The Las Vegas Raiders

The Gipper

@mjp28 said:
Many people working or retired have started moving away from "Zika-ville" and other areas for various reasons and are moving "back home".

My sister "retired" from Fort Lauderdale Fla. after 35+ years of being there to back home here in Northeast Ohio.

OldBrownsFan

I was (very) glad Cleveland was first of all able to get another NFL team and second to keep their name and colors (even though the Browns have been a big disappointment since 99 and nowhere near the Browns of old). Too bad for Oakland that apparently that is not going to happen here and we will see the Las Vegas Raiders. I think when a team pulls up stakes from a city and moves to another city let them get another logo/mascot and new team colors and leave the old behind. If Oakland would ever get another NFL team it just seems surreal they would have to get a different name than the Raiders.

Mark O

@oldbrownsfan said:
I was (very) glad Cleveland was first of all able to get another NFL team and second to keep their name and colors (even though the Browns have been a big disappointment since 99 and nowhere near the Browns of old). Too bad for Oakland that apparently that is not going to happen here and we will see the Las Vegas Raiders. I think when a team pulls up stakes from a city and moves to another city let them get another logo/mascot and new team colors and leave the old behind. If Oakland would ever get another NFL team it just seems surreal they would have to get a different name than the Raiders.

Going to be a very very long time before Oakland could get another NFL team (just like San Diego) but I agree with what you're saying. The Raiders belong in Oakland.

The Gipper

@oldbrownsfan said:
I was (very) glad Cleveland was first of all able to get another NFL team and second to keep their name and colors (even though the Browns have been a big disappointment since 99 and nowhere near the Browns of old). Too bad for Oakland that apparently that is not going to happen here and we will see the Las Vegas Raiders. I think when a team pulls up stakes from a city and moves to another city let them get another logo/mascot and new team colors and leave the old behind. If Oakland would ever get another NFL team it just seems surreal they would have to get a different name than the Raiders.

We did not get "another team". We kept the same team we had from 1946.

As for Oakland getting another team, I don't see it happening. The NFL will want the 49ers to be the "Bay Area" team. I mean, hell, after all, they now play 45.3 miles south of San Francisco...and Oakland is actually only 42.8 miles from Santa Clara.

In a sense, they should be the San Jose 49ers.

I just am aware of the historic cultural differences between the 49er fan base and the Raider fan base. 49er fans are white collar, Silicone valley, yuppie wine sipping types. Raider fans are Blue Collar, Hell's Angels/Road Warrior types.

Can the two mix to support the same team?

I have my doubts. Some Oaklanders may continue to follow the Raiders. Many may just give up on the NFL altogether.

OldBrownsFan

@the-gipper said:

We did not get "another team". We kept the same team we had from 1946.

As for Oakland getting another team, I don't see it happening. The NFL will want the 49ers to be the "Bay Area" team. I mean, hell, after all, they now play 45.3 miles south of San Francisco...and Oakland is actually only 42.8 miles from Santa Clara.

In a sense, they should be the San Jose 49ers.

I just am aware of the historic cultural differences between the 49er fan base and the Raider fan base. 49er fans are whit collar yuppie wine sipping types. Raider fans are Blue Collar, Hell's Angels/Road Warrior types.

Can the two mix to support the same team?

I have my doubts. Some Oaklanders may continue to follow the Raiders. Many may just give up on the NFL altogether.

Where am I missing it? We did get another team. Our team moved to Baltimore but I agree that once they moved they were no longer our team they were Baltimore's. And we got another team (fortunately) to replace them and (fortunately) able to keep the Browns name.

Oakland may not get another team but who knows? At least for all the loyalty the NFL shows to fans they could do that much and leave the team name and colors for the fans behind when teams move to other cities.

The Gipper

@oldbrownsfan said:

Where am I missing it? We did get another team. Our team moved to Baltimore but I agree that once they moved they were no longer our team they were Baltimore's. And we got another team (fortunately) to replace them and (fortunately) able to keep the Browns name.

What are you missing? Everything apparently...like the facts.

Our team did not move to Baltimore. Art Modell moved to Baltimore....was given a new NFL franchise. OUR NFL franchise stayed right here.

Not sure how you could have missed that fact.

Its like a house. You...the owner may move from that house, and you may take some of your furnishings with you....but the house was not moved just because you moved.

Oakland may not get another team but who knows? At least for all the loyalty the NFL shows to fans they could do that much and leave the team name and colors for the fans behind when teams move to other cities.

