• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NFL 2016 Week 13 |OT| This is not the Greatest NFL Thread it's Only a Tribute

C

chuckddd

Fear of a GAF Planet
Hunter S. said:
Probably because it can bring an entire city a boost in the economy. Good fans love their team and will watch them good, or bad. Buy food and gear, and keep the community thriving.
Click to expand...

I find it weird that people don't understand that professional sports teams are a boon to local economies. Read a book or something.
 
P

Pepiope

Member
effzee said:
Had the Eagles not moved up for Wentz, they could have potentially traded up for Zeke, stayed put at 8 for the best available Tackle while also retaining DeMarco to be the best option at RB, nabbed Prescott in any round after the first, and still traded Bradford for a 1st round pick.

Fuck.
Click to expand...
I really don't think Dak would look good behind our line and with our receivers. I'm pretty confident we have the much better QB.
 
Z

Zvonimir Boban

Banned
Hunter S. said:
Probably because it can bring an entire city a boost in the economy. Good fans love their team and will watch them good, or bad. Buy food and gear, and keep the community thriving.
Click to expand...

chuckddd said:
I find it weird that people don't understand that professional sports teams are a boon to local economies. Read a book or something.
Click to expand...

http://news.stanford.edu/2015/07/30/stadium-economics-noll-073015/

When an NFL team wants to build a new stadium, it often argues that the facility would boost the local economy.

But that is not true, says Roger Noll, a Stanford professor emeritus in economics. A former senior economist for the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, Noll is an expert on the economics of sports.

“NFL stadiums do not generate significant local economic growth, and the incremental tax revenue is not sufficient to cover any significant financial contribution by the city,” said Noll, a senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research. He has written articles and books and given talks on the public financing of sports stadiums.

“By comparison, other billion dollar facilities – like a major shopping center or large manufacturing plant – will employ many more people and generate substantially more revenue and taxes,” Noll said.
Click to expand...

http://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1024&context=mpampp_etds

When arguing in favor of continued public investment in their franchises, owners have
often pointed to data which shows increases in economic indicators such as per capita income
and employment rates after a team has been in a city (Baade). This is a perfect example of the
misapplication of results taken from standard treatment effect analysis. The results from the
treatment analysis of per capita income in this study showed a constant growth over the six year
period, so an owner may claim this positive effect was attributable to their team’s presence.
However, such a causal claim cannot be made until the dummy shift approach is taken into
account so that all of the trends, in this case before a team arriving and after, are included in the
analysis. The literature states that once this has been taken into account, the vast majority of
franchises demonstrate little or no positive economic impact on their cities.
Click to expand...

If franchises generally created a
positive effect on the area, then their removal would coincide with an observed negative impact
on the city in terms of per capita income or unemployment. This is not the case as the analysis
reveals no statistically significant effects caused by the relocation. As such, it is the
recommendation of this study that policymakers not use public funds to entice teams to remain in
their city on the basis of economic development. If policymakers wish to offer public funding
for teams to stay, they should do so for social reasons such as maintaining quality of life or civic
pride, not under the guise of economic development
Click to expand...

https://www.marketplace.org/2015/03/19/business/are-pro-sports-teams-economic-winners-cities

There are a lot of things economists disagree about, but the economic impact of sports stadiums isn't one of them.

“If you ever had a consensus in economics, this would be it," says Michael Leeds, a sports economist at Temple University. "There is no impact."

Leeds studied Chicago – as big a sports town as there is, with five major teams.

“If every sports team in Chicago were to suddenly disappear, the impact on the Chicago economy would be a fraction of 1 percent,” Leeds says. “A baseball team has about the same impact on a community as a midsize department store.”
Click to expand...

Inglewood – one of poorest neighborhoods in LA — projects a football stadium would generate more than $800 million dollars worth of economic activity a year.

But Victor Matheson, a sports economist at College of the Holy Cross, is dubious.

“A good rule of thumb that economists use is to take what stadium boosters are telling you and move that one decimal place to the left, and that’s usually a good estimate of what you’re going to get,” Matheson says.

Economists say the biggest reason sports teams don’t have much impact is that they don’t tend to spur new spending. Most people have a limited entertainment budget, so the dollars they are spending when they go to a game is money they would have spent elsewhere, maybe even at a restaurant or small businesses where more money would have stayed in the community. Plus, Matheson says, rather than draw people to a neighborhood, games can actually repel them.

“Sporting events can cause significant crowds and congestion that can cause people to stop going to other events in the area,” he says.

That’s part of the reason why a 2003 analysis on Staples Center commissioned by the Los Angeles City Controller included a surprising finding.

“Economic activity in Inglewood actually increased when the Lakers left town,” says Matheson.

That is, sales tax revenue went up when the Lakers and Kings moved to Staples Center in 1999.
Click to expand...
 
S

Sanjuro

Member
How did this thread advance two pages since my last visit.

Let me check...

mNzbFZm.jpg
 
D

Deadbeat

Banned
effzee said:
Had the Eagles not moved up for Wentz, they could have potentially traded up for Zeke, stayed put at 8 for the best available Tackle while also retaining DeMarco to be the best option at RB, nabbed Prescott in any round after the first, and still traded Bradford for a 1st round pick.

