Media Hype: Colts move in the night... (1 Viewer)

[IndyHavoc]

OK, I need some history and opinions from true football fans here. I've read more than a few op/ed pieces on the Colts move from Baltimore to Indy. Now I've been listening to Balt fans calling into local shows, and Herd railing ALL morning about what a big deal this was and is.

What I'm confused about - and need some help / perspective - is the situation that surrounded that move? It sounds like Irsay and the City of Baltimore had a seriously contentious relationship and tensions were building over issues (stadium? facilities?). So, wasn't the move somewhat expected at the time? What's the real reason for the continued bad feelings? Is it just the name? Is it the "move in the night" that Herd just keeps harping on?

I'm seriously asking for help, I was like 9 years old at the time, so don't have any recolection what-so-ever of what was going on in the NFL and Baltimore at this time. From reading Wikipedia, it sounds like the Colts were catastrophically bad at the time. Wasn't the move somewhat a relief to get rid of a real stinker of a team?? Educate me, please.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

OK, I need some history and opinions from true football fans here. I've read more than a few op/ed pieces on the Colts move from Baltimore to Indy. Now I've been listening to Balt fans calling into local shows, and Herd railing ALL morning about what a big deal this was and is.

What I'm confused about - and need some help / perspective - is the situation that surrounded that move? It sounds like Irsay and the City of Baltimore had a seriously contentious relationship and tensions were building over issues (stadium? facilities?). So, wasn't the move somewhat expected at the time? What's the real reason for the continued bad feelings? Is it just the name? Is it the "move in the night" that Herd just keeps harping on?

I'm seriously asking for help, I was like 9 years old at the time, so don't have any recolection what-so-ever of what was going on in the NFL and Baltimore at this time. From reading Wikipedia, it sounds like the Colts were catastrophically bad at the time. Wasn't the move somewhat a relief to get rid of a real stinker of a team?? Educate me, please.

Start here.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Here are some of the stories from the Baltimore Sun regarding the history (and note these are not all from the Sports Section):

Colts memories, ill feelings over move are alive and well

Move to Indy was covert operation

Some people need lesson in history of real Colts

Colts owner faces relentless grudge

In Ravens' town, time dims glory of Colts' deeds

 

[SuperJohn96]

The team began play in 1953 as the Baltimore Colts. A previous Baltimore Colts team played between 1947-50. The original Colts team began play in 1946 as the Miami Seahawks, a member of the upstart All-America Football Conference. They relocated to Baltimore as the Colts in 1947, and joined the NFL in 1950 after the AAFC merged into the older league. However, the franchise folded after one NFL season. After fans in Baltimore protested, the NFL formed another Colts team out of the ashes of the failed Dallas Texans for the 1953 season. While in Baltimore, the club won four NFL Championships, including one Super Bowl.

Prior to the 1984 season, the Colts moved from Baltimore to Indianapolis, highlighted by an infamous incident in which they packed all of their belongings into Mayflower Transit trucks in the middle of a snowy night on March 28. The move angered many Baltimore fans and former players so much that they completely disassociated themselves from the relocated Indianapolis team.

Several years later on November 6, 1995, Browns owner Art Modell announced his intention to move his Browns team to Baltimore

Seems you guys can't keep your grubby little fingers off of other cities' teams.Maybe it serves you right that Irsay took off with the Colts.

:fishing?:

 

[IndyHavoc]

Here are some of the stories from the Baltimore Sun regarding the history (and note these are not all from the Sports Section):

Colts memories, ill feelings over move are alive and well

Move to Indy was covert operation

Some people need lesson in history of real Colts

Colts owner faces relentless grudge

In Ravens' town, time dims glory of Colts' deeds

Jeff, this is the exact op/ed dribble that I'm trying to get around!! I want some details on the relationship and events that were transpiring between Irsay and the City of Baltimore. Everyone wants to rail on this, but they also manage to complete omit what the situation was in Baltimore and the decisions made. If you owned an NFL franchise, it was completely in the dumps, and then the city decided to threaten to use "immeninent domain" and take the franchise right out from under you (I'd assume he'd have gotten "market value", but I'm sure that would have been a joke).....wouldn't you feel obligated to listen to deals from other cities and venues? All these op/ed pieces kill me with a complete lack of details about what was really happening with Irsay and the City. Anyone have some recollections about this stuff at all? The wiki and everythign else just seems to say the same things...there were problems, then they picked up and left. Yes, great, but were the "problems" extreme? were they public? were they extended out, something that went on and on for more than a year?

Anyone? My opinion at this point is that Irsay was a jerk and somewhat of a bufoon at running a team. Then when he wanted to get the same help everyone else was getting from their cities and fans, he was told to shove it. He got bitter, and found a sweetheart deal with another city. Then to further rub Baltimore's nose in it, he fought and fought to keep the name, uniforms, colors, etc. What I'm asking for is, is this true?

