XFL expansion

XFL Football discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
Lone Star
Running Back
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:14 pm
Location: DFW

Re: XFL expansion

Post by Lone Star »

GDAWG wrote: Fri Mar 03, 2023 5:31 pm
Lone Star wrote: Fri Mar 03, 2023 4:50 pm
GDAWG wrote: Fri Mar 03, 2023 12:09 pm

Oklahoma City yes (Taft Stadium), Milwaukee No. However, Oklahoma City has plans for a new stadium in a few years, so OKC will be an option that gets considered. Milwaukee has nowhere at all. Now there are plans on an 8,000 stadium for Milwaukee, but they will be too busy to even consider hosting football as they will host the soccer and lacrosse teams for Marquette University to go along with a USL Soccer team for Milwaukee. So if that is the case, Milwaukee is not going to happen ever.

Taft Stadium has similar field issues to Cashman Field (which is why the USL Championship OKC Energy FC has gone on hiatus) and I would guess that the XFL doesn't want to deal with that again.
Bob Stoops is literally a head coach in the XFL. Why don't you think the league could make a deal with OU's stadium? And I think OKC would be a great attended market because there's only one major league team there, the area and school loves football, and the market hasn't been burned out with several failed alt league teams in the past.

Miller Park/American Family Field in Milwaukee has played host to three international friendly soccer matches. I don't know if they would like a full-time football/soccer team playing there, but if the "majestic" Yankee Stadium can share a stadium during the same time frame with an MLS team, then nothing's too good for Milwaukee.
I think that OU's Stadium is way too big for the XFL. The XFL needs to go for MLS sized stadiums like they have done with DC. OU has an 80,000 seat stadium, and having 12,000 people in an 80,000 seat stadium looks really bad. It is why I don't want any future Austin team playing at the University of Texas.

The last thing the XFL needs is to place a team in an active Major League Baseball Stadium, so it should not be American Family Field. New York City FC is moving out of Yankee Stadium in a few years. I am not a fan of football being played in active baseball stadiums.
I agree that's it way too big, but maybe the league can invest in those tarps with logos, even sponsor logos, to cover the upper levels like the Oakland A's do. I do think OKC would rival San Antonio in attendance though with alt football not being overdone yet like it has in Birmingham, San Antonio, and Orlando. Add in a football crazy state and 30,000+ OU students still being in school during the season. I don't think 25-30,000 fans in the lower sideline/south end zone with the rest tarped off wouldn't look terrible.

I agree an MLB stadium shouldn't be the permanant answer but I am still high on Omaha and its 24,000-seat Charles Schwab ballpark.

However, all of this discussion is of course assuming the XFL can make it past Year 1 for once.
Kriegsbeil
Receiver
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2023 3:16 pm

Re: XFL expansion

Post by Kriegsbeil »

I just want to see an Oakland Pillagers expansion team, lol. :lol:

Make their colors black and silver too.
GDAWG
MVP
Posts: 2885
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:15 pm

Re: XFL expansion

Post by GDAWG »

Lone Star wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:57 am
GDAWG wrote: Fri Mar 03, 2023 5:31 pm
Lone Star wrote: Fri Mar 03, 2023 4:50 pm

Bob Stoops is literally a head coach in the XFL. Why don't you think the league could make a deal with OU's stadium? And I think OKC would be a great attended market because there's only one major league team there, the area and school loves football, and the market hasn't been burned out with several failed alt league teams in the past.

Miller Park/American Family Field in Milwaukee has played host to three international friendly soccer matches. I don't know if they would like a full-time football/soccer team playing there, but if the "majestic" Yankee Stadium can share a stadium during the same time frame with an MLS team, then nothing's too good for Milwaukee.
I think that OU's Stadium is way too big for the XFL. The XFL needs to go for MLS sized stadiums like they have done with DC. OU has an 80,000 seat stadium, and having 12,000 people in an 80,000 seat stadium looks really bad. It is why I don't want any future Austin team playing at the University of Texas.

The last thing the XFL needs is to place a team in an active Major League Baseball Stadium, so it should not be American Family Field. New York City FC is moving out of Yankee Stadium in a few years. I am not a fan of football being played in active baseball stadiums.
I agree that's it way too big, but maybe the league can invest in those tarps with logos, even sponsor logos, to cover the upper levels like the Oakland A's do. I do think OKC would rival San Antonio in attendance though with alt football not being overdone yet like it has in Birmingham, San Antonio, and Orlando. Add in a football crazy state and 30,000+ OU students still being in school during the season. I don't think 25-30,000 fans in the lower sideline/south end zone with the rest tarped off wouldn't look terrible.