Well, that is a tough negotiation. Only Cleveland among NFL teams has been able to keep its franchise intact.

OldBrownsFan

@the-gipper said:

@oldbrownsfan said:

Where am I missing it? We did get another team. Our team moved to Baltimore but I agree that once they moved they were no longer our team they were Baltimore's. And we got another team (fortunately) to replace them and (fortunately) able to keep the Browns name.

What are you missing? Everything apparently...like the facts.

Our team did not move to Baltimore. Art Modell moved to Baltimore....was given a new NFL franchise. OUR NFL franchise stayed right here.

Not sure how you could have missed that fact.

Its like a house. You...the owner may move from that house, and you may take some of your furnishings with you....but the house was not moved just because you moved.

Oakland may not get another team but who knows? At least for all the loyalty the NFL shows to fans they could do that much and leave the team name and colors for the fans behind when teams move to other cities.

Well, that is a tough negotiation. Only Cleveland among NFL teams has been able to keep its franchise intact.

I see your point Gip and you are right but it still seems like word semantics. In 99 weren't we really no more or less than any other expansion team (except the NFL didn't give us as good of deal as they did Carolina and Jacksonville)?. You are right due to grass roots fans in Cleveland who did work out a great negotiation they kept the franchise here. But in reality we had an established NFL team that moved and were replaced with an expansion team. It is hard for me not to see the Browns from 99 on as anything but the new Browns.

DieHardBrownsFan

Browns players all moved to Baltimore along with coaching staff, equipment etc. We had a vacant stadium and after huge pressure the NFL gave us 'an expansion' team. They named it the Browns.

The Gipper

@oldbrownsfan said:

I see your point Gip and you are right but it still seems like word semantics. In 99 weren't we really no more or less than any other expansion team (except the NFL didn't give us as good of deal as they did Carolina and Jacksonville)?. You are right due to grass roots fans in Cleveland who did work out a great negotiation they kept the franchise here. But in reality we had an established NFL team that moved and were replaced with an expansion team. It is hard for me not to see the Browns from 99 on as anything but the new Browns.

It is the same franchise. It went through an expansion process to simply replenish the roster. Every team goes through roster changes. The 49ers won the Super Bowl the year before, but for much of the last decade they have sucked as bad or worse than the Browns. They actually even moved away to a different city 45 miles from where they were.

So their situation is no different really than the Browns. The problem with the Browns has been bad ownership/management.

Assume for a moment that in lieu of "moving" the Browns stayed here....with Al Lerner buying the team. You still would have had Al, then Randy owning the team, and I don't know if anything would have been different. Randy was capable of making the same bad decisions whether his Dad had gotten the team through purchase from Modell, or the way it was done.

The Gipper

@diehardbrownsfan said:
Browns players all moved to Baltimore along with coaching staff, equipment etc. We had a vacant stadium and after huge pressure the NFL gave us 'an expansion' team. They named it the Browns.

No. See above. The franchise was always the Browns. They just used an expansion like process to replenish the roster.

All they did, as I said, was sell the franchise to a new owner. Not much different than when Randy sold it to Haslam.

Players and coaches are fungible.

My example of the house sale is a pretty good analogy.

You move from your house, you don't move the house. You move some furniture, you don't move the house. Maybe the house is vacant for a while while you find a new buyer and they take some time to move in. It is still the same house. The foundation, the walls, the roof are all still in place.

The new buyers brought in some new furniture and appliances (players, coaches, equipment).

That is all that happened.

Zombo

@ghoolie said:

Oakland? Look who's talking. What, don't you like Baltimore?

Listen, Dickfuck, I don't know where you are going with this Baltimore thing, and frankly, I don't give a shit.

Here are the Professional sports teams I root for: The Cleveland Browns, the Cleveland Cavaliers and the Cleveland Indians.

Do you notice some sort of trend there?

I root for Cleveland, Ohio.

Baltimore can blow me. Oakland can lick my balls. And Vegas can eat my ass.

The Vegas Raiders are not the Oakland Raiders.

No, they're not. They are a much gayer version. Oakland is a tough city, Vegas has no soul. It's a place for soulless fucks to run to when they can't hang anymore. You should buy a condo there.

Best Climate in the USA..

