When my team drafts, I want them to choose based on who they think gives them the best chance to win on the football field. That's not unreasonable.
Ok, so would it be fair for me to say that the Texans didn't do what you expect from them? Please don't try to argue that they really thought Mario Williams would help their team more than Vince Young or Reggie Bush. They looked at the numbers, figured out how much Reggie and Vince would cost, and decided to go for the bargain with Mario Williams. That was a buisness decision.
I know what you'll say...Well they didn't think they needed a quarterback or a runningback. Sorry, that doesn't excuse them for passing on once in a generation type talent.
Re: All of the Titans bandwagoning is ridiculous
[re: LONGHORNman]
No, it wouldn't be. Bob McNair has NO hesitation to pay high salaries. Why do you think they triggered the option on Carr's contract last year after four generally mediocre season? The Texans are a lot of things... cheap isn't one of them. They've had no hesitation signing players to big deals, many of which haven't worked out to their benefit. These aren't the Arizona Cardinals. The Texans picked Mario Williams because they thought he was the best player for them. They had the worst defense in the AFC last season, zero pash rus and thought he was the best fit on the field, imo. They may be wrong, but they made the decision based on on-field issues.
Oh, and P.S.: there's a reason DE is a cornerstone position in the minds of NFL experts and general managers and RB is not.
As for Sam Bowie, that's absurd. Sam Bowie wasn't Sam Bowie just because he was picked in front of MJ. Sam Bowie was Sam Bowie because he sucked ass. Mario Williams has decent numbers and has put consistent pressure on opposing quarterbacks all season long. He's drawing double and triple teams every snap. He has been the leader of a much improved pass rush and a defense that has gone from awful in the first couple of weeks to pretty solid as of now.
No matter what you think of the decision to bypass VY, Mario Williams is having a good season and doing well for himself. As a result, he's not Sam Bowie. The comparison is silly and absurd.
Re: All of the Titans bandwagoning is ridiculous
[re: LONGHORNman]
In reply to:
MTF: The two articles regarding empty seats were posted from one game - against Washington. . . . But that's the only game this season where that's been an issue. . . . I guarantee you won't be able to find any of those comments on the Miami, Jacksonville or Buffalo games
Then what does this bolded portion from that Chronicle article mean?
In reply to:
A third straight disappointing performance against Washington, and the Texans were greeted to even more no-shows the next week against Miami.
What do I get for your guarantee?
In reply to:
As for the middle article, that's about demand from ticket brokers, not the original sale of tickets. Whether the tickets resale for $500, face value or $5 has no effect on the Texans' bottom line. It's all about the original sales, of which ticket brokers have no relevance.
Uh, we are talking here about concessions sales and other sales that are gained from attending fans (see my initial quote above about selling beer and hot dogs to empty seats). If ticket brokers are left holding tickets because of lack of demand, that means empty seats. Your claim about resale value is a non sequitur.
Regardless, you are the one responding to my claim that the Texans have had empty seats. You admit that games at the end of last season were half empty, and I've already found articles confirming numerous empty seats at two games this year. The burden is on you to prove your point, as I've already given enough to prove mine.
Re: All of the Titans bandwagoning is ridiculous
[re: LONGHORNman]
the Texans defenders remind me of the boardroom in the movie Big. The Titans and Vince fans are saying, "I don't get it, what is so fun with playing with a skyscraper"
Texans fan point out all the profit and sell outs and support the team.
Titans and Vince fans....."I don't get it"
what is the fun in having an easy to sack skyscraper in Carr, who wants that?
Re: All of the Titans bandwagoning is ridiculous
[re: LONGHORNman]
How exactly am I supposed to prove if the seats were full? It's not like the AP assigns writers to discuss exactly how full a stadium listed as soldout is on a weekly basis. As for the Miami game, I was there and it was very different than the previous game against Washington. You've found one source on that - a writer with a pretty clear bias on this issue. I question exactly how valid his judgment is.
As for the your point on the ticket brokers, read a little closer. With the exception of one guy speaking about the final two games of one of the worst seasons in NFL history, they aren't saying the ticket brokers are left holding tickets. They're saying there's not significant demand and thus the price isn't what they would like to sell the tickets for. There's a huge, huge difference between the two.
