Benson, San Antonio officials impressed with fans' support [Archive]

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 01:08 AM

Benson, San Antonio officials impressed with fans' support

Web Posted: 10/03/2005 12:00 AM CDT

Tom Orsborn
Express-News Staff Writer

New Orleans Saints owner Tom Benson — in between congratulatory hugs, handshakes and kisses from family, friends and even fans — credited the Alamodome crowd of 58,688 for sparking his team to a 19-7 victory over Buffalo on Sunday.

"I want to thank the people of San Antonio," Benson said. "I think they charged up our defense, and that was the game.

"It was a great home crowd for us. Just marvelous, unbelievable support."

Rita Benson LeBlanc, Benson's granddaughter and a member of the team's board of directors, agreed.

"It was one of the loudest NFL crowds I've heard," LeBlanc said. "I'm more than pleased."

The lack of a sellout for San Antonio's first NFL regular-season game — the dome seats 65,000 — didn't prevent Benson and city officials from calling the event a success and predicting either sellouts or near capacity crowds for the displaced team's two other games at the Alamodome.

"With everything we've been through, the attendance is about what I expected," said Benson, who received a kiss from his wife, Gayle, after the defense stopped Willis McGahee for a 2-yard loss on fourth-and-one in the fourth quarter.

"I also think what happened today will help us with the other games," Benson said. "The Atlanta game will be sold out, and I think the excitement here today will help us (sell tickets) to the Detroit game."

The Oct. 16 game with the Falcons is a near sellout, with unsold tickets totaling 5,000. About 40,000 tickets remain for the Dec. 24 game with the Lions.

Saints officials attributed the lack of a sellout for their Alamodome opener to forces beyond their control.

"We had two weeks (to sell tickets) and two hurricanes (Katrina and Rita)," LeBlanc said. "You do with it what you can."

Said City Councilman Chip Haass: "It's awful tough to ramp up in two weeks what normally takes a year to do."

Benson said it's too early to gauge how ticket sales are going for the four games the Saints will play in Baton Rouge, La. He also declined comment on his plans for the team, which are uncertain after Katrina severely damaged the Louisiana Superdome.

"Let's just win these games and keep packing the stadium," Benson said.

But others weren't as reserved. After the game, one fan leaned into Benson's suite and shouted, "Relocate to San Antonio, Tommy."

At least one city leader, noting the Saints' logo on the walls outside the Alamodome, offered a similar sentiment.

"It certainly looks like the Saints' home stadium, and we hope it remains the Saints' home stadium," City Councilman Roland Gutierrez said.

While the city fell short of reaching its goal of a sellout, Mayor Phil Hardberger and other officials agreed with Benson that the crowd support was outstanding.

"No one told these fans to cheer for the Saints," Hardberger said. "They chose to do it, and I'm proud."

Hardberger, who watched the game in Benson's suite, said his goal is to make sure NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue attends one or both of the remaining games in San Antonio. Tagliabue skipped the Saints-Bills game to attend the San Francisco 49ers-Arizona Cardinals contest in Mexico City.

"If (Tagliabue) was here today, he could not help but be impressed," Hardberger said. "I don't know if he would change his mind (about calling San Antonio a small market), but I think he would be impressed."

Another guest in the Benson suite was former San Antonio mayor Henry Cisneros.

"This was an unqualified success," Cisneros said. "I don't think you can ask for much better than this — beautiful day, exciting game, enthusiastic crowd, near-sold out house."

County Judge Nelson Wolff, who also watched the game in a Saints suite, agreed.

"When the Saints fell behind 7-0 in the first quarter, someone from Louisiana told me they would have been booed if the game was in the Superdome," Wolff said. "But everyone was cheering for them here."

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/stories/MYSA100305.1C.FBN_saints_officials.881e6a5.html

phyzik

10-03-2005, 01:18 AM

nice article.

Honestly, I would rather not have the Saints here. I dont want San Antonio seen as "looters" and honestly it does feel that way to me, Pretty words from city officials doesn't change the fact that our city is taking advantage of the situation in New Orleans. The city just "feels" like its whoring itself out for this team. I would rather have NFL officials here, including Tagliabue, to see that we can support an NFL team and maybe get an expansion deal sometime in the future.

The big question all of these people are forgeting is how well will the tickets sell when the NFL coincides with the NBA games in San Antonio?

I still think SA would be a Spurs-first town for quite some time, just like when the Spurs first came to town.

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 01:19 AM

I still think SA would be a Spurs-first town for quite some time, just like when the Spurs first came to town.

Huh?

There was nothing else when the Spurs first came to town.

phyzik

10-03-2005, 01:21 AM

Huh?

There was nothing else when the Spurs first came to town.

Yes, but not many people in SA where jumping on the wagon, it took quite some time before the Spurs (formerly Dallas Chaparrals) got some respect in SA, I guess I should have clarified what I was trying to get across. My point is, it would take a while for the city to warm up to a new team. Even now the Spurs franchise has trouble selling out tickets. How tough would it be with two franchises?

Vashner

10-03-2005, 01:30 AM

nice article.

Honestly, I would rather not have the Saints here. I dont want San Antonio seen as "looters" and honestly it does feel that way to me, .

Spare us the drama....

The players want to be here right now so....

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 01:31 AM

Yes, but not many people in SA where jumping on the wagon, it took quite some time before the Spurs (formerly Dallas Chaparrals) got some respect in SA. My point is, it would take a while for the city to warm up to a new team.

In 1973 we had half the current population we have now. We only had the military and tourism as major economic industries.

In 1973, there was no pro sports team to gauge how well San Antonio could support it. And mind you, the ABA was second fiddle to the NBA.

It wasn't so much the residents who thought we couldn't do this or the ABA commish or anyone outside the city. It was the city leaders and the business people more so who thought the ABA (pro basketball in general) wouldn't survive in football country (SA). But it did.

San Antonio has always been a city that loved football. From pee-wee to high school to the NFL.

I don't think there's ever been a doubt from anyone living in San Antonio that it couldn't or wouldn't support a team, aside from the rare few, except for the higher ups inside the NFL. They're the ones who don't see SA supporting a team.

