|
|
Post by Milkman Norm on Feb 5, 2007 15:20:25 GMT -5
A goverment taking a team from an owner that tries to move the team would be awesome. If had a time machine I would have alerted the state patrol of Maryland that the team was leaving, had the roads blocked and forced them back to Maryland. In fact I hope there is some sort of retroactive law that would force them back to Baltimore. Teams that move piss me off.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,362
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Feb 5, 2007 16:52:17 GMT -5
A goverment taking a team from an owner that tries to move the team would be awesome. If had a time machine I would have alerted the state patrol of Maryland that the team was leaving, had the roads blocked and forced them back to Maryland. In fact I hope there is some sort of retroactive law that would force them back to Baltimore. Teams that move piss me off. Even teams that move because they are losing money? It really is no different from businesses relocating. I am only bothered by teams that get new stadiums built for them that move before the local government has made their money back. Besides, imminent domain laws are abused way too much as is. If Baltimore really had pulled it off, they would still be in litigation over doing it, with a real chance that any profits made in the interem becoming the rightful property of the Irsays. If the fans truly don't want their team to ever, ever move, do what the Packers' fans did; buy the team your own damn selves. BTW, how sad is it that no NFL team can make good enough money in LA? Seriously, Oakland and St. Louis are honestly more profitable locations? |
|
|
|
Post by Milkman Norm on Feb 5, 2007 17:25:12 GMT -5
A goverment taking a team from an owner that tries to move the team would be awesome. If had a time machine I would have alerted the state patrol of Maryland that the team was leaving, had the roads blocked and forced them back to Maryland. In fact I hope there is some sort of retroactive law that would force them back to Baltimore. Teams that move piss me off. Even teams that move because they are losing money? It really is no different from businesses relocating. I am only bothered by teams that get new stadiums built for them that move before the local government has made their money back. Besides, imminent domain laws are abused way too much as is. If Baltimore really had pulled it off, they would still be in litigation over doing it, with a real chance that any profits made in the interem becoming the rightful property of the Irsays. If the fans truly don't want their team to ever, ever move, do what the Packers' fans did; buy the team your own damn selves. BTW, how sad is it that no NFL team can make good enough money in LA? Seriously, Oakland and St. Louis are honestly more profitable locations? 1. The NFL passed a rule that bans public ownership 2. I know what you're saying but I'm a softy traditionalist. My compramise would be that owners could do what Art Modell did, move his team but void the rights to the name, logo, etc to the city. It's pathetic that there's a team in Hoston but they can't be the Oilers even thought the team in Memphis isn't using the name. I guess thing that bothers me is that sports and fan loyalty is viewed as just another bussiness. I assume that the Israys were using money in Baltimore and I know that Baltimore in the early 80's wasn't a great place to be (when your cities unoffical slogan is Baltimore a City that Bleeds, you know you have some issues.) but there were loyal fans who had followed that team at Memorial Stadium through the joy of John Unitas in the fifties to the sadness of the Ghost to the Post in the 70'. I'm not raining on the Indy Colts parade, the team was the best in the NFL and good for Peyton to get the monkey off his back. But the fact of the matter is that the Colts were a Baltimore instition with a loyal fan base and those people had their team taken from them. It might have been the only option available the Israys but it doesn't change the fact that I think it sucks that it has to be that way. |
|
mo
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
"Here are the young men, the weight on their shoulders..."
Posts: 16,623 
|
Post by mo on Feb 5, 2007 18:05:08 GMT -5
Everyone knows Aikman is the greatest. At least that'll always be my contention. Granted Montana and some are better, but meh.. #8 huzzah! That's right, Troy Aikman of the old Dallas Cowboys   |
|
|
|
Post by RoloSolo IV on Feb 5, 2007 19:35:17 GMT -5
I never understood why some fans in Baltimore are still upset over that move. Cause a few years later, the Ravens won the Super Bowl (even though the Ravens moved from Cleveland as the former Browns). And the Ravens still have a good team, esp. with that D.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,362
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Feb 7, 2007 9:56:50 GMT -5
Even teams that move because they are losing money? It really is no different from businesses relocating. I am only bothered by teams that get new stadiums built for them that move before the local government has made their money back. Besides, imminent domain laws are abused way too much as is. If Baltimore really had pulled it off, they would still be in litigation over doing it, with a real chance that any profits made in the interem becoming the rightful property of the Irsays. If the fans truly don't want their team to ever, ever move, do what the Packers' fans did; buy the team your own damn selves. BTW, how sad is it that no NFL team can make good enough money in LA? Seriously, Oakland and St. Louis are honestly more profitable locations? 1. The NFL passed a rule that bans public ownership 2. I know what you're saying but I'm a softy traditionalist. My compramise would be that owners could do what Art Modell did, move his team but void the rights to the name, logo, etc to the city. It's pathetic that there's a team in Hoston but they can't be the Oilers even thought the team in Memphis isn't using the name. I guess thing that bothers me is that sports and fan loyalty is viewed as just another bussiness. I assume that the Israys were using money in Baltimore and I know that Baltimore in the early 80's wasn't a great place to be (when your cities unoffical slogan is Baltimore a City that Bleeds, you know you have some issues.) but there were loyal fans who had followed that team at Memorial Stadium through the joy of John Unitas in the fifties to the sadness of the Ghost to the Post in the 70'. I'm not raining on the Indy Colts parade, the team was the best in the NFL and good for Peyton to get the monkey off his back. But the fact of the matter is that the Colts were a Baltimore instition with a loyal fan base and those people had their team taken from them. It might have been the only option available the Israys but it doesn't change the fact that I think it sucks that it has to be that way. Would it make you feel any better to know that Irsay has willingly been losing a tone of money in order to win? He has spent around $70 Million of his own cash (i.e. money beyond what the Colts actually bring in) in order to build for this championship. If the Irsays are willing to part with that kind of money, I am willing to bet that their situation in Baltimore must have been pretty grim indeed. |
|