You've proven all of two games this year having no-show issues (and I strongly question the second, but even if we count that). That's not exactly a majority. Besides, the average fan spends approximately $5 on concessions. This is a confirmed fact when you look at concession revenue per team (available through Forbes) and divide by the approximate number of fans in the season. Worst case scenario, the team has 10,000 no shows. That's the worst... it never was that bad, imo, but I'll give you the worst case for an example. That's approximately $50,000 on two games, which would be $100,000 or so. Of course, at least half of that would go to the food manufacturers, vendors and through commission-related sales to employees. So we're talking about maybe $50,000, at most (and probably significantly less, but I'm playing out the worst case scenario for you) through lost concession revenue from these no-shows. A few thousand dollars of a profitable franchise worth $946 million. Somehow, I really doubt they're suffering over only selling 6/7 as many hot dogs as they possibly could.
Re: All of the Titans bandwagoning is ridiculous
[re: LONGHORNman]
In reply to:
How exactly am I supposed to prove if the seats were full? It's not like the AP assigns writers to discuss exactly how full a stadium listed as soldout is on a weekly basis.
This from the guy who asks on another thread:
In reply to:
I'm still waiting for any evidence to a majority (much less all, I'll take a majority) of Texans fans being aggy. Can someone please show me?
If you are so keen on evidence, provide some of your own for your claim that Vince could not possibly have a game day impact because the games are already sellouts. I've already provided links, with limited evidence available because the Texans don't release game day attendance figures, that there have been significant no-shows for at least two games this year and games at the end of last season. All you've provided is your unsubstantiated claim that the stands were packed for two games. I've proven my argument that there have been empty seats that Vince could impact; since you've challenged that, the burden is on you to show otherwise.
In reply to:
As for the Miami game, I was there and it was very different than the previous game against Washington. You've found one source on that - a writer with a pretty clear bias on this issue. I question exactly how valid his judgment is.
You're right, we should just trust your clearly unbiased view over an article in the Chronicle. After all, if you can't trust a self-described diehard Texans fan's claim that there were not empty seats, who can you trust?
By the way, in case you forgot, you guaranteed that I couldn't find any comments about empty seats on the Miami game. Your credibility isn't exactly rock solid at this point. It only makes your claims about the two recent games even more questionable.
In reply to:
As for the your point on the ticket brokers, read a little closer. With the exception of one guy speaking about the final two games of one of the worst seasons in NFL history, they aren't saying the ticket brokers are left holding tickets. They're saying there's not significant demand and thus the price isn't what they would like to sell the tickets for. There's a huge, huge difference between the two.
Read closer yourself. The article says that "the current period is the slowest for ticket sales in team history." Slow ticket sales means they aren't selling the tickets.
In reply to:
You've proven all of two games this year having no-show issues (and I strongly question the second, but even if we count that). That's not exactly a majority.
Where did I say it was a majority? I'm countering your argument that Vince couldn't make a financial difference on game day because the tickets are all sellouts. You've provided nothing to back up your argument, while I've shown that at least two games this season had significant no-shows, as well as games at the end of last season. And you admit that they didn't show because of the team's poor play, which could very possibly continue for the next few years. Thus, Vince could potentially make a difference by packing the stands.
In reply to:
Worst case scenario, the team has 10,000 no shows.
I disagree, I remember the stands being nearly half empty last season. And even if they had more at the peak (probably late first quarter), many are coming late and only staying for an hour or so and leaving. Hell, the San Antonio Express News article I linked earlier estimated a quarter of the stands were empty against Washington, and that only 10,000 fans were left by the end of the game.
In reply to:
That's the worst... it never was that bad, imo, but I'll give you the worst case for an example. That's approximately $50,000 on two games, which would be $100,000 or so. Of course, at least half of that would go to the food manufacturers, vendors and through commission-related sales to employees. So we're talking about maybe $50,000, at most (and probably significantly less, but I'm playing out the worst case scenario for you) through lost concession revenue from these no-shows. A few thousand dollars of a profitable franchise worth $946 million. Somehow, I really doubt they're suffering over only selling 6/7 as many hot dogs as they possibly could.
Thanks for the math lesson. But like your unproven claims on fan attendance, I'll go with something more concrete. For example, CNN Money, which establishes that the Texans pull in $1.4 million in concessions during every home game:
The Link
In reply to:
At Reliant, tickets are sold out, fans are happy, and concessions pull in $1.4 million during every home game. But the Texans? They're well on their way to one of the worst records in the league.
That article was from 3 years ago, when the attendance actually was 70,000 per game. Without even taking into account price increases, if 10,000 fans aren't showing, and we assume that is 1/7 of the concessions profits, that's $200,000 lost per home game with no-shows. While you claim that is worst case scenario, I think worst case is more like 20,000-30,000 no shows or more, with some games being closer to full. But even if we say 10,000 average no-shows, that comes out to a million and a half lost dollars over a season. And that's only concessions; I don't think that even counts sales from the stores at Reliant and things like program sales. Also add parking money from those that don't have passes.