Mr. Body

10-03-2005, 02:02 AM

I don't think there's ever been a doubt from anyone living in San Antonio that it couldn't or wouldn't support a team, aside from the rare few, except for the higher ups inside the NFL. They're the ones who don't see SA supporting a team.

The problem is, as I'm sure is obvious, San Antonio lacks a sizeable regional audience. That's a huge consideration and the reason why Los Angeles and other markets lacking an NFL team are far ahead in line. As much as San Antonio might love football and as rabid as its fanbase might be, Houston and Dallas already have their franchises, one of which is massively entrenched, and so there's little room for another.

Take a look at the Carolina Panthers. The NFL's modus operandi is to go for regional markets - that's why they didn't specify a city or state for the team. They were going for as many fans as possible. I see it as highly unlikely there will ever be a franchise in SA. One is slated for Los Angeles. Toronto looks like they might want one. And then, after tonight, the league would look long and hard at trying to stick one in Mexico City.

Vashner

10-03-2005, 02:06 AM

I dispute that as well. With all the small cities around us and the main town. We are big enough..

They can give us an expansion team.. period. they will make money..

The only reason is Jerry Jones and other team owners don't want another Spurs success with pigskins...

Now please stop being negative.. NFL YES.. SADDAM NO!!! (little humor geeze)

baseline bum

10-03-2005, 02:14 AM

LuvBones

10-03-2005, 02:18 AM

How big is the Alamodome(capacity) compared to other domes?

Mr. Body

10-03-2005, 02:27 AM

I dispute that as well. With all the small cities around us and the main town. We are big enough..

They can give us an expansion team.. period. they will make money..

I agree with others. Not selling out this first game was a bad sign.

Anyway, it's bad business to put on in SA over better markets. Even Vegas would be an option.

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 02:30 AM

I'm disappointed the Dome didn't sell out. Actually, I'm shocked. I'll never complain about the NFL passing over SA after hearing the Dome was 10% empty for the first real NFL game ever played in the city.

If you knew all the facts, you would be shocked.

Don't you find it strange that the "majority" empty seats were three corner areas, yet the entire second level and most of the third level was packed.

Isn't that just a tad bit "strange?"

ZStomp

10-03-2005, 03:16 AM

It was an awesome atmosphere man!

i can't wait for the next game!

I want a team NOW!!

PM5K

10-03-2005, 04:29 AM

The Bills haven't played in ANY SELLOUTS, I wonder why that is?

Could it be The City Of San Antonio, or the FUCKING HORRIBLE BUFFALO BILLS?

Gee, I wonder....

This isn't even OUR team but not only are we supposed to support them on two weeks notice, but we are supposed to watch one of the worst fucking teams in the NFL, and sell it the fuck out?

Vashner

10-03-2005, 05:18 AM

People are used to 5-10 dollar for those seats not 30+ fees...

Spurs spoiled them in the dome..

But really for football they are SO much better than the dome with basketball.. at least the sideline seats.

Falcons game is going to be nuts...

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 05:30 AM

This city deserves a team!

http://www.photohome.com/pictures/texas-pictures/san-antonio/downtown-san-antonio-1a.jpg

http://www.photohome.com/pictures/texas-pictures/san-antonio/downtown-san-antonio-2a.jpg

http://www.photohome.com/pictures/texas-pictures/san-antonio/downtown-san-antonio-3a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/TimManuParker/SA_082.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/TimManuParker/SA_079.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/TimManuParker/SA_078a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/TimManuParker/SA_083.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/TimManuParker/P8160567.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/TimManuParker/P8160556.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/TimManuParker/P8160544.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/TimManuParker/b34e8598.jpg

Credit to Slomo, Photohome.com, and Buddy Holly

Brodels

10-03-2005, 05:53 AM

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 06:03 AM

If they couldn't sell out the first game in San Antonio, how can you expect the NFL to want to move to SA?

The fact that they didn't sell out the game doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the city's ability to support a team.
Says who?

In two weeks they were able to sell 59,000 tickets for the first game. Tell me, what other city could have or would have done that? Esp, with all the bugs and errors on the part of the Saints in terms of ticket distribution. Advertising a "3 game package" and discontinuing it before tickets went on sell. How about Rita?

How about the city so far selling over 150,000 tickets in just 2 and a half weeks.

Give me a break.

And again, if Benson or any other owner wants to relocate his team to SA, they can, Tags can't stop them.

PM5K

10-03-2005, 06:09 AM

boutons

10-03-2005, 06:16 AM

PM5K

10-03-2005, 06:43 AM

The Bills angle is important, but "beggars can't be choosers".

The SA franchise beggars have only 3 serendipitous chances to show their NFL commitment this season, so they really can't be choosy about the NO Saints opponents.

The Bills wouldn't have been a sellout in New Orleans either, or any other market for that matter really....

boutons

10-03-2005, 07:14 AM

"Bills wouldn't have been a sellout"

OK, but under "normal" circumstances. SA is supposed trying to exploit an abormal situation. Selling out the Bills, vs the Bills selling out nowhere else, would have been a dramatic indication of SA's commitment.

rwb

10-03-2005, 08:26 AM

I couldn't care less overall because I'm not much of a football fan, but I would support a home team. The Saints are orphans in need of a temporary foster home. I'd like SA to eventually have a team of it's own.

Phenomanul

10-03-2005, 09:10 AM

San Antonio Saints has a pretty nice ring to it.... On a personal note though, I'd be hard pressed to drop the Cowboys for the Saints.

TOP-CHERRY

10-03-2005, 09:12 AM

San Antonio Saints has a pretty nice ring to it.... On a personal note though, I'd be hard pressed to drop the Cowboys for the Saints.
Who says you can't love both?

timvp

10-03-2005, 09:19 AM

This city deserves a team!

San Antonio doesn't deserve anything. If they can't sellout the Dome for a regular season game, no one should complain when this remains a one sport town.

SA had their chance but blew it.

CharlieMac

10-03-2005, 09:20 AM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/TimManuParker/P8160567.jpg

One night after work we were walking to the bar to grab a drink and there were these two crazy homeless women fighting at that busstop. We would have stopped it, but there was biting involved. Good for entertainment though.

