonio.

[houstonsemipro]

More news. Read below...

San Antonio not in shape for Saints

The city's financial constraints would probably prevent it from being readyfor an NFL team

Friday, May 13, 2005

By Mike Triplett

Staff writer

-------------------

This message has been edited to remove copyrighted material.

Please do not post copyrighted photos or articles from newspapers or magazines. We have already received a warning from the Houston Chronicle, and the legal departments of other publications have visited the site. If you would like to discuss a published article, please summarize the article and provide a link to the original source.

-------------------

[DJ V Lawrence]

We need another NFL Team in this state. California, Floridia, and New York get all of the teams, and Texas is the 2nd most populated State.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Respect to CityKid for the valid point. Let's see, if I'm correct, California leads all states in the U.S. with three NFL teams, followed by Texas, Florida, and NEW JERSEY with two (yes, New Jersey. New York state has ONE team. Buffalo. New York Giants and Jets play at the Meadowlands in NEW JERSEY!!! NYC, DON'T be fooled. We're not. Build your stadium in Manhattan, and you'll get some credit, aight?!)

Now check it: http://www.forbes.com/2004/09/01/04nfland.html

This is the major plus for a team in S.A. instead of L.A. Two out of the three highest valued teams in the NFL are located in Texas, and BOTH are expected to pass up the Washington Redskins as the highest valued storts teams of ALL major U.S. franchises. For S.A., a team would be great for the city, its revenue, its image, and its surrounding businesses, but the biggest winner to having another franshise in Texas is Austin. I'd be fighting like hell to get another team here if I were state legislature. State revenue would be boosted madly.

As for L.A., I'm not sure how L.A. wouldn't be able to win back a franchise by simply renovating the L.A. Colloseum. It wouldn't be as expensive as a new stadium, and I think the revenue would work to the city's and owner's advantage the highest if it were to go there.

Lastly, I can see the Saints owner asking for a new stadium as part of the deal should the Saints actually pursue a move to S.A., with renovations to the Dome for a temporary stay as also being part of the deal. With that, the possible MLS team or teams would play long-term in a state-of-the-art Alamodome, and pump revenue from three different venues (including SBC Center)

[houstonsemipro]

Well, L.A. got the money to do things, S.A. don't. We would love S.A. to have an NFL team, but do tot he lack of money S.A. has, it's going to be hard as hell to outdo L.A. The NFL commissioner already said that they want L.A. to have the the next NFL team. Maybe the Saints would have it better in L.A. then in S.A. But the owner of the Saints is really pushing for S.A.

But, it's hard to say right now. We can talk until we blue in the face about this, and then at the end the Saints stays put in New Orleans. But, who knows. Saints owner may work out an deal with the city of S.A. on bringing the franchise there. We shall see.

[NewMND]

Respect to CityKid for the valid point. Let's see, if I'm correct, California leads all states in the U.S. with three NFL teams, followed by Texas, Florida

Actually, even Florida has three teams! JAX, Tampa, Miami. I too would like to see a team for central Texas, don't really see it happening, but it could be cool.

[citykid09]

^ I think if LA gets this next team, San Antonio will be the next after LA to get a team.

[houstonsemipro]

I also think that SA is not ready to host a NFL team. If the Saints move to SA, they be in the same situtation like they was in New Orleans. So my prediction is stay in N.O., or move the team to L.A.

L.A. is ready to host a team there. They have four big stadiums to host an NFL team temporary has they build a new stadium, (a new propose stadium already on plans). Besides, even the NFL Commissioner is pushing for an NFL team in L.A. by 2008-2009.

[kjb434]

You can hardly call the Colloseum a good stadium. LA will have to completely build a new facility for a new team.

[DJ V Lawrence]

Actually, even Florida has three teams! JAX, Tampa, Miami.  I too would like to see a team for central Texas, don't really see it happening, but it could be cool.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Respect to NewMND for the correction. A thousand apologies for my ignorance, yo!

Oye, and by the way, whatever happened to the talks of the next NFL franchise being located in Mexico City?

[Subdude]

Just an idea they threw around at the time of the last expansion. It wasn't a serious proposal, just a vague competitive threat to make sure cities continued coughing up for spankin'-new stadiums.

[houstonsemipro]

L.A. had two teams before, L.A. RAMS and L.A. RAIDERS. They both left the city. What was the reason they left? Stadium issues? Will the past hunt them if they get a NFL team back in L.A.?

