Jump to content

2012-2013 NFL Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (knightni @ Apr 14, 2012 -> 09:04 PM)
Any idea what the largest NFL stadium in the NFL is by seating?

 

EDIT: Found my own answer...

 

Cowboys Stadium - 80,000 seats

I have zero doubts that Chicago could fill a Cowboys Stadium sized mega-palace for the Bears. Same reason why people don't consider "could Chicago support a second football team" to be a crazy question. That city is a great football city and a huge city. It could fill a Jerryworld Megapalace 8 times a year with ease, at pretty darn high ticket prices too.

 

The other city that could fill it for 1 team is New York, but instead they do 2 teams. Chicago doesn't have the long-term built-in fanbase for the second team, and Bear fans aren't going to happily convert to a second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (knightni @ Apr 14, 2012 -> 08:04 PM)
Any idea what the largest NFL stadium in the NFL is by seating?

 

EDIT: Found my own answer...

 

Cowboys Stadium - 80,000 seats

 

MetLife stadium in NY can seat 82,566. FedEx Field in DC used to seat 90,000+, but now the capacity is 82k.

 

It's funny how the NFL is such a monster, but it's college football with 20 stadiums larger than the NFL's biggest.

Edited by LittleHurt05
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 14, 2012 -> 09:09 PM)
I have zero doubts that Chicago could fill a Cowboys Stadium sized mega-palace for the Bears. Same reason why people don't consider "could Chicago support a second football team" to be a crazy question. That city is a great football city and a huge city. It could fill a Jerryworld Megapalace 8 times a year with ease, at pretty darn high ticket prices too.

 

The other city that could fill it for 1 team is New York, but instead they do 2 teams. Chicago doesn't have the long-term built-in fanbase for the second team, and Bear fans aren't going to happily convert to a second.

We had that discussion last fall, iirc. A second NFL team could do better than a second NBA team.

 

The Cardinals were in Chicago until the 1960, but they struggled because they were perennial losers and no one went to their games because of that.

 

If a winning AFC franchise came to Chicago as a second team, I believe that they could carve a niche in Chicago big enough to be noticed. All it would take would be to cater to the middle class and lower middle class fans that can't afford to attend games. Twenty thousand nosebleed seats for $25 each in a 100,000 seat stadium by a Chicago AFC franchise would go a long way to put the smelling salts under the McCaskeys' noses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question...

 

Could the Bears consistantly sell out a 100,000 seat stadium for home games?

Assuming the nosebleeds are relatively cheap by NFL standards the Bears could fill a 200k stadium if one were to exist. The problem is the parking and road infrastructure off Roosevelt can barely handle what the Bears have now, you say the Red Line but that thing turns into craziness over the baseball games. Anything over what the Bears have now would gridlock everything south of Randolph and stretch the CTA way past its limits for Sundays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 15, 2012 -> 02:59 AM)
Assuming the nosebleeds are relatively cheap by NFL standards the Bears could fill a 200k stadium if one were to exist. The problem is the parking and road infrastructure off Roosevelt can barely handle what the Bears have now, you say the Red Line but that thing turns into craziness over the baseball games. Anything over what the Bears have now would gridlock everything south of Randolph and stretch the CTA way past its limits for Sundays.

Unless the stadium was located in a different area...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (knightni @ Apr 14, 2012 -> 07:36 PM)
Question...

 

Could the Bears consistantly sell out a 100,000 seat stadium for home games?

If you dont mind me asking,what sparked you to ask this question? (Not saying it's a bad question, just kind of random)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless the stadium was located in a different area...

Like where? The lakefront location is awesome, its in a park, on the lakefront, perfect view of downtown, close to the metra lines and interstates and right off a huge transfer station on the L. The truth is that Chicago just does not have the transportation infastructure anywhere in the city to allow a stadium any larger than what the Bears have now. A suburb would be even more nightmarish.

 

As for the schedule, Bears dont have any stretches of games that look too difficult in a row. Their tough games are pretty well broken up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 17, 2012 -> 08:55 PM)
Like where? The lakefront location is awesome, its in a park, on the lakefront, perfect view of downtown, close to the metra lines and interstates and right off a huge transfer station on the L. The truth is that Chicago just does not have the transportation infastructure anywhere in the city to allow a stadium any larger than what the Bears have now. A suburb would be even more nightmarish.

 

As for the schedule, Bears dont have any stretches of games that look too difficult in a row. Their tough games are pretty well broken up.

It could go where the Olympic Stadium was supposed to be built. It would be a joint stadium shared by the Bears/AFC Chicago team. Kind of like Giants/Jets.

 

 

#fantasyland

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...