Really? So you've never been to Hawaii? San Diego? Key West? Frying your fat ass in the desert in 115 temps is what works for you? Good ... that's your choice. Embrace it. Make it your own. Live in Vegas. Root for Vegas. I'm gonna live on the Beach and root for Cleveland. And sleep like a baby because I never gave up.

Florida? LMAO. Zomblow dates a lot of hot women in Naples. He takes them home and pulls on their tits until the wrinkles come out.

I get more pussy at 52 than you got at 25. Naples is stocked with MILFs 35-50, divorced. Hubby stayed up North, they live down here on his alimony, and I'm banging all of them.

Maybe if you lose 100 pounds you wouldn't have to pay for a handjob in Vegas like you do now, some rancid barfly in memphis might actually touch your dick.

Zombo

StinkHole

@the-gipper said:

No. See above. The franchise was always the Browns. They just used an expansion like process to replenish the roster.

All they did, as I said, was sell the franchise to a new owner. Not much different than when Randy sold it to Haslam.

Players and coaches are fungible.

My example of the house sale is a pretty good analogy.

You move from your house, you don't move the house. You move some furniture, you don't move the house. Maybe the house is vacant for a while while you find a new buyer and they take some time to move in. It is still the same house. The foundation, the walls, the roof are all still in place.

The new buyers brought in some new furniture and appliances (players, coaches, equipment).

That is all that happened.

But what if Modell had taken the name and colors, which he very well could have, then I don't think you could apply your analogy.

You would have still had the franchise (house) in place, but the colors and name would be different. So with that couldnt you say regardless of whether the new team in Cleveland is named the Browns or the Bishops, the real Browns moved to Baltimore?

Ive heard browns fans say they wished Modell had taken the name and colors. The regimes that have been in control since 99 have dragged the name and colors through poop, turning this franchise into the greatest laughingstock in the modern era. Although Modell decided to give up the name and colors, fans have said in hindsight that the powers that be should have left the great tradition of the Cleveland Browns die and rest in peace and let the shitshow since 99 be attached to another name and colors... not the Cleveland Browns.

The Gipper

@ghoolie said:

Gipper, don't be a jack off, You can't win this fucking idiotic argument.

I have already won....because this is NOT an argument. This is NOT a matter of opinion which can be arguable. These are hard cold facts that are inarguable.

If the team didn't move, why the fuck did they not play in Cleveland in 1996?

Because they took a hiatus. They weren't the first team to do so. Both the Rams and Steelers did the same in their histories.

A football team is made up of players. All the Browns players moved to Baltimore.

Players are NOT a team. Players are fungible commodities. They come and go like grain in a silo.

Wanna bet how many of the current Raider players actually still play for the Raiders when they finally move to Vegas in 2020? I will wager that you may be able to count at most 10 or fewer.

Can you name for us the Browns roster in 1996? If there were no players in 1996, where were they? Please, tell us who the 1996, 97, and 98 Browns team consisted of.

They were on hiatus. The Browns in those years simply didn't play.

I mean....they hardly play now....so why is taking a few years off in the 90s matter. They may as wel have taken off the last 3-4 years. Fair to say?

mjp28

Ghoolie got this right, taxes plus a pile of cash caused the BROWNS players, ALL OF THEM to move and play in Baltimore. ......

business reporter, Miriam Hill, examined motivations for the move:

Estate planning as motivation?

Decision to move team may be driven by Modell's age: 70

Art Modell's decision to move the Browns to Baltimore may be due, in part, to his need to ensure his heirs have the financial ability to keep the team after he dies.

At age 70, Modell undoubtedly has been thinking about the condition of his estate when he dies. In fact, local lawyers and financial planners say Modell's need may have been one factor in dictating the move.

"Art's world has greatly changed, and now somebody's dangling a lot of money and saying, `Here's a way to solve your problems,' said William Karnatz, an estate planning lawyer with Nicola Gudbranson & Cooper.

Modell's spokesman, David Hopcraft, could not be reached yesterday, but here is Modell's problem:

If he wanted to keep the team in the family, his heirs - probably his wife and two stepsons - would have to pay a tax of up to 55 percent of the value of the estate. With the value of the Browns franchise probably in the neighborhood of $200 million, that would put the estate taxes in the neighborhood of $100 million.

Modell has said that a majority of his assets are tied up in the Browns. To pay the tax, the estate might have had to sell the team. And given the fact that a sale could have been necessary, it's unlikely that the family could have received its full value.