[Subdude]

I believe it was stadium issues. Unlike most cities, LA hasn't been willing to cough up the bucks to support the NFL in the style to which it's become accustomed. LA can get away with it since, due to the size of the market, the NFL is desperate to get back into the area.

[kjb434]

One of the problems with the stadium the raiders played at was that fans wouldn't go to it. The neighborhood wasn't safe and the seating was particularly good.

[houstonsemipro]

Well, getting back to the Saints relocating issue. My advice to the Saints is these three options.

1. Stay in New Orleans, and sign a long term contract rennovate the superdome.

2. Relocate to L.A.

3. Sell the team

Now, the reason why I said relocate to L.A. and not the S.A. cause first of all S.A. is not prepared to host a NFL team, secondly, L.A. already has 3 big stadiums that could host a NFL team tempotary until they build a new one.

For selling the team. Benson (Saints owner), have had offers to sell the team. The highest seller was $1.2 billion, the lowest was $1 billion.

[HeightsGuy]

Bob McNair paid 700 million for the Texans. He and Jerry Jones are two of the most powerful owners in the NFL. Do you think both of them are going to just roll over and concede merchandising to all of central and south central Texas to a new team in SA?

No chance. SA will never have an NFL team.

[The Great Hizzy!]

You know, most people don't know this but the San Diego Chargers started off as the Los Angeles Chargers in the AFL before moving a couple years later. So Los Angeles has been the home at one time or another of three current NFL teams.

Pretty impressive.

In any case, Los Angeles will eventually get another team, and it may just be another expansion team. The NFL announced last year that it would basically guarantee a new LA team in the near future, even if it meant expansion, which means that (if expansion) some other city will be in line for a franchise, too. I can think of several candidates for the 34th team, including Portland, OR, Sacramento, CA, Memphis, TN (they've been trying to get a team for 20 years), Oklahoma City, San Antonio, Toronto, Birmingham, AL and even Las Vegas, NV.

[houstonsemipro]

I seriously doubt they will have another expansion team in the NFL. It's 5 NFL teams looking for relocation due to stadium issues. Buffalo Bills, Minnesota Vikings, New Orleans Saints, Indianapolis Colts, and San Diego Chargers.

[el-tri]

to me San Antonio is a better home to a football team than Los Angeles,

plus the Alamodome is way better than the LA Coliseum.

[Gary]

to me San Antonio is a better home to a football team than Los Angeles,

plus the Alamodome is way better than the LA Coliseum.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

El-tri,

have you ever been to the LA colliseum? Yes it's old but it is emense. It's a great place to see a football game, it's outside generally in great weather and it's laid out very nicely (although a little large).

The only domed stadium I could stand was the Astrodome because sunlight actually got through (to some degree). Imo every other one I've been to including the Alamodome was sterile and uninviting. It's like being in a cave.

I remember when I first moved here and went to a few Astros games in the dome and although it was very nostalgic for me it wasn't nearly as cool as watching a game in Dodger stadium. Then they built Enron field and I thought I had died and gone to heaven. You just can't beat an outdoor stadium.

[DJ V Lawrence]

Well, getting back to the Saints relocating issue. My advice to the Saints is these three options.

1. Stay in New Orleans, and sign a long term contract rennovate the superdome.

2. Relocate to L.A.

3. Sell the team

Now, the reason why I said relocate to L.A. and not the S.A. cause first of all S.A. is not prepared to host a NFL team, secondly, L.A. already has 3 big stadiums that could host a NFL team tempotary until they build a new one.

For selling the team. Benson (Saints owner), have had offers to sell the team. The highest seller was $1.2 billion, the lowest was $1 billion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First off, I thought Indianapolis already got that football-college basketball stadium approved. I think the Colts have already been confirmed to play in a new Staduim in '08 or 09.

Secondly, to Mr. Benson, Take the money and RUUUNNN!! RRRRUUUUUUNNNN!!!Your team is one of the lowest worth teams in the league (around $550 Million). You are NOT the Cowboys or Texans! TAKE THE 1.2 BILLION and buy a different team!!!!

Oh, and S.A. NEEDS a team. Alamodoem was primarily built to lure an NFL team to them, anyway. What has L.A. done so far to already have a stadium in place?

And finally, I think Jones and McNair would make MORE money if S.A. had a team, compared to L.A., where there would almost be no effect afterwards on Texas teams.

[HeightsGuy]

DJ, tell me how the Texans make more money with a team in SA vs. LA. Is it that we will sell more Texans merchandise in SA once SA gets their own team, or will it be from all the TV revenue SA can bring to the table as compared to LA?