You also totally ignored my argument that Vince could have created other financial opportunities for the Texans, such as through corporate sponsorships. As I said, Mattress Mack believed that drafting Vince would have doubled the value of his sponsorship, and he's probably right. Increased value for corporate sponsorships = increased money from corporate sponsorships.
Re: All of the Titans bandwagoning is ridiculous
[re: LONGHORNman]
There has been a lot of effort in support of 2 sub .500 teams. Though I'm glad everyone is showing their own loyalties. The whole origin of the thread is just humorous.
Of course, i can say this since I'm a Cowboys fan and could care less. But I will cheer for the Titans since VY is on the team and could care less about the Texans.
Re: All of the Titans bandwagoning is ridiculous
[re: LONGHORNman]
Win - I agree that watching this Houston Civil War is hilarious. I do have to interject though for a brief moment... to all of you Texans supporters that are praising McNair for having one of the most profitable franchises in sports... are you freakin' stupid? Yes, he is making money hand over fist due to his Reliant contract. So what is his incentive to actually putting a decent product on the field? Have any of you guys followed the Cubs and their wretched ownership by the Tribune Corp.? For the better part of a century they were profitable because of their badass stadium and made a mint whether they sucked or not. So they didn't spend anything on improving the team and kept cashing their checks. Only now that the White Sox actually are threatening their stranglehold on the Chicago fanbase have they realized the depth of their neglect and are spending money like crazy to try and bring the Cubs a title. Houston? Last time I saw there wasn't another NFL team in Houston to spur McNair to actually give a [censored] and hire a real coach and actually draft a transcendant talent. Maybe if he sees his precious Reliant Stadium filled with Columbia Blue and Burnt Orange he will have a moment of epihany, but I doubt it.
"Give me an army of West Point cadets and I'll win a battle, give me an army of Texas Aggies and I'll show you a field of crushed testicles and a herd of terrified sheep" - Gen. George S. Patton (as real as their version)
Re: All of the Titans bandwagoning is ridiculous
[re: MTF]
In reply to:
If you are so keen on evidence, provide some of your own for your claim that Vince could not possibly have a game day impact because the games are already sellouts. I've already provided links, with limited evidence available because the Texans don't release game day attendance figures, that there have been significant no-shows for at least two games this year and games at the end of last season. All you've provided is your unsubstantiated claim that the stands were packed for two games. I've proven my argument that there have been empty seats that Vince could impact; since you've challenged that, the burden is on you to show otherwise.
Or you want evidence of how many fans were actually in the seats? Tell me then, how am I supposed to find that? It's not exactly like that's standard practice for journalists to write about. It's a lot more newsworthy when fans AREN'T there than when they are, so of course there isn't evidence to this. But how can you prove the Texans are any different than the Titans, if that's the case? Or any other team? If you supposedly have to PROVE that there were no empty seats, instead of taking it for granted, can you prove to me that other NFL teams have had no empty seats?
In reply to:
You're right, we should just trust your clearly unbiased view over an article in the Chronicle. After all, if you can't trust a self-described diehard Texans fan's claim that there were not empty seats, who can you trust?
By the way, in case you forgot, you guaranteed that I couldn't find any comments about empty seats on the Miami game. Your credibility isn't exactly rock solid at this point. It only makes your claims about the two recent games even more questionable.
Wow, you got me on one game. Wow, I'm sure the Texans are just CRIPPLED financially from those extra 10,000 no-shows I wasn't thinking about. Man, they only sold 85 percent or so of the hot dogs they regularly do! They're going to sell the team after that one!
In reply to:
Read closer yourself. The article says that "the current period is the slowest for ticket sales in team history." Slow ticket sales means they aren't selling the tickets.
No, it does not. Slow ticket sales means they're not going as fast or for as much. It doesn't necessarily mean they aren't going at all.
In reply to:
Where did I say it was a majority? I'm countering your argument that Vince couldn't make a financial difference on game day because the tickets are all sellouts. You've provided nothing to back up your argument, while I've shown that at least two games this season had significant no-shows, as well as games at the end of last season. And you admit that they didn't show because of the team's poor play, which could very possibly continue for the next few years. Thus, Vince could potentially make a difference by packing the stands.
No, I admitted they didn't show because of the team's incredibly poor play - i.e. 2-17 in the team's last 19 games. They're 4-5 since that point and relatively competitive and clearly a more talented team than the version a season ago. So no, it doesn't seem extremely possible for them to be that bad for years to come.