I agree an MLB stadium shouldn't be the permanant answer but I am still high on Omaha and its 24,000-seat Charles Schwab ballpark.

However, all of this discussion is of course assuming the XFL can make it past Year 1 for once.
If it's tarped off with about 25-30,000 fans in the lower level, it would not be too bad. So the field is Bermuda Grass, so the transition from OU wordmarks and logos to XFL wordmarks and logos on the field should not be a problem. Also, OU may want something in return, like a percentage of ticket sales.
User avatar
Lone Star
Running Back
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:14 pm
Location: DFW

Re: XFL expansion

Post by Lone Star »

GDAWG wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 12:05 pm
Lone Star wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:57 am
GDAWG wrote: Fri Mar 03, 2023 5:31 pm

I think that OU's Stadium is way too big for the XFL. The XFL needs to go for MLS sized stadiums like they have done with DC. OU has an 80,000 seat stadium, and having 12,000 people in an 80,000 seat stadium looks really bad. It is why I don't want any future Austin team playing at the University of Texas.

The last thing the XFL needs is to place a team in an active Major League Baseball Stadium, so it should not be American Family Field. New York City FC is moving out of Yankee Stadium in a few years. I am not a fan of football being played in active baseball stadiums.
I agree that's it way too big, but maybe the league can invest in those tarps with logos, even sponsor logos, to cover the upper levels like the Oakland A's do. I do think OKC would rival San Antonio in attendance though with alt football not being overdone yet like it has in Birmingham, San Antonio, and Orlando. Add in a football crazy state and 30,000+ OU students still being in school during the season. I don't think 25-30,000 fans in the lower sideline/south end zone with the rest tarped off wouldn't look terrible.

I agree an MLB stadium shouldn't be the permanant answer but I am still high on Omaha and its 24,000-seat Charles Schwab ballpark.

However, all of this discussion is of course assuming the XFL can make it past Year 1 for once.
If it's tarped off with about 25-30,000 fans in the lower level, it would not be too bad. So the field is Bermuda Grass, so the transition from OU wordmarks and logos to XFL wordmarks and logos on the field should not be a problem. Also, OU may want something in return, like a percentage of ticket sales.
Give the students free end zone tickets and don't take away their beer snake lol.
User avatar
BattleHawks
Running Back
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2022 10:55 pm

Re: XFL expansion

Post by BattleHawks »

there is going to have to be a merger, and they are going to have to take the markets with the best attendance, which means:

STL
SAN
BHM
?
?
?
XLL
Kicker
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2023 10:02 pm

Re: XFL expansion

Post by XLL »

Here you go:

Oakland RAGE Sliver and Red Team Colors

Birmingham BOLTS Great XFl team to bring back
XLL
Kicker
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2023 10:02 pm

Re: XFL expansion

Post by XLL »

Here you go:

Oakland RAGE silver & red team colors. Bring back the raiders style. Fans will go nuts
User avatar
Sykotyk
Quarterback
Posts: 203
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 12:26 am

Re: XFL expansion

Post by Sykotyk »

First, this is entirely if the USFL sticks around. Until then, and as the USFL goes to home markets for games, I could see the likelihood that there won't be two teams in a market like Houston is currently (once Houston gets placed at home).

Big cities (new or long since second tier football leagues):
Denver
Chicago
Ohio Big 3 city
Atlanta
Raleigh
Hartford

Yes, I include Hartford as a 'big city'. If they don't want to try again with NJ, I could see Hartford being the 'New England area substitute' team. A big city by itself that would really want a team. Not too far from NY or Boston for fans. But the big thing would be what to call it. NY? Nope. New England? That kills NY interest. Hartford? That flatlines interest from NYC and Boston, but would still probably get good support.

Denver had a great run with the Gold and gets overlooked every time a new league is formed. Why? Their weather may have bad storms, but Denver is usually pretty temperate by February on non-storm days. It's just a risk to take. Plus, who wouldn't love a snow game. There's Dicks Sporting Good Park in Commerce City, there's Mile High, obviously, as well as maybe getting creative and seeing if Boulder would host.