If so, I just don't see how Baltimore feels completely blameless. Want to keep your team, pony up. Want to threaten to take the team from it's rightful owner (idiot or not), then expect to be bent over the barrel. *shrug* Tell me I'm wrong.

 

[North]

The team began play in 1953 as the Baltimore Colts. A previous Baltimore Colts team played between 1947-50. The original Colts team began play in 1946 as the Miami Seahawks, a member of the upstart All-America Football Conference. They relocated to Baltimore as the Colts in 1947, and joined the NFL in 1950 after the AAFC merged into the older league. However, the franchise folded after one NFL season. After fans in Baltimore protested, the NFL formed another Colts team out of the ashes of the failed Dallas Texans for the 1953 season. While in Baltimore, the club won four NFL Championships, including one Super Bowl.

Prior to the 1984 season, the Colts moved from Baltimore to Indianapolis, highlighted by an infamous incident in which they packed all of their belongings into Mayflower Transit trucks in the middle of a snowy night on March 28. The move angered many Baltimore fans and former players so much that they completely disassociated themselves from the relocated Indianapolis team.

Several years later on November 6, 1995, Browns owner Art Modell announced his intention to move his Browns team to Baltimore

Seems you guys can't keep your grubby little fingers off of other cities' teams.Maybe it serves you right that Irsay took off with the Colts.

:fishing?:

The other incidents "texans" and "miami seahawks" are not issues. In that time teams moved b/c of popularity and finacial issues. No one knows the reasons for those moves but if you are going to start putting blame on those moves then you are going to have to do it for every team that has ever moved cities. Lets see, the Lakers from the NBA would be one of those teams. The Dodgers from MLB would be one of those teams. The Titans..... I could go on all day b/c thats the way it used to be.I think the biggest contention with the Colts is that they took the name and REFUSED to let the city have it. So now when you see commercials like I see daily on NFL network selling the "Indy Colts" team history DVD they show players like Unitas and Donovan and Moore, and they are being sold as part of Indy Colts history when in fact they were true Baltimoreans.

At least the Browns kept their name and history. The Ravens are now making their own history, as this will be 2 superbowls within 6 years.

 

[dparker713]

Baltimore lost any and all sympathy cards when they stole the Browns.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Here are some of the stories from the Baltimore Sun regarding the history (and note these are not all from the Sports Section):

Colts memories, ill feelings over move are alive and well

Move to Indy was covert operation

Some people need lesson in history of real Colts

Colts owner faces relentless grudge

In Ravens' town, time dims glory of Colts' deeds

Jeff, this is the exact op/ed dribble that I'm trying to get around!! I want some details on the relationship and events that were transpiring between Irsay and the City of Baltimore. Everyone wants to rail on this, but they also manage to complete omit what the situation was in Baltimore and the decisions made. If you owned an NFL franchise, it was completely in the dumps, and then the city decided to threaten to use "immeninent domain" and take the franchise right out from under you (I'd assume he'd have gotten "market value", but I'm sure that would have been a joke).....wouldn't you feel obligated to listen to deals from other cities and venues? All these op/ed pieces kill me with a complete lack of details about what was really happening with Irsay and the City. Anyone have some recollections about this stuff at all? The wiki and everythign else just seems to say the same things...there were problems, then they picked up and left. Yes, great, but were the "problems" extreme? were they public? were they extended out, something that went on and on for more than a year?

Anyone? My opinion at this point is that Irsay was a jerk and somewhat of a bufoon at running a team. Then when he wanted to get the same help everyone else was getting from their cities and fans, he was told to shove it. He got bitter, and found a sweetheart deal with another city. Then to further rub Baltimore's nose in it, he fought and fought to keep the name, uniforms, colors, etc. What I'm asking for is, is this true?

If so, I just don't see how Baltimore feels completely blameless. Want to keep your team, pony up. Want to threaten to take the team from it's rightful owner (idiot or not), then expect to be bent over the barrel. *shrug* Tell me I'm wrong.

Easy there IndyHavoc - I'm just trying to give you some info.I'm sure that there are facts within those articles that are relevant, but you're absolutely right that everything is opinionated right now in the Baltimore area.

That's why I started with Wikipedia.

As for the complete story, I was 12 at the time, but I do know that there is a lot of resentment.

I did hear a sound clip from Irsay just a few months before he moved the team that he had no intention of moving the Colts (a la Nick Saban / Alabama).

