san antonio should be ashamed

[td4mvp3]

i don't frequent the nfl board, but this caught my eye, figured i'd share


San Antonio should be ashamed

By GIL LEBRETON
Star-Telegram Staff Writer

Looters should be shot.

And that includes you, too, San Antonio.

In the wake of the largest natural disaster in U.S. history, the citizens of hurricane-ravaged New Orleans often have had to rely upon the kindness of strangers.

But what sort of purported good Samaritan welcomes a city with one hand, while robbing it with the other?

Call San Antonio's coveting of the New Orleans Saints what you will. I call it looting - to take or carry off as plunder; to steal.

San Antonio doesn't deserve an NFL team. For preying upon one community's misfortunes, it deserves the disdain of every decent city in America.

The floodwaters were still rushing into New Orleans three weeks ago, when Saints owner Tom Benson made the decision to relocate his team's practices and offices to his second home of San Antonio. Saints fans, accustomed to distrusting the owner's motives, immediately saw the "evacuation" as the lowest in a long line of Benson low blows.

Benson had previously used threats of moving the team as leverage to extract more money and concessions from the state of Louisiana. The tactic has proven to be more than profitable for the Benson family. Since state funds were allocated to guarantee any Benson shortfalls, the Saints' reported revenues have ranked not at the bottom of the NFL, but in the middle, among some cities twice New Orleans' size.

But there is no honor among thieves. Benson -- always -- wants more money. And San Antonio is willing to sell its soul to give him some.

The Saints have been in New Orleans since their expansion season of 1967. The team is as much a part of the fabric of the city as, well, the Spurs are in San Antonio.

Thank heavens Thursday night that Hurricane Rita appeared to be veering toward the east.

Thank heavens, because what if a major disaster had befallen San Antonio? What if a tornado had killed hundreds and made much of the city uninhabitable?

And what if the mayor of, say, Las Vegas had called a press conference and invited San Antonio's beloved Spurs to come stay awhile, if not permanently? Las Vegas, most NBA watchers agree, looms as the next city on the list to get a league franchise. It has already been awarded the 2007 NBA All-Star Game.

Steal the Spurs? Why not? It would be no different than what San Antonio is trying to do to New Orleans.

At a breakfast meeting last week, the San Antonio Chamber of Commerce rallied its area corporate heads. Former mayor Henry Cisneros shamelessly preached to the congregation about stealing the Saints, calling it "a financial affirmation of economic momentum,"" according to the San Antonio Express-News.

One lowlife city councilman called Cisneros' speech "stirring -- something out of Braveheart."

Like I said, there is no honor among thieves.

In a lengthy question-and-answer session, however, that appeared Monday in The Times-Picayune of New Orleans, NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue reaffirmed the league's position.

"We're going to do everything possible to make sure there's a New Orleans Saints," Tagliabue said.

A lot will depend, Tagliabue properly added, on what sort of New Orleans emerges from the muddy rubble. The league has long been fond of New Orleans. It hosted the fourth Super Bowl, and nine in all. When Donald Trump throws his hat and hair into the ring and professes his interest in helping to rebuild the city, as he did this week, Tagliabue is inclined to listen.

Besides, the commissioner told The Times-Picayune, "We're not going to be moving any teams into small markets ...We're going to be moving up in market size, not down or flat."

In San Antonio, the mayor, among others, promptly bristled at the insinuation that his city was small-time.

Tagliabue never said exactly that. But if the commissioner had used the term "small-minded," he wouldn't have gotten an argument here.

Since Tagliabue brought it up, however, let's define the parameters.

First and foremost, consider the building that will be temporarily housing the Saints for part of this season. The Alamodome, built 12 years ago, has ample seating capacity, but lacks the amenities to which the NFL has become accustomed.

It has, for example, only 34 luxury suites. Houston's Reliant Stadium, home of the NFL Texans, has 188. Texas Stadium has 380.

The Spurs, despite their NBA championships, reportedly had trouble selling all of their 51 suites last season at the SBC Center.