In reply to:
I disagree, I remember the stands being nearly half empty last season. And even if they had more at the peak (probably late first quarter), many are coming late and only staying for an hour or so and leaving. Hell, the San Antonio Express News article I linked earlier estimated a quarter of the stands were empty against Washington, and that only 10,000 fans were left by the end of the game.
So I can't be credible because I'm a fan, but you as a hater can be? LMAO!
In reply to:
Thanks for the math lesson. But like your unproven claims on fan attendance, I'll go with something more concrete. For example, CNN Money, which establishes that the Texans pull in $1.4 million in concessions during every home game:
In reply to:
That article was from 3 years ago, when the attendance actually was 70,000 per game. Without even taking into account price increases, if 10,000 fans aren't showing, and we assume that is 1/7 of the concessions profits, that's $200,000 lost per home game with no-shows. While you claim that is worst case scenario, I think worst case is more like 20,000-30,000 no shows or more, with some games being closer to full. But even if we say 10,000 average no-shows, that comes out to a million and a half lost dollars over a season. And that's only concessions; I don't think that even counts sales from the stores at Reliant and things like program sales. Also add parking money from those that don't have passes.
Now let's multiply the average ticket price of $57 times the paid attendance of 70,000. That's approximately 4 million. Let's multiply that by the 10 games held at Reliant during a season (regular and preseason). You're looking at $40 million. Let's add in the other concession revenue and all the other sponsorship deals McNair has, and let's see what percentage that $1.5 million takes up. I'll give you a hint: it's really, really tiny, and no one is going to take a percentage that small into account when making football-related decisions.
Also, you have no evidence that no-shows are a problem for an entire season. You've quoted a couple of articles citing an issue in two games at the beginning of this season and a couple at the end of last season. Even combined, it doesn't add up to a full season of games. So, to remotely make 10,000 no shows on average a reasonable proposition, you need to establish that this is a consistent problem, not in a couple of games here and there. Furthermore, even if you did establish that (you haven't, can't and won't), it's still not anywhere close to enough of a financial problem to make McNair lose a second's sleep.
As for merchandise sales, try again. NFL merchandise sales are distributed evenly from team to team. It's amazing you guys can't grasp this. We're talking about a few fewer hotdogs and a few fewer programs. For one of the most profitable franchises in sports with a net worth of almost one billion dollars, that's not something that's a big concern for them. Nor should it be.
In reply to:
You also totally ignored my argument that Vince could have created other financial opportunities for the Texans, such as through corporate sponsorships. As I said, Mattress Mack believed that drafting Vince would have doubled the value of his sponsorship, and he's probably right. Increased value for corporate sponsorships = increased money from corporate sponsorships.
That's speculative. I'm trying to stay as close as I can to things that can be debated through empirical evidence.
By the way, I'm about to head off to bed, so if you respond, I'm not ignoring it... I'll get to it tomorrow. And fwiw, I do respect your argument... I'm really not trying to be an ass here or anything like that.
Re: All of the Titans bandwagoning is ridiculous
[re: Sneezy]
)[
In reply to:
Is that why his contract can reach 62.1 million with incentives??
Ok you got me on that one Sneezy. Vince got screwed.
Mario Willliams 6-year, $54 million ($26.5 million guaranteed)
Reggie Bush 6-year, $51 milllion ($26.2 million guaranteed)
Vince Young 6-year, $48 million ($25.9 million guaranteed
Re: All of the Titans bandwagoning is ridiculous
[re: LONGHORNman]
In reply to:
Or you want evidence of how many fans were actually in the seats? Tell me then, how am I supposed to find that? It's not exactly like that's standard practice for journalists to write about. It's a lot more newsworthy when fans AREN'T there than when they are, so of course there isn't evidence to this. But how can you prove the Texans are any different than the Titans, if that's the case? Or any other team? If you supposedly have to PROVE that there were no empty seats, instead of taking it for granted, can you prove to me that other NFL teams have had no empty seats?
Your failure to prove your argument isn't my problem. I've given enough proof to establish mine. Next time don't make assertions that you can't back up. And it's hypocritical of you to complain about being asked to back up your allegedly unprovable claims while on another thread asking someone to back up their unprovable claims that most texans fans are aggies.
In reply to:
Wow, you got me on one game. Wow, I'm sure the Texans are just CRIPPLED financially from those extra 10,000 no-shows I wasn't thinking about. Man, they only sold 85 percent or so of the hot dogs they regularly do! They're going to sell the team after that one!