But I think most people dont realize that the Saints couldn't sell out in NO. They would have had half the crowd we did here if it was against the Bills.

SWC Bonfire

10-03-2005, 09:24 AM

But I think most people dont realize that the Saints couldn't sell out in NO. They would have had half the crowd we did here if it was against the Bills.

Not only that, but they didn't have the most supportive fanbase in the world. Pretty crappy fans.

MannyIsGod

10-03-2005, 09:32 AM

Just do me a favor:

Explain to me why San Antonio at the current time looks more attractive than Los Angeles?

SWC Bonfire

10-03-2005, 09:35 AM

Just do me a favor:

Explain to me why San Antonio at the current time looks more attractive than Los Angeles?

Well, it's more attractive only to the players in that they actually get a home-field advantage. As far as money to the league, it can possibly make much more money in LA, but they would actually have to do what they couldn't do two times in the past.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 09:40 AM

The Raiders ranked 31st out of 32 teams in 2004 National Football League attendance. The AFC West team averaged 50,742 fans for its eight regular-season home games at Network Associates Coliseum (since renamed McAfee Coliseum). The Raiders averaged 55,008 (30th in the league) in 2003. The Coliseum seating capacity for football is listed at 62,500.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 09:43 AM

Besides the fact that the Pittsburgh Steelers are by far my favorite team, I just don’t like the Saints,” said the Lancaster County, Pa., native. “They demand way too much.”

The demands Prino spoke about were the cost of game tickets. The purchase of a season ticket package for the Saints costs in the range of $250-$1,300 per seat compared to the $250-$2,700 for the Steelers.

“Every game I went to, they lost,” Prino said. “What have they done for us to make me want to pay that much?”

Tiffane Guichet, a 29-year-old bartender at the Old Absinthe House, couldn’t agree more about the Saints, whose record since 1967, 234-399-5, includes a 1-15 record in 1980.

“I think everybody’s tired of the losing streak that hasn’t ended in 35 years,” Guichet said. “I can’t afford to go. I think they’re asking too much out of the city where half the city is falling apart.”

The Saints have an agreement with city officials that would allow the team a 90-day period to leave the city after the season by paying an $81 million exit fee. Saints owner Tom Benson has said that he does not want to relocate the team, but state officials have opposed a deal to pay the Saints $186 million over 10 years to keep the franchise in Louisiana, saying the state cannot afford it.

Opinions on the status of professional sports in New Orleans are even being formed by those who aren’t necessarily enthralled with the sports world.

“If they can make better money somewhere else, let them go,” said Paul Fritt, a regular at Jonny White’s who pays no attention to sports, in response to the tentative proposal made by the Saints to move the franchise to San Antonio. “It’s the same with the Hornets, but they’re not as greedy as the Saints are. It’s nice to have a hometown team, but the Saints have over-stepped the bounds of decency in greeting the local economy.”

Even though some fans appear to have given up totally on their home teams, there are still those who have taken to heart the new media campaign being pushed by the Hornets, which calls for fans to “Believe.”

Kenneth Smith, who has lived in New Orleans his whole life, has not lost faith in the Hornets.

http://www.nytimes-institute.com/xfans.html

CharlieMac

10-03-2005, 09:44 AM

Just do me a favor:

Explain to me why San Antonio at the current time looks more attractive than Los Angeles?

Due to the lack of anything going on around here when basketball season ends, our fanbase would be far more supportive. That's pretty much it though, there is no denying that LA is a better short term financial situation.

j-6

10-03-2005, 09:47 AM

I was more interested in pictures from the event rather than photos of the fucking skyline, so here's what I've found so far.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/multimedia/slideshows/show_685/saints_bills10.jpg

http://www.mysanantonio.com/multimedia/slideshows/show_685/saints_bills11.jpg

http://www.mysanantonio.com/multimedia/slideshows/show_685/saints_bills03.jpg

http://www.mysanantonio.com/multimedia/slideshows/show_685/saints_bills12.jpg

http://www.mysanantonio.com/multimedia/slideshows/show_685/saints_bills13.jpg

http://www.mysanantonio.com/multimedia/slideshows/show_685/saints_bills08.jpg

http://www.neworleanssaints.com/photos/gallery/10-2-05%20Saints%20vs%20Bills/01-G3M7435.jpg

http://www.neworleanssaints.com/photos/gallery/10-2-05%20Saints%20vs%20Bills/02-3D5698.jpg

http://www.neworleanssaints.com/photos/gallery/10-2-05%20Saints%20vs%20Bills/03-T7923.jpg

http://www.neworleanssaints.com/photos/gallery/10-2-05%20Saints%20vs%20Bills/04-7951.jpg

http://www.neworleanssaints.com/photos/gallery/10-2-05%20Saints%20vs%20Bills/11-7996.jpg

http://www.neworleanssaints.com/photos/gallery/10-2-05%20Saints%20vs%20Bills/13-5242.jpg

http://www.neworleanssaints.com/photos/gallery/10-2-05%20Saints%20vs%20Bills/17-5720.jpg

http://www.neworleanssaints.com/photos/gallery/10-2-05%20Saints%20vs%20Bills/23-5480.jpg

http://www.neworleanssaints.com/photos/gallery/10-2-05%20Saints%20vs%20Bills/30-D5402.jpg

John T

10-03-2005, 09:47 AM

I'm completely ignorant about the teams in LA. Will somebody please explain why teams have failed there in the past and why it is expected to be different this time? Thanks!

Carie

goliath

10-03-2005, 09:53 AM

Interesting qoute from a Saints fan at the game from a Saints board:

Quote of the Day: the mayor of SA's campaign manager (Christian something) came down from Mr Benson's box and told the people around him that Mr Benson announced to all in his box that "this team would never leave SA." I'd love for some reporter to confront him with that quote.

