Sports in Austin - Page 7

Jdawgboy · #**121** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 6:32 AM**

Okay if the plot of land is exactly be between the two cities, will It still only use the San Antonio name? Looks like it despite which depending on where the land is, it could be within the Austin metropolitan area. Austin has a higher spending income so it's simply going to be used to bolster SA's team recognition.

I'd just rather have them build the stadium within SA in that case. We aren't second fiddle to anyone.

The ATX · #**122** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 6:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Okay if the plot of land is exactly be between the two cities, will It still only use the San Antonio name? Looks like it despite which depending on where the land is, it could be within the Austin metropolitan area. Austin has a higher spending income so it's simply going to be used to bolster SA's team recognition.

I'd just rather have them build the stadium within SA in that case. We aren't second fiddle to anyone.

I would prefer the name "South Texas Raiders" instead of using one of the city's names. (Yes, Austin is technically South Texas.) But I think this is more of a negotiating ploy that the Raiders are using to pressure the City of Oakland than an actual possibility (at this point).

JoninATX · #**123** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 6:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

I would prefer the name "South Texas Raiders" instead of using one of the city's names. (Yes, Austin is technically South Texas.) But I think this is more of a negotiating ploy that the Raiders are using to pressure the City of Oakland than an actual possibility (at this point).

I agree. But knowing Jerry would have a field day at that. If The Raiders ever do move to Texas it would be awesome! I would go see them, and their new stadium.

The ATX · #**124** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 7:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoninATX

I agree. But knowing Jerry would have a field day at that. If The Raiders ever do move to Texas it would be awesome! I would go see them, and their new stadium.

The video in the link I posted addresses the Jerry Problem. Sort of. But I think Oakland (with the NFL's help) will eventually give in to the Raiders' demands.

JoninATX · #**125** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 7:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

The video in the link I posted addresses the Jerry Problem. Sort of. But I think Oakland (with the NFL's help) will eventually give in to the Raiders' demands.

My thoughts exactly.

drummer · #**126** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 7:55 AM**

I would support a shared team with San Antonio, for sure. I think the name of "South Texas" or "Central Texas" would be better than Austin or San Antonio, if it is indeed a shared team for the market's sake. While Austin is technically South Texas, I always think of everything south of San Antonio as such and consider Austin as Central....I'm okay being technically wrong on that one.

The ATX · #**127** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 8:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer

I would support a shared team with San Antonio, for sure. I think the name of "South Texas" or "Central Texas" would be better than Austin or San Antonio, if it is indeed a shared team for the market's sake. While Austin is technically South Texas, I always think of everything south of San Antonio as such and consider Austin as Central....I'm okay being technically wrong on that one.

I think this fictional team would have to identify as South Texas to help pull in support from Corpus and The Valley.

drummer · #**128** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 8:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

I think this fictional team would have to identify as South Texas to help pull in support from Corpus and The Valley.

That makes sense. Raiders' current market is largely Spanish-speaking also. That'd be interesting to pull in the largely Hispanic South Texas market.

Novacek · #**129** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 3:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer

That makes sense. Raiders' current market is largely Spanish-speaking also. That'd be interesting to pull in the largely Hispanic South Texas market.

Tejas Raiders?

the Genral · #**130** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 3:56 PM**

Invasores del sur de Texas. Nope, never mind...

GoldenBoot · #**131** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 5:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lzppjb

...But I just don't see Jones and McClane sitting back and letting it happen.

They won't. And this pipe dream of the Raiders moving to the region is just silly. Jones and McClane have enough clout within NFL circles to easily get an additional six owners to vote "no." Seventy-five percent of the NFL owners (24) must approve any move. And I pretty darn sure Jones/McClane can get 8+ owners to see it their way.

Moving a team (or two) to L.A. is the NFL's highest priority. There is a better chance a team will land in London, Toronto, or Mexico City than in the Austin-San Antonio region. Remember, they go where the money is. The NFL can no longer afford to place teams in small(er) markets.

Also, from where is the money going to come to build it? As an example, Minnesota's new $1.048B stadium was financed by the State of Minnesota (~33%), the City of Minneapolis (~15%), and the owner/private investors (~52%). The State of Texas will not facilitate 33% of a new stadium in the Austin-San Antonio corridor. I do not believe the cities of Austin and/or San Antonio have enough dough to fork over 15%. And for darn sure, the owner and his private investors are going to do anything and everything to lower their equity in such a project (placing the burden back on the city and state to get it built).

Jdawgboy · #**132** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 6:48 PM**

Just a side note: Austin by definition is located in Central Texas. You can look at every link on Google if you type in Where is Austin located in Texas?

I have never seen nor heard of Austin being in South Texas. If you want to get very technical you could say South Central Texas but we are not in South Texas by any means. Just look at a map and it's clear that we are centrally located right in the heart of the state.

The ATX · #**133** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 8:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Just a side note: Austin by definition is located in Central Texas. You can look at every link on Google if you type in Where is Austin located in Texas?

I have never seen nor heard of Austin being in South Texas. If you want to get very technical you could say South Central Texas but we are not in South Texas by any means. Just look at a map and it's clear that we are centrally located right in the heart of the state.

I'm not sure why this upsets you. The geographic center of Texas is near Brady which is NW of the Austin Metro. That makes Austin South (or East) Texas. "Central" is not a compass direction.

lzppjb · #**134** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 8:50 PM**

I have never in my 32 years here in Austin heard it called South Texas. South Texas is San Antonio down to the RGV.

The ATX · #**135** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 9:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lzppjb

I have never in my 32 years here in Austin heard it called South Texas. South Texas is San Antonio down to the RGV.

That is why I said "Technically" meaning the four compass directions. Of course Austin is commonly called Central Texas since it is the largest city close to the center of the state and it's the Capitol.

drummer · #**136** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 11:39 PM**

I can see Austin/San Antonio not being next in the pipeline for an NFL team, but I don't think it's impossible. With the population of the entire state growing, not to mention the major metros specifically, three teams could easily be supported. I understand why Jones and McClane would fight it, of course, and I'm not saying they couldn't stop it for now. In some ways, I think new rivalries could bring in more money al around.

If we want a team centrally located to serve Central Texas and South Texas, perhaps a Three Rivers / George West team....

JoninATX · #**137** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 11:58 PM**

If it ever became a reality for us to get an NFL team, people who live in Temple, Killeen, Waco, and Bryan- College Station would also see The Raiders. There is actually a good number of people in Temple that are Raiders fan. So it wouldn't just benefit South Texas, it would be a regional thing.

lzppjb · #**138** Posted **Jan 13, 2016, 12:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

That is why I said "Technically" meaning the four compass directions. Of course Austin is commonly called Central Texas since it is the largest city close to the center of the state and it's the Capitol.

If Brady is the only place that can be Central Texas, then El Paso is the only one that can be West Texas, and we are all East Texas.

Just for the halibut, this is a map that pretty much reflects my thoughts on Texas regions: http://www.texascounties.net/statistics/regions.htm

paul78701 · #**139** Posted **Jan 13, 2016, 2:56 AM**

It would appear that the Raiders will not be moving to Los Angeles:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14...te-los-angeles

drummer · #**140** Posted **Jan 13, 2016, 5:03 AM**

^ You beat me to it! I had an ESPN alert pop up talking about the Rams moving to LA. That said, I'm still open to the Raiders coming to Central Texas.