Atlanta, I think, is one of those that would work if the right situation. AAF had the market so XFL 2.0 didn't even consider it. Same as what happened with Orlando. A market that 'should' work for XFL 3.0. Raleigh puts you in the growing carolina territory. But away from Charlotte and the Panthers dominated football sphere. Raleigh-Durham has some options for host stadiums that are all large enough.

Chicago is always an issue. It helps for TV, but the tradeoff is not a lot will attend, especially at Soldier Field due to traffic, parking etc. But for TV, it's a big deal.

And lastly is Ohio. One of Cleveland, Columbus, or Cincinnati. There's the old Historic Crew Stadium that now has turf in Columbus that would be perfect for XFL. Or Cincinnati at either Paycor or Nippert (doubtful TQL would be interested). Cleveland has fewer options, mainly just FES, but there's also preempting the Canton USFL experiment by putting a team there or Akron and calling it 'Ohio' or 'Cleveland' and just winging it.

For smaller cities:

Omaha
Sacramento
San Diego
Tucson
Boise
Fargo
Little Rock
Norfolk
Rochester

First, I'll mention that San Diego is bigger, but on a sporting landscape, it's down to one major team. They've got the facility now and weren't that bad with the Fleet. But the big issue is the facility.

Omaha had great success with the UFL/FXFL teams there. But the leagues dragged them down and slowly dwindled the fan interest in a dying product. Stadium is an issue as it would be a smallish baseball stadium most likely.

Sacramento is a possibility. With the likelihood of the Republic never joining MLS, the possibility of playing on their field or at Sacramento State is a possibility. City only has one other major league team. Gives you a team in Northern California. But maybe only get viewers from the bay area, but might turn a lot if you went with Sacramento name. If you did Northern California (NorCal) and SoCal for two teams, you might develop a regional rivalry in the state that doesn't matter where the teams are playing as long as people just tune in to root for their half of the state.

Tucson is a similar thought. Everything is in the Phoenix area except U of A. Could play there, and be the 'big pro team' for Tucson and not glom onto the Phoenix market is get overlooked. Call yourself Arizona and you won't develop a regional bias as the team still represents all of Arizona.

Boise is definitely a reach. But stock them full of BSU alums and play on the blue turf and you'll at least get a novelty factor. Again, it's not so much drawing their fans as it is giving the XFL another weekly game to draw TV viewers for a TV contract. And we know MWC games do get ratings when they're on unapposed to other college games. Same could hold true for a Boise/Idaho team.

Fargo is in a Similar vein as Boise. Pro sport deprived area (though mostly Vikings fans), that has a huge following for their NDSU Bison, who are striving to be taken seriously at the FCS level. The state is growing still from oil, though the western end of the state. A cross state drive is not ridiculous to sports fans in North Dakota. It would be the state's first real major team aside from some junior league hockey, summer league baseball, and one single unaffiliated minor league baseball team. Again, this is more 'schedule filler' than 'growth market'. But fans on TV don't really care much who is playing. Just that they're playing.

Little Rock has the stadium. Definitely need to rely on the whole state and not just the Little Rock area. But would be a natural rival to the Texas teams. Especially Arlington. Also, close to Arlington if you're still operating as a base city system.

Norfolk wouldn't be the first time a secondary league tried to establish in Norfolk. UFL did. Norfolk State's Dick Price Stadium would be sufficient. The southeast VA market is huge and sprawling including Norfolk, Chesapeake, Virginia Beach, Hampton Roads, Newport News, and even Williamsburg and Suffolk. But it doesn't have a central identity and 'point zero' the way every other metropolitan area does. ABA had the Virginia Squires who played mostly in Norfolk, but did barnstorm around the state. It has a huge military presence and could be a 'overlooked metro area'. If NFL can find space for New Orleans and Buffalo, XFL could fit comfortably with Norfolk and SEVA.

Lastly, Rochester. It's northern, and you're prone to snowstorms for much of the season. But it has a stadium that is mostly sitting empty in the 13ish k range. A market that just as AAA baseball and AHL hockey. Not far from Buffalo to still attract rabid fans, and Syracuse to the east. Could regionalize and just be "New York" or "New York State" or go Golden State's route and be the Empire State (whatevers).

