Vikings Stadium

[howeda7]

Correct, if you factor in the cost of a new stadium, and how a new stadium only moves revenue from things like movies theaters and other forms of entertainment to the NFL, then Super Bowls and Final Fours do nothing for the economy. One thing you may want to take note of is that there is not a chance that there would be more than one Super Bowl. So when you consider that no new out-of-state new money comes in with a new park, except for a couple of big events like the Super Bowl and Final Four, you end up spending half a billion of public money in order to get 1 Super Bowl and probably 2 Final Fours. I guess you could throw in 5-6 NCAA regionals. The economic arguments for stadiums don't hold water.

You're not spending $500 million only for 1 Super Bowl, 2 Final Fours and 5-6 regionals, those are just the bonus events where almost all of the economic activity is from out-state people who would not be here otherwise. That doesn't mean you can disregard that a significant portion of the money spent on the Vikings would be spent outside the state of Minnesota whether by folks who are season-ticket holders from Iowa, ND and SD or by folks in MN who will spent thier Viking season ticket alottment on a vacation or something similar. The argument that every $ spent on the Vikings would simply get re-directed to Gopher tickets, theatre tickets and the Mall of America is ridiculous. Sure some would, but not that much.

Can the whole $500 million be justified? Maybe not, but a good chunk of it can. And whether you want to acknowledge it or not, there is an intangible quality of life benefit to having an NFL franchise in the state as well as a venue capable of bringing Final Fours, Super Bowls and political conventions.

 

[howeda7]

The Vikings have been around 50 years and have 4 NFC Championships to show for it. Less than 1 per decade.

People say the Vikings are always in the hunt? So are the other 31 teams in the league. That's the genius of the NFL. The Vikings play in a 4 team division. 25% chance at winning it without even playing a game.

Throw in a salary cap and an NFL draft and you get a recipe of turning a bad team into a good one in a short time.

College football and the NFL are two totally different monsters and it bugs the crap out of me when people want to compare them apples to apples.
A great example of this is how Chilly couldn't put together a team all his own by the draft and had to go out and sign Jared Allen and Brett Favre. Brew would have loved to go out and sign Seantrel Henderson to a billion dollar deal to fix his offensive line problems.

I've said this before but the Big Ten expanding to 12 teams and splitting into 2 divisions is going to benefit teams like the Gophers more than anyone. Having a shot at winning a 6 team division is much more attainable than winning a 11 team division.

12 of 32 teams make the Play-offs. That's equivalent of 4 Big 10 Teams making a Bowl. How often have the Gophers finished in the Top 4? The two years they did (1999 and 2003) they went to a decent Bowl Game (Sun Bowl) and probably should have gone to an even better one. Those were exciting seasons and I know many casual fans who go into it. Going 6-6 and to the Insight Bowl is simply not the same as mking the play-offs in the NFL.

Whining about Free Agency like it's some sort of disadvantage for the Gophers is silly. Do Wisconsin and Iowa have the ability to go buy thier players? And if they do, that's a whole different problem and has nothing to do with the Vikings.

 

[josh087]

12 of 32 teams make the Play-offs. That's equivalent of 4 Big 10 Teams making a Bowl. How often have the Gophers finished in the Top 4? The two years they did (1999 and 2003) they went to a decent Bowl Game (Sun Bowl) and probably should have gone to an even better one. Those were exciting seasons and I know many casual fans who go into it. Going 6-6 and to the Insight Bowl is simply not the same as mking the play-offs in the NFL.

Are you really trying to equate making the playoffs in the NFL with making a bowl in college football? Nice stretch - but it's like saying getting into a community college and getting into medical school are equivalent.

Whining about Free Agency like it's some sort of disadvantage for the Gophers is silly. Do Wisconsin and Iowa have the ability to go buy thier players? And if they do, that's a whole different problem and has nothing to do with the Vikings.

The point you are failing to comprehend is that it is much easier to fix an NFL losing team than a college football losing team. I don't really have the time or energy to point out the numerous examples of teams that have made the turnaround but I would hope you can even see the hole in this argument as well. Nobody is claiming that it is a disadvantage against the Gophers versus other CFB teams, but what it does mean is that the NFL team they are competing with has a much better chance of winning in any given season - all it takes is a little money and some good draft picks. Iowa and Wisconsin, the teams you mentioned, don't have to deal with this competition like the Gophers do.

