The Gipper Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 And check this out: while this coming year the Browns will be playing in MarkO land (LA...SoCal), the year after they play in Zomboland: 2018 Browns schedule Away Baltimore Cincinnati Pittsburgh Denver (fall in the Rockies?) Oakland (or Vegas?) New Orleans (could be a sweet trip) Tampa Bay (Z-land) AFC South Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 Latest I have found on Raiders Vegas move: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/12/20/raiders-poised-to-move-to-las-vegas-with-or-without-sheldon-adelsons-involvement/ Edit: Actually, this is even more recent, only 2 days old: http://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/nfl-vegas/steelers-owner-raiders-might-move-las-vegas-without-adelson-investment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark O Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 Understandable, short-term reaction... let's see what July brings. As for a Browns hypothetical move to Columbus? As long as they are still the Browns, then I'd follow them. After all from Texas, what difference would it make other than "The Columbus Browns" sounding weird as hell for a couple years. For every truly disenfranchised, invested fan in the greater Cleveland area, there'd probably be at least one in mid-Ohio to take their place. Hell... IIRC... it'd make hoota's travel much shorter. People in San Diego won't support the LA Chargers, SD hates LA and everything about LA so there's no chance of any support going up the freeway. The fact that it looks like the Chargers are going to switch to the classic powder blue color scheme now as well is just one more slap in the face to SD and their fans who have been begging for that for years. As for the hypothetical Columbus move.....if it don't say Cleveland in front of the Browns, I'm out and I'd be donating every piece of Cleveland Browns clothing to the local homeless shelter. Just like I wouldn't have supported the Baltimore Browns if that is how things had turned out 22 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark O Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 War, did you read anything regarding the actual plan proposed by the Chargers? Why, exactly, do you support raising the taxes of SD? If 85% of economists -- even Greg Mankiw -- agree on something... they're probably right. Public subsidies for stadiums are generally a BAD idea for the taxpayer. The Chargers put out a horrible, obviously flawed "plan" with assumptions that never had a chance of being true - and just expected everyone to dumbly buy it. That article is 18 months old and the proposal that was put out was for a "tourism tax". Essentially an extra tax on all hotel rooms in the city of San Diego that would've paid a large portion of the stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 They apparently will be moving there training camp down there soon, so you will have a short trip for that. Oh, I've been following it Gip. Yeah it's happening, no it's not, yes it is. Here's the latest as of the end of December- NO IT'S NOT. http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2016/12/28/Browns-staying-home.html# They'll still in all likelihood have the full scrimmage at Ohio State though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 The Cleveland parallel is an interesting take. Not hard to see a possible return to SD three years down the road following a stadium deal. Especially if the Chargers draw less than expected as LA's "other team". Understandable, short-term reaction... let's see what July brings. As for a Browns hypothetical move to Columbus? As long as they are still the Browns, then I'd follow them. After all from Texas, what difference would it make other than "The Columbus Browns" sounding weird as hell for a couple years. For every truly disenfranchised, invested fan in the greater Cleveland area, there'd probably be at least one in mid-Ohio to take their place. Hell... IIRC... it'd make hoota's travel much shorter. A good chunk of the ratings decline has been explained by a rise in mobile viewing on line. Spoken like a true fan (not). I suppose if they had stayed the 'Baltimore Browns' you would have followed them also? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 14, 2017 Report Share Posted January 14, 2017 Spoken like a true fan (not). I suppose if they had stayed the 'Baltimore Browns' you would have followed them also? It strikes me as odd when your definition of "true fan" is to turn away from the game. I take it that you are first and foremost a fan of the City of Cleveland. Cavs must have suffered the loss of your support when they moved to Richfield. Columbus would phase me less than an out of state move and the last I checked Baltimore is not in Ohio... so there's that, but addressing your "Baltimore Browns" question... while my initial reaction was to flatly say, "No," honestly... I'm not sure. I certainly could not see myself either road-tripping to attend games in Baltimore or spend hours each week on the "BaltimoreBrownsBoard". Most likely I'd have followed the Oilers, who I'd also lose, then the Texans. I am sure I'd have looked in on "the BLT Browns" out of curiosity... especially in their first SB year. Their 2000 win was already bitter enough as "the Ravens", but had they been the Browns??? Ever heard of the five stages of grief? All I am saying is once the initial hurt of an intrastate move is over, and it will/would hurt, there will be some fans who attend games and wish they had their burned memorabilia back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted January 14, 2017 Report Share Posted January 14, 2017 If the Browns had remained the Baltimore Browns, like originally intended. I would have quit watching the game period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wargograw Posted January 15, 2017 Report Share Posted January 15, 2017 I wouldn't want to follow the Columbus Browns, it would just suck to not have a team, and/or have to find a new team. It just doesn't "feel" right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 16, 2017 Report Share Posted January 16, 2017 If the Browns had remained the Baltimore Browns, like originally intended. I would have quit watching the game period. If the Browns had in fact moved to Baltimore (They never moved people), A. they would have changed there name likely/appropriately and B. they could have all died in a plane crash as far as I am concerned. C. We would have had the Cleveland Bulldogs expansion team here. Probably not doing any better than the Browns have since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjp28 Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 I wouldn't want to follow the Columbus Browns, it would just suck to not have a team, and/or have to find a new team. It just doesn't "feel" right. Plus the "new BROWNS" here kind of like "new Coke" never really made it...but our Brownies are still on life support if only in name only. Why? 1. The NFL slightly changed the new franchise draft rules after the super immediate success of CAR and JAX. 2. The BROWNS never had a real good FO, ever since returning from the dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 Plus the "new BROWNS" here kind of like "new Coke" never really made it...but our Brownies are still on life support if only in name only. Why? 1. The NFL slightly changed the new franchise draft rules after the super immediate success of CAR and JAX. 2. The BROWNS never had a real good FO, ever since returning from the dead. Well, the former only affected the "expansion draft". I would say that the latter is like 99.4% purely the reason for this team's failures. Multiple poor front offices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.