There's a lot more obviously. But these are the ones I think are most in line with the XFL not counting the USFL markets. Of which, I'd say Birmingham, Memphis, Detroit, and New Orleans are the most notable that have stadiums or best markets. Pittsburgh would be nice but without Acrisure Stadium involved, there's nowhere to play. And Canton is not the answer if you really want a home stadium.
GDAWG
MVP
Posts: 2885
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:15 pm

Re: XFL expansion

Post by GDAWG »

Sykotyk wrote: Sun Mar 12, 2023 1:20 pm First, this is entirely if the USFL sticks around. Until then, and as the USFL goes to home markets for games, I could see the likelihood that there won't be two teams in a market like Houston is currently (once Houston gets placed at home).

Big cities (new or long since second tier football leagues):
Denver
Chicago
Ohio Big 3 city
Atlanta
Raleigh
Hartford

Yes, I include Hartford as a 'big city'. If they don't want to try again with NJ, I could see Hartford being the 'New England area substitute' team. A big city by itself that would really want a team. Not too far from NY or Boston for fans. But the big thing would be what to call it. NY? Nope. New England? That kills NY interest. Hartford? That flatlines interest from NYC and Boston, but would still probably get good support.

Denver had a great run with the Gold and gets overlooked every time a new league is formed. Why? Their weather may have bad storms, but Denver is usually pretty temperate by February on non-storm days. It's just a risk to take. Plus, who wouldn't love a snow game. There's Dicks Sporting Good Park in Commerce City, there's Mile High, obviously, as well as maybe getting creative and seeing if Boulder would host.

Atlanta, I think, is one of those that would work if the right situation. AAF had the market so XFL 2.0 didn't even consider it. Same as what happened with Orlando. A market that 'should' work for XFL 3.0. Raleigh puts you in the growing carolina territory. But away from Charlotte and the Panthers dominated football sphere. Raleigh-Durham has some options for host stadiums that are all large enough.

Chicago is always an issue. It helps for TV, but the tradeoff is not a lot will attend, especially at Soldier Field due to traffic, parking etc. But for TV, it's a big deal.

And lastly is Ohio. One of Cleveland, Columbus, or Cincinnati. There's the old Historic Crew Stadium that now has turf in Columbus that would be perfect for XFL. Or Cincinnati at either Paycor or Nippert (doubtful TQL would be interested). Cleveland has fewer options, mainly just FES, but there's also preempting the Canton USFL experiment by putting a team there or Akron and calling it 'Ohio' or 'Cleveland' and just winging it.

For smaller cities:

Omaha
Sacramento
San Diego
Tucson
Boise
Fargo
Little Rock
Norfolk
Rochester

First, I'll mention that San Diego is bigger, but on a sporting landscape, it's down to one major team. They've got the facility now and weren't that bad with the Fleet. But the big issue is the facility.

Omaha had great success with the UFL/FXFL teams there. But the leagues dragged them down and slowly dwindled the fan interest in a dying product. Stadium is an issue as it would be a smallish baseball stadium most likely.

Sacramento is a possibility. With the likelihood of the Republic never joining MLS, the possibility of playing on their field or at Sacramento State is a possibility. City only has one other major league team. Gives you a team in Northern California. But maybe only get viewers from the bay area, but might turn a lot if you went with Sacramento name. If you did Northern California (NorCal) and SoCal for two teams, you might develop a regional rivalry in the state that doesn't matter where the teams are playing as long as people just tune in to root for their half of the state.

Tucson is a similar thought. Everything is in the Phoenix area except U of A. Could play there, and be the 'big pro team' for Tucson and not glom onto the Phoenix market is get overlooked. Call yourself Arizona and you won't develop a regional bias as the team still represents all of Arizona.

Boise is definitely a reach. But stock them full of BSU alums and play on the blue turf and you'll at least get a novelty factor. Again, it's not so much drawing their fans as it is giving the XFL another weekly game to draw TV viewers for a TV contract. And we know MWC games do get ratings when they're on unapposed to other college games. Same could hold true for a Boise/Idaho team.

