To be fair, the FXFL was a pretty solid disaster all-around, not just in Boston. As for the USFL, their problem was more of a stadium issue: they couldn't get Harvard Stadium or Alumni Stadium and were stuck in tiny Nickerson. That stadium problem will be the challenge any Boston team has... and they don't even want to try Foxborough. Boston would be a risk but a worthwhile one.GDAWG wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 3:39 pmThere has been little proof that Chicago can support a non-NFL pro football team. Alternative leagues have tried and failed to find a footing in Chicago. I don't know how XFL 2.0 would be different in Chicago. Same for Las Vegas. Alternative leagues have tried and failed in spectacular fashion in Las Vegas. The Raiders will do well in Vegas because it's an NFL team. Like Chicago, there would be no guarantee Las Vegas would work in XFL 2.0. Boston is in the exact same boat as Las Vegas and Chicago. The USFL went there and failed miserably. The FXFL (pre-cursor to the Spring League) also failed there.
The Alliance of American Football tried Atlanta and Phoenix. Neither worked. So what would be different?
But as far as the more recent examples... Chicago, Vegas, Atlanta, Phoenix... yeah, all of them terrible ideas that've been tried and failed. That "huge fan base for NFL, college" never showed up for the AAF and there's no real reason why we should suspect they'd show up for the XFL. Vegas might be slightly better since the old XFL was fairly successful there.
The main correlation between a lot of these inaugural markets is that all but Seattle and Houston have NHL teams, and Seattle's getting a team in 2021. None of them have an NBA team but not an NHL team. Perhaps it says something about the cities' fan base and tastes in sport.