2005-12-05

What happens if the Saints play and nobody shows up to see it?



Reported attendence was 34,411 at LSU's stadium. I'm guessing far fewer people showed up than that.

"You come out there, and I felt like it was just my family in the stands, man," said Kenyatta Walker. "It was strange. It was just dead. I felt like I was in the Twilight Zone.

"It was just real slow. There wasn't a lot of high energy. I don't know for what reason, but sometimes, you'd look in the stands and it felt like a preseason game for a minute. So you had to mentally get yourself right."

8 comments:

Scott said...

If the Saints lose, but no one is around to see them, does it count in the stats?

Cutthroat Pirates said...

The media reported that a lot of Saints fans are also LSU fans and traveled to Atlanta, Ga. (Georgia Dome)for the game. Plus a lot of people are still suffering from the hurricane.

Ski said...

it's always about the stats with you scott . . .

and yeah, the Saints stink and LSU played away, but what happens to the Saints next year if New Orleans is not prepared to host a team (which they probably are not)?

in a profit sharing league, the NFL and it's owners have a large incentive to move a team to L.A. and this might be the time to do it. low attendence numbers would be just the excuse for Benson to move the team (especially if the Saints stay in Baton Rouge next season and people continue to stay away from the Saint's games).

Scott said...

> low attendence numbers would be just the excuse for Benson to move the team

The fans haven't been exactly beating the door down to see the Saints for several years. Low attendence numbers aren't an "excuse", they're a good reason. If your fanbase in your hometown isn't coming to the games, you're not making money. If you ask New Orleans residents if they like the Saints, of course they'll say yes. But they have to back it up with their attendance and they're cash in order for it to count. Having the Saints in New Orleans was actually costing the city and state because of the lease agreement to the Superdome and guarantees made to the team. I wrote an opinion about it a few months ago and, despite the hurricanes, I think it still holds true.

Douglas Scott S. said...

wow, awesome ski. did you not read what i wrote? everyone has bad games. how can you criticize vick when simms is your QB, i dont go to your site and talk crap about the bucs. and you have no right to say anything bad about the falcons/vick. isnt simms the QB that everyone was saying is "mentally weak"? yeah im pretty sure thats him. you guys only put up 10 pts against the saints... impressive. and y'all lost to the 49ers. so dont come here saying stuff like that about vick b/c its pretty lame.

i figured id put it here too incase you didnt come back to my site to read it. but if you're gonna criticize anything bad about the falcons, i'll be sure to do the same for you.

i'm not saying vick is the best QB in football, and i'm not saying the falcons are a great team. so i dont need you to tell him how much they suck, ok?

and if you're gonna say vick is overrated, please explain..

Ski said...

good article scott, well worth a read.

I agree with most of the things you have to write except for the profit a team can bring to a city. while the team it's self provides very little economic windfall the peripheral business created by the sports team (i.e. restaurants/bars amd hotels) can bring in a steady stream of taxable revenue. For example, the Trop and the Rays have helped to revitilize downtown st pete (although BayWalk no doubt played a large role in that). And just one profitable hotel can bring in a close to a million dollars of revenue for a city in a year (although this is a very rough generalization).

anyway, if the saints do move to L.A. how much does that cross country flight affect how well the Bucs play (and vice versa)?

Scott said...

The peripheral business is legitimate, although how much they really contribute to the community is also up for debate. I haven't been in the neighborhood of Tropicana Field (which, why they would ever change the name from the Thunderdome, the most awesome dome name ever, is totally beyond me, endorsement deals be damned) in a number of years, but the last time I was there, it was still essentially a shithole. And if you go around to every NFL stadium in the country, how many of them are in neighborhoods that you wouldn't want to walk alone in at night? Ford Field? FedEx? Lincoln Financial? Stop me if you feel safe in one of these up-and-coming neighborhoods. The ones that are in ok neighborhoods (Candlestick, Jack Murphy, Gillette to name a few) didn't affect a change. Those neighborhoods were fine before the stadiums came along.

And keep in mind that cities, counties and states have already made huge tax concessions to just to get the team to locate there. The teams essentially pay no taxes. On top of that, they are getting hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer money to build new stadiums. How much did the tax in Tampa raise for the stadium? $150M, I think? Your hotel would have to be in business for 150 years to make that up. How many restaurants would it take to make that up? I agree that the peripheral business is good, but it's good in a more gradual way. The overall number of jobs goes up, so more people buy houses in the area and the overall economy of the area is raised slightly. But what improvements could have been made if Tampa had just injected $150M directly into the city? How much better off would New Orleans be if it had that $81M back from the Saints sweetheart deal?

My overall point is that I am suspicious of the benefits that are touted as reasons to bring sports franchises to struggling areas. I'm rambling now, so I'll stop.

Anonymous said...

FUCK YOU you bastard. That's why we got a SEASON TICKET sellout this season huh?


fuckin' prick you lucky this the internet cuz I would whip your ass if you were here right now....and fuck your mother and sisters afterwords.....

BITCH.