Fuck.
Click to expand...
This is like kicking yourself for not drafting brady before the 6th round. Hindsight 20/20 etc.

Eagles got a qb. Now get an oline and weapons.
 
G

Gigglepoo

Member
F

FloydtheFathead

Member
cdyhybrid said:
Yes. The Browns have no weaknesses.
Click to expand...

yankeehater said:
If you add up the record of all the teams in the league at the end you get 8-8. Congrats everyone we all did it!
Click to expand...
BG.. we did it..

Yankee is a math teacher so he in fact knows the numbers..

The_Darkest_Red said:
They were also down 30-3 to Georgia Tech at one point... You just never know. My only hope is some transitive property bullshit; VT beat Pitt who beat Clemson.
Click to expand...
If Clemson is slow to start.. then I can see VT making it a game.

ActStriker said:
Gronk getting back surgery.

welp
Click to expand...
Dutch.. your thou...

Dutch Gronk said:
I'm going to end my life.

Done with football for the year.
Click to expand...
So that means you'll let Chris or I win the Shirtless title?

Chris.. we did it friend!!
 
B

bionic77

Member
CrocMother said:
2017 will get off to a great start

Cowboys Superbowl
Click to expand...
The pain and misery is going to continue through the start of 2017.

I am a little tempted to take the day off and go down to DC and protest the fuck out of Trump's inauguration. I want the world to see that most of America is not cool with this shit.

I am sure the SB that follows is going to be something horrible like Pats Cowboys.

If we turn it around it will be after the Switch launch. In the past I would have assumed the greatest gaming experience of all time would have been enough, but lets face facts. People, and especially Americans, are stupid and really suck. So even though Switch's greatness is guaranteed I don't know if that will translate to sales. I know that I and my NFL bros will do our part. But we are not inbred racists and most of us have some sort of schooling and taste so that purchase is a given. The rest of you can start to budget for a year in advance to buy whatever shit games on on your shit system. Us Switch fans are ballers and will just show to Target on launch day and buy that shit straight cash.
 
Z

Zvonimir Boban

Banned
Gigglepoo said:
Thanks for pulling those up. It's a common misconception that teams economically benefit the cities that they are in, but even if that were true, we shouldn't acquiesce to the ransom demands of billionaires.
Click to expand...

If there's anything we should have learned from 2016 it's that we shouldn't trust a fucking thing that billionaires say.
 
B

Bread

Banned
after careful deliveration and thought process, i have decided that 2016 has not done it and i am shutting this thread down. i'll see you all in the NBA thread where i must remind you that you cannot talk about the sixers or the ********
 
H

Hunter S.

Member
@Boban

I don't know about Chokeland, or SD, but Denver tax payers did only pay for about 1/10th of the cost of our stadium. Not many have bitched about that. That would be treason here.
 
F

Fox318

Member
Whats more likely?

Jerry Jones meets trump with his super bowl winning team


or Trump meets with Trump as Secretary of Labor?
 
H

Hindl

Member
Deadbeat said:
This is like kicking yourself for not drafting brady before the 6th round. Hindsight 20/20 etc.

Eagles got a qb. Now get an oline and weapons.
Click to expand...

The OL is fine. Well, the OL is doing alright considered it's ravaged by injuries. A fully healthy Eagles OL was fantastic and led to that great start. Remember that we were on our 3rd string LG, 2nd string RG, and 3rd string RT for the Packers game. If you want more OL depth, then sure, but it's probably the 4th priority I have for the team. In some order, we need to go WR, RB, and CB in the first 3 rounds of the draft, and get a vet WR in the offseason. Then we should have a good foundation set up.
Striker said:
Joe McKnight murdered

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2016/12/terrytown_murder_jpso.html
Click to expand...

Holy shit that's awful. RIP
 
E

Euron

Member
Zeke said:
Pff listed all the WR crops this season top 10 in order
1.pats
2.cowboys
3.Skins
4.raiders
5.Broncos
6.falcons
7.cards
8.saints
9.Steelers
10.giants
29.eagles
https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-ranking-all-32-nfl-receiving-corps-this-season/
Click to expand...
Cole Beasley has been very underrated but the Cowboys should not be in front of the Raiders and Broncos. The Raiders should probably be #1.

Aside from Larry, the Cards have had a pretty disappointing group of receivers this year. And the Steelers' receivers are mediocre to bad aside from Brown, who skews this by being the best in the league. I'd rank the Giants ahead of The Cards and Steelers at least. Obviously OBJ and Shep are great but Cruz has always had a great catch in a pivotal moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
2021 NFL Season | OT | "Some of those blokes are giving 110, 120%"
|OT| Social News 27 28 29 30 31
2K
77K
Smiggs replied
NFL 2017 Week 7 |OT| Kraft Money Rules Everything Around Me
40 41 42 43 44
2K
127K
WizardofPeace replied
NFL 2016 Week 11 |OT| - football
93 94 95 96 97
5K
189K
Greg replied
NFL 2017 Week 6 |OT| Fulfill Your Destiny
104 105 106 107 108
5K
230K
gutshot replied
NFL 2017 Week 3 |OT| An Epidemic of "Leakyolinitus" has Broken Out
142 143 144 145 146
7K
366K
gutshot replied
Top Bottom