[RedScare]

You can't forget, Tom Benson is himself, a San Antonio man, so SA is in play. Until Red McCombs sold, Texas had 6 NFL owners, 2 in San Antonio.

San Antonio could support a team. There are only 10 games a year, so tickets, though expensive, are affordable for a season pass, compared to basketball and baseball. San Antonio metro is over 1, 600,000, equal to San Diego and larger than Jacksonville. Add in Austin (1,250,000) next door, and it is equal to Minneapolis and bigger than Green Bay/Milwaukee, Indy, Nashville, Charlotte and Tampa, among others.

Media market is a big deal when deciding an expansion site, but Tom Benson is a longtime owner, and if he wanted to move to his hometown, I suspect the owners would let him.

If Tom is turning down $1 Billion, as has been reported, he clearly likes owning the team. The question is still stadiums. Can the AlamoDome be renovated to satisfy Club/Suite needs?

[kjb434]

San Diego and Jacksonville Metro is much bigger than 1.6mil. San Diego proper is just over 1 mill with a large subrurban area reach over a million.

Jacksonvill is similar with about 800,000 people in the proper with over a million in the suburbs.

To me as I said before, San Antonio and Austin should work together and place a team in between around New Braunfels similar to Boston and Providence having a team in Foxbury.

[DJ V Lawrence]

DJ, tell me how the Texans make more money with a team in SA vs. LA. Is it that we will sell more Texans merchandise in SA once SA gets their own team, or will it be from all the TV revenue SA can bring to the table as compared to LA?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think there would be any affect on the Texas markets if L.A. recieved the team.

However, if S.A. got the new team, and they were as passionate about the team as we expect them to be, I think merchandise between S.A., the Cowboys, and Texans would jump.

But S.A. would either be in the NFC with the Cowboys, or the AFC with the Texans, which means there would be more rivalry games played among us every season. Rivalry means ratings and revenue. Ratings mean noteriety, and merchandise sales.

[RedScare]

http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/phc-t3.html

Table 3.

Don't take my word for it...

San Antonio/Austin combined metro population - 2,842,146

San Diego - 2,813,833

St. Louis - 2,603,607

Denver - 2,581,506

Tampa - 2,395,997

Pittsburgh - 2,358,695

Cincinatti - 1,979,202

Kansas City - 1,776,202

Green Bay/Milwaukee combined metro - 1,916,350

Indianapolis - 1,607,486

Charlotte - 1,499,293

New Orleans - 1,337,726

Nashville - 1,231,311

Buffalo - 1,170,111

Jacksonville - 1,100,491

Not to mention 2 metros that are less than 5% larger...

Minneapolis - 2,968,806

Cleveland - 2,945,831

Count 'em...one half of NFL metros smaller than SA?Austin.

[Heights2Bastrop]

If the Saints care about their fans, then they should relocate to somewhere where there is a cheap supply of brown paper bags.

[HeightsGuy]

RedScare, for the sake of this argument, you should be using this stat:

Neilson Media Top Markets

To think of the places the next franchise might settle, you have to think of the owner's incentive. The owners share all TV and merchandise revenue (forgot about that last one, washes one of my arguments about McNair not wanting new franchise in SA). They also share a good portion of ticket sales, but they don't share the extra money made through luxury boxes, which is why that has been the buzzword for a while and represents a significant revenue streem for individual owners.

That said, there are probably a hundred cities in the US that could fill a stadium every week, but not every city is equal when it comes to TV viewership. Since the owners share TV revenue (125 million each per year now), they have a vested interest to place teams in markets that have the most viewers. Currenly, LA (the number 2 TV market in the country) has no team.

Does that make it any clearer why LA wins over SA?

[RedScare]

Dude, why would I want to use that list. It queers my whole argument for SA!

Seriously, there is no denying LA would be the preferred site, IF LA wanted it, and Benson wanted to move there. A guy turning down $1 Billion clearly is not thinking only of the money (quite refreshing). There is something going on in LA, when 2 teams leave and none will take their place for 10 years.

Don't get me wrong. It may be a good thing that LA is telling these billionaires to pay for their own playpens. But, if the NFL has other cities willing to pony up, like Houston, then the urge is to go where the money is.

My posts should not be construed as some type of argument that SA is the smartest place to move a team...only that the area could support one. As the NBA showed this year, 3 Texas teams in the playoffs can be very exciting (for us). I'd love to see it in the NFL, as well.

P.S. - Via Los Es Spurs!