 

[North]

Here are some of the stories from the Baltimore Sun regarding the history (and note these are not all from the Sports Section):

Colts memories, ill feelings over move are alive and well

Move to Indy was covert operation

Some people need lesson in history of real Colts

Colts owner faces relentless grudge

In Ravens' town, time dims glory of Colts' deeds

Jeff, this is the exact op/ed dribble that I'm trying to get around!! I want some details on the relationship and events that were transpiring between Irsay and the City of Baltimore. Everyone wants to rail on this, but they also manage to complete omit what the situation was in Baltimore and the decisions made. If you owned an NFL franchise, it was completely in the dumps, and then the city decided to threaten to use "immeninent domain" and take the franchise right out from under you (I'd assume he'd have gotten "market value", but I'm sure that would have been a joke).....wouldn't you feel obligated to listen to deals from other cities and venues? All these op/ed pieces kill me with a complete lack of details about what was really happening with Irsay and the City. Anyone have some recollections about this stuff at all? The wiki and everythign else just seems to say the same things...there were problems, then they picked up and left. Yes, great, but were the "problems" extreme? were they public? were they extended out, something that went on and on for more than a year?

Anyone? My opinion at this point is that Irsay was a jerk and somewhat of a bufoon at running a team. Then when he wanted to get the same help everyone else was getting from their cities and fans, he was told to shove it. He got bitter, and found a sweetheart deal with another city. Then to further rub Baltimore's nose in it, he fought and fought to keep the name, uniforms, colors, etc. What I'm asking for is, is this true?

If so, I just don't see how Baltimore feels completely blameless. Want to keep your team, pony up. Want to threaten to take the team from it's rightful owner (idiot or not), then expect to be bent over the barrel. *shrug* Tell me I'm wrong.

Also it has been said that years after the move when Baltimore was the front runner for an expansion team it was Irsay that was running around trying to convince others to give the teams to Carolina and JAX, and it was Irsay that told Baltimore that they would "NEVER" get a francise and they should use their money on a museum. The Herd had a caller this morning who got that story wrong, he said it was Taggs who said they should spend their money on a mall when in fact it was Irsay who said to spend their expansion money on a museum. I dont know what lead up to the move but to recap since the move:1. WOULD NOT let the city keep the name, uniform and history.

2. Rallied owners to deny Baltimore an expansion team.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

One of the hardest things to take as a Colts fan during Irsay's ownership was the way Irsay openly shopped the team for the last several years they were in Baltimore. I think it was in '79 when he was flown into the Jacksonville stadium in a helicopter to be feted by the city, thinking they had a shot to get the team. So for at least 5 years, the thought was there that he'd leave if the right deal came along. There are probably those here who remember the details better than I, but I believe the city and/or state was about to try & declare Eminent Domain when Irsay finally got the vans loaded.

 

[SuperJohn96]

The team began play in 1953 as the Baltimore Colts. A previous Baltimore Colts team played between 1947-50. The original Colts team began play in 1946 as the Miami Seahawks, a member of the upstart All-America Football Conference. They relocated to Baltimore as the Colts in 1947, and joined the NFL in 1950 after the AAFC merged into the older league. However, the franchise folded after one NFL season. After fans in Baltimore protested, the NFL formed another Colts team out of the ashes of the failed Dallas Texans for the 1953 season. While in Baltimore, the club won four NFL Championships, including one Super Bowl.

Prior to the 1984 season, the Colts moved from Baltimore to Indianapolis, highlighted by an infamous incident in which they packed all of their belongings into Mayflower Transit trucks in the middle of a snowy night on March 28. The move angered many Baltimore fans and former players so much that they completely disassociated themselves from the relocated Indianapolis team.

Several years later on November 6, 1995, Browns owner Art Modell announced his intention to move his Browns team to Baltimore

Seems you guys can't keep your grubby little fingers off of other cities' teams.Maybe it serves you right that Irsay took off with the Colts.

:fishing?:

The other incidents "texans" and "miami seahawks" are not issues. In that time teams moved b/c of popularity and finacial issues. No one knows the reasons for those moves but if you are going to start putting blame on those moves then you are going to have to do it for every team that has ever moved cities. Lets see, the Lakers from the NBA would be one of those teams. The Dodgers from MLB would be one of those teams. The Titans..... I could go on all day b/c thats the way it used to be.I think the biggest contention with the Colts is that they took the name and REFUSED to let the city have it. So now when you see commercials like I see daily on NFL network selling the "Indy Colts" team history DVD they show players like Unitas and Donovan and Moore, and they are being sold as part of Indy Colts history when in fact they were true Baltimoreans.

At least the Browns kept their name and history. The Ravens are now making their own history, as this will be 2 superbowls within 6 years.

I was only joking about the Miami and Dallas teams, but that last line actually got me mad.What a crock of ####!

"Hey, some loser stole the only photo album I have AND all of my kid's photos that were in it. But at least when we stole yours we let you keep the album."

Thanks for stealing what would have been a Cleveland Browns Super Bowl title by the way.

 

[SuperJohn96]

And I am sorry for the hijack...

