Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

No more BOA


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 5/1/2023 at 8:42 PM, pantherdad said:

And the Winston-Salem dash also play at truist park as well

Truist HQ is in Winston Salem too. Would oy make sense for them yo take over the naming rights fir Panthers stadium.  

 

But Bojangles is expanding.  They are opening 3 places in the suburbs of Chicago in the next year.  So they might want the naming rights. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Squirrel said:

Truist HQ is in Winston Salem too. Would oy make sense for them yo take over the naming rights fir Panthers stadium.  

 

But Bojangles is expanding.  They are opening 3 places in the suburbs of Chicago in the next year.  So they might want the naming rights. 

Other option is American Airlines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2023 at 12:22 PM, BrisbanePanther said:

Whatever it is, I suspect there will be some tea leaves to read regarding timing of a new stadium, which would fetch huge dollars by itself. Also have to keep in mind that there'll be other stadiums coming too which could take some potential sponsors, including new ones in Buffalo, Nashville, and DC (which will almost certainly have their pick of sponsors in a mega-deal to compete with Bezos). In fact, I think a new DC stadium could break the $500m sponsorship mark.

That being said, my contenders would be:

American Airlines Field due to the Charlotte hub, but I'm not sure airlines are throwing money like this at sponsorships anymore.

I also think it could be a random one like:

Samsung Stadium--but then again this feels like the name for a new (or heavily renovated) stadium. The tech upgrades, customer experience, and product placement takes care of itself. All the video boards, ribbon boards, monitors, wifi, everything--all Samsung and probably special features for Samsung phone owners (like me! 👍). 

Allegiant Airlines has the naming rights for the Raiders stadium in Vegas. Airlines still have arena naming rights. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time is running out on Bank of America’s naming rights contract for the Carolina Panthers’ stadium uptown. The bank purchased the naming rights in 2004 under a 20-year agreement for $140 million, or $7 million per season. The financial institution has been headquartered in Charlotte since 1998 after NationsBank’s merger with BankAmerica. It’s unclear if Bank of America will renew the contract. A bank spokesperson said there’s nothing to report at this time.

 

Today, the average stadium naming rights deal across the country is about $14 million a year, Depken said. He expects the new contract for the Panthers stadium to cost about $10 to $15 million annually. Last year, insurance company Acrisure paid $10 million per year for 15 years to be the name on the Pittsburgh Steelers’ stadium.

 

Also last year, the Cincinnati Bengals and Paycor signed a deal worth for $12 million a year for 16 years. Other stadium deals have doubled and tripled those numbers. In 2019, Social Finance Inc. paid more than $30 million annually over 20 years to put its name “SoFi” on the new stadium for the Los Angeles Rams and Chargers. The same year, Allegiant Airlines paid $25 million per year for Las Vegas Raiders stadium rights.

Read more at: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article275007936.html#storylink=cpy

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I’m not necessarily advocating sticking with Bryce. His highs show the ability is there, but there’s enough bad film out there to doubt that he can consistently enough play at a high enough level. But this video from Brett Kollman is a pretty good argument to give it a bit more time, whether that be rolling with Bryce just next year or picking up his 5th year option (not extending him).      The gist is that the structural (wider hashes) and rule (3 yd vs 1 yd thresholds for intelligible offensive lineman downfield penalties) differences in the college and NFL have led to wildly different play calling and scheme diets in college. There is much more shotgun and RPO calls in college and screen/quick throws. This simply doesn’t set up young QBs to be able to play under center, which is more preferred in the NFL due to RBs being able to more effectively run out of that formation.  They don’t know how to do it and have to learn. Yes, the NFL has trended more toward college style offense in the last decade or so, but it isn’t that pronounced and is more out of necessity than desire. And on top of all that, they ask the young QBs to do all this learning with coaching and other personnel churn going on around them.  Bad results lead to coaches getting fired and new ones with different ideas on scheme and footwork and different terminology and playbooks coming in. It makes it harder on those young QBs to learn.     So we may drop Bryce for a young QB starter in the draft and be in a similar situation. With a QB who is going to take years to learn how to operate in an NFL style offense and will struggle along the way.  So you have to weigh whether the struggles we see from Bryce are more due to this learning process vs solely physical limitations on his part. It’s almost undoubtedly a bit of both, but the answer to that question I think dictates your strategy at QB over the next few years. And of course, you have to consider what the alternatives available are.    I’m neither a Bryce hater or a Bryce Stan and I don’t have an answer to that question. But I do fear that if we move on from him, unless it’s for an established player, we’re just in for continued frustration on the QB front because it’s going to take a few years for a college QB to develop (Drake Maye’s don’t grow on trees). 
    • The defense has pulled that feat off this season though.  Multiple times. offense has not had a single good first half all season.  Only and good opening scripted drive paired with disappointing play.  defense has been the actual unit you can measure real and consistent improvement IMO.  Still holes and flaws to it that aren’t going away until new bodies get here but they really are the story of the season IMO
    • One thing about RB's and LB's is they are going to get hurt. It's inevitable. Having a fresh Chuba is not a bad thing.  My only criticism of this entire situation is that I wish our staff would adjust personnel to matchup a little better. I think Chuba is a lot better than Rico against the stacked boxes we've seen the last two weeks. They are very different backs with very different strengths, and I love them both. Rico is so good at identifying the hole early, and hitting it full speed early. He's much better at breaking the big run. Chuba is a much more patient back, and finds 3 yards when there's nothing there better than Rico.  It's in no way a criticism of either, but I think Chuba would have had more success than Rico the way the Saints and Falcons attacked us from a Defensive standpoint.  When you put 9 in the box, often times there is no hole to attack. 
×
×
  • Create New...