Can the Twin Cities support two hockey teams? (Viking: cost, move to)

[Min-Chi-Cbus]

Originally Posted by knke0204

I can't believe the Vikings HAVEN'T moved to a different metro yet.

They are a joke of a franchise. They play in an embarassing, pathetic stadium. The Vikings' fan base is pretty pathetic too... A bunch of whiney bandwagoners. They cry, cry, cry about their poor pathetic Vikings, but are the first people to throw on their purple when they get a win, and are the first people to throw off their purple when the other team scores.

All you hear about is grumbling, grumbling, grumbling, and then when they get one little win (ie, the Philly game this year), they are all of a sudden super awesome champions of the NFL. It's a joke....

Look at the stadium issue.. People are so quick to snarl, scoff and scream "Oh boy, you better not touch my miserable tax dollars!!!!, arg!!" but then are the first people to line up at the sports bar and cheer "Go Go Go!" when AP gets a hand-off.

I'm tired of the contradictory fan base. It's either you like the Vikings, or you don't. I myself am a giant fan. It's a sad franchise, whos History outshines anything that's been done recently... however, I still throw on my purple and will cheer cheeer cheeer for four quarters whether they lose or win. I stuck through every game this pathetic season and did all of last year's amazing season.

what's sad is that the Vikings have maybe one of the best running backs ever on their team, but nobody seems to give him the credit he deserves. Everybody cries about his fumbles, but fail to realize that the guy is a machine, and it should be looked at as collateral damage.

So to answer the question of the OP, no, the Twin Cities could NOT support two Hockey teams (technically they do, U of M and Wild), the Twin Cities need to start support the four professional franchises first.

What are you, a Packers fan? The fan base here is incredible compared to many other NFL cities. In the past the team has been mediocre and the players have been selfish a-holes, yet most of the fans rallied behind them anyways. It's easy to root for the Cowboys, Packers, or Steelers when they WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS and put together solid teams year after year. Minnesotans in general seem to support their teams regardless of how well they play, much moreso than most places.

[knke0204]

Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus

Regardless how much money it makes, LA SUCKS as a football town. Always has, always will.

Why do you say that? You know that USC, one of the most storied college football programs is in LA right?

The reason the Rams failed and left wasn't because 'fans sucked'.

The Rams still used a slow, running, non-flashy, very early 80s type of offense. The NFL had evolved from the late 80s into the mid 90s with West Coast Offenses, fast, snappy flashy offenses. the Rams were one of the last to change their schemes. Add that in with a decade of embarassing teams and losing records, fans lost interest. Dwidling support and poor ownership made the Rams leave, the same thing that will make the Vikings leave. Does that mean that Minneapolis SUCKS as a football town? I guess then according to your logic. Plus, St. Louis had been looking for a team since the Cardinals left. Plus, LA couldnt get funding for a new stadium. Still, i don't see any reason why that makes LA people suck at liking football.

The Raiders, now that's a different story. 1st, they were originally an Oakland team, 2nd their owner is a nut job. Al Davis, the owner was promised a new, larger Stadium in LA. The stadium in Oakland only had about 45,000 seats. Well, they waited for 13 years, played in a crappy stadium and never gained the support. Again, not really the fans' fault that a rival moved into their area and played in a crap stadium..
It'd be like if the Packers moved into the Dome and was MN's second football team, and the first football team (the Vikes) aka the (Rams in this scenario) were plss poor and hadnt fielded a winning team in a decade...

PS, the NFL has done a 180 in the way it functions since the early 90s when LA's teams left. It's a totally different industry now.

[knke0204]

Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus

What are you, a Packers fan? The fan base here is incredible compared to many other NFL cities. In the past the team has been mediocre and the players have been selfish a-holes, yet most of the fans rallied behind them anyways. It's easy to root for the Cowboys, Packers, or Steelers when they WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS and put together solid teams year after year. Minnesotans in general seem to support their teams regardless of how well they play, much moreso than most places.

Right, but they'll still complain and complain about their team and are so confused as to why they cannot make the playoffs..

Like this year... Really? Ya'll expected them to go 12-4 again and go the the NFC championship? They have a depleted garbage of an offensive line, a slow QB and a pathetic secondary.. THREE HUGE things that are needed for a team to be successful.. Oh yea and your star WR had hip surgery in June when he should have had it in February... Hank Baskett, Randy Moss and Greg Camarillo were nice pick ups, HA!

Cowboys have been irrelevant since the mid 90's and the Packers won their first Super Bowl in 14 years... So I wouldnt say it's 'easy'. The Vikings are a horribly owned, pathetically ran franchise. Look at their stadium and their crap Winter Park.

At least the Packers are owned by the community, have a rich history, have awesome fans, have a great facility and Stadium and oh yeah, WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS.

Darren Nelson's 1988 drop, fail
Gary Anderson's 1998 missed kick, fail
Daunte's 2000 Giant's Blowout, fail
Favre's int and Tahi's 12th man, fail

Those are four huge failures in my lifetime, In CHAMPIONSHIP games, not to mention the handful of embarassing Playoff losses and seasons that didnt' even get them to the playoffs.

Like I said, I like the Vikings, probably more than most people I know, but let's not kid ourselves people. The Vikes are what they are. A mediocre, shriveling franchise that ONCE had glory about 40 years ago.

[Min-Chi-Cbus]

Originally Posted by knke0204

Why do you say that? You know that USC, one of the most storied college football programs is in LA right?

The reason the Rams failed and left wasn't because 'fans sucked'.

The Rams still used a slow, running, non-flashy, very early 80s type of offense. The NFL had evolved from the late 80s into the mid 90s with West Coast Offenses, fast, snappy flashy offenses. the Rams were one of the last to change their schemes. Add that in with a decade of embarassing teams and losing records, fans lost interest. Dwidling support and poor ownership made the Rams leave, the same thing that will make the Vikings leave. Does that mean that Minneapolis SUCKS as a football town? I guess then according to your logic. Plus, St. Louis had been looking for a team since the Cardinals left. Plus, LA couldnt get funding for a new stadium. Still, i don't see any reason why that makes LA people suck at liking football.

The Raiders, now that's a different story. 1st, they were originally an Oakland team, 2nd their owner is a nut job. Al Davis, the owner was promised a new, larger Stadium in LA. The stadium in Oakland only had about 45,000 seats. Well, they waited for 13 years, played in a crappy stadium and never gained the support. Again, not really the fans' fault that a rival moved into their area and played in a crap stadium..
It'd be like if the Packers moved into the Dome and was MN's second football team, and the first football team (the Vikes) aka the (Rams in this scenario) were plss poor and hadnt fielded a winning team in a decade...

PS, the NFL has done a 180 in the way it functions since the early 90s when LA's teams left. It's a totally different industry now.

My sister went to USC and lived in LA....I am well aware of how they pay attention to football. I'm not sure if you're trying to rationalize moving the Vikings to LA or just being argumentative, but I could care less if LA has money and a media market -- it's the wrong thing to do and my guess is that it WON'T happen because the NFL doesn't want to become known for ripping teams away from loyal fan bases.

[Min-Chi-Cbus]

Originally Posted by knke0204

Right, but they'll still complain and complain about their team and are so confused as to why they cannot make the playoffs..

Like this year... Really? Ya'll expected them to go 12-4 again and go the the NFC championship? They have a depleted garbage of an offensive line, a slow QB and a pathetic secondary.. THREE HUGE things that are needed for a team to be successful.. Oh yea and your star WR had hip surgery in June when he should have had it in February... Hank Baskett, Randy Moss and Greg Camarillo were nice pick ups, HA!

Cowboys have been irrelevant since the mid 90's and the Packers won their first Super Bowl in 14 years... So I wouldnt say it's 'easy'. The Vikings are a horribly owned, pathetically ran franchise. Look at their stadium and their crap Winter Park.

At least the Packers are owned by the community, have a rich history, have awesome fans, have a great facility and Stadium and oh yeah, WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS.

Darren Nelson's 1988 drop, fail
Gary Anderson's 1998 missed kick, fail
Daunte's 2000 Giant's Blowout, fail
Favre's int and Tahi's 12th man, fail

Those are four huge failures in my lifetime, In CHAMPIONSHIP games, not to mention the handful of embarassing Playoff losses and seasons that didnt' even get them to the playoffs.

Like I said, I like the Vikings, probably more than most people I know, but let's not kid ourselves people. The Vikes are what they are. A mediocre, shriveling franchise that ONCE had glory about 40 years ago.

You say all of this but I'd be willing to bet you thought the Vikes would be repeat contenders in 2010......am I wrong? What's wrong with getting excited? The most entertaining time for football is often the week or two BEFORE it starts, because any team can win at that point.

[knke0204]

Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus

You say all of this but I'd be willing to bet you thought the Vikes would be repeat contenders in 2010......am I wrong? What's wrong with getting excited? The most entertaining time for football is often the week or two BEFORE it starts, because any team can win at that point.

I know my posts are coming off as harsh or whatever, but I'm just trying to ground us in reality.

Did I think they'd go 12-4 and go back to the NFC Championship game? No.

Did I think they had a very good chance of winning the North? Yes.

The writing was on the wall... Brett's first season had many factors for their success - The Sidney Rice factor. The easy schedule. The 5 weeks the spent at home in December last season, from multiple home games and a bye. The lack of depth and talent on other teams in the NFC and North.

This season, you could just tell, that the ship had sailed. The Packers hit their stride, the Vikes' O-Line was older and hurt, a much harder schedule, and an older QB.

[QuantumIguana]

I remember when games between Green Bay and Tampa Bay were called the "Bay of Pigs".

[Min-Chi-Cbus]

Tampa should have never been in our division, but I still feel like they are a rival sometimes. They OWNED the Vikes in the 90's.

[knke0204]

Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus

Tampa should have never been in our division, but I still feel like they are a rival sometimes. They OWNED the Vikes in the 90's.

LOL, forgot about them days... I think it was the other way around though?

Well at least the old cream colored TB days, the Vikes always beat up on them..

I remember the Vike's only loss of the 1998 season came against TB at TB. I remember that game like yesterday. Pretty much a joke since the Vikes were incredibly explosive at that point and the Bucs were, well, a joke.

[Min-Chi-Cbus]

Yeah, sorry, after Warren Sapp joined the team basically and Warrick Dunn ran around everybody.