 

[North]

Baltimore lost any and all sympathy cards when they stole the Browns.

Not stole. Last I checked the city of Clev. still has a team called the Browns.This situation was a little different in that Modell had been begging the city to give him a new stadium after they had built one for the Indians, and after they had approved $ to build the rock and roll hall of fame, and after they approved $ to build a new mall downtown, and after they built a new arena for the cavs.|The city of Clev. was built on the Browns but they refused to help Modell build a new stadium. He begged and warned them he would move the team. After months of begging and threats he moved to Baltimore but Modell has gone on record saying he NEVER wanted to leave.Irsay said he wasn't going to move, then rolled out in the middle of the night. BIG DIFFERENCE.

 

[North]

The team began play in 1953 as the Baltimore Colts. A previous Baltimore Colts team played between 1947-50. The original Colts team began play in 1946 as the Miami Seahawks, a member of the upstart All-America Football Conference. They relocated to Baltimore as the Colts in 1947, and joined the NFL in 1950 after the AAFC merged into the older league. However, the franchise folded after one NFL season. After fans in Baltimore protested, the NFL formed another Colts team out of the ashes of the failed Dallas Texans for the 1953 season. While in Baltimore, the club won four NFL Championships, including one Super Bowl.

Prior to the 1984 season, the Colts moved from Baltimore to Indianapolis, highlighted by an infamous incident in which they packed all of their belongings into Mayflower Transit trucks in the middle of a snowy night on March 28. The move angered many Baltimore fans and former players so much that they completely disassociated themselves from the relocated Indianapolis team.

Several years later on November 6, 1995, Browns owner Art Modell announced his intention to move his Browns team to Baltimore

Seems you guys can't keep your grubby little fingers off of other cities' teams.Maybe it serves you right that Irsay took off with the Colts.

:fishing?:

The other incidents "texans" and "miami seahawks" are not issues. In that time teams moved b/c of popularity and finacial issues. No one knows the reasons for those moves but if you are going to start putting blame on those moves then you are going to have to do it for every team that has ever moved cities. Lets see, the Lakers from the NBA would be one of those teams. The Dodgers from MLB would be one of those teams. The Titans..... I could go on all day b/c thats the way it used to be.I think the biggest contention with the Colts is that they took the name and REFUSED to let the city have it. So now when you see commercials like I see daily on NFL network selling the "Indy Colts" team history DVD they show players like Unitas and Donovan and Moore, and they are being sold as part of Indy Colts history when in fact they were true Baltimoreans.

At least the Browns kept their name and history. The Ravens are now making their own history, as this will be 2 superbowls within 6 years.

I was only joking about the Miami and Dallas teams, but that last line actually got me mad.What a crock of ####!

"Hey, some loser stole the only photo album I have AND all of my kid's photos that were in it. But at least when we stole yours we let you keep the album."

Thanks for stealing what would have been a Cleveland Browns Super Bowl title by the way.

Moved in 95. Won superbowl in 2000. The Ravens won the superbowl on the backs of players who were drafted after the move.

 

[IndyHavoc]

Thanks all, that's the information I was looking for! So I was right about one thing, Irsay definitely had a vendetta against Baltimore after the fact. And it makes more sense to just say that the contention that remains today is about the name / history. That I can understand. I can't understand the whole focus on moving the team "in the middle of the night." That is just the silliest view to take on this, makes someone sound like a little child.

Again, my thanks to all!

 

[dparker713]

Baltimore lost any and all sympathy cards when they stole the Browns.

Not stole. Last I checked the city of Clev. still has a team called the Browns.This situation was a little different in that Modell had been begging the city to give him a new stadium after they had built one for the Indians, and after they had approved $ to build the rock and roll hall of fame, and after they approved $ to build a new mall downtown, and after they built a new arena for the cavs.|The city of Clev. was built on the Browns but they refused to help Modell build a new stadium. He begged and warned them he would move the team. After months of begging and threats he moved to Baltimore but Modell has gone on record saying he NEVER wanted to leave.Irsay said he wasn't going to move, then rolled out in the middle of the night. BIG DIFFERENCE.

Thats a rather selective view of it.Both teams were entrenched. Both cities refused to upgrade facilities. Not like either owner hadn't been lobbying for years to get upgrades. And that sorry sack of a team in Cleveland is not the Browns. Keeping the name and the records is not only ridiculous, but also just allows for people of Baltimore to feel better about being the exact thing they'd hated for years.

 

[roarlions]

This provides a little more info. on the relationship between Irsay and the city/state regarding the team:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Irsay

Here is a link to articles from the NY Times during Feb. and March of 1984, which shows some of the back and forth that led up to the move:

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/...;inline=nyt-org

 

[Delusions Of Adequacy]

I was living in Balt at the time. Irsay was requesting concessions from the city of Baltiore, new stadium, luxury boxes, etc, the usual, but had NOT threatened to move to Indy or anywhere else.

