I've been a Browns fan my whole life- my entire adult life (post 1999 team) I've been seeing this happen over and over again.  After the 2-8 season, I turned on the game and only watched the first half and a couple of minutes of the third quarter before I turned off the TV figuring I'd read about it in the morning.  I am SO glad I fell asleep on the game!  I actually laughed pretty hard while shaking my head at the videos I saw posted- and I'm a lifelong fan!  I don't see the fan base dealing with this too much longer- 16 years is long enough.

Not that it caused the kick to be blocked, but the Ravens lined up offsides on that play

 

 

As for the rest of the game, at least it was entertaining.  Perhaps one of the more entertaining MNF games this year.  I was thinking we were going to get blown out, especially when the Ratbirds went up 10-0.  But it wasn't a total embarrassment to watch..... and, sadly, that is about all we can hope for as Browns fans.

I've been a Browns fan my whole life- my entire adult life (post 1999 team) I've been seeing this happen over and over again.  After the 2-8 season, I turned on the game and only watched the first half and a couple of minutes of the third quarter before I turned off the TV figuring I'd read about it in the morning.  I am SO glad I fell asleep on the game!  I actually laughed pretty hard while shaking my head at the videos I saw posted- and I'm a lifelong fan!  I don't see the fan base dealing with this too much longer- 16 years is long enough.

 

The Browns have been such a bad image for a city that already has such a bad image.  I agree with the one article posted earlier, get them out of Cleveland if it means a developed lakefront and possibly a better image for the city.  I was recently in Milwaukee and was blown away by the amount of construction cranes around downtown and how perfect their lakefront seemed, or at least compared to Cleveland's mistake of a lakefront.  It is sad that an organization like the Browns has sucked money out of America's poorest city to support renovation's to one of the most mediocre stadiums in the NFL.

 

See ya, Browns!

I actually watched the game and tweeted during the game that I felt embarrassed for Cleveland to host that game. There was nothing good to say about the Browns, so it became a three-hour rip job (more if you include the pre- and postgame) on national TV. I'll bet after that game and next week's game (Redskins-Cowboys, both losing teams) that ESPN will demand from the NFL the ability the flex games out/in to Monday Night Football at the season's midpoint.

 

BTW, I laughed out loud at how the game ended.

 

Time to trade the Browns to LA in exchange for a couple of their Fortune 1000 employers. :)

I could not believe my eyes at the end of the game last night.  I hate the Ravens, so I was cheering for the Browns, but when that blocked kick was run back I couldn't help but laugh.  What a Browns way to lose.  I feel for you guys, though.  I distinctly remember being at a Bengals-Steelers game back in the 90s where the Bengals improbably overcame a large deficit in the 4th quarter, and then scored a touchdown with like 10 seconds left in the game.  All they had to do was hit the extra point to win.  Kick goes wide left, game goes to overtime, where the Bengals swiftly lost.  Hang in there.

 

I saw tons of empty seats last night.  If Haslam's wallet starts to take a hit, maybe he'll get serious about making changes.  Without the TV blackouts anymore, though, attendance probably doesn't matter as much from a financial standpoint.

 

I actually watched the game and tweeted during the game that I felt embarrassed for Cleveland to host that game. There was nothing good to say about the Browns, so it became a three-hour rip job (more if you include the pre- and postgame) on national TV. I'll bet after that game and next week's game (Redskins-Cowboys, both losing teams) that ESPN will demand from the NFL the ability the flex games out/in to Monday Night Football at the season's midpoint.

 

BTW, I laughed out loud at how the game ended.

 

Time to trade the Browns to LA in exchange for a couple of their Fortune 1000 employers. :)

 

It was actually a great game to watch if you are an NFL fan.  The Browns played hard, made some nice plays on offense & defense.  McCown played his butt off and I think the coaches had a nice game plan in place.  The special teams killed them obviously with the punt return at the beginning and blocked kick at the end.  It goes without saying but in the NFL the difference in a great team and a bad team is not that much.  They only have 2 wins but they are not far away from being a playoff team

I've been a Browns fan my whole life- my entire adult life (post 1999 team) I've been seeing this happen over and over again.  After the 2-8 season, I turned on the game and only watched the first half and a couple of minutes of the third quarter before I turned off the TV figuring I'd read about it in the morning.  I am SO glad I fell asleep on the game!  I actually laughed pretty hard while shaking my head at the videos I saw posted- and I'm a lifelong fan!  I don't see the fan base dealing with this too much longer- 16 years is long enough.

 

The Browns have been such a bad image for a city that already has such a bad image.  I agree with the one article posted earlier, get them out of Cleveland if it means a developed lakefront and possibly a better image for the city.  I was recently in Milwaukee and was blown away by the amount of construction cranes around downtown and how perfect their lakefront seemed, or at least compared to Cleveland's mistake of a lakefront.  It is sad that an organization like the Browns has sucked money out of America's poorest city to support renovation's to one of the most mediocre stadiums in the NFL.

 

See ya, Browns!

 

Not to derail this thread but I have to laugh when Clevelanders say this type of thing.  We have acres of lakefront land that have been undeveloped for years and somehow tearing down the Browns stadium will cause a mega development on the lakefront? 

 

In reality, we'd probably end up with the same kind of Flats East 3-4 story buildings, maybe a Hooters and some other restaurants/bars. 

 

Like em or not, the Browns do contribute a massive amount to the economy of this city (and Berea of course).  I do side with some of the arguments about Haslem giving back some renovation money, but to lose them all together would be a blow to the economy and prestige of our town.

...but to lose them all together would be a blow to the economy and prestige of our town.

 

Because the Browns bring such prestige to the city of Cleveland...

 

And I'd actually be curious to see how much of an economic impact the Browns have on the city. I'd expect it's less than most people would think

^^It's fine that residents are willing to tax themselves for an amenity like a pro football team, but the Browns are most definitely not a "massive" contributor to the local economy. The biggest economic difference had they not been reborn would be a few hundred million dollars still in local taxpayer pockets or spent on something else downtown. Or on more police or whatever. They are an expensive civic luxury.

^^It's fine that residents are willing to tax themselves for an amenity like a pro football team, the Browns are most definitely not a "massive" contributor to the local economy. The biggest economic difference had they not been reborn would be a few hundred million dollars still in local taxpayer pockets or spent on something else downtown. Or on more police or whatever. They are an expensive civic luxury.

 

Until someone provides a compelling study and analyis and study of the numbers (something clearly missing from the Crain's article), I'm going to continue to extrapolate that the Browns have an impact via these and other means:

 

$100 Million in player payroll.  What other Cleveland companies are in this payroll range?

Visiting team jock taxes

Admission taxes

Ticketing fees

Suite sales

Stadium rentals for non-NFL events

Merchandise sales

Concessions, parking, food, both in stadium and downtown districts

Food and beverage sales in regional bars and restaurants

Wages for stadium employees, security, off duty cops, etc

Ad revenue for local TV and radio networks, along with their salaