<![CDATA[Y'all smell that?]]>Do I detect a hint of smoke? Is there a little fire being lit?

Ok so i'm not suggesting theres going to be a firesale and a huge bomb going off...but you can see now with DQ being released and Rubin on the cutting board that Farmer and Pettine are starting to ever so slowly put "THEIR" plan for the team together without making it look like a complete rebuild. I'm basically making this topic so sometime next year when we're balls deep in a 3 win season I can say I told you all so. Look I'm over the Chud firing and I do like this Pettine guy.......but I was under no illusions what the Pettine hiring, and then the whole FO dismissal...meant for the franchise. Boss Jimmeh hit the redo button. He pulled a mulligan.

I'm not trying to shit in y'all cheerios before the draft let alone the start of next season......but we need to be reminded about what these kind of coaching changes and FO upheavals mean for the upcoming season. Why? Cause I swear I will stab a mother fucker who calls for Pettines job next year. I will stab you in the fucking dick. We'll be lucky to win 5 games next year. If we win 5 or 6 i'm gonna celebrate like we won the SB.

So in conclusion....this is a way pre emptive omg shut your fucking hole next year while we watch our team adjust to another scheme on both sides of the ball and a young qb running for his dear life. If we suck we suck...we win 3 games so be it. Nobody even breathe a word of firing Pettine cause quite honestly that would be the end of the Browns. If you think it's hyperbole that the NFL would look into taking the franchise somewhere else again you are fooling yourself blind. If they could get away with it they would have already moved the Browns to LA. They don't give a fuck about places like Cleveland, they want their teams in big city markets.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/topic/28615/y-all-smell-thatRSS for NodeFri, 02 Oct 2026 07:49:26 GMTFri, 28 Feb 2014 19:34:12 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Tue, 04 Mar 2014 15:09:03 GMT]]>

@hoorta said:

Yes, but Gip. A lot of those smaller markets overlap a bigger one. You have the Carolina Panthers, not the Charlotte Panthers, and the Tennessee Titans, not the Nashville Titans. Think of the NFL's 75 mile blackout rule. Dayton is considered part of Cinci's market, so the Browns are always preempted by those damn Bungles- though Columbus is not. Toledo and Ann Arbor are part of the Detroit market. Baltimore and Washington DC's markets overlap.

Yes, Larry, I know that is all true. If you combined markets that are within that 75 mile radius you would get a different result.

Example: Orlando would be combined with Tampa. As noted, Baltimore and Washington would be combined.

West Palm Beach and Miami. Dayton and Cinci. Toledo and Detroit. Greensboro and Raleigh/Durham (but these would not be within the Charlotte 75 mile radius) Maybe Harrisburg and Philly (though actually, Harrisburg may actually be closer to Baltimore)

Sacramento and the Bay Area possibly. Flint and Detroit.

But, as noted, probably the largest two areas that can be combined that does not already have a team...besides LA... is the San Antonio/Austin area. Combine those two and you have a potential Top 15 marketplace. But Jerry Jones jealousy guards that as his personal territory despite already having the #5 largest market sewn up.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390755https://brownsboard.com/post/390755Tue, 04 Mar 2014 15:09:03 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:16:56 GMT]]>

@the-gipper said:

Here is the DMA rank of various cities that do not have NFL teams:

2. Los Angeles....bigger than 29 other NFL markets

18. Orlando/Daytona...bigger than 14 other NFL Markets

20. Sacramento...bigger than 13 other NFL Markets

22. Portland...bigger than 12 other NFL Markets

24. Raleigh/Durham...bigger than 11 other NFL markets

30. Hartford/New Haven...bigger than 6 other NFL markets

32. Columbus...bigger than 5 other NFL markets (including Cinci)

33. Salt Lake City...bigger than 5 other NFL markets

34. Milwaukee...bigger than 5 other NFL markets

36. San Antonio...Bigger than 4 other NFL markets

37. Greenville/Spartanburgh...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

38. West Palm Beach...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

39. Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo/Battle Creek...bigger that 4 other NFL markets