Stop twisting people's opinions around to something they never claimed just so you can attempt to have a better argument.

 

[howeda7]

Are you really trying to equate making the playoffs in the NFL with making a bowl in college football? Nice stretch - but it's like saying getting into a community college and getting into medical school are equivalent.



The point you are failing to comprehend is that it is much easier to fix an NFL losing team than a college football losing team. I don't really have the time or energy to point out the numerous examples of teams that have made the turnaround but I would hope you can even see the hole in this argument as well. Nobody is claiming that it is a disadvantage against the Gophers versus other CFB teams, but what it does mean is that the NFL team they are competing with has a much better chance of winning in any given season - all it takes is a little money and some good draft picks. Iowa and Wisconsin, the teams you mentioned, don't have to deal with this competition like the Gophers do.

Stop twisting people's opinions around to something they never claimed just so you can attempt to have a better argument.

I think you're misunderstanding the point. I agree with you, going to a bowl game onto itself does not equal making the NFL play-offs. The OP was trying to say that the Vikings success has been over-blown when compared to the Gophers.

I also fully understand that it's easier to get better quickly in the NFL. My point is that the teams the Gophers are actually competing against (Iowa, Wisconsin) operate under the same system as they do. Likewise, the teams the Vikings are competing against have the same opportunity to get better. The Vikings have done a better job competing against thier peers then the Gophers have. Plain and simple. Iowa and Wisconsin's dominance over the Gophers has nothing to do with the Vikings as you seem to be saying. They have been better-coached and have recruited better over the last 20 years. Trying to pin that on the fact that there's no NFL team in Iowa City or Madison is weak. Kirk Ferentz is simply a better coach/recruiter then Tim Brewster and Barry Alvarez was generally better then Glen Mason. (I cannot bring myself to say the same for rat-face).

The Pitt Panthers not only have to compete with a team that's even MORE beloved then the Vikings, they have to play in thier stadium, off-campus. On top of THAT, they're not even the most popular college football team in thier own state. PSU is. By a mile. But in spite of that, they have been nationally relevant in recent years, and made runs at thier conference title. Yes, the Big 10 is better then the Big East, but the point remains that they were once great, fell into a decline and when they got a decent coach back at the helm, they returned to competing at a high level. If you don't like that example, see Georgia Tech. Boy, the darn Falcons are sure keeping them down, huh?

 

[mplsbadger]

The Pitt Panthers not only have to compete with a team that's even MORE beloved then the Vikings, they have to play in thier stadium, off-campus. On top of THAT, they're not even the most popular college football team in thier own state. PSU is. By a mile. But in spite of that, they have been nationally relevant in recent years, and made runs at thier conference title. Yes

Good point on Pitt. Also won a national championship while the Steelers were winning Super Bowls didn't they?

 

[howeda7]

Good point on Pitt. Also won a national championship while the Steelers were winning Super Bowls didn't they?

Yes during the Tony Dorsett era. Who was the coach then? I want to say Johnny Majors but I could be wrong.

 

[monk10]

I also fully understand that it's easier to get better quickly in the NFL. My point is that the teams the Gophers are actually competing against (Iowa, Wisconsin) operate under the same system as they do. Likewise, the teams the Vikings are competing against have the same opportunity to get better. The Vikings have done a better job competing against thier peers then the Gophers have. Plain and simple. Iowa and Wisconsin's dominance over the Gophers has nothing to do with the Vikings as you seem to be saying. They have been better-coached and have recruited better over the last 20 years. Trying to pin that on the fact that there's no NFL team in Iowa City or Madison is weak. Kirk Ferentz is simply a better coach/recruiter then Tim Brewster and Barry Alvarez was generally better then Glen Mason. (I cannot bring myself to say the same for rat-face).

I disagree with this. The perception of a team that is getting better has a huge effect on the casual fan. The casual fan that I would think we would want to be a hard core fan. The amount of revenue that comes into the U from propaganda of selling Gopher gear comes from a perception of whether it is "cool", "hip" etc to be a Gopher fan. When you have another football team in town there is no worry from the media that they will lose viewership by pumping up Viking Football instead of Gopher football. In addition we have a large number of badger/hawkeye fans here that have an interest in ensuring that Gopher football is perceived to be a lesser commodity. It has been reported over and over again that we are one of the lowest revenue based Big Ten teams, and therefore we are not on equal footing with the other Big Ten teams around us.