There was never an announced move. Irsay privately decided he couldn't get what he wanted in Baltimore, and over a weekend, in the night, moved everything from their Owings Mills complex in Balt to Indy.

People in Baltimore woke up to find the Colts gone, just like that. It would be hard for me to convey the sense of shock and loss in the city.

Other cities have lost teams, but not like that.

 

[obxlegends]

Seems you guys can't keep your grubby little fingers off of other cities' teams.

Maybe it serves you right that Irsay took off with the Colts.

First off, you need to die.

Second, Baltimore was promised teams for over a decade after the Colts left. Tags promised and promised teams for the upcoming expantions. None ever came. So we went out and took care of it ourselves. You saw how long it took Tags to make Cleveland whole again after that right? Exactly.

Once again, die in a fiery blaze and take Tags with you.

 

[dparker713]

Thanks all, that's the information I was looking for! So I was right about one thing, Irsay definitely had a vendetta against Baltimore after the fact. And it makes more sense to just say that the contention that remains today is about the name / history. That I can understand. I can't understand the whole focus on moving the team "in the middle of the night." That is just the silliest view to take on this, makes someone sound like a little child.Again, my thanks to all!

There were plenty of reasons that Baltimore was not going to get an expansion team. Of paramount importance of the league were the already failed franchise and the proximity of the Redskins. There were also flaws and delays in their potential stadium. Plus, the league wasn't impressed with the potential ownership. Anyone that thinks that Irsay alone could have blocked a franchise being awarded to Baltimore doesn't understand how the NFL works and underestimates Tag's ability to get things done.

 

[obxlegends]

Thanks all, that's the information I was looking for! So I was right about one thing, Irsay definitely had a vendetta against Baltimore after the fact. And it makes more sense to just say that the contention that remains today is about the name / history. That I can understand. I can't understand the whole focus on moving the team "in the middle of the night." That is just the silliest view to take on this, makes someone sound like a little child.Again, my thanks to all!

There were plenty of reasons that Baltimore was not going to get an expansion team. Of paramount importance of the league were the already failed franchise and the proximity of the Redskins. There were also flaws and delays in their potential stadium. Plus, the league wasn't impressed with the potential ownership. Anyone that thinks that Irsay alone could have blocked a franchise being awarded to Baltimore doesn't understand how the NFL works and underestimates Tag's ability to get things done.

No, he had help from Jack Kent Cook.So all those reasons magically disappeared after the Ravens got to Baltimore from Cleveland? The stadium? The ownership? Overall support?You think Jacksonville's money? They end up giving away thousands of tickets per home game. The city is transient at best. Good choice NFL, good choice.

 

[roadkill1292]

Thanks all, that's the information I was looking for! So I was right about one thing, Irsay definitely had a vendetta against Baltimore after the fact. And it makes more sense to just say that the contention that remains today is about the name / history. That I can understand. I can't understand the whole focus on moving the team "in the middle of the night." That is just the silliest view to take on this, makes someone sound like a little child.Again, my thanks to all!

The "middle of the night" phrase, while very accurate to describe the move, is more emblematic of all the underhandedness and ungraciousness affiliated with the Irsay front office. Devil Bob was a bitter, vindictive, petty man with a tyrant complex. He met any questioning of his actions with vituperation. He hired equally bitter underlings who made bad choices on the field. There's a reason John Elway threatened to play baseball if he was drafted by the Colts and the reason was Bob Irsay. He told his fan base that their opinions didn't matter and he told them with a drink in his hand.

Thats a rather selective view of it.Both teams were entrenched. Both cities refused to upgrade facilities. Not like either owner hadn't been lobbying for years to get upgrades. And that sorry sack of a team in Cleveland is not the Browns. Keeping the name and the records is not only ridiculous, but also just allows for people of Baltimore to feel better about being the exact thing they'd hated for years.

I don't hold the fans of Indianapolis responsible for the Colts moving and it is equally unjust to hold the fans of Baltimore responsible for Cleveland's loss as well.

 

[pizzatyme]

Seems you guys can't keep your grubby little fingers off of other cities' teams.

Maybe it serves you right that Irsay took off with the Colts.

First off, you need to die.

Second, Baltimore was promised teams for over a decade after the Colts left. Tags promised and promised teams for the upcoming expantions. None ever came. So we went out and took care of it ourselves. You saw how long it took Tags to make Cleveland whole again after that right? Exactly.

Once again, die in a fiery blaze and take Tags with you.

This is the kind of response I expected to see from a Purple Pigeons fan!

Co Colts! The INDIANAPOLIS COLTS!

 

[obxlegends]

Seems you guys can't keep your grubby little fingers off of other cities' teams.