40. Austin...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

41. Oklahoma City...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

42. Las Vegas...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

43. Harrisburg...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

44. Birmingham...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

45. Norfolk/Va. Beach...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

46. Greensboro/High Pt....bigger than 4 other NFL markets

47. Albequerque/Santa Fe...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

49. Louisville...bigger than 3 other NFL markets

50. Memphis...bigger than 3 other NFL markets

Dayton

Yes, but Gip. A lot of those smaller markets overlap a bigger one. You have the Carolina Panthers, not the Charlotte Panthers, and the Tennessee Titans, not the Nashville Titans. Think of the NFL's 75 mile blackout rule. Dayton is considered part of Cinci's market, so the Browns are always preempted by those damn Bungles- though Columbus is not. Toledo and Ann Arbor are part of the Detroit market. Baltimore and Washington DC's markets overlap.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390633https://brownsboard.com/post/390633Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:16:56 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:05:45 GMT]]>Stoolers were ranked 28th at 88.2% capacity, they also set record lows in individual games over the past 2 seasons... lowest ever in 2012 against the Browns and second lowest last year.

Try 15 years of losing football Pittspuke.. Browns fans are the most loyal there is Steelers fans are Fraks.

http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/steelers/2013/12/15/On-the-Steelers-How-low-can-attendance-go/stories/201312150100

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390630https://brownsboard.com/post/390630Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:05:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:49:00 GMT]]>Here is the DMA rank of various cities that do not have NFL teams:

2. Los Angeles....bigger than 29 other NFL markets

18. Orlando/Daytona...bigger than 14 other NFL Markets

20. Sacramento...bigger than 13 other NFL Markets

22. Portland...bigger than 12 other NFL Markets

24. Raleigh/Durham...bigger than 11 other NFL markets

30. Hartford/New Haven...bigger than 6 other NFL markets

32. Columbus...bigger than 5 other NFL markets (including Cinci)

33. Salt Lake City...bigger than 5 other NFL markets

34. Milwaukee...bigger than 5 other NFL markets

36. San Antonio...Bigger than 4 other NFL markets

37. Greenville/Spartanburgh...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

38. West Palm Beach...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

39. Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo/Battle Creek...bigger that 4 other NFL markets

40. Austin...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

41. Oklahoma City...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

42. Las Vegas...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

43. Harrisburg...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

44. Birmingham...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

45. Norfolk/Va. Beach...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

46. Greensboro/High Pt....bigger than 4 other NFL markets

47. Albequerque/Santa Fe...bigger than 4 other NFL markets

49. Louisville...bigger than 3 other NFL markets

50. Memphis...bigger than 3 other NFL markets

And all of the following are bigger than the Green Bay/Appleton DMA:

Providence

Wilkes Barre/Scranton

Fresno

Little Rock

Richmond

Albany

Mobile/Pensacola

Tulsa

Knoxville

Dayton

Charleston W. Va.

Roanoake/Lynchburg

Wichita

Flint

Honolulu

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390623https://brownsboard.com/post/390623Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:49:00 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:24:42 GMT]]>Here is the rank of the Nielsen DMAs (Designated Market Areas) as of 1/1/2014 for each NFL team:

1. Giants/Jets NYC

3. Bears...Chicago

4. Eagles...Philly

5. Cowboys...Dallas/Ft. Worth

6. 49ers/Raiders...San Fran/San Jose/Oak.

7. Patriots... Boston/Manchester

8. Redskins...Washington D.C

9. Falcons...Atlanta

10. Texans...Houston

11. Lions...Detroit

12. Cardinals...Phoenix/Prescott

13. Seahawks...Seatlle/Tacoma

14. Buccaneers...Tampa/St. Pete/Sarasota

15. Vikings...Minneapolis/St. Paul

16. Dolphins...Miami/Ft. Lauderdale

17. Broncos...Denver

19. Browns...Cleveland/Akron/Canton

21. Rams...St. Louis

23. Steelers...Pittsburgh

25. Panthers...Charlotte

26. Colts...Indianapolis

27. Ravens...Baltimore

28. Chargers...San Diego

29. Titans...Nashville

31. Chiefs...Kansas City

35. Bengals...Cincinnati

48. Jaguars...Jacksonville

51. Saints...New Orleans

52. Bills...Buffalo

70. Packers...Green Bay

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390614https://brownsboard.com/post/390614Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:24:42 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:05:47 GMT]]>

@the-gipper said:

Most NFL teams are privately held businesses not public....except for the Packers, and they will by NO means ever disclose their income/loss/profit figures.

did not know this though...]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390612https://brownsboard.com/post/390612Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:05:47 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:05:30 GMT]]>