 

[howeda7]

I disagree with this. The perception of a team that is getting better has a huge effect on the casual fan. The casual fan that I would think we would want to be a hard core fan. The amount of revenue that comes into the U from propaganda of selling Gopher gear comes from a perception of whether it is "cool", "hip" etc to be a Gopher fan. When you have another football team in town there is no worry from the media that they will lose viewership by pumping up Viking Football instead of Gopher football. In addition we have a large number of badger/hawkeye fans here that have an interest in ensuring that Gopher football is perceived to be a lesser commodity. It has been reported over and over again that we are one of the lowest revenue based Big Ten teams, and therefore we are not on equal footing with the other Big Ten teams around us.

The Gopher football program is among the bottom of the Big 10, but the basketball program is near the top and they have to compete with the Timberwolves a lot more directly then the Gophers compete with the Vikings (games being played at the same time, direct competition for ticket sales and tv eyeballs.) Yet no one is crying on the basketball board and wishing the Timberwolves would move away. Yes, they are a joke right now, but that has not always been the case. As for the perception of the casual fan, yes winning makes all of the difference. But the fact that the Vikings have a game the next day doesn't change anyone's perception of what they're seeing on a Saturday afternoon. Winning or losing does.

Bottom-line is that the basketball program is competative financially and the football program could be too. TCF helps a lot. I doubt they're in the bottom 2-3 anymore. Either way, it's not the Vikings fault for thier struggles. Yes, if the Vikings moved, the Gophers would sell a few more tickets and a few more t-shirts, but not enough to make any signficant difference, and certainly not enough to get the Seantrel Henderson's of the world so excited that they do a complete 180 and ignore the USC's and Florida's.

A marginal uptick in fan interest due to the Vikings moving does not directly translate to wins on field unless we're suddenly going to expand TCF to 80,000 and fill it with loud, screaming fans every week like OSU or Michigan. If you think this is what will happen simply because the Vikings leave, I can procure some beachfront real estate in Louisiana I think you'd like.

 

[monk10]

Okay at least you are on the right track that they no longer compete on equal footing. Your over the top statement at the end is trying to drive the debate to an end. Is that your interest? I would argue that every dollar lost can relate to a lot of our history of not being able to provide a consistent coaching staff ala the two forces you keep trying to say we are on equal footing with.

Dollars that could be spent on: recruiting, marketing, assistant coaching staff. If you are concerned about wins on the field why would you ignore the costs that have a direct affect on those wins, or maybe you are just trying to sell a viking stadium coupled with some beachfront real estate in Louisiana.

 

[GoGophers2005]

I think you're misunderstanding the point. I agree with you, going to a bowl game onto itself does not equal making the NFL play-offs. The OP was trying to say that the Vikings success has been over-blown when compared to the Gophers.

I also fully understand that it's easier to get better quickly in the NFL. My point is that the teams the Gophers are actually competing against (Iowa, Wisconsin) operate under the same system as they do. Likewise, the teams the Vikings are competing against have the same opportunity to get better. The Vikings have done a better job competing against thier peers then the Gophers have. Plain and simple. Iowa and Wisconsin's dominance over the Gophers has nothing to do with the Vikings as you seem to be saying. They have been better-coached and have recruited better over the last 20 years. Trying to pin that on the fact that there's no NFL team in Iowa City or Madison is weak. Kirk Ferentz is simply a better coach/recruiter then Tim Brewster and Barry Alvarez was generally better then Glen Mason. (I cannot bring myself to say the same for rat-face).

The Pitt Panthers not only have to compete with a team that's even MORE beloved then the Vikings, they have to play in thier stadium, off-campus. On top of THAT, they're not even the most popular college football team in thier own state. PSU is. By a mile. But in spite of that, they have been nationally relevant in recent years, and made runs at thier conference title. Yes, the Big 10 is better then the Big East, but the point remains that they were once great, fell into a decline and when they got a decent coach back at the helm, they returned to competing at a high level. If you don't like that example, see Georgia Tech. Boy, the darn Falcons are sure keeping them down, huh?

I believe the Vikings success has been overblown.....they won their first playoff game this year in how many years? Yet Chilly gets an extension (before he even won a playoff game), while Brew gets mocked and ridiculed for taking a team to 2 bowls in 3 years?

