Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Green Bay Packers play in a city of 100K and metro area of 300K, or, less than half the size of the Charleston metro area.
The Packers are an extremely unique situation. The franchise joined the NFL in 1921, I believe only the Bears and the Cardinals are older franchises (both were originally located in other locations, unlike the Packers who have always been located in Green Bay). They are also the only publicly owned franchise in the NFL (actually I think they are the only publicly owned major professional sports franchise in the U.S.).
The franchise model used in Green Bay would probably never work anywhere else in the country because no one else would have the history that the Packers have in Green Bay and ownership situations like Green Bay has are prohibited by the NFL (Green Bay was grand fathered in).
Quote:
I do not think the NHL will come to South Carolina as they will expand to Atlanta for the third time. (Yes, the NHL will expand in a few years.) I think a high-tier minor league rivaling the AHL could try the southeastern United States.
There is already an AHL team in Charlotte, they moved up from the ECHL a few years ago (technically the ECHL franchise was surrendered and another AHL franchise, Albany I believe, was moved to Charlotte, but they kept the name of the former ECHL franchise in Charlotte).
South Carolina itself won't attract a higher tier franchise anytime soon, the two ECHL teams left in SC both averaged less than 4,000 fans per game last year.
Quote:
It would certainly have to be in Columbia. Even that's a bit close to Charlotte. Doubt 2 teams could exist that close without more people. But, this is assuming Cola tops the metro 1,000,000 mark in the future, and Greenville/Charleston do too. The Panthers just haven't gained traction here in SC. Clemson and USC are still by far more popular.
Maybe an NFL team and USC could partner and split the costs of a new stadium that they'd share, kinda like the Steelers and University of Pittsburgh do. The Cardinals and Arizona State used to do do that, as did U of Miami and the Dolphins, and the Buccaneers and USF do it now too.
The South Carolina Sharks? Share a stadium with USC? I think it could work.
That will never happen. USC has shown no interest at all in sharing a stadium (of any type) with any sports team, nor should they. Look back when the Panthers were first formed and needed somewhere to play their first season, they looked at Williams-Brice and were told no, so they went to Clemson. Look at what happened with the baseball stadium at Carolina, the city wanted a shared stadium and again it didn't happen.
Personally I am against all shared stadiums in college sports, all of those colleges you mentioned (with the exception of ASU as I personally don't really remember them ever sharing a stadium with the Cardinals, but then again I don't pay much attention to ASU) are pathetic. Most recent Miami, Pitt, or USF games I have seen the crowd looks pathetic. The stadium atmosphere looks generic at best and it takes away one of the best parts of college football (in my opinion).
I just don't see SC being able to support a NFL team, most people here are far bigger college football fans than NFL fans. Those who are big NFL fans already have their favorite teams. There aren't really enough corporate interest in the state to make it attractive to put a team here from a sponsorship stand point (not to mention not a big enough state population to really make it attractive to outside corporations). The casual fans are going to fill up the stadium week in and week out, it just doesn't make a ton of sense.
Well, the NFL itself is tax exempt for one. Yep. Google it. A $9-billion dollar industry...is tax exempt.
The $9 billion industry you refer to is not tax exempt. The NFL organization, which doesn't make any profits anyway, is tax exempt. The NFL organization distributes earnings to NFL teams, which are each for-profit businesses that are taxed as such.
As cool as this would be i think with the Panthers here already, I can't say I would see it happen as much as I would like too. But with that being said, one thing that would be a great addition to sc is MLB. I know it's far fetched and the league has market size requirements, but the same argument CD is making for a football team could be used for MLB in Columbia, plus not too mention the many tourists that make their way to sc during the MLB season. A family from Tennessee on their way to Charleston or Myrtle Beach could easily stay a might in Columbia to see an MLB on their way. This of course on top of the avid baseball fans we have in this state that would easily travel an hour to see a game.
You may want to check your metro populations. Greenville is over 800K, coming in at 842,000. Columbia is at 784,000.
And no, NFL has too many other cities they would expand to first. There is a reason the Panther's are called the "Carolina" Panthers and not the Charlotte Panthers. They are THE team for the Carolinas. With both Columbia and Greenville being only an hour drive to Charlotte, there is no reason and no financial logic to the NFL even considering SC.
Greenville-Anderson-Mauldin or whatever. Anderson and Mauldin or whatever might not appreciate having their names left out. If the goal would be to get the state to support an NFL team, a central location would be the best option.
Green Bay is wholly unique when it comes to small metros supporting NFL teams. They were established almost a century ago, in an era in which the other NFL teams included the Decatur (IL) Staleys, the Kenosha (WI) Maroons, the Rock Island (IL) Independents, the Muncie (IN) Flyers and the Hammond (IN) Pros, all of which later relocated or closed up shop. Green Bay is the last vestige of the small town teams.
What's the next smallest town with a franchise? Buffalo? And it had twice as many residents when the team was started in 1960.
The money, tax support and sheer force of will required to start a new NFL expansion is such that even cities like LA have trouble getting and keeping franchises. Plus, what's the upside for the NFL when a team already exists in the rough geographic center of the Carolinas as a market?
You do realize that it's a pipe dream, right? I won't say SC would NEVER get a team... after all, Phoenix was a small town a hundred years ago and has an NFL team now. In another hundred years, Phoenix could be a wide spot on a desert road, Green Bay could be bigger than Denver and we could all be cheering for the Pelion Pirates, winners of Super Bowl CXLVII, coached by the reanimated corpse of Vince Lombardi.
The NFL wouldn't support another team here in the Carolinas when you have so many much larger cities without a franchise. The second largest city and media market in the country (LA) still don't have a team yet . You have other cities like, san jose, Portland Oregon, oklahoma city, Austin , and san Antonio tx, Columbus ohio, Virginia beach/Norfolk, and Orlando. I believe the next best thing would have been the panthers playing a few regular season home games in Columbia like how the packers use to split their home games with Milwaukee.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