__________________

j-6

10-03-2005, 09:55 AM

http://images2.nfl.com/u/ap/photos/SAD105100215_lower.jpg

http://images2.nfl.com/u/ap/photos/SAD101100212_lower.jpg

http://images2.nfl.com/u/ap/photos/SAD107100215_lower.jpg

http://images2.nfl.com/u/ap/photos/SAD103100215_lower.jpg

TheTruth

10-03-2005, 10:00 AM

I had more fun at the Saints game then I did watching my fav team (the broncs) at mile high for the first time. Nothing better than cheering on a pro football team during a regular season game in OUR alamodome. Fucking fantastic.

TOP-CHERRY

10-03-2005, 10:07 AM

Awesome pictures!!!

:)

Ishta

10-03-2005, 10:19 AM

CharlieMac

10-03-2005, 10:25 AM

Garza would have used thos event to push for a soccer team.

TheTruth

10-03-2005, 11:51 AM

It was incredible...My friend had a great sign ..It said
Evacuate the Cowboys up 35 North or something like that..Anyway, I would love for the Saints to come here..Yes, the dome wasn't a sellout, but it was a great ROWDY ASS crowd anyway!
DUDE!!! If you were with those guys, I came by your truck and offered you guys some jalapeno poppers. Awesome.

Kip Fanatic

10-03-2005, 11:54 AM

I was amazed at the people in the dome. It was so loud. I remember being in Reliant Stadium the first year they had the Texans play there. I thought I would never hear a crowd that loud again. I was wrong. The crowd yesterday was freaking loud. Guess who was playing the Texans when I went to Houston to watch? The Bills. Our crowd was much louder than theirs and that stadium holds 70,000 people. I have even watched Cowboys games in Texas Stadium and was not impressed by the noise level. Am I saying that San Antonio is better than Houston or Dallas in terms of football towns, no? I am just saying that San Antonio did a fantastic job in showing the NFL it would be a great town for football just like Dallas and Houston.

Mixability

10-03-2005, 11:55 AM

San Antonio Saints has a pretty nice ring to it....

Santos de San Anto sounds a little better.... :smokin

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 11:59 AM

los santos de san antonio!

TOP-CHERRY

10-03-2005, 12:00 PM

How about "The Antonians"?

Kip Fanatic

10-03-2005, 12:05 PM

I don't think you would have to change the name. San Antonio is Saint Anthony (who I have no idea who he was or is), so I would say the San Antonio Saints is perfect.

Kip Fanatic

10-03-2005, 12:06 PM

Not only that, but it would fit in perfect. Let me show you guys. San Antonio Spurs (SAS), San Antonio Silver Stars (SAS), and now the San Antonio Saints (SAS).

TOP-CHERRY

10-03-2005, 12:09 PM

(I was kidding)

TheTruth

10-03-2005, 12:09 PM

Not only that, but it would fit in perfect. Let me show you guys. San Antonio Spurs (SAS), San Antonio Silver Stars (SAS), and now the San Antonio Saints (SAS).
I thought that we all agreed that they didn't exist.

Slomo

10-03-2005, 12:51 PM

I'm completely ignorant about the teams in LA. Will somebody please explain why teams have failed there in the past and why it is expected to be different this time? Thanks!

Carie
bump

Does anybody know the answer to this?

gameFACE

10-03-2005, 01:07 PM

The whole arguement that because the Alamodome wasn't sold out it is there fore a bad sign has got to be one of the weakest arguements i've heard. I'm not using these three games as a barometer for anything except to enjoy them. To watch a few pro football games in person and rooting for the home team. If SA were to get football somehow, it's most likely going to be a losing or struggling team whether its an existing team or a franchise. So if yesterday is a measure of anything it's that.

If your arguement for not going is "it's only the fucking Saints and Bills", consider that after the Spurs won their third championship there are people out there saying "it's only the fucking Spurs".

gameFACE

10-03-2005, 01:18 PM

Here is the caption that goes with this photo:
http://espn-i.starwave.com/media/apphoto/SAD10110021619.jpg
Buffalo Bills fan Guillermo Mateos dances to the music of the mariachis outside the Alamodome before the Bills game against the New Orleans Saints Sunday, Oct. 2, 2005 in San Antonio. Mateos traveled from Monterrey, Mexico to attend his first NFL game. The Saints are playing some of their home games in San Antonio in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. (AP Photo/David J. Phillip)

Seeing that the NFL is interested in the Mexican market Maybe the San Antonio Saints might work. Not only that, you could get this dude in the promo's:

http://www.santoandfriends.com/santopictures/carlitos.jpg
http://www.teacuerdas.com/images/nostalgia-personajes-santoenmascarado4.jpg

Horry For 3!

10-03-2005, 01:24 PM

"When the Saints fell behind 7-0 in the first quarter, someone from Louisiana told me they would have been booed if the game was in the Superdome," Wolff said. "But everyone was cheering for them here."
That is sad, your only down 7 - 0 and you get booed?

TheTruth

10-03-2005, 01:25 PM

bump

Does anybody know the answer to this?
The city is a basketball town. The city has soooo much disposable income, yet they can't sell out even half of their baseball schedule? They'll support a team under two circumstances. 1) They are winning/championship contenders and 2) They are the Lakers. The town is too trendy. If it isn't a winner, they won't show up. Al Davis isn't stupid, if he was going to make more money keeping the Raiders in L.A. he never would have moved them to Oakland (not the biggest media market around).

Just my opinion. Probably am wrong.

Vashner

10-03-2005, 01:25 PM

This guy that sat next to me during the opening.. he started Screaming Let's go Bills during the national anthem....
Oh yea.. I wanted to punch him... but soon a picture flashed of me being led away with handcuffs.. I went from zero to fifty real fast (got pissed)...

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 03:06 PM

TheTruth

10-03-2005, 03:35 PM

wow, so no comment on this?
Its not hard to believe. The A's have one of the lowest attendance figurs annually, and you know the Warriors don't sell out. Oakland is not really a sports town, but they are better than L.A. Al Davis says so.

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 03:36 PM

wow, so no comment on this?The point you're trying to make isn't clear.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 03:37 PM

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 03:44 PM

it is funny how every says sa can't support a team bc we only got 58,000 fans in the seats with only a couple weeks notice, the nfl commish saying you will never get a team and many of the best seats not even available til a few days before the game...

all the while oakland has had a team a few times and still doesn't do shit..