And for all you out there going to rip the Insight Bowl, how many Big Ten teams went to a Bowl Game this year? 7. How many Big Ten teams went to the 2009 NCAA BB tourny? 7. So essentially you can rip the football team from going to the post season but celebrate the Field of 64 (now 68) in basketball like they are kings of the world? Sorry that isn't Vikings related but I'm tired of all the crap downgrading a bowl game. There were 3 plus years under Mason where the Gophers got passed over for a better bowl game....please remember that people. What if the Vikes went 9-7 and Green Bay went 8-8 but Green Bay jumped over the Vikes by a secret panel and the Vikes had to play in the Wild Card Game and the Packers didn't? I'm not complaining, as a college football fan I realize that happens and I also am smart enough to get all my information and facts straight. The typical fan in this state doesn't have the attention span at looking at all the facts and jumps to conclusions "the gophers suck and played in the music city bowl again".

 

[goldengophers]

I believe the Vikings success has been overblown.....they won their first playoff game this year in how many years? Yet Chilly gets an extension (before he even won a playoff game), while Brew gets mocked and ridiculed for taking a team to 2 bowls in 3 years?

And for all you out there going to rip the Insight Bowl, how many Big Ten teams went to a Bowl Game this year? 7. How many Big Ten teams went to the 2009 NCAA BB tourny? 7. So essentially you can rip the football team from going to the post season but celebrate the Field of 64 (now 68) in basketball like they are kings of the world? Sorry that isn't Vikings related but I'm tired of all the crap downgrading a bowl game. There were 3 plus years under Mason where the Gophers got passed over for a better bowl game....please remember that people. What if the Vikes went 9-7 and Green Bay went 8-8 but Green Bay jumped over the Vikes by a secret panel and the Vikes had to play in the Wild Card Game and the Packers didn't?

Brewster was hired to take us to a different level, beyond Mason who was fired after losing the Insight Bowl. I am sorry that I am not entirely on-board with a coach who brought us two straight loses in bowl that got the previous coach fired.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

Brewster was hired to take us to a different level, beyond Mason who was fired after losing the Insight Bowl. I am sorry that I am not entirely on-board with a coach who brought us two straight loses in bowl that got the previous coach fired.

Mason got fired by President Bruininks because it was painfully obvious to anyone who saw him in the locker room after the Texas Tech bowl game that blowing huge leads on national TV was not something that bothered Mason all that much.

Does anyone in GopherHole think that Brewster would not be tempted to sell his soul to bring the Gophers to the Rose Bowl?

 

[howeda7]

I believe the Vikings success has been overblown.....they won their first playoff game this year in how many years?

Since 2005. 5 years. Not that long. Before that? 2000, 1999 and 1998, etc.

Yet Chilly gets an extension (before he even won a playoff game), while Brew gets mocked and ridiculed for taking a team to 2 bowls in 3 years?

It's possible to love the Vikings and not hold Chilly in any higher regard then Brew. Put me down for that.

And for all you out there going to rip the Insight Bowl, how many Big Ten teams went to a Bowl Game this year? 7. How many Big Ten teams went to the 2009 NCAA BB tourny? 7. So essentially you can rip the football team from going to the post season but celebrate the Field of 64 (now 68) in basketball like they are kings of the world? Sorry that isn't Vikings related but I'm tired of all the crap downgrading a bowl game.

You have a point. But it depends. The 7th place team in football will almost always get to a bowl game, even if they went 6-6, 3-5 like the Gophers did this year. A 7th place basketball team that goes 15-15, 7-11 will NOT make the NCAA tournament. The Gopher basketball team went 21-13, 12-10 and barely made it in. And no, I don't think anyone was crowning them. It was only impressive in light of everything that went wrong earlier in the season.

There were 3 plus years under Mason where the Gophers got passed over for a better bowl game....please remember that people. What if the Vikes went 9-7 and Green Bay went 8-8 but Green Bay jumped over the Vikes by a secret panel and the Vikes had to play in the Wild Card Game and the Packers didn't? I'm not complaining, as a college football fan I realize that happens and I also am smart enough to get all my information and facts straight. The typical fan in this state doesn't have the attention span at looking at all the facts and jumps to conclusions "the gophers suck and played in the music city bowl again".

That's a valid point. The 1999 and 2003 Gopher football seasons were every bit as sucessful as anything the Gopher basketball team has done in the same period and every bit as successfull as the Vikings were in that period too. But what is your point? That people don't give them credit for those seasons? Perhaps not, but many on here wanted Mason gone not too long after that as well.

