The Bengals have said they're not moving but the county has been talking about the possibility of the team moving, based around the fact that their lease for the stadium has not been renewed yet. All speculation at this point. As a fan of another team, Brown is cheap and I don't think he would move unless a city is willing to pay the entire bill for a new stadium. https://footballstadiumdigest.com/2018/01/mike-brown-cincinnati-bengals-are-not-leaving/
That is from 2 years ago. With the county trying to use FCC as a potential tenant. Old news + ain't happening. Though I do appreciate the link.
He is right, Brown is cheap and it shows. Last year, the Bengals had the lowest attendance in the NFL of teams not playing in a SSS. You couldn't pay me to go to a Bengals game. If things don't change, I could see the Bengals relocating and no one in Cincinnati caring. Put another way, Brown has no negotiating leverage for stadium upgrades.
Bengals tanked for Burrow. They got him. Believe there is a clause in the PBS lease that mandates upgrades.
I think what LV needs is an expansion partner. I doubt MLS owners want to be stuck with 31 for more than a year. Looking back in history, MLB needed 2 to go to the West Coast, so the Dodgers talked the Giants into joining them. As a result, The West was Won.
Bengals aren't moving. The Modell law would stop that. Burrow may revive attendance in Cincinnati but the team is still very poorly run. The stadium is fine but the lease is terrible. Hamilton county is on the hook for improvements just as the Bengals are about to start getting rent free use of the stadium. The lease was designed to be NFL friendly but one of the 2 commissioners who approved it Bob Bedinghaus, was voted out of office sooner afterward and became a Bengals employee.
Is there someone in Cincinnati with deep enough pockets to prevent them from moving? The NFL is also in a much better position to just tell Ohio to f**k off than MLS is. They aren't nearly as likely to cave as MLS was.
Umm... I agree with the second sentence but compairing putting a team in Vegas in 2020 to the Dodger moving to Cali in 1958 is strange. LA is much closer to Vegas than St. Louis was to LA back then. However they should come in with someone like Phoenix for balance sake.
I wouldn't be surprised if the city/County agreed to let them move. Of course, I'm not sure where they'd move? Who would want them?
There are billionaires in Cincinnati, including the Lindner family. They own FCC, UDF, an insurance company and used to own the Reds. If nobody local wants to buy the team, the city could just use regular Eminent Domain and resell them to someone outside the city. Bezos, etc. The NFL uses the same law firm as MLS (and NHL and NBA). The same legal arguments that failed in Columbus would fail in Cincinnati. I doubt the NFL would fight for several reasons. The Brown family does the bare minimum for the league and basically collect shared revenues without contributing much. The NFL would like to avoid establishing as a matter of law, that their teams are subject to seizure by cities. The NFL is also a previously adjudicated anti-trust violator. They would be in line to pay treble damages if they lost an anti-trust suit from the city or new ownership to complete a sale.
MLS's arguments didn't fail.. They agreed to a settlement before any decision on the merits of the case could be arrived at...
They settled because their arguments failed. The Court of Common Pleas stopped the clock ticking under the Modell law for the duration of the case. MLS then tried an interlocutory appeal on numerous grounds to the 10th district Court of Appeals. The CoA not only rejected their appeal per curiam, it wouldn't even give them a hearing to argue the merits. That's the equivalent of being laughed out of court. When none of a kitchen sink appeal's arguments are even worth a hearing, you better settle.
Im guessing vegas has been delayed again after no talk from the city council. But what the absolute heck is Phoenix doing? The lack of publicity is absolutely shocking on their part. Are they even trying?
Maybe just delayed a bit. Citing details “still yet to be resolved” in negotiations with a developer, Las Vegas officials said Tuesday that a proposed stadium deal at Cashman Field will not be presented to city lawmakers next week as expected.
I’ve always been a major proponent of expand, expand, expand... But at 30 teams... I might start saying, okay, let’s make sure teams have: #1 the right stadium situations #2 the teams have productive youth academies, reserve, and affiliates #3 the right TV/media deals #4 We start loosening the cap yo catch up with global competitors. For the most part, the map is well covered... at least for now and with the addition of USL. Now, I know there is still a hole in the Southwest/Desert Region to include Las Vegas, Phoenix, Albuquerque, San Diego, and El Paso. Teams could also be added to the Midwest to include primarily Detroit and Indianapolis... but I caution against over expansion in cold weather climates if they don’t have suitable alternatives for when the weather gets cold. In short, I’d say let’s get all 30 teams in the league... let it play out for a few years. Continue to stabilize USL and let’s go from there.
That is a well-reasoned and thoughtful post. Boooooo! Seriously, though, I think 32 by 2026 is still a layup. Only way it is not is if they see 32 as a hard ceiling, in that case they are going to get picky (& pricey) on the last two spots. But I still doubt they turn down a good bid, particulary if it is Vegas, Detroit, Phoenix, or SD. I do think the league also wants to do a bit of "clean up on aisle 9" type of stuff. New ownership + a stadium deal in Columbus plus new ownership in Chicago is a good start. Ushering Arsenic Park over the line & getting Citeh/Fire permanent homes would also be high on the league's to-do list. I also think how some of the expansion teams do might impact future expansion decisions. Miami/Nashville-Charlotte/Austin doing well (or poorly) might impact Tampa, Raleigh, or San Antonio (if you think they are still in it).
Oh, I agree. There’s a homer part of me that would like to see two 20 team leagues in the East and West, plus a second division built in much the same. And I think the US has the size and population to accommodate such. But, there has been so much rapid expansion lately, that I think we may just want to pause and see how the league is responding. Personally, I think the league will weather the storm well. Although, it’d be terrible if we jump to 36-40 teams at the blink of an eye and we accidentally let in a bunch of Chivas USA’s. Again, I’m one that wants to see the league reach every corner of the American market. Just we have to be smart and not do too much too soon.
The thing about 36 teams is that you can split the teams into 2 conferences and do a double round-robin within each conference so that each team plays 34 games and there is no coast-to-coast traveling. Top teams from each conference could meet in the playoffs, as well as the USOC, Concacaf Champions, and whatever SUM can dream up.
This would be a solid set up that I continue to like the more I put thought into it. The playoffs become a little more important (and necessary) since the eastern and western teams won't play much anymore. They could also do away with the current shield format and start to have an official shield for the best team in the East and West to compete for during the regular season.
Why not have east and west supporter shield champions declared and start the next season with a supporter shield championship game.