Once again, it shows that your rhetoric is without substance. You challenge my assertion that there are empty seats by pointing to two recent sellouts (based on your own observations). When I point to at least two games this season and some last season where there were empty seats, you "guarantee" that no article will show that about the Miami game. When I point to the article that says that about the Miami game, you retreat to the claim that only one game had no shows, when I've shown that at least two games this season and some last season had substantial no-shows. Dancing around so much must get tiring.
In reply to:
No, it does not. Slow ticket sales means they're not going as fast or for as much. It doesn't necessarily mean they aren't going at all.
True, it doesn't necessarily mean that; either interpretation is possible. Given that the article is about the "no-show factor" and the no-shows at two games, context indicates that my interpretation is the correct one.
In reply to:
No, I admitted they didn't show because of the team's incredibly poor play - i.e. 2-17 in the team's last 19 games. They're 4-5 since that point and relatively competitive and clearly a more talented team than the version a season ago. So no, it doesn't seem extremely possible for them to be that bad for years to come.
I guess we'll see on this. It's just opinion at this point.
In reply to:
So I can't be credible because I'm a fan, but you as a hater can be? LMAO!
Nice try at putting words in my mouth. I never said you can't be credible because you're a fan; I said you can't claim to be more credible than a newspaper article because they are the biased ones. As for calling me a "hater," how old are you, seriously?
In reply to:
Now let's multiply the average ticket price of $57 times the paid attendance of 70,000. That's approximately 4 million. Let's multiply that by the 10 games held at Reliant during a season (regular and preseason). You're looking at $40 million. Let's add in the other concession revenue and all the other sponsorship deals McNair has, and let's see what percentage that $1.5 million takes up. I'll give you a hint: it's really, really tiny, and no one is going to take a percentage that small into account when making football-related decisions.
First of all, I think everyone here is taking your fuzzy math with a grain of salt after the "few thousand dollars in concessions" debacle. You haven't exactly proven to be a whiz with numbers
Regardless, you keep building up straw man arguments to tear down; it isn't helping your argument. I never argued that concessions were an enormous portion of the teams' total earnings. I argued that there were empty seats representing fans that weren't buying concessions, and when you countered that, we got in a discussion about whether there were in fact empty seats. If it makes you feel better to invent arguments to respond to, feel free. Based on all of the failed arguments you have made and retreated from so far, it is understandable that it might.
Also, if McNair didn't give a [censored] about concessions profits, beers wouldn't cost damn near ten bucks. Money's money, and it all adds up to millions of dollars. McNair didn't become a billionaire by throwing away hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars.
In reply to:
Also, you have no evidence that no-shows are a problem for an entire season. You've quoted a couple of articles citing an issue in two games at the beginning of this season and a couple at the end of last season. Even combined, it doesn't add up to a full season of games. So, to remotely make 10,000 no shows on average a reasonable proposition, you need to establish that this is a consistent problem, not in a couple of games here and there. Furthermore, even if you did establish that (you haven't, can't and won't), it's still not anywhere close to enough of a financial problem to make McNair lose a second's sleep.
That's funny--so between us, you provide no evidence of packed houses, and I provide evidence of no shows for not only two games this season, but games at the end of last season, and I'm the one not providing enough evidence? Your continual double-standards are amusing. Regardless, I've backed up my claim that there have been substantial numbers of empty seats by linking to articles showing that. You've failed to do the same.
In reply to:
As for merchandise sales, try again. NFL merchandise sales are distributed evenly from team to team. It's amazing you guys can't grasp this.
And its amazing you can't grasp reading comprehension skills. I didn't say that merchandise sales should be taken into account in terms of the amount the team gets from licensing; I said the number doesn't take into account sales from the stores at Reliant. The Texans make a retail profit on things sold in their stores, like caps and foam fingers and programs and signed footballs, the same as they do from concessions. That's entirely separate from the amount manufacturers pay to license the Texans logo.
In reply to:
That's speculative. I'm trying to stay as close as I can to things that can be debated through empirical evidence.
Funny, you've provided no empirical evidence for any of your claims so far. So you can argue that the Texans could not financially benefit from having Vince as a player because the sellout games are packed with fans (without any proof), but I can't argue that the Texans can financially benefit from Vince because sponsors wanted Vince (with a specific reference to a statement from one of their biggest sponsors?)
Regardless, it is a legitimate argument, and one you apparently have no answer for. Further, it isn't entirely speculative. If sponsors like Mattress Mack think the value would have doubled, that means the value to the Texans of the sponsorship would go up. The perception of the sponsors is all that matters when trying to get them involved in more financial arrangements.
Shop the Co-op |
Email A Friend |
Contact Us
Become a HornFans Sponsor
Pages in this thread: 
Rate thread
Print Thread