 

[wait!what?]

Maybe it's just me but Rick Spielman sounds like a dic&.

 

[Ski U Master]

If this passes, will the U expand TCF's seating for the Vikings temporary stay during construction or will the Vikings just have to reduce their season tickets for the duration?

 

[ruralgopher]

If this passes, will the U expand TCF's seating for the Vikings temporary stay during construction or will the Vikings just have to reduce their season tickets for the duration?

I can't see one good reason for expansion unless the Vikes pay for it. The stadium is perfect, an empty upper deck would look ugly.

 

[ruppertflywheel]

Put the construction workers on

Improving our schools. Drive up 169 and talk to the locals about what bad shape the school or schools are in their specific towns. You would be surprised on how quick those 3000 jobs would be put to use

 

[RodentRampage]

I can't see one good reason for expansion unless the Vikes pay for it. The stadium is perfect, an empty upper deck would look ugly.

How many season tickets do the Vikings sell each year? I now you can usually obtain individual game tickets, so season tickets can't be sold out. Perhaps 50,000 seats would be enough to meet the Vikings season ticket demand for a year or two if they rented TCF stadium while a new stadium was built.

I'd like to see expansion at TCF someday, but only if the demand is there long-term for the additional seating. 50,000 people in a 50,000 seat stadium makes for a great experience. Even with the same 50,000 in a 60, 70 or 80,000 seat stadium, the experience would be totally different. It reminds me of some of the NSIC games played at the Metrodome - the crowds might not feel too bad in a small college stadium, but put the same size crowd in a 60,000 seat stadium, and it's like no one is there.

Obviously 50,000 people in a 60,000 seat stadium isn't as bad as 3,000 in a 60,000 seat stadium, but still, the whole energy is different than a packed crowd. I have no problem with the Vikings using TCF on a temporary basis, but any expansion has to meet the needs of the U, not the Vikings.

 

[FireCosgroveGuy]

Improving our schools. Drive up 169 and talk to the locals about what bad shape the school or schools are in their specific towns. You would be surprised on how quick those 3000 jobs would be put to use

Believe it or not we can actually have both schools and stadiums.

I hate the people who act like we can never have things like stadiums until every single aspect of life is perfect. I've got news for you - it will never happen. Ever. Its OK to pursue other things that improve quality of life for everyone.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

Believe it or not we can actually have both schools and stadiums.

I hate the people who act like we can never have things like stadiums until every single aspect of life is perfect. I've got news for you - it will never happen. Ever. Its OK to pursue other things that improve quality of life for everyone.

Every big time team in Minnesota has a stadium. The Hump is only 25 years old. If Ziggy doesn't like it he can expand it or build another one. He has already made $200 or $300 million from his brief ownership of the Vikings.

Owning an NFL team is license to print money. Ziggy could fund a new stadium all by himself if he wanted and he would still make a good living. He doesn't want to do that because he thinks he can get the taxpayers of Minnesota to pay for it. Ziggy can go screw himself.

 

[goldygo4]

Ziggy is a smart man. If he doesn't have to pay for the stadium all by himself and can con the public to pay for half of it why wouldn't he? There is a reason he has millions of dollars, he knows how to save money.

 

[Zales04]

I can't see one good reason for expansion unless the Vikes pay for it. The stadium is perfect, an empty upper deck would look ugly.

If they built an expansion for the Vikings, we would be right back into the problem we had in the Metrodome. 1 game per year would turn into an away game, and would completely negate the whole reason for TCF being the size it is. I think the Vikings could tough it out for 2 years with the current capacity. If they don't like it, tough sh!t, they can go somewhere else.

The construction market is essentially dead in the Metro, and I know I am one of the lucky ones to still be employed right now. I don't know how much longer I can say that. Stadium construction would definitely help quite a few folks get back on their feet. My company probably wouldn't get a shot at it because of the Big Green Machine, but I wouldn't mind hearing about other guys getting back to work. Personally, I am undecided about this whole issue. It would be a good thing, but at the same time there are so many issues in this state it is ridiculous.

 

[mplsbadger]

I can't see one good reason for expansion unless the Vikes pay for it. The stadium is perfect, an empty upper deck would look ugly.

