December 26, 2025Dec 26 27 minutes ago, Lukakke Appling said: Haha not a good catch at all. I’ve never heard of the Buffalo Braves. I was saying NY state has 8 teams, and I assumed it was the Sabres you had forgotten. Or it’s possible one of the 8 doesn’t play in NY anymore. I’ve got: Mets, Yankees, Bills, Knicks, Nets, Rangers, Islanders, Sabres. Ha! I did totally forget about the Buffalo Sabres! You're right - there are 8 MLB/NFL/NBA/NHL teams that currently play in the state of New York. So, NY state has lost 6 teams over the years (w/ 2 of those still playing in the NYC metro), but still have 8 teams playing within the state boundaries. ....and I'm only counting those 4 sports leagues, of course - not MLS, WNBA, etc.
December 26, 2025Dec 26 3 hours ago, Lukakke Appling said: Haha not a good catch at all. I’ve never heard of the Buffalo Braves. I was saying NY state has 8 teams, and I assumed it was the Sabres you had forgotten. Or it’s possible one of the 8 doesn’t play in NY anymore. I’ve got: Mets, Yankees, Bills, Knicks, Nets, Rangers, Islanders, Sabres. I was going to add the jets but then remembered they play in jersey
December 27, 2025Dec 27 23 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said: I assume you mean the Buffalo Braves, not the Sabres, but good catch! I had to look them up.....they're the LA Clippers now. The Braves of the NBA moved to San Diego first and then Los Angeles. Edited December 27, 2025Dec 27 by The Mighty Mite
December 27, 2025Dec 27 23 hours ago, Lukakke Appling said: If you forgot the Sabres nobody could blame you. 23 hours ago, Lukakke Appling said: If you forgot the Sabres nobody could blame you. Edited December 27, 2025Dec 27 by The Mighty Mite
December 27, 2025Dec 27 23 hours ago, Lukakke Appling said: Haha not a good catch at all. I’ve never heard of the Buffalo Braves. I was saying NY state has 8 teams, and I assumed it was the Sabres you had forgotten. Or it’s possible one of the 8 doesn’t play in NY anymore. I’ve got: Mets, Yankees, Bills, Knicks, Nets, Rangers, Islanders, Sabres. You forgot the Syracuse Nationals who moved to Philadelphia and became the 76ers, this was after the Warriors left Philly and moved to San Francisco.
December 27, 2025Dec 27 39 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said: You forgot the Syracuse Nationals who moved to Philadelphia and became the 76ers, this was after the Warriors left Philly and moved to San Francisco. Rochester Royals moved to Cincy-KC-Omaha- Sacramento Kings.
December 27, 2025Dec 27 39 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said: You forgot the Syracuse Nationals who moved to Philadelphia and became the 76ers, this was after the Warriors left Philly and moved to San Francisco. Interesting that both Syracuse and Rochester, NY had NBA teams way back in the day.
December 27, 2025Dec 27 17 minutes ago, pcq said: Rochester Royals moved to Cincy-KC-Omaha- Sacramento Kings. Yes they did.
December 28, 2025Dec 28 Here's an interesting look at just how much of a sweetheart deal the new stadium deal is for the Chiefs and how bad it sounds for Kansas taxpayers:
December 28, 2025Dec 28 1 hour ago, 77 Hitmen said: Here's an interesting look at just how much of a sweetheart deal the new stadium deal is for the Chiefs and how bad it sounds for Kansas taxpayers: It looks bad for Kansas taxpayers but still, the Kansas politicians feel overall it will benefit the State of Kansas, I find it difficult to believe that Kansas is going to lose money on the deal.
December 28, 2025Dec 28 49 minutes ago, WBWSF said: It looks bad for Kansas taxpayers but still, the Kansas politicians feel overall it will benefit the State of Kansas, I find it difficult to believe that Kansas is going to lose money on the deal. Guessing a lot of casual football fans wouldn’t even think of KC as being outside of Kansas.
December 28, 2025Dec 28 1 hour ago, WBWSF said: It looks bad for Kansas taxpayers but still, the Kansas politicians feel overall it will benefit the State of Kansas, I find it difficult to believe that Kansas is going to lose money on the deal. Suddenly your letters to JR make sense.