Maybe it serves you right that Irsay took off with the Colts.

First off, you need to die.

Second, Baltimore was promised teams for over a decade after the Colts left. Tags promised and promised teams for the upcoming expantions. None ever came. So we went out and took care of it ourselves. You saw how long it took Tags to make Cleveland whole again after that right? Exactly.

Once again, die in a fiery blaze and take Tags with you.

This is the kind of response I expected to see from a Purple Pigeons fan!

Co Colts! The INDIANAPOLIS COLTS!

I don't have a problem with the Colts. In fact they reward me with joy and laughter every year as Manning tries to out do himself in "most embarrsing ways to get eliminated from the playoffs contest".

I do think Romo has him beat this year.

It will be tough for Manning to out do him this year, but we're hopeful.

Ravens: 4 years from move to Super Bowl victory.

Indy: Over 20 years since move... none, nada and zilch!

 

[dparker713]

I've no idea why the Colts moving was an outright surprise. Irsay had been shopping around for a new stadium, irregardless of the city, for years. How he moved wasnt exactly normal, but then again the city was threating to take his team away from him.

As for the problems with Baltimore at the time of the Jax/Car expansion, time did help. Camden Yards had just finished construction in 93, the expansion was supposed to happen in 95. The Ravens' stadium wasn't completed until 2000, right before the season started. Could Baltimore have funded and completed the stadium in time for the 95 season? Maybe, but the Jax and Car stadiums were better bets. And the ownership was Modell and not a new group of owners. Considering neither Jax nor Car have folded and the league has continued to explode, I don't think the league has any regrets about their expansion choices. After all, if things get really bad, Jax can always threaten to move to LA...

 

[Doug B]

There's a reason John Elway threatened to play baseball if he was drafted by the Colts and the reason was Bob Irsay.

Frank Kush wasn't exactly a selling point, either.

 

[roadkill1292]

There's a reason John Elway threatened to play baseball if he was drafted by the Colts and the reason was Bob Irsay.

Frank Kush wasn't exactly a selling point, either.

True, Kush was a big part of the regime of negativity fostered by Devil Bob.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

As for the problems with Baltimore at the time of the Jax/Car expansion, time did help. Camden Yards had just finished construction in 93, the expansion was supposed to happen in 95. The Ravens' stadium wasn't completed until 2000, right before the season started. Could Baltimore have funded and completed the stadium in time for the 95 season?

The new stadium was completed in 98, not 2000. And the plan was never to play in the new stadium the first year. Just as the ravens did, they were to play in memorial stadium until the new one was done. Similarly, the Panthers played at clemson for a year while their stadium was built.

 

[Marvelous]

Thanks all, that's the information I was looking for! So I was right about one thing, Irsay definitely had a vendetta against Baltimore after the fact. And it makes more sense to just say that the contention that remains today is about the name / history. That I can understand. I can't understand the whole focus on moving the team "in the middle of the night." That is just the silliest view to take on this, makes someone sound like a little child.Again, my thanks to all!

My understanding is that after long negotiations, the Colts and the state of Maryland were very close to an agreement, at least Maryland thought so. So the move in the middle of the night was a shock to everyone. You would have thought Irsay would at least break off the negotiations before moving the team.

 

[dparker713]

As for the problems with Baltimore at the time of the Jax/Car expansion, time did help. Camden Yards had just finished construction in 93, the expansion was supposed to happen in 95. The Ravens' stadium wasn't completed until 2000, right before the season started. Could Baltimore have funded and completed the stadium in time for the 95 season?

The new stadium was completed in 98, not 2000. And the plan was never to play in the new stadium the first year. Just as the ravens did, they were to play in memorial stadium until the new one was done. Similarly, the Panthers played at clemson for a year while their stadium was built.

Even still, with the stadium completed in 98, the Ravens were playing in memorial for 2 years it seems - 96 and 97. And realistically, Baltimore was competing against Jax for the expansion team. Carolina was essentially a lock at the time. And Jax had the stadium ready for their first game. In the end, Baltimore is as much to blame as Irsay in this deal. You don't try to exercise emminent domain if you're in the middle of good faith negotiations. And then, after getting spurned for expansion for various reasons, taking matters into their own hands and enticing a team thought by some as immoveable.

 

[On The Rocks]

My history lesson link regarding the: Colts Move

 

[Mungo Burrows]

As for the problems with Baltimore at the time of the Jax/Car expansion, time did help. Camden Yards had just finished construction in 93, the expansion was supposed to happen in 95. The Ravens' stadium wasn't completed until 2000, right before the season started. Could Baltimore have funded and completed the stadium in time for the 95 season?