Fargo is in a Similar vein as Boise. Pro sport deprived area (though mostly Vikings fans), that has a huge following for their NDSU Bison, who are striving to be taken seriously at the FCS level. The state is growing still from oil, though the western end of the state. A cross state drive is not ridiculous to sports fans in North Dakota. It would be the state's first real major team aside from some junior league hockey, summer league baseball, and one single unaffiliated minor league baseball team. Again, this is more 'schedule filler' than 'growth market'. But fans on TV don't really care much who is playing. Just that they're playing.

Little Rock has the stadium. Definitely need to rely on the whole state and not just the Little Rock area. But would be a natural rival to the Texas teams. Especially Arlington. Also, close to Arlington if you're still operating as a base city system.

Norfolk wouldn't be the first time a secondary league tried to establish in Norfolk. UFL did. Norfolk State's Dick Price Stadium would be sufficient. The southeast VA market is huge and sprawling including Norfolk, Chesapeake, Virginia Beach, Hampton Roads, Newport News, and even Williamsburg and Suffolk. But it doesn't have a central identity and 'point zero' the way every other metropolitan area does. ABA had the Virginia Squires who played mostly in Norfolk, but did barnstorm around the state. It has a huge military presence and could be a 'overlooked metro area'. If NFL can find space for New Orleans and Buffalo, XFL could fit comfortably with Norfolk and SEVA.

Lastly, Rochester. It's northern, and you're prone to snowstorms for much of the season. But it has a stadium that is mostly sitting empty in the 13ish k range. A market that just as AAA baseball and AHL hockey. Not far from Buffalo to still attract rabid fans, and Syracuse to the east. Could regionalize and just be "New York" or "New York State" or go Golden State's route and be the Empire State (whatevers).

There's a lot more obviously. But these are the ones I think are most in line with the XFL not counting the USFL markets. Of which, I'd say Birmingham, Memphis, Detroit, and New Orleans are the most notable that have stadiums or best markets. Pittsburgh would be nice but without Acrisure Stadium involved, there's nowhere to play. And Canton is not the answer if you really want a home stadium.
Attendance at Soldier Field might not be a problem anymore once the Bears move out to Arlington Heights, because at 61,500, I could see Soldier Field undergoing another major renovation to reduce the seating capacity by half to 30,000 for the Chicago Fire. Now I don't know how many fans the XFL Chicago team would get if Soldier Field was reduced to 30,000.
User avatar
Sykotyk
Quarterback
Posts: 203
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 12:26 am

Re: XFL expansion

Post by Sykotyk »

GDAWG wrote: Sun Mar 12, 2023 1:53 pm
Sykotyk wrote: Sun Mar 12, 2023 1:20 pm First, this is entirely if the USFL sticks around. Until then, and as the USFL goes to home markets for games, I could see the likelihood that there won't be two teams in a market like Houston is currently (once Houston gets placed at home).

Big cities (new or long since second tier football leagues):
Denver
Chicago
Ohio Big 3 city
Atlanta
Raleigh
Hartford

Yes, I include Hartford as a 'big city'. If they don't want to try again with NJ, I could see Hartford being the 'New England area substitute' team. A big city by itself that would really want a team. Not too far from NY or Boston for fans. But the big thing would be what to call it. NY? Nope. New England? That kills NY interest. Hartford? That flatlines interest from NYC and Boston, but would still probably get good support.

Denver had a great run with the Gold and gets overlooked every time a new league is formed. Why? Their weather may have bad storms, but Denver is usually pretty temperate by February on non-storm days. It's just a risk to take. Plus, who wouldn't love a snow game. There's Dicks Sporting Good Park in Commerce City, there's Mile High, obviously, as well as maybe getting creative and seeing if Boulder would host.

Atlanta, I think, is one of those that would work if the right situation. AAF had the market so XFL 2.0 didn't even consider it. Same as what happened with Orlando. A market that 'should' work for XFL 3.0. Raleigh puts you in the growing carolina territory. But away from Charlotte and the Panthers dominated football sphere. Raleigh-Durham has some options for host stadiums that are all large enough.

Chicago is always an issue. It helps for TV, but the tradeoff is not a lot will attend, especially at Soldier Field due to traffic, parking etc. But for TV, it's a big deal.

And lastly is Ohio. One of Cleveland, Columbus, or Cincinnati. There's the old Historic Crew Stadium that now has turf in Columbus that would be perfect for XFL. Or Cincinnati at either Paycor or Nippert (doubtful TQL would be interested). Cleveland has fewer options, mainly just FES, but there's also preempting the Canton USFL experiment by putting a team there or Akron and calling it 'Ohio' or 'Cleveland' and just winging it.