... By moving to Baltimore, Modell will have a revenue stream estimated at $30 million a year. After paying the cost of running a team, he can invest the profits to help his heirs generate enough cash to pay the taxes.

mjp28

Big deal Cleveland got the colors, records, whatever they became a NEW expansion team period and without the JAX & CAR extras.

The Gipper

@stinkhole said:

But what if Modell had taken the name and colors, which he very well could have, then I don't think you could apply your analogy.

But that is NOT what happened? He didn't, (and couldn't) take the house with him. He just moved and took some furniture.

You would have still had the franchise (house) in place, but the colors and name would be different. So with that couldnt you say regardless of whether the new team in Cleveland is named the Browns or the Bishops, the real Browns moved to Baltimore?

Again, that is not what happened. The franchise was left in place. The name was left in place. Everything was left in place but those furnishings. Why theorize on what could have happened...when we know the facts of what DID happen.

Ive heard browns fans say they wished Modell had taken the name and colors. The regimes that have been in control since 99 have dragged the name and colors through poop, turning this franchise into the greatest laughingstock in the modern era.

OK, well, at least, yes,you got that right. But that sort of thing can and has happened to many franchises. For many years this century the Raiders were the most pathetic franchise in the league. ....worse than the Browns. But recently they made some good personell decisions that seem to be getting them out of their 15 year doldrum. And as I said before....the 49ers, the great dynasty of the 1980s and good in the 90s has lately become a dumpster fire. And as good as the Steelers have been more recently, they had 40 years of being a shitstorm organization. And the team that has had the most #1 overall draft picks in their history have been the Colts (Balt. or Indy). And second have been the Bengals.

So, many teams at various time have been "laughingstocks". And some day soon I expect the Browns to start to be very competitive. The 3 teams in their division are all much weaker than they have been in the recent past.

Although Modell decided to give up the name and colors, fans have said in hindsight that the powers that be should have left the great tradition of the Cleveland Browns die and rest in peace and let the shitshow since 99 be attached to another name and colors... not the Cleveland Browns.

Well, again, a theory.

Another theory propounded is that every team that "moves" should do what happened with the Browns. The Colts Baltimore history should have been transferred to the new Baltimore franchise....who should be a continuation of the Colts franchise in Baltimore and not "The Ravens". The Oilers franchise should have stayed in Houston and what is now the "Texans" should still be The Oilers.

This is exactly what happened in the NBA with the Charlotte Hornets/New Orleans Hornet/Charlotte Bobcats/New Orleans Pelicans. The history of the Hornets in Charlotte was transferred back to the "Bobcats" when they changed their name back to the Hornets, and the team in New Orleans had its New Orleans history kept in New Orleans.

Here is a bit of an explanation of that transaction:

http://nba.nbcsports.com/2014/05/20/charlotte-hornets-assume-historical-records-from-new-pelicans/

Something similar has been proposed if Seattle were to get a new team. That the Sonics history be reverted to Seattle, and that Oklahoma city be considered a new, separate franchise.

Some propose that the same thing should be done with the Raiders franchise. That the "Raiders" should remain an Oakland property...and that the new Las Vegas team be given a new name, identity, history. Now, I don't think for a moment that will happen.....but perhaps it should.

Of course, the model for the Hornets/Pelicans deal was the Browns situation.

mjp28

An empty rutterless, directionless, leader less empty shell was left behind.

I'm so glad that the BROWNS never left Cleveland.

The Gipper

@ghoolie said:

As you can see from my Avatar, Modell DID take the name, colors and records with him to Baltimore. I actually have a Baltimore Browns sweatshirt.

The following article from Cleveland.com restates everything I have said all along.

Only people like Gipper and Hoorta fantasize that the Browns didn't leave. They did. They got the fuck out of Cleveland.

Well, if facts are fantasy....when am I in reality going to bed down Kaley Cuocco?

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/09/when_art_modell_moved_his_clev.html

When the move happened, I promoted the idea that the new team not be named the Browns. For reasons you cited. Plus, I accurately predicted back in 1995 that the new team should not be allowed to just come in and reap the benefits of all that went on before. I assessed that the new team would be horrible, but because of fan sentiment, the idiots would make the new owner rich no matter how shitty the team was.

Was I right?