Al Davis moved the Raiders back to Oakland against the wishes of Paul Tagliabue and the other NFL owners.

They objected in part because he was taking the Raiders from being the only team in the #2 market, to playing second fiddle in the #4 market (behind the 49ers), based upon a promise for stadium upgrades that wasn't in writing. They did not believe Oakland was a viable market.

And Davis has taken a financial bath for his decision. The Raiders have horrible attendance, and they rank like 30th in franchise value. Davis never got his refurbished stadium.

So Davis made a terrible decision against the advice of the league, and the league was proven right.

How does that example help San Antonio?

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 03:47 PM

Just do me a favor:

Explain to me why San Antonio at the current time looks more attractive than Los Angeles?

For what?

Expansion? Well, Tags what's to be there.

As for owners willing wanting to move a team, SA is in the grab.

Did you watch JT the Brick on Sports Sunday last night.

He gave you the needed answers.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 03:48 PM

even through all problems you stated..the move still was made...

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 03:49 PM

In the NFL, thanks to revenue sharing, there are teams that are net contributors to league revenue, and there are teams that have to be subsidized.

It is not enough for San Antonio to prove that there is at least one NFL market worse than them. What they have to prove is that the market can support a team to the degree that it puts money in the other owners' pockets.

So citing the Oaklands and the Buffalos and the Jacksonvilles of the league is not a persuasive point. The NFL wants to avoid those kinds of markets.

cherylsteele

10-03-2005, 03:50 PM

Al Davis moved the Raiders back to Oakland against the wishes of Paul Tagliabue and the other NFL owners.

They objected in part because he was taking the Raiders from being the only team in the #2 market, to playing second fiddle in the #4 market (behind the 49ers), based upon a promise for stadium upgrades that wasn't in writing. They did not believe Oakland was a viable market.

And Davis has taken a financial bath for his decision. The Raiders have horrible attendance, and they rank like 30th in franchise value. Davis never got his refurbished stadium.

So Davis made a terrible decision against the advice of the league, and the league was proven right.

How does that example help San Antonio?
Then why did the Rams Leave too? It is because support was nil in LA. They had TWO teams and could keep neither one.

Does anyone know how well the games in Baton Rouge are selling?

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 03:51 PM

but showing we can already do better with waaaay less time and resources IS a selling point.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 03:52 PM

Then why did the Rams Leave too? It is because support was nil in LA. They had TWO teams and could keep neither one.

Does anyone know how well the games in Baton Rouge are selling?

man, it's been a while.. i forgot about the shitty la rams!

supposedly they are keeping quiet about the baton rouge tickets

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 03:52 PM

even through all problems you stated..the move still was made...You are right that if Tom Benson absolutely, positively wants to move to San Antonio, and the city absolutely, positively doesn't care about the criticism, then nobody can stop them.

But Benson will lose a lot of money just as Al Davis has. If he's willing to lose hundreds of millions of dollars to bring the NFL to San Antonio, then the door is open.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 03:54 PM

i think sa could pull it off if the team were actually san antonio's.. all the shit we're doing for them now and it isn't even our team...

cherylsteele

10-03-2005, 03:55 PM

man, it's been a while.. i forgot about the shitty la rams!

supposedly they are keeping quiet about the baton rouge tickets
They weren't horrible just poorly managed...they did make a Super Bowl in '79.
Granted they were no world beaters either....probably a step up from the Texans.

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 03:56 PM

You are right that if Tom Benson absolutely, positively wants to move to San Antonio, and the city absolutely, positively doesn't care about the criticism, then nobody can stop them.

But Benson will lose a lot of money just as Al Davis has. If he's willing to lose hundreds of millions of dollars to bring the NFL to San Antonio, then the door is open.

Benson is going to "lose" money if he moves from New Orleans to San Antonio?

How? Explain. Don't use any other past examples, explain how Benson, who had to be paid by the state of Louisiana in order to just stay, is going to lose money?

Didn't know buying tickets, buying merch, watching the games didn't make a owner money.

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 03:59 PM

Then why did the Rams Leave too? It is because support was nil in LA. They had TWO teams and could keep neither one.

Does anyone know how well the games in Baton Rouge are selling?

Fan support had nothing to do with either move. While attendance wsn't great, the problem in both cases was the inability to get the government in Southern California to pay for a new stadium. Anaheim Stadium and the L.A. Coliseum did not generate enough revenue.

The Rams' move was blessed by the league because there was a brand new dome rife with luxury suites and concessions waiting for them in downtown St. Louis. And, the NFL thought there would still be the Raiders in L.A.

The Raiders' move was not blessed because there were only verbal promises for upgrades to be made to the old Oakland Coliseum, and because the move meant the abandonment of the #2 media market.

This is instructive when thinking about S.A. as a potential NFL market.

cherylsteele

10-03-2005, 04:00 PM

You are right that if Tom Benson absolutely, positively wants to move to San Antonio, and the city absolutely, positively doesn't care about the criticism, then nobody can stop them.

But Benson will lose a lot of money just as Al Davis has. If he's willing to lose hundreds of millions of dollars to bring the NFL to San Antonio, then the door is open.
The Rams left to St Louis which is a much smaller market and are doing okay.

You are just speculating that something bad will happen financially if the Saints were to move here. you have no real proof. Just like I have no proof that they were to be succesful if they came.

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 04:03 PM

St. Louis' stadium seats 65,000.

How is that different from the Alamodome? Yes, the Dome doesn't have enough lux. boxes, but besides that, what else is different?

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 04:12 PM

MannyIsGod

10-03-2005, 04:12 PM

St. Louis' stadium seats 65,000.

How is that different from the Alamodome? Yes, the Dome doesn't have enough lux. boxes, but besides that, what else is different?
You don't think that is a pretty big difference?

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 04:20 PM

You don't think that is a pretty big difference?

Again, besides the lux. box situation, what else is different. Tell me Manny.

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 04:21 PM

Benson is going to "lose" money if he moves from New Orleans to San Antonio?

How? Explain. Don't use any other past examples, explain how Benson, who had to be paid by the state of Louisiana in order to just stay, is going to lose money?