For smaller cities:

Omaha
Sacramento
San Diego
Tucson
Boise
Fargo
Little Rock
Norfolk
Rochester

First, I'll mention that San Diego is bigger, but on a sporting landscape, it's down to one major team. They've got the facility now and weren't that bad with the Fleet. But the big issue is the facility.

Omaha had great success with the UFL/FXFL teams there. But the leagues dragged them down and slowly dwindled the fan interest in a dying product. Stadium is an issue as it would be a smallish baseball stadium most likely.

Sacramento is a possibility. With the likelihood of the Republic never joining MLS, the possibility of playing on their field or at Sacramento State is a possibility. City only has one other major league team. Gives you a team in Northern California. But maybe only get viewers from the bay area, but might turn a lot if you went with Sacramento name. If you did Northern California (NorCal) and SoCal for two teams, you might develop a regional rivalry in the state that doesn't matter where the teams are playing as long as people just tune in to root for their half of the state.

Tucson is a similar thought. Everything is in the Phoenix area except U of A. Could play there, and be the 'big pro team' for Tucson and not glom onto the Phoenix market is get overlooked. Call yourself Arizona and you won't develop a regional bias as the team still represents all of Arizona.

Boise is definitely a reach. But stock them full of BSU alums and play on the blue turf and you'll at least get a novelty factor. Again, it's not so much drawing their fans as it is giving the XFL another weekly game to draw TV viewers for a TV contract. And we know MWC games do get ratings when they're on unapposed to other college games. Same could hold true for a Boise/Idaho team.

Fargo is in a Similar vein as Boise. Pro sport deprived area (though mostly Vikings fans), that has a huge following for their NDSU Bison, who are striving to be taken seriously at the FCS level. The state is growing still from oil, though the western end of the state. A cross state drive is not ridiculous to sports fans in North Dakota. It would be the state's first real major team aside from some junior league hockey, summer league baseball, and one single unaffiliated minor league baseball team. Again, this is more 'schedule filler' than 'growth market'. But fans on TV don't really care much who is playing. Just that they're playing.

Little Rock has the stadium. Definitely need to rely on the whole state and not just the Little Rock area. But would be a natural rival to the Texas teams. Especially Arlington. Also, close to Arlington if you're still operating as a base city system.

Norfolk wouldn't be the first time a secondary league tried to establish in Norfolk. UFL did. Norfolk State's Dick Price Stadium would be sufficient. The southeast VA market is huge and sprawling including Norfolk, Chesapeake, Virginia Beach, Hampton Roads, Newport News, and even Williamsburg and Suffolk. But it doesn't have a central identity and 'point zero' the way every other metropolitan area does. ABA had the Virginia Squires who played mostly in Norfolk, but did barnstorm around the state. It has a huge military presence and could be a 'overlooked metro area'. If NFL can find space for New Orleans and Buffalo, XFL could fit comfortably with Norfolk and SEVA.

Lastly, Rochester. It's northern, and you're prone to snowstorms for much of the season. But it has a stadium that is mostly sitting empty in the 13ish k range. A market that just as AAA baseball and AHL hockey. Not far from Buffalo to still attract rabid fans, and Syracuse to the east. Could regionalize and just be "New York" or "New York State" or go Golden State's route and be the Empire State (whatevers).

There's a lot more obviously. But these are the ones I think are most in line with the XFL not counting the USFL markets. Of which, I'd say Birmingham, Memphis, Detroit, and New Orleans are the most notable that have stadiums or best markets. Pittsburgh would be nice but without Acrisure Stadium involved, there's nowhere to play. And Canton is not the answer if you really want a home stadium.
Attendance at Soldier Field might not be a problem anymore once the Bears move out to Arlington Heights, because at 61,500, I could see Soldier Field undergoing another major renovation to reduce the seating capacity by half to 30,000 for the Chicago Fire. Now I don't know how many fans the XFL Chicago team would get if Soldier Field was reduced to 30,000.

Unfortunately that's still probably a few years away. A 30k stadium for the Fire would be perfect. The problem with Soldier Field is even then, the parking isn't near the stadium. Because of its location, most parking is further away which means a lot of walking and that's a big turnoff to people today to attend a game.
Post Reply