The new stadium was completed in 98, not 2000. And the plan was never to play in the new stadium the first year. Just as the ravens did, they were to play in memorial stadium until the new one was done. Similarly, the Panthers played at clemson for a year while their stadium was built.

Even still, with the stadium completed in 98, the Ravens were playing in memorial for 2 years it seems - 96 and 97. And realistically, Baltimore was competing against Jax for the expansion team. Carolina was essentially a lock at the time. And Jax had the stadium ready for their first game. In the end, Baltimore is as much to blame as Irsay in this deal. You don't try to exercise emminent domain if you're in the middle of good faith negotiations. And then, after getting spurned for expansion for various reasons, taking matters into their own hands and enticing a team thought by some as immoveable.

The expansion decision was made in 93 and the jags started playing in the renovated gator bowl in 95 (2 years later) and the Panthers got into their stadium in 96 (3 years later). The Ravens came to baltimore in 96 and started playing in their stadium in 98 (2 years later)

 

[dparker713]

As for the problems with Baltimore at the time of the Jax/Car expansion, time did help. Camden Yards had just finished construction in 93, the expansion was supposed to happen in 95. The Ravens' stadium wasn't completed until 2000, right before the season started. Could Baltimore have funded and completed the stadium in time for the 95 season?

The new stadium was completed in 98, not 2000. And the plan was never to play in the new stadium the first year. Just as the ravens did, they were to play in memorial stadium until the new one was done. Similarly, the Panthers played at clemson for a year while their stadium was built.

Even still, with the stadium completed in 98, the Ravens were playing in memorial for 2 years it seems - 96 and 97. And realistically, Baltimore was competing against Jax for the expansion team. Carolina was essentially a lock at the time. And Jax had the stadium ready for their first game. In the end, Baltimore is as much to blame as Irsay in this deal. You don't try to exercise emminent domain if you're in the middle of good faith negotiations. And then, after getting spurned for expansion for various reasons, taking matters into their own hands and enticing a team thought by some as immoveable.

The expansion decision was made in 93 and the jags started playing in the renovated gator bowl in 95 (2 years later) and the Panthers got into their stadium in 96 (3 years later). The Ravens came to baltimore in 96 and started playing in their stadium in 98 (2 years later)

Well, Im pretty sure that the deal for the Browns to move was made before the 95 season, so thats third year for Baltimore. And considering that neither the jags nor the panthers started playing until 95, construction time for those 2 years is fairly irrelevant. Carolina played 1 year in an old stadium, the jags zero, the Modells 2 years plus a lame duck year in Cleveland.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

As for the problems with Baltimore at the time of the Jax/Car expansion, time did help. Camden Yards had just finished construction in 93, the expansion was supposed to happen in 95. The Ravens' stadium wasn't completed until 2000, right before the season started. Could Baltimore have funded and completed the stadium in time for the 95 season?

The new stadium was completed in 98, not 2000. And the plan was never to play in the new stadium the first year. Just as the ravens did, they were to play in memorial stadium until the new one was done. Similarly, the Panthers played at clemson for a year while their stadium was built.

Even still, with the stadium completed in 98, the Ravens were playing in memorial for 2 years it seems - 96 and 97. And realistically, Baltimore was competing against Jax for the expansion team. Carolina was essentially a lock at the time. And Jax had the stadium ready for their first game. In the end, Baltimore is as much to blame as Irsay in this deal. You don't try to exercise emminent domain if you're in the middle of good faith negotiations. And then, after getting spurned for expansion for various reasons, taking matters into their own hands and enticing a team thought by some as immoveable.

The expansion decision was made in 93 and the jags started playing in the renovated gator bowl in 95 (2 years later) and the Panthers got into their stadium in 96 (3 years later). The Ravens came to baltimore in 96 and started playing in their stadium in 98 (2 years later)

Well, Im pretty sure that the deal for the Browns to move was made before the 95 season, so thats third year for Baltimore. And considering that neither the jags nor the panthers started playing until 95, construction time for those 2 years is fairly irrelevant. Carolina played 1 year in an old stadium, the jags zero, the Modells 2 years plus a lame duck year in Cleveland.

No that's not the same. Your original point was that the stadium availability was a factor in the expansion process. Make up your mind what point you're trying to make.The agreement between the NFL and Cleveland to let the team go, make the ravens an "expansion" team, and let cleveland keep the name, stats etc. and promise them Browns 2.0 etc. was Feb 1996 - during the offseason before the 06 season.

 

[dparker713]

As for the problems with Baltimore at the time of the Jax/Car expansion, time did help. Camden Yards had just finished construction in 93, the expansion was supposed to happen in 95. The Ravens' stadium wasn't completed until 2000, right before the season started. Could Baltimore have funded and completed the stadium in time for the 95 season?

The new stadium was completed in 98, not 2000. And the plan was never to play in the new stadium the first year. Just as the ravens did, they were to play in memorial stadium until the new one was done. Similarly, the Panthers played at clemson for a year while their stadium was built.