Without significant upgrades to facilities so that the Alamodome can generate revenue to the degree that newer stadiums can, a team in San Antonio will need to be subsidized by NFL revenue sharing, even if it managed to sell out every home game.

The Alamodome should be substantially renovated to provide more of the following revenue-generating amenities:
Luxury suites
Club seats
Concessions
Team stores
Restaurants
Miscellaneous fan amenities
Premium parking

A prospective team must be given control of all concessions, as well as sponsorship and naming rights, and a portion of the proceeds from mass transit to the facility, given the Alamodome's unique setup.

If a team is concerned about attendance, the city could provide "guaranteed" sellouts, if it came to that. But Joe Q. Fan will not make or break the team. It will be corporate support in the purchase of the top-dollar seats, suites, and amenities, as well as sponsorships, that will be the determining factor.

Without those things, an S.A. team would rank near the bottom in revenues, with teams like the Vikings.

Didn't know buying tickets, buying merch, watching the games didn't make a owner money.Wow. That's a brilliant statement. Ever heard of opportunity cost or return on investment? Did you pass high school economics?

I thought you were some self-styled "expert" on urban development? Or do you just like imagining pretty buildings in your head? Get a job.

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 04:22 PM

Again, besides the lux. box situation, what else is different. Tell me Manny.REVENUE GENERATION.

You have no clue about what makes the money in professional sports in the 21st century. Just shut the fuck up and go back to masturbating on the toilet while reading the SA Business Journal.

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 04:28 PM

REVENUE GENERATION.

You have no clue about what makes the money in professional sports in the 21st century. Just shut the fuck up and go back to masturbating on the toilet while reading the SA Business Journal.

So I guess, A+B = C

Huh?

How hard is that? It's easily doable.

MannyIsGod

10-03-2005, 04:33 PM

ES,

Save your breath. Arguing with Buddy Holly that there are more attractives venues in this country for an NFL team is an excercise in futility.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 04:34 PM

Without significant upgrades to facilities so that the Alamodome can generate revenue to the degree that newer stadiums can, a team in San Antonio will need to be subsidized by NFL revenue sharing, even if it managed to sell out every home game.

The Alamodome should be substantially renovated to provide more of the following revenue-generating amenities:
Luxury suites
Club seats
Concessions
Team stores
Restaurants
Miscellaneous fan amenities
Premium parking

A prospective team must be given control of all concessions, as well as sponsorship and naming rights, and a portion of the proceeds from mass transit to the facility, given the Alamodome's unique setup.

If a team is concerned about attendance, the city could provide "guaranteed" sellouts, if it came to that. But Joe Q. Fan will not make or break the team. It will be corporate support in the purchase of the top-dollar seats, suites, and amenities, as well as sponsorships, that will be the determining factor.

Without those things, an S.A. team would rank near the bottom in revenues, with teams like the Vikings.

Wow. That's a brilliant statement. Ever heard of opportunity cost or return on investment? Did you pass high school economics?

I thought you were some self-styled "expert" on urban development? Or do you just like imagining pretty buildings in your head? Get a job.

if they were going to do this for MLS then they sure as hell would do it for the NFL...

so, what market would be better than sa? we have already figured out oakland sucks, la sucks, jax sucks.. who wouldn't suck?

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 04:35 PM

ES,

Save your breath. Arguing with Buddy Holly that there are more attractives venues in this country for an NFL team is an excercise in futility.

where?

MannyIsGod

10-03-2005, 04:35 PM

Los Angeles and Portland.

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 04:37 PM

The Rams left to St Louis which is a much smaller market and are doing okay.

You are just speculating that something bad will happen financially if the Saints were to move here. you have no real proof. Just like I have no proof that they were to be succesful if they came.St. Louis built the Edwards Jones Dome (back then called the TWA Dome) to attract a team.

It was state-of-the-art in 1995, when the team moved.

The team made more money by moving from Anaheim Stadium to the Dome, even though it was a smaller market.

How? Well, because prospective wealthy fans were willing to pay a premium for an air-conditioned, wood-floored suite with leather furniture, a full bar, and a big-screen TV in St. Louis than they were for an old metal seat with chewing gum stuck to the bottom in Anaheim.

(The stadium in Anaheim was subsequently renovated into a baseball-only facility for the Angels.)

While San Antonio's Alamodome isn't nearly as bad off as decrepit old heaps like the Metrodome in Minneapolis, it nevertheless lags far behind the best stadiums in the amenities it offers for which wealthy fans will pay a heavy premium, assuming S.A. has enough of those wealthy fans to begin with.

It will need to be redone.

Facilities + market size + corporate support + fan support = successful team. With regard to the Rams, L.A. had the bigger market, but St. Louis offered better facilities, and much more support from the corporate base and the fans.

Another example would be when the Oilers moved from Houston to Nashville. Nashville is much smaller than Houston, but the Coliseum in Nashville is a far superior facility to the Astrodome, and it makes a lot more money.

Houston had to build a $450 million retractable-roof palace to get the NFL back.

So no, I am not speculating any more than I would be if I said that I would be better off with a $150,000 per year job than with a $30,000 per year job.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 04:38 PM

Los Angeles and Portland.

come on manny...we've already figured out that la sucks.. how many teams have left there? and why? because they were making money? i don't think so...

portland could deserve a shot, but not before sa... football is texas and texas is football.

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 04:38 PM

Los Angeles and Portland.

Portland? Yeah, the Saints can use that huge stadium they have just sitting there.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 04:40 PM

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 04:41 PM

MannyIsGod

10-03-2005, 04:43 PM

I am certainly willing to admit that if San Antonio is willing to spend, say, $300 to $400 million in renovating the Alamodome, plus another $100-$200 million in upgrading surrounding infrastructure and amenities, with taxpayers footing 80-100% of the bill, and with lucrative incentives to a team built on top of that, with sufficient guarantees of revenue should fan support falter, then yes, S.A. absolutely would be in the mix for an NFL team. No question.

You'll see me leading the fucking protests on that based on that pile of shit.

