Could Chicago support two NFL teams?

**Smoke** · 08-22-12, 08:24 AM

**ChalkyDog** · 08-22-12, 08:25 AM

Wish it could. Sounded like good times - grandfather telling me stories about being a Chicago Cardinals fan.

**d2bets** · 08-22-12, 08:35 AM

The new team would be the ugly stepchild. In theory, yes. But it shouldn't happen.

**milwaukee mike** · 08-22-12, 08:53 AM

of course it could

cities like cleveland and cincinnati have nfl teams with population of only 400,000

green bay only has 100,000 people

**ChalkyDog** · 08-22-12, 08:54 AM

Well, it would be easy just to throw it on the south side, with all second tier reject crap goes to live.

**Brock Landers** · 08-22-12, 08:59 AM

No chance in hell. This is a Bears town, any other team that came in would either fold or move within 10 years

**milwaukee mike** · 08-22-12, 09:10 AM

Originally posted by ChalkyDog

Well, it would be easy just to throw it on the south side, with all second tier reject crap goes to live.

yeah i guess winning championships or even playoff games since 2003 makes your team "second tier reject crap"

**betplom** · 08-22-12, 09:14 AM

Two losing teams are better than one, no?

**ChalkyDog** · 08-22-12, 09:42 AM

Originally posted by milwaukee mike

yeah i guess winning championships or even playoff games since 2003 makes your team "second tier reject crap"

It does in this town. This is a Cubs and Bears town - if your affinity lies elsewhere, that's your problem.

But bring back the Cardinals. They would fit in well in this town. Their lack of QB is something us Illinois natives can relate to.

**McBa1n** · 08-22-12, 09:50 AM

It probably is a big enough City/area to support 2, but competing with the team the city has been about for....Forever, I'd say it'd be really f'n stupid. It'd be less stupid if the 85 Bears never existed.

But then again, the better question is - can Florida support 3?
I'm gonna go ahead and say no on that.

**Boner_18** · 08-22-12, 10:00 AM

Nope. 1/2 rate city full of corn holers and dirty pols.

**stevek173** · 08-22-12, 10:02 AM

Didnt I see this at sbrfancy

**Chi_archie** · 08-22-12, 10:05 AM

Let's give south dakota a franchise

**stevek173** · 08-22-12, 10:08 AM

Rhode Island

No State Taxes

**crustyme** · 08-22-12, 10:14 AM

only if bartman was their qb.

**milwaukee mike** · 08-22-12, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by ChalkyDog

It does in this town. This is a Cubs and Bears town - if your affinity lies elsewhere, that's your problem.

But bring back the Cardinals. They would fit in well in this town. Their lack of QB is something us Illinois natives can relate to.

fair enough

but i know plenty of people in chicago that like the sox and hate the cubs

**Microphone** · 08-22-12, 10:41 AM

Simple formula that is you show you are committed to winning (watching Houston build to a winner), they will support it. If you are like Detroit, they won't. The fans are pretty smart and will know your ownership abilities quick and whether they should spend their hard earned $150+ a person per game on your product.

People like winners.

**ChalkyDog** · 08-22-12, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by milwaukee mike

fair enough

but i know plenty of people in chicago that like the sox and hate the cubs

And they also live in a van down by the river? Blame their parents. Some people are just brought up wrong.

**lunchbawks** · 08-22-12, 10:59 AM

chicago could easily support 2 nfl teams

nfl is working on LA first

**Sportsbetting123** · 08-22-12, 11:03 AM

Cant imagine a team sharing Chicago with the Bears. Seriously

**PickWinnerAllDay** · 08-22-12, 11:59 AM

Originally posted by crustyme

only if bartman was their qb.

This has got to be... the worst attempt at humor I've ever seen in my entire life.

**PickWinnerAllDay** · 08-22-12, 11:59 AM

Originally posted by lunchbawks

chicago could easily support 2 nfl teams

nfl is working on LA first

This is bears town. The new football team would be much worse off than the White Sox. It wouldn't work.

**meader99** · 08-22-12, 12:27 PM

No way jose. With all the improvements TV has made, more and more people watch the game on television. The Bears would struggle to sell every game out if they didn't have all of the corporate owned seats.

**PickWinnerAllDay** · 08-22-12, 12:29 PM

Originally posted by meader99

No way jose. With all the improvements TV has made, more and more people watch the game on television. The Bears would struggle to sell every game out if they didn't have all of the corporate owned seats.

If there was anything at all worth doing in Wisconsin, the Packers would struggle to sell out too.

**mathdotcom** · 08-22-12, 04:16 PM

Easily done with 3 step plan

Call them the Chicago Big Bears

Beat the Packers

Count the money

**meader99** · 08-22-12, 09:10 PM

Originally posted by PickWinnerAllDay

If there was anything at all worth doing in Wisconsin, the Packers would struggle to sell out too.

Perhaps because they are real football fans..... Regardless of weather the stadium is full. Regardless of the teams record, the stadium is full. Bear fans could never relate to that.....Cub fans on the other hand..............

**lunchbawks** · 08-23-12, 12:01 AM

Originally posted by PickWinnerAllDay

This is bears town. The new football team would be much worse off than the White Sox. It wouldn't work.

it would work out to perfection, just put the north side against the south side

2 teams= 16 home games per season, you really don't think chicago could cover that?

**Dabeergod** · 08-23-12, 12:33 AM

One crappy team here in Chicago is bad enough