December 29, 2025Dec 29 On 12/25/2025 at 7:19 AM, WBWSF said: From what I've seen most people in KC and Missouri aren't too happy about the Chiefs moving out of state. Even the Missouri politicians aren't happy about it. The more I've thought about it the more I find it amazing that Illinois hasn't approved the Bears Arlington Heights site. It would be a great thing for the area. If something doesn't change and Indiana offers the Bears a tremendous deal the Bears are going to move out of state, The states of Kansas and Indiana view a NFL franchise as an asset. Even tho the money is putting more money into the NFL billionaire owners pockets Kansas and Indiana think its worth it in the long run. Fans and politicians will be pissed if they leave, but it’s the very same folks saying don’t give them a dime though the Bears are asking for money for infrastructure around the stadium. Bears leaving kind of has to happen tbh.
December 29, 2025Dec 29 On 12/28/2025 at 1:35 PM, WBWSF said: It looks bad for Kansas taxpayers but still, the Kansas politicians feel overall it will benefit the State of Kansas, I find it difficult to believe that Kansas is going to lose money on the deal. Lmao. Most stadiums are boondoggles
December 30, 2025Dec 30 On 12/28/2025 at 1:35 PM, WBWSF said: It looks bad for Kansas taxpayers but still, the Kansas politicians feel overall it will benefit the State of Kansas, I find it difficult to believe that Kansas is going to lose money on the deal. Jerry Reinsdorf likes the cut of your jib.
December 31, 2025Dec 31 22 hours ago, ron883 said: So is the "Fire to the 78" thing all but a done deal? We'll see when they actually break ground on the facility, which is supposed to be this coming spring.
December 31, 2025Dec 31 On 12/28/2025 at 11:35 AM, WBWSF said: It looks bad for Kansas taxpayers but still, the Kansas politicians feel overall it will benefit the State of Kansas, I find it difficult to believe that Kansas is going to lose money on the deal. The market is the market at the end of the day. They got a better deal and they took it which is a rational decision, so as much as i despise the Chiefs, it was the proper move. The public or their elected representatives have to make that cost/benefit analysis. The taxpayers rarely come out ahead but there's only 32 of these teams out there and these communities have to decide how much or how little they value having one. Thankfully, the owners of my NFL team are rich enough with all that Walmart money that they are just writing a 2-4 billion dollar check for the new stadium on a private basis and not asking the public to pitch in.
December 31, 2025Dec 31 On 12/28/2025 at 1:35 PM, WBWSF said: It looks bad for Kansas taxpayers but still, the Kansas politicians feel overall it will benefit the State of Kansas, I find it difficult to believe that Kansas is going to lose money on the deal. Looking at the history of public funding for stadiums, I find it hard to believe Kansas isn’t going to lose money on the deal, and a ton of it. But they get the Chiefs.
January 2Jan 2 On 12/31/2025 at 2:50 PM, SoCalChiSox said: The market is the market at the end of the day. They got a better deal and they took it which is a rational decision, so as much as i despise the Chiefs, it was the proper move. The public or their elected representatives have to make that cost/benefit analysis. The taxpayers rarely come out ahead but there's only 32 of these teams out there and these communities have to decide how much or how little they value having one. Thankfully, the owners of my NFL team are rich enough with all that Walmart money that they are just writing a 2-4 billion dollar check for the new stadium on a private basis and not asking the public to pitch in. I read where the Bears are meeting with the Indiana officials next Tuesday. ( January 6) It will be interesting to see if there is any movement on a new Bears stadium.
January 2Jan 2 11 minutes ago, WBWSF said: I read where the Bears are meeting with the Indiana officials next Tuesday. ( January 6) It will be interesting to see if there is any movement on a new Bears stadium. Good let them talk. "You are looking live" at the Hammond Bears. 😉 The politicians have made it pretty clear until the Bears pay off the renovation debt from 2002 they aren't getting any cooperation. Let them go to Indiana, they'll still be the Chicago Bears.
January 3Jan 3 12 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said: Good let them talk. "You are looking live" at the Hammond Bears. 😉 The politicians have made it pretty clear until the Bears pay off the renovation debt from 2002 they aren't getting any cooperation. Let them go to Indiana, they'll still be the Chicago Bears. How about the Illiana Bears.
January 3Jan 3 2 hours ago, The Mighty Mite said: How about the Illiana Bears. If Indiana gives the Bears everything they want, I wonder what will happen if Indiana says the deal has to have the team known as the Indiana Bears.
January 3Jan 3 2 hours ago, WBWSF said: If Indiana gives the Bears everything they want, I wonder what will happen if Indiana says the deal has to have the team known as the Indiana Bears. Who cares? It's just a name. Don't lose any sleep over this.
January 3Jan 3 3 hours ago, WBWSF said: If Indiana gives the Bears everything they want, I wonder what will happen if Indiana says the deal has to have the team known as the Indiana Bears. I doubt they'd make that a condition. Colts fans in the state would probably not be on board with such a demand.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.