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!

     

Is Charlotte the worst sports city right now?


hepcat
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

You do know the biggest military base in the US is located just an hour from Raleigh in Fort Bragg right?

Military families are family oriented. A hour drive to games is nothing compared to traveling 3 hours to Charlotte.

 

Cmon man there is nothing happening in Western Carolina other than Charlotte. I only go west for outdoor activities and some nature/mountain views.

Nfl leaders don't look at the population of just the city itself.  Charlotte has three of the top fifty combined statistical areas within a 1 to 1.5 hour drive.  Charlotte, Greensboro/WS/High Point, and Greenville Spartanburg.  Those three statistical areas include nearly 7 million people.  Other than Raleigh, the only one in the top fifty within an hour and half of raleigh is Greensboro.  So only about 4-5 million people.  Charlotte has many more people to draw from.  

Also, many of the surrounding communities for Raleigh are not native born.  If memory serves, many still refer to Cary as Containment area for relocated Yankees.  One of the reasons the Canes do so well is a significant portion of the population are people who moved from Northern Areas.  Would that population translate into support for a NFL team?  Hard to say, but I see a tremendous amount of Giants/Jets jerseys in the triangle when I forced to endure the crazy traffic on 40/85.  

Edited by Davidson Deac II
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Davidson Deac II said:

Nfl leaders don't look at the population of just the city itself.  Charlotte has three of the top fifty combined statistical areas within a 1 to 1.5 hour drive.  Charlotte, Greensboro/WS/High Point, and Greenville Spartanburg.  Those three statistical areas include nearly 7 million people.  Other than Raleigh, the only one in the top fifty within an hour and half of raleigh is Greensboro.  So only about 4-5 million people.  Charlotte has many more people to draw from.  

Also, many of the surrounding communities for Raleigh are not native born.  If memory serves, many still refer to Cary as Containment area for relocated Yankees.  One of the reasons the Canes do so well is a significant portion of the population are people who moved from Northern Areas.  Would that population translate into support for a NFL team?  Hard to say, but I see a tremendous amount of Giants/Jets jerseys in the triangle when I forced to endure the crazy traffic on 40/85.  

Population has nothing to do with fans being loud at games. The fact Charlotte has more people just shows you why the games are 50/50. Raleigh is smaller and has a more passionate fanbase. The city is together. Charlotte doesn't have that vibe.

Charlotte will continue to suck at attendance because not many people really care about their local team. It's just not a sports city imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 This is just stupid. If Tepper owned the team and they were in your backyard it wouldn’t be any different after 6 losing seasons. People would be pissed and it just wouldn’t be any different. 

This malaise is Tepper generated. 

Edited by strato
  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Population has nothing to do with fans being loud at games. The fact Charlotte has more people just shows you why the games are 50/50. Raleigh is smaller and has a more passionate fanbase. The city is together. Charlotte doesn't have that vibe.

Charlotte will continue to suck at attendance because not many people really care about their local team. It's just not a sports city imo.

generally speaking, to be committed to bad teams......you need time.  Born into it. Generations. I mean, that's why people support the Jets, or Cubs or whoever that can suck for a decade.  Panthers still lack the time to have a "proper fanbase".  40 year olds still grew up on different teams because they didn't exist. 

so the Charlotte teams are largely in the you have to be good for people to care window.  One of the reasons Raleigh is deemed a passionate fanbase is the Hurricanes actually had early success and are currently succesful.  In the postseason year 2 and in the Stanley Cup by year 5.  Then won it a couple years after that.  I mean, that's actually beyond early success.  That was great success.   And if you look more recently, they have had 6 straight playoff seasons. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Philadelphia has fans who put batteries in snow balls then throw them at opposing players and fans. Now that is a poo hole sports city. Not to mention an entire downtown area that looks like a war zone where people walk the streets like zombies due to all the fentanyl being taken. No sports city gets worse than that. Yeah, their football team may have performed better in recent years but that city and many of their fans SUCK something awful!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, CRA said:

generally speaking, to be committed to bad teams......you need time.  Born into it. Generations. I mean, that's why people support the Jets, or Cubs or whoever that can suck for a decade.  Panthers still lack the time to have a "proper fanbase".  40 year olds still grew up on different teams because they didn't exist. 

so the Charlotte teams are largely in the you have to be good for people to care window.  One of the reasons Raleigh is deemed a passionate fanbase is the Hurricanes actually had early success and are currently succesful.  In the postseason year 2 and in the Stanley Cup by year 5.  Then won it a couple years after that.  I mean, that's actually beyond early success.  That was great success.   And if you look more recently, they have had 6 straight playoff seasons. 

"Panthers still lack the time to have a proper fanbase"....Uh...29 years and two SB appearances says... Wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, 3838 said:

"Panthers still lack the time to have a proper fanbase"....Uh...29 years and two SB appearances says... Wrong.

Still fighting the remnants of the old timers who were normally either Redskins, Cowboys, or Falcons from when the Carolinas were NFL No Man’s Land.

Those are deep roots. I was a Johnny U fan when I was a kid. If Irsay hadn’t left Baltimore like he did I’d have had an issue when the Panthers came to life. 

I actually remember JR in his playing days with the Colts, fwiw btw snafu.

And all the transplants make it tougher too 

Edited by strato
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 3838 said:

"Panthers still lack the time to have a proper fanbase"....Uh...29 years and two SB appearances says... Wrong.

I mean, 40 year olds that grew up on other teams.....simply aren't the same as people that were passed down a team for generations in their family.  When I was kid, my favorite player was Darrell Greene.  Because my team was the Skins.  If the Panthers suck, I can just watch the NFL at large.  It is what it is.  I adopted the Panthers because they were the local team. 

The Panthers and the Browns simply aren't going to have the same fanbases right now.  Shouldn't be expected.  And most of the real purchasing power is with people who didn't grow up with the Panthers.  The money isn't with a 19 year olds. 

and if the Hurricanes were less successful, people wouldn't be hyping the Raleigh fanbase as much.  But I can concede that is slightly different, as hockey isn't big in the south so most in the area haven't switched over from other teams.  It's their introduction to the sport.  Which makes the Hurricanes a little different than other franchises.  They probably compare better with Charlotte FC IMO.  If you gave Raleigh a random MLB team that sucked......I don't that folks could get away with claiming Raliegh fans are "built different" than Charlotte folks. 

  • Pie 3
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

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...