The new team, The Cleveland Bulldogs could have been way cool, and very, very historically important and respectful of the old Browns. It could have been named with the Great Paul Brown in mind. It could have had it's own identity. Had the team been named the Cleveland Bulldogs, it would have had to win over the fans and once it did, it would have been a love affair. Given the hurt of losing the Browns, the Bulldogs would have a far more rewarding relationship to the city than this idiotic bag of shit we got instead.

I understand and think there could have been some merit to that....but the "Bulldogs" would not have had a connection with Paul Brown. Its connection would be more to Jim Thorpe and the Canton/Cleveland Bulldogs that won 3 championships back in the 20s.

However, I don't know that different name/franchise designation would have mattered or changed the history of football here over the last 20 years. We still would have had the Randy Lerner's making a mess of things...and everyone else. It would just have been done in different name.

There is no heart and soul to this team. This team is not like the Steelers to its fans. There is no fucking connection to the past with this broth of ball sacks and boogers.

This is just not true. There is far more heart and soul to Browns fans than Steeler fans. Can you imagine the crickets that would have come out over there if that team had been as bad as the Browns? Hell...just 2-3 years after winning 4 SBs in 6 years, they were getting like 35K to show up in a 59K capacity stadium.

Besides, FYI, the Steelers emerged from the Eagles franchise.

You are NEVER, EVER going to see Browns fans take over Hienz Field like we did TRS in the old days. You are never going to see Cleveland ever remedy that voluminous amount of Steeler fans that this shit franchise has helped bring to NE Ohio.

Never say never. Again, when the worm turns, the loser fans of Pisstown will abandon their team like they were empty crab shells on a beach.

The Browns are now, as you mentioned, a losing franchise, head to head, the Steelers own the Browns, and that is not going to change in our lifetime. I am here because of the good old days, and because of my many friends. But, with the birth of a new franchise in Las Vegas, and me loving Vegas so much, it is the next best thing to having The Cleveland Bulldogs.

This Browns team is a facade.

Again, wishes cannot change facts. I wish that JFK had never been assassinated, but I can't change history.

And I see....YOU are in favor of designating the Las Vegas Franchise as a "new" franchise. Does that mean you advocate leaving the Raider name and history in Oakland?

And would that not be a hypocritical stance on your part...give your attitude about the Browns?

The Gipper

@mjp28 said:

Ghoolie got this right, taxes plus a pile of cash caused the BROWNS players, ALL OF THEM to move and play in Baltimore. ......

business reporter, Miriam Hill, examined motivations for the move:

Estate planning as motivation?

Decision to move team may be driven by Modell's age: 70

Art Modell's decision to move the Browns to Baltimore may be due, in part, to his need to ensure his heirs have the financial ability to keep the team after he dies.

At age 70, Modell undoubtedly has been thinking about the condition of his estate when he dies. In fact, local lawyers and financial planners say Modell's need may have been one factor in dictating the move.

"Art's world has greatly changed, and now somebody's dangling a lot of money and saying, `Here's a way to solve your problems,' said William Karnatz, an estate planning lawyer with Nicola Gudbranson & Cooper.

Modell's spokesman, David Hopcraft, could not be reached yesterday, but here is Modell's problem:

If he wanted to keep the team in the family, his heirs - probably his wife and two stepsons - would have to pay a tax of up to 55 percent of the value of the estate. With the value of the Browns franchise probably in the neighborhood of $200 million, that would put the estate taxes in the neighborhood of $100 million.

Modell has said that a majority of his assets are tied up in the Browns. To pay the tax, the estate might have had to sell the team. And given the fact that a sale could have been necessary, it's unlikely that the family could have received its full value.

... By moving to Baltimore, Modell will have a revenue stream estimated at $30 million a year. After paying the cost of running a team, he can invest the profits to help his heirs generate enough cash to pay the taxes.

That all didn't ultimately matter did it? Even with the big cash bribe, and whatever money he was making in Baltimore, he still could not succeed, and he was forced by the league to sell his team due to his financial ineptness. And now both he and the son he wanted to preserve the team for are both dead.

Perhaps we should just let the dead lie in peace. No sense rehashing that.

The Gipper

@mjp28 said:

An empty rutterless, directionless, leader less empty shell was left behind.

I'm so glad that the BROWNS never left Cleveland.

It was neither empty, rutteless (sic..you mean rudderless), directionless. When Al Lerner was alive, this expansion franchise went from paper to playoffs in 4 years.

But even after that none of what you say applies.....the thing is, it was directed and lead in a bad manner. It has had bad leadership, not no leadership.

It may have been better off with no leadership.