@clevfan4life said:

well in some ways that "could" skew the facts. I have no idea what shittspuke ticket prices are but if they're substantially higher than Cleveland than they could theoretically pull in as much gate as the Browns do with lesser attendance. I'm pretty sure merchandise wise the steelers do significantly better than the Browns. I don't where the Browns are ranked but Shittspuke is 9th in team merchanidse. That can't be all pgh people.

who cares? Its all about the mighty dollar in the end.]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390611https://brownsboard.com/post/390611Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:05:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 20:54:54 GMT]]> I don't where the Browns are ranked but Shittspuke is 9th in team merchanidse. That can't be all pgh people

FRAKS.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390605https://brownsboard.com/post/390605Mon, 03 Mar 2014 20:54:54 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 20:53:52 GMT]]>

XxDaBuckeyexX said:

what they should have done was compare incomes. Thats all that really matters if u think about it.

Most NFL teams are privately held businesses not public....except for the Packers, and they will by NO means ever disclose their income/loss/profit figures.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390604https://brownsboard.com/post/390604Mon, 03 Mar 2014 20:53:52 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 20:43:05 GMT]]>

XxDaBuckeyexX said:

what they should have done was compare incomes. Thats all that really matters if u think about it.

well in some ways that "could" skew the facts. I have no idea what shittspuke ticket prices are but if they're substantially higher than Cleveland than they could theoretically pull in as much gate as the Browns do with lesser attendance. I'm pretty sure merchandise wise the steelers do significantly better than the Browns. I don't where the Browns are ranked but Shittspuke is 9th in team merchanidse. That can't be all pgh people.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390597https://brownsboard.com/post/390597Mon, 03 Mar 2014 20:43:05 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:52:30 GMT]]>

@clevfan4life said:

ahh, they're listing at as raw numbers and not percentage of seats filled. Makes sense I guess.

what they should have done was compare incomes. Thats all that really matters if u think about it.]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390587https://brownsboard.com/post/390587Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:52:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:39:25 GMT]]>

@the-gipper said:

The Steelers are 30th because they play in one of the 3 smallest stadiums in the NFL. They could have built more seats when they built PNC, but they didn't want to so that the demand for their tickets stayed high.

ahh, they're listing at as raw numbers and not percentage of seats filled. Makes sense I guess.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390579https://brownsboard.com/post/390579Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:39:25 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 15:39:23 GMT]]>

@clevfan4life said:

wow, pgh's really 30th in the league on that list? wut? and you go back a couple years, when they were playing very very good football...they're still not better than the mid 20's. Anyway, it's good news....i certainly knew we had one of the better attendance records in the NFL. But I'm still wondering how much we're worth to the NFL. I know the team makes good gate obviously. I just wonder where we are brand wise. I hate to say it but I would think the Steelers are a much more valuable "brand" to the NFL than we are currently.

The Steelers are 30th because they play in one of the 3 smallest stadiums in the NFL. They could have built more seats when they built PNC, but they didn't want to so that the demand for their tickets stayed high.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390432https://brownsboard.com/post/390432Mon, 03 Mar 2014 15:39:23 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 15:36:23 GMT]]>

@clevfan4life said:

i'm 36...and no I won't stop cause I think there's a smidgen of truth to it. The NFL wants to expand and it may need to cull teams from small markets that aren't doing well and don't show signs of ever doing well.

You don't get it. "Doing well" to the NFL mean not making enough money. Not selling out. It has nothing to do with the size of the town or the record on the field. Teams that are not doing well by NFL standards would be teams like Oakland or Jax. Not Cleveland.

I would think Cleveland at this point in time would qualify for this. The NFL has big plans to expand overseas, here the market is saturated...football is god and it's great and everything, but it's not gonna grow much more cause like I said already god. But overseas people don't get it and that bugs the shit out of the NFL....why else do they continue to play games in London when it's only americans showing up to watch? Why do they keep talking about a team in Toronto when clearly Canadians as a whole could give a flying fuck about football when Hockey takes up 9 months of their lives every year. Beleive me I would love to think that the Browns are sacrosanct but i'm not naive enough anymore to think that given the right circumstances, meaning the right money is on teh table, a bunch of franchises could be uprooted.