MannyIsGod

10-03-2005, 04:44 PM

come on manny...we've already figured out that la sucks.. how many teams have left there? and why? because they were making money? i don't think so...

portland could deserve a shot, but not before sa... football is texas and texas is football.
LA doesn't suck when compared to San Antonio though! Oakland was a stupid move, and you won't find anyone that debates that.

If they could go back and do it again, I bet you Davis would stay in LA.

MannyIsGod

10-03-2005, 04:45 PM

Portland? Yeah, the Saints can use that huge stadium they have just sitting there.
And somehow Portland building a new stadium is more unlikely than San Antonio putting in half a billion dollars to the AlamoDome?

Right.

SWC Bonfire

10-03-2005, 04:45 PM

I am certainly willing to admit that if San Antonio is willing to spend, say, $300 to $400 million in renovating the Alamodome, plus another $100-$200 million in upgrading surrounding infrastructure and amenities, with taxpayers footing 80-100% of the bill, and with lucrative incentives to a team built on top of that, with sufficient guarantees of revenue should fan support falter, then yes, S.A. absolutely would be in the mix for an NFL team. No question.

Revise your figures down some, and you have a realistic expectation. Say $200mil in the Alamodome and $120 mil for infrastructure, which has uses other than football.

Remember that construction costs are lower in Texas than LA or Portland, and the team could get more for less.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 04:45 PM

how much do new stadiums cost?

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 04:48 PM

And somehow Portland building a new stadium is more unlikely than San Antonio putting in half a billion dollars to the AlamoDome?

Right.

Half a billion?

Like plucking those numbers out your ass or what.

j-6

10-03-2005, 04:48 PM

Revise your figures down some, and you have a realistic expectation. Say $200mil in the Alamodome and $120 mil for infrastructure, which has uses other than football.

Remember that construction costs are lower in Texas than LA or Portland, and the team could get more for less.

$320 million for renovations when it costs $190M to build the Alamodome in the first place twelve years ago?

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 04:49 PM

come on manny...we've already figured out that la sucks.. how many teams have left there? and why? because they were making money? i don't think so...

portland could deserve a shot, but not before sa... football is texas and texas is football.

L.A. would be just fine if only if could get a stadium built. The reason L.A. doesn't have a team is because the only available football stadiums now are the L.A. Coliseum and the Rose Bowl, both of which are ancient.

Back in the 1990's, smaller cities were offering publicly-financed stadiums while L.A. was telling the NFL that any stadium would have to be 100% privately financed. So the NFL took the money.

These days the public money is drying up, and teams like the New England Patriots and San Francisco Giants have demonstrated that a private-owned stadium can be a real cash cow if done right.

So the NFL is looking for an ownership group than can get the financing for a stadium, be it public, private, or some combination. Nobody's been able to get their act together so far.

While Southern California may not be football-rabid, the sheer size of the market makes it highly desirable. It doesn't take a very large percentage of 15 million people to be interested in a team for it to make a lot of money.

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 04:50 PM

I'm just glad we now have Sheryl Sculley to run this ship.

She'll get some shit done.

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 04:50 PM

$320 million for renovations when it costs $190M to build the Alamodome in the first place twelve years ago?

People love plucking numbers out their ass. Even though its been stated many times already that a study showed 150-200 million dollars worth of upgrades would make the Dome NFL ready.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 04:50 PM

L.A. would be just fine if only if could get a stadium built. The reason L.A. doesn't have a team is because the only available football stadiums now are the L.A. Coliseum and the Rose Bowl, both of which are ancient.

Back in the 1990's, smaller cities were offering publicly-financed stadiums while L.A. was telling the NFL that any stadium would have to be 100% privately financed. So the NFL took the money.

These days the public money is drying up, and teams like the New England Patriots and San Francisco Giants have demonstrated that a private-owned stadium can be a real cash cow if done right.

So the NFL is looking for an ownership group than can get the financing for a stadium, be it public, private, or some combination. Nobody's been able to get their act together so far.

While Southern California may not be football-rabid, the sheer size of the market makes it highly desirable. It doesn't take a very large percentage of 15 million people to be interested in a team for it to make a lot of money.

if, if, if...

j-6

10-03-2005, 04:53 PM

People love plucking numbers out their ass. Even though its been stated many times already that a study showed 150-200 million dollars worth of upgrades would make the Dome NFL ready.

Maybe, maybe not.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/football/nfl/stories/MYSA051105.1A.saints_move.260e14283.html

Benson declined to comment about a possible move to San Antonio, other than to say through a spokesman that he "has not spoken to anyone there, political or not, about the Saints."

Before any team seriously considers relocating to San Antonio, several hurdles would have to be overcome. The biggest obstacle would be bringing the Alamodome up to NFL standards, a project likely to cost close to $200 million.

According to a study commissioned by the city in 2001, the Alamodome is smaller by more than 200,000 square feet than 10 recently built NFL stadiums. It has far fewer luxury suites and premium club seats than other new NFL venues.

NFL insiders say the dome would need at least 120 to 140 suites and at least 10,500 club seats to generate enough revenue to lure a team.

The Alamodome has 38 finished suites, with space to build an additional 28, and more than 6,000 club/suite seats, with the ability to add 1,000 more.

The study estimated it could take nearly $140 million to overhaul the dome, a price tag that doesn't include the cost for construction of a training facility.

John T

10-03-2005, 04:54 PM

Does anyone know how well the games in Baton Rouge are selling?

I just checked to see what was available for 2 seats together. I have no idea if they're holding the 32,000 season ticket holder seats (I think it's 32K) until 10 days prior to the game like they did for the games here. And I'm not sure how long ago they went on sale.

4-game tickets
Lover level/10 yard line/row Q

vs. Chicago Bears
Lower level/Goal line/row 55 (not sure why these are numbers not letters)

vs. Miami Dolphins
Lower level/corner section/row M

Oh, and thanks Truth for answering!

Carie

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 04:55 PM

$320 million for renovations when it costs $190M to build the Alamodome in the first place twelve years ago?Look at how much Reliant Stadium cost ($450 million).

Look how much the new facility for the Cowboys in Arlington is costing ($650 million).

$300+ million in renovations is comparatively cheap these days.

But this is how it always is with San Antonio. People bitch and moan about how they deserve a team, but then when you show them the price tag, they get sticker shock.