According to the San Antonio paper, a study commissioned by the city five years ago estimated that it would cost $136 million to redo the Alamodome to NFL standards.

Good luck with that bond election, brave hearts. It was a district in San Antonio's Bexar County that led to the infamous Robin Hood school funding plan, "robbing" from the property-rich districts to fund the poor. Every school district in Bexar County receives Robin Hood funds.

How much will Tom Benson get?

Mayor Phil Hardberger noted that San Antonio is the nation's eighth-largest city in population. Maybe, but the metropolitan area ranks somewhere around 30th. As a TV market, San Antonio ranks No. 37.

Both of those, let me suggest, aren't real-life figures in NFL terms. The league already has two teams in Texas, and neither likely would be fond of relinquishing any share of the TV or merchandising market to a San Antonio franchise.

San Antonio, for the most part, is Cowboys country. The city has proven that.

If the Fox affiliate dares to show a Saints road game over a Cowboys one this season, expect San Antonio viewers to be livid.

Subtract all the Cowboys fans from the San Antonio metro population, therefore, and eliminate them from the TV audience, and where does "small market" San Antonio rank now?

The NFL, let me suggest, would make its mark better in Birmingham, Ala., or Portland, Ore.

It will be interesting to see how many Saints tickets are sold in San Antonio after Tagliabue's "small market" comment came to light.

Tagliabue, it appears, only wants to do the right thing. And the moral road, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, is to allow no looting, no preying upon a city that already has been ravaged and can't yet defend itself.

Thank heavens that Hurricane Rita and any deadly tornadoes appear to be veering elsewhere.

Thank heavens, because you never know. Some city might have come to San Antonio's "rescue" and lusted after the Spurs.

Shame on you, San Antonio.

[samikeyp]

Basically the dude is threatened by SA dropping their allegiance to the Cowboys. His worst fear is people like me. Loyal to the Cowboys but more loyal to my home town. If Tom Benson moved the Saints here, which is 99% not happening, he will do so by his own choice, therefore it cannot be stealing. Typical metroplex media bias. him.

[Trainwreck2100]

How long ago was that posted, cause that guy didn't do his homework well.

[dknights411]

This is what happens when poeple don't quite know what the heck they are talking about. I mean BIRMINGHAM?!?

Everyone is just in denial that San Antonio is more than capable to support an NFL team today. The Cowboys can survive without San Antonio if they needed too.

[Rescueone]

See, I told you in some of my posts in other threads that people from outside this region think that the people of this area are "small-minded". Then in his lame ass reasoning, shame should jump on Oklahoma City also for looting the Hornets. We're not stealing anything. Stealing would have been if New Orleans had stole the Spurs from San Antonio. We're helping out the Saints with a place to play short term. If we were trying to loot the Saints, we should have shown our greed and demanded all home games be played here. Then I would say San Antonio was taking advantage of the situation. Don't worry, when next year comes along and the Saints relocate to LA, we all will retaliate on this ass then. I would rather have an expansion team in San Antonio or Indy if they're thinking of relocating! This guy needs to go piss in the wind.

[samikeyp]

The Cowboys can survive without San Antonio if they needed too.

Very true but they don't want to. There are a lot of Cowboys fans here and, more importantly to Jerry Jones, they spend money. They buy merchandise, tickets, bus trips to games, etc. That is why he had training camp here, because he can make a lot of money. If it wasn't for Parcells' objections to having camp here, it would still be here. JJ will be against bringing a team here and it is purely because of money.

[Guru of Nothing]

Bitter mavs fan.

[Marcus Bryant]

Maybe Gil is trying to make a good impression on Jerry?

If you could strip away the holier than thou at ude, he does lay out a good basic case against SA as a prospective NFL market.

Dude must've gotten beaten down the last time he visited SA.

[Marcus Bryant]

Bitter mavs fan.

Well, that could be.

[FromWayDowntown]

This makes me mad, because it's just plain incorrect. My e-mailed response to the columnist (which I wish I had more carefully edited):

Dear Mr. LeBreton,

As a resident of the City of San Antonio, I am outraged by the gross misstatements concerning my home. Your utter unwillingness to fully research the issue has lead you to write a column that should, ultimately, leave you ashamed.