One or two could be. And Oakland is making noise about moving back to LA. As for the US being saturated? Not true. The US could easily support 4 more franchises...if the Raiders stayed in Oakland you could put expansion teams in LA, San Antonio/Austin, Portland, Salt Lake City. Here is the Nielsen DMA by which they would go by:

http://www.tvb.org/media/file/TVB_Market_Profiles_Nielsen_TVHH_DMA_Ranks_2013-2014.pdf

They would probably on pick 2 of those...and yes would probably cream their jeans over the thought of Toronto or London UK...

but they ain't leaving Cleveland, which is one of the Top 20 DMAs.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390429https://brownsboard.com/post/390429Mon, 03 Mar 2014 15:36:23 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 06:28:59 GMT]]>Cleveland fan my ass there not going anywhere,shove $hitsburg ou your rear.Find somewhere else to preach you gloom and doom

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390337https://brownsboard.com/post/390337Mon, 03 Mar 2014 06:28:59 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 06:02:46 GMT]]>

@hoorta said:

Here's your numbers guy- just forget about the Browns ever being moved again- at least in your lifetime. Any teams getting moved- it's the Raiders, Jacksonville, or the Chargers (Mark-O would tell you the Chargers lease is up and they're in no compunction to stay in SD if they want to move). The Browns are in the top 1\2 (despite 14 years of suckage) in attendance, both home and away. If you just went by pure numbers I can make a case it's more likely to move the Steelers out of Pittsburgh.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance

wow, pgh's really 30th in the league on that list? wut? and you go back a couple years, when they were playing very very good football...they're still not better than the mid 20's. Anyway, it's good news....i certainly knew we had one of the better attendance records in the NFL. But I'm still wondering how much we're worth to the NFL. I know the team makes good gate obviously. I just wonder where we are brand wise. I hate to say it but I would think the Steelers are a much more valuable "brand" to the NFL than we are currently.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390334https://brownsboard.com/post/390334Mon, 03 Mar 2014 06:02:46 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Mon, 03 Mar 2014 01:37:17 GMT]]>

@hoorta said:

Here's your numbers guy- just forget about the Browns ever being moved again- at least in your lifetime. Any teams getting moved- it's the Raiders, Jacksonville, or the Chargers (Mark-O would tell you the Chargers lease is up and they're in no compunction to stay in SD if they want to move). The Browns are in the top 1\2 (despite 14 years of suckage) in attendance, both home and away. If you just went by pure numbers I can make a case it's more likely to move the Steelers out of Pittsburgh.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance

Yep your right, despite all the suckage, Cleveland has too big of a fan base and makes way to much moolah to uproot the franchise. NEVER gonna happen, at least not in our lifetime.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390294https://brownsboard.com/post/390294Mon, 03 Mar 2014 01:37:17 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Sun, 02 Mar 2014 21:22:56 GMT]]>

@hoorta said:

Here's your numbers guy- just forget about the Browns ever being moved again- at least in your lifetime. Any teams getting moved- it's the Raiders, Jacksonville, or the Chargers (Mark-O would tell you the Chargers lease is up and they're in no compunction to stay in SD if they want to move). The Browns are in the top 1\2 (despite 14 years of suckage) in attendance, both home and away. If you just went by pure numbers I can make a case it's more likely to move the Steelers out of Pittsburgh.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance

The Chargers and Rams will be playing in LA in the very near future. Most likely in the same stadium, I'm betting it's going to be on the land that the Rams owner just bought not far from the old Forum where the Lakers used to play.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390250https://brownsboard.com/post/390250Sun, 02 Mar 2014 21:22:56 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Sun, 02 Mar 2014 21:03:01 GMT]]>

@clevfan4life said:

i'm 36...and no I won't stop cause I think there's a smidgen of truth to it. The NFL wants to expand and it may need to cull teams from small markets that aren't doing well and don't show signs of ever doing well. I would think Cleveland at this point in time would qualify for this. The NFL has big plans to expand overseas, here the market is saturated...football is god and it's great and everything, but it's not gonna grow much more cause like I said already god. But overseas people don't get it and that bugs the shit out of the NFL....why else do they continue to play games in London when it's only americans showing up to watch? Why do they keep talking about a team in Toronto when clearly Canadians as a whole could give a flying fuck about football when Hockey takes up 9 months of their lives every year. Beleive me I would love to think that the Browns are sacrosanct but i'm not naive enough anymore to think that given the right circumstances, meaning the right money is on teh table, a bunch of franchises could be uprooted.