Clandestino

10-03-2005, 04:55 PM

how much did reliant cost? what about the new stadium up in dallas?

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 04:57 PM

if, if, if...If San Antonio can beat L.A. to the punch in getting a deal done, more power to them.

The NFL wanted to expand to L.A., not Houston, in 2002. But a moneybags owner and a $450 million stadium, coupled with foot-dragging in L.A., changed those plans.

SWC Bonfire

10-03-2005, 04:58 PM

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 04:59 PM

People love plucking numbers out their ass. Even though its been stated many times already that a study showed 150-200 million dollars worth of upgrades would make the Dome NFL ready.

Upgrading the Dome by itself is not enough.

But, hey, if $200 million in taxpayer money is all it takes, then that referendum should pass easily, right?

Ask the Spurs about that.

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 04:59 PM

Look at how much Reliant Stadium cost ($450 million).

Look how much the new facility for the Cowboys in Arlington is costing ($650 million).

$300+ million in renovations is comparatively cheap these days.

But this is how it always is with San Antonio. People bitch and moan about how they deserve a team, but then when you show them the price tag, they get sticker shock.

Of course they're going to cost that must. It's like buying a new Lamborghini to get you to work. Flashy and very unnecessary. While your co-worker went out and bought a hybrid civic. San Antonio is buying the hybrid civic. Nothing fancy, good enough to get him to work.

The upgrades aren't major. No retractable roof being added. No new screens. No new section. Just more boxes and seats.

Simple.

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 05:00 PM

Upgrading the Dome by itself is not enough.

But, hey, if $200 million in taxpayer money is all it takes, then that referendum should pass easily, right?

Ask the Spurs about that.

Yeah I will. Because it was a landslide victory.

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 05:00 PM

Reliant Stadium is physically 3 times bigger than the Alamodome. Warehouses around the Alamodome aren't exactly priceless, either.

Reliant Stadium was built on part of the Astrodome's parking lot. Harris County already owned the land.

SWC Bonfire

10-03-2005, 05:01 PM

Reliant Stadium is physically 3 times bigger than the Alamodome

Concrete=Cost

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 05:03 PM

Yeah I will. Because it was a landslide victory.That was a county election. Remember? Remember how the city couldn't get a proposal for a downtown arena done? Remember how you personally bitched about that when you weren't trying to fulfill your NFL wet dream?

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 05:04 PM

That was a county election. Remember? Remember how the city couldn't get a proposal for a downtown arena done? Remember how you personally bitched about that when you weren't trying to fulfill your NFL wet dream?

You do know the Spurs (peter holt) turned down the cities offer to build an arena downtown because he didn't want the Riverwalk selling from his concession revenue.

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 05:05 PM

Of course they're going to cost that must. It's like buying a new Lamborghini to get you to work. Flashy and very unnecessary. While your co-worker went out and bought a hybrid civic. San Antonio is buying the hybrid civic. Nothing fancy, good enough to get him to work.

The upgrades aren't major. No retractable roof being added. No new screens. No new section. Just more boxes and seats.

Simple.Except it's a lot easier to get your rich neighbor to fork over $150,000 for a new Lamborghini than it is for a Honda Civic hybrid.

You act as if San Antonio is doing the NFL a favor by offering to let it relocate a team there.

j-6

10-03-2005, 05:07 PM

Look at how much Reliant Stadium cost ($450 million).

Look how much the new facility for the Cowboys in Arlington is costing ($650 million).

$300+ million in renovations is comparatively cheap these days.

But this is how it always is with San Antonio. People bitch and moan about how they deserve a team, but then when you show them the price tag, they get sticker shock.

(proposed/under construction) Arlington Stadium, DAL- $650M

Lincoln Financial Field, PHI - $512M

Ford Field, DET - $500M

Reliant Stadium, HOU - $450M

(proposed/under construction)Minneapolis Stadium, MIN - $450M

(proposed/under construction) New Orleans Stadium, NO - $450M

(proposed/under construction) San Diego Stadium, SD - $400M

Gillette Stadium, NE - $397M

INVESCO Field at Mile High, DEN -$364M

Qwest Field, SEA - $360M

(proposed/under construction) Glendale Stadium, ARI - $355M

Heinz Field, PIT - $280M

Vashner

10-03-2005, 05:09 PM

I think we could always throw some money at the dome and convert the club level to an all executive suits on the sidelines.

Among other things.. Without rebuilding it.

The 2 new giant screens where awesome....

TheWriter

10-03-2005, 05:13 PM

(proposed/under construction) Arlington Stadium, DAL- $650M

Lincoln Financial Field, PHI - $512M

Ford Field, DET - $500M

Reliant Stadium, HOU - $450M

(proposed/under construction)Minneapolis Stadium, MIN - $450M

(proposed/under construction) New Orleans Stadium, NO - $450M

(proposed/under construction) San Diego Stadium, SD - $400M

Gillette Stadium, NE - $397M

INVESCO Field at Mile High, DEN -$364M

Qwest Field, SEA - $360M

(proposed/under construction) Glendale Stadium, ARI - $355M

Heinz Field, PIT - $280M

Ohmigod! Arizona didn't spend 600 million.

Holy shiznit! Pittsburgh is only spending 280 million, not 500 or 600 or 700!!!??

How can they support a team? How can they make it work?

The madness Extra.

Extra Stout

10-03-2005, 05:22 PM

Ohmigod! Arizona didn't spend 600 million.

Holy shiznit! Pittsburgh is only spending 280 million, not 500 or 600 or 700!!!??

How can they support a team? How can they make it work?

The madness Extra.Read my last post, dipshit.

I said $300 million when it's all said and done is relatively cheap to get an NFL team.

Besides, those places already have teams. San Antonio is trying to attract one. It should expect to pay more.

But, hey, if the price tag is in the ballpark of $200 million plus infrastructure improvements plus incentive packages (in other words, $300 million), then let's see San Antonio go ahead and get that done.

I'm sure C.O.P.S. and their cohorts will have no problem with that.

I'm guessing you won't be interested in arguing the point anymore and will go off on some tangent.