I suspect that they would look at cramming more people into the bleachers, adding temporary seats in the end zone, and look at adding about 8-10 rows of temporary seats around the bowl on top. I'll bet they could add close to 10,000 temporary seats without needing to modify the stadium. They would be lousy seats however.

 

[ruralgopher]

Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth: Bagley states the Vikings have 'concerns' over the 40 year lease. 800 million dollars for something that isn't going to last 40 years. This is exactly why I hate Bagley, the Wilfs, and public funding of a new stadium.

 

[RodentRampage]

Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth: Bagley states the Vikings have 'concerns' over the 40 year lease. 800 million dollars for something that isn't going to last 40 years. This is exactly why I hate Bagley, the Wilfs, and public funding of a new stadium.

Stadiums should last a long time. If we had been able to get funds to rennovate Memorial Stadium, we'd still be playing there for many decades to come. I don't think 40 years is at all unreasonable for a stadium to last.

 

[howeda7]

Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth: Bagley states the Vikings have 'concerns' over the 40 year lease. 800 million dollars for something that isn't going to last 40 years. This is exactly why I hate Bagley, the Wilfs, and public funding of a new stadium.

On this, I have to agree with the stadium oppenents. Bagley, frankly comes off like an idiot more times then not, and quiveling over whether the Vikings will contribute 1/3 of the Open-air cost or 1/3 of the domed cost and whether the lease should be 40 years does nothing but make them look petty. Newsflash to Ziggy and Lester, an open-air stadium does no one but the Vikings any good. So if you want an open-air stadium, pay for it yourself. A dome is the only thing that makes sense for all parties involved and 1/3 of the cost is a starting point for your share.

 

[FishingMN]

howeda7 wins the debate (as far as I'm concerned).

The only thing that matters is winning and it's not the Vikings fault. I definitely consider myself a proud Gopher alum and fan but I like pro football much better and would hate to see the team leave. Personally, I think the salary cap, the draft and playoff system make the product so much better. College football is like baseball where you get the haves (Yankees/Texas/USC) and the have nots (Royals/Gophers). The built in disadvantages just make for a poor fan experience when you know going into the season that your team has zero chance to compete for a title. Winning, or at least the appearance of a somewhat equal chance to win, are critical. Then the stupid college football post season where only 1 game matters is assinine.

I renewed my football tickets because of the good schedule this year but "paying" to watch a losing team really isn't that fun (for me anyway).

 

[UpnorthGo4]

howeda7 wins the debate (as far as I'm concerned).

The only thing that matters is winning and it's not the Vikings fault. I definitely consider myself a proud Gopher alum and fan but I like pro football much better and would hate to see the team leave. Personally, I think the salary cap, the draft and playoff system make the product so much better. College football is like baseball where you get the haves (Yankees/Texas/USC) and the have nots (Royals/Gophers). The built in disadvantages just make for a poor fan experience when you know going into the season that your team has zero chance to compete for a title. Winning, or at least the appearance of a somewhat equal chance to win, are critical. Then the stupid college football post season where only 1 game matters is assinine.

I renewed my football tickets because of the good schedule this year but "paying" to watch a losing team really isn't that fun (for me anyway).

Your post pretty much says it all about sports fans in general. They will only support a winner. If their favorite team at the moment starts losing, they find another team to cheer for.

Fortunately, many Gopher football fans have more integrity and loyalty than that. We have been rooting for a team that hasn't won a Big 10 Championship for over 40 years. Some of us have had season tickets for longer than that.

Winning may be the only thing that matters in professional sports. But for true blue college sports fans - winning is irrelevant. You can't stop supporting your favorite college team any easier than you can stop supporting a friend. Your loyalty to your favorite college football team says a lot about who you are as a person.

 

[AhliBobwa]

Obviously, it is not. Why even type something so stupid? Stop fishing for replies to your posts.

"I like it more" in no way equals "superior...in every respect", d*uchenozzle.

Wow, clearly you didn't read my post. Along with the other reasons I offer, the fact is that professional football is strategically bland and sterile. (since you missed it the first time read this http://smartfootball.blogspot.com/2009/07/nfl-offense-what-is-it-why-does-every.html

There are reasons why intelligent announcers and football purists almost universally prefer the college game.

My argument is clear (and backed by expert analysis).

In response to a cogent argument you hurled grade school insults that amount to nothing more than unsubstantiated assertions. (you actually called me a d*uchenozzle, that's embarrassing for you)

Grow up.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

nm