Here's your numbers guy- just forget about the Browns ever being moved again- at least in your lifetime. Any teams getting moved- it's the Raiders, Jacksonville, or the Chargers (Mark-O would tell you the Chargers lease is up and they're in no compunction to stay in SD if they want to move). The Browns are in the top 1\2 (despite 14 years of suckage) in attendance, both home and away. If you just went by pure numbers I can make a case it's more likely to move the Steelers out of Pittsburgh.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390246https://brownsboard.com/post/390246Sun, 02 Mar 2014 21:03:01 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Sun, 02 Mar 2014 19:48:12 GMT]]>

@miktoxic said:

just goes to show you how young you are. obviously you know squadoosh about the HISTORY of the cleveland browns. what are you 16? no way the NFL would ever think about moving this team EVER again. so stop your shit.

i'm 36...and no I won't stop cause I think there's a smidgen of truth to it. The NFL wants to expand and it may need to cull teams from small markets that aren't doing well and don't show signs of ever doing well. I would think Cleveland at this point in time would qualify for this. The NFL has big plans to expand overseas, here the market is saturated...football is god and it's great and everything, but it's not gonna grow much more cause like I said already god. But overseas people don't get it and that bugs the shit out of the NFL....why else do they continue to play games in London when it's only americans showing up to watch? Why do they keep talking about a team in Toronto when clearly Canadians as a whole could give a flying fuck about football when Hockey takes up 9 months of their lives every year. Beleive me I would love to think that the Browns are sacrosanct but i'm not naive enough anymore to think that given the right circumstances, meaning the right money is on teh table, a bunch of franchises could be uprooted.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390235https://brownsboard.com/post/390235Sun, 02 Mar 2014 19:48:12 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Sun, 02 Mar 2014 17:02:12 GMT]]>

@clevfan4life said:

laugh my fucking ass off....that's one way to look at it yes. Not an invalid point I grant you. Still think though that if they could get away with it they'd move the Browns in a heartbeat "IF" it's to a place like L.A. Obviously there's a few teams more ripe for that move, but still...if the opportunity was there, they'd take it imo. I have zero doubt about it. They have their AFC North rivalry between the steelers and Ravens which makes them their money...they don't "need" a team in Cleveland. Imo one of the big reasons why there's still a team in Cleveland is that who do you replace the team with in the North?

just goes to show you how young you are. obviously you know squadoosh about the HISTORY of the cleveland browns. what are you 16? no way the NFL would ever think about moving this team EVER again. so stop your shit.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390192https://brownsboard.com/post/390192Sun, 02 Mar 2014 17:02:12 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Sun, 02 Mar 2014 17:00:20 GMT]]>

@bbedward said:

Yep I like Phil, can't blame him for leaving. He's probably happy he left too, after seeing us get another 4 win season and him making the NFC championship.

and he got to leave with his texas blow boy mccoy to the same team.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390191https://brownsboard.com/post/390191Sun, 02 Mar 2014 17:00:20 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Sun, 02 Mar 2014 16:21:43 GMT]]>

@hoorta said:

If you just look at stats, Dawson had a better year than Cundiff. Phil averaged 3 yards longer on his kickoffs, was way better on FG percentage 91 opposed to 78, and his long was 56 as opposed to 51.

Deal was- Phil didn't want to be here. He's still one of the best but not the best- and it would have cost the Browns an insane amount of money to keep him around.

Yep I like Phil, can't blame him for leaving. He's probably happy he left too, after seeing us get another 4 win season and him making the NFC championship.

Cundiff is not as good, but he's adequate enough for now. Phil wouldn't have brought us over 5 wins.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390189https://brownsboard.com/post/390189Sun, 02 Mar 2014 16:21:43 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Y'all smell that? on Sat, 01 Mar 2014 21:31:46 GMT]]>

@clevfan4life said:

we won't know until we play some meaningful games in December will we? The past season is a blur to me I barely remember any of it anymore....was Cundiff in a position to win or lose a game for us? What was the outcome if so?

If you just look at stats, Dawson had a better year than Cundiff. Phil averaged 3 yards longer on his kickoffs, was way better on FG percentage 91 opposed to 78, and his long was 56 as opposed to 51.

Deal was- Phil didn't want to be here. He's still one of the best but not the best- and it would have cost the Browns an insane amount of money to keep him around.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/390111https://brownsboard.com/post/390111Sat, 01 Mar 2014 21:31:46 GMT