As an initial matter, Mr. LeBreton, you might note that when those forced to evacuate Louisiana needed a place of refuge, San Antonio stepped up to the plate and offered its facilities, its services, its support, and its sympathy. As Hurricane Rita has approached the Texas Gulf Coast and our friends from communities that had not been directly struck by Katrina have sought refuge, San Antonio has, once again, stepped up to the proverbial plate without asking a single question or thinking twice about any consequences. Certainly, we are not alone in having done so – but your rhetorical castigation of this City wholly omits any mention of those rather significant truths. Painting hysterics with a broad brush might sell newspapers, but it does a great disservice to the many hard-working and devoted people in this City who have put their lives on hold to ensure that those who have suffered such great misfortunes and need help are cared for. I’d like to think that other cities would be equally as willing to afford San Antonians the same compassion should we ever suffer such catastrophes.

To the point of your column, I have paid particular attention to the rumblings in San Antonio concerning the NFL. At the present time, my City is abuzz with interest in seeing the games the NFL has allowed us. I would think that such an interest would be understandable, even from the outside, but apparently, the jaundiced eye of the big city doesn’t allow understanding of such giddiness. In our excitement, we have certainly become enthralled with the idea of having an NFL team to call our own – a goal that my city has articulated since the campaign to build the Alamodome began in the mid-1980’s. That goal, in and of itself, is certainly not de able. The excitement about the fact that the goal may be achieved, however, has not (to my knowledge) been directly linked to any internal plan to “steal” the Saints. You might note that San Antonio had expressed only passing interest in luring Saints (generally fodder for the empty summer-time hours of sports talk radio) before Katrina struck. Any direct interest in the Saints that you point to, however, arose not because of some devious plan from within these city limits, but because Tom Benson expressly and unequivocally stated an interest in moving his team – the Saints – here. So, a city desirous of the NFL is mentioned by an owner as a possible relocation point, and I guess, in your world, should politely refuse to entertain any discussions on that issue? But had Los Angeles done the same – or had the Commissioner of the National Football League openly stated a preference that the Saints relocate to Los Angeles – I suppose there would have been no real harm in that, right?

A more significant point that you missed in your diatribe is a rather simple one. San Antonio has a chance that few other cities have ever had – a live audition for the NFL; a chance to show that we can support an NFL team. There is no correlation between the chance to make that showing and the Saints, other than the cir stances that have brought the Saints here. We’re going to get gussied-up, and our city leadership is encouraging citizens to get excited about the chance to show the NFL what some NBA cities apparently disdain about us – our unwavering support for the home team, despite our rather diminutive market size. But the result we seek is not necessarily the relocation of the Saints. Rather, we seek to show the NFL that we can house a team – any team – because we are large enough and strong enough to do so. Can you really blame us for seizing that opportunity?

I doubt you’ve read all of this, and I suppose that my response to you is nothing more than proof that someone is reading your column. But if I’ve caused you to think again at all about what you’ve written – and to regret your choice of words even one bit – I’ve accomplished my goal.

[Steve Perry]

Looks like something mouse would write, minus the good grammer

[tsb2000]

This makes me mad, because it's just plain incorrect. My e-mailed response to the columnist (which I wish I had more carefully edited):

Well written. If the Saints, (or Vikings, or Bengals...etc.) are moving anywhere, it's to Los Angeles. Why would the NFL allow the moving of a team to the 9th largest city when the 2nd largest city has no team? If the basis of a team's move is money, that's where the money is.

[exstatic]

Well written. If the Saints, (or Vikings, or Bengals...etc.) are moving anywhere, it's to Los Angeles. Why would the NFL allow the moving of a team to the 9th largest city when the 2nd largest city has no team? If the basis of a team's move is money, that's where the money is.

Then why can't they keep a team? The Rams move FROM Los Angeles. I guess the money was in StL, at least $500M worth, including a stadium deal.