Even still, with the stadium completed in 98, the Ravens were playing in memorial for 2 years it seems - 96 and 97. And realistically, Baltimore was competing against Jax for the expansion team. Carolina was essentially a lock at the time. And Jax had the stadium ready for their first game. In the end, Baltimore is as much to blame as Irsay in this deal. You don't try to exercise emminent domain if you're in the middle of good faith negotiations. And then, after getting spurned for expansion for various reasons, taking matters into their own hands and enticing a team thought by some as immoveable.

The expansion decision was made in 93 and the jags started playing in the renovated gator bowl in 95 (2 years later) and the Panthers got into their stadium in 96 (3 years later). The Ravens came to baltimore in 96 and started playing in their stadium in 98 (2 years later)

Well, Im pretty sure that the deal for the Browns to move was made before the 95 season, so thats third year for Baltimore. And considering that neither the jags nor the panthers started playing until 95, construction time for those 2 years is fairly irrelevant. Carolina played 1 year in an old stadium, the jags zero, the Modells 2 years plus a lame duck year in Cleveland.

No that's not the same. Your original point was that the stadium availability was a factor in the expansion process. Make up your mind what point you're trying to make.The agreement between the NFL and Cleveland to let the team go, make the ravens an "expansion" team, and let cleveland keep the name, stats etc. and promise them Browns 2.0 etc. was Feb 2006 - during the offseason before the 06 season.

Jacksonville had a permanent stadium in place for their first game. They didn't require a year in a temp home, so yes, they provided the NFL with better stadium availability. My point was that the package that Baltimore had in place for the 95 expansion teams was frought with problems, including stadium availability. The biggest problem was of course Jack Kent Cook. But there were plenty of cracks he harp on to drive a wedge between the NFL and a Baltimore expansion team. And Im guessing that the deal you're referring to was the deal in 1996, not last year. While the deal was finalized at that time, the move was announced in the middle of the 1995 season.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

As for the problems with Baltimore at the time of the Jax/Car expansion, time did help. Camden Yards had just finished construction in 93, the expansion was supposed to happen in 95. The Ravens' stadium wasn't completed until 2000, right before the season started. Could Baltimore have funded and completed the stadium in time for the 95 season?

The new stadium was completed in 98, not 2000. And the plan was never to play in the new stadium the first year. Just as the ravens did, they were to play in memorial stadium until the new one was done. Similarly, the Panthers played at clemson for a year while their stadium was built.

Even still, with the stadium completed in 98, the Ravens were playing in memorial for 2 years it seems - 96 and 97. And realistically, Baltimore was competing against Jax for the expansion team. Carolina was essentially a lock at the time. And Jax had the stadium ready for their first game. In the end, Baltimore is as much to blame as Irsay in this deal. You don't try to exercise emminent domain if you're in the middle of good faith negotiations. And then, after getting spurned for expansion for various reasons, taking matters into their own hands and enticing a team thought by some as immoveable.

The expansion decision was made in 93 and the jags started playing in the renovated gator bowl in 95 (2 years later) and the Panthers got into their stadium in 96 (3 years later). The Ravens came to baltimore in 96 and started playing in their stadium in 98 (2 years later)

Well, Im pretty sure that the deal for the Browns to move was made before the 95 season, so thats third year for Baltimore. And considering that neither the jags nor the panthers started playing until 95, construction time for those 2 years is fairly irrelevant. Carolina played 1 year in an old stadium, the jags zero, the Modells 2 years plus a lame duck year in Cleveland.

No that's not the same. Your original point was that the stadium availability was a factor in the expansion process. Make up your mind what point you're trying to make.The agreement between the NFL and Cleveland to let the team go, make the ravens an "expansion" team, and let cleveland keep the name, stats etc. and promise them Browns 2.0 etc. was Feb 2006 - during the offseason before the 06 season.

Jacksonville had a permanent stadium in place for their first game. They didn't require a year in a temp home, so yes, they provided the NFL with better stadium availability. My point was that the package that Baltimore had in place for the 95 expansion teams was frought with problems, including stadium availability. The biggest problem was of course Jack Kent Cook. But there were plenty of cracks he harp on to drive a wedge between the NFL and a Baltimore expansion team. And Im guessing that the deal you're referring to was the deal in 1996, not last year. While the deal was finalized at that time, the move was announced in the middle of the 1995 season.

I went back and fixed the year. Apologies for that one..Cooke's arguments were just more excuses to support Tags' agenda to get new teams into what the league saw as an underrepresented Southeastern US. Both STL (who did have a 95 stadium ready) and Baltimore had plans that were far more financially viable than tarp-out-the-seats-to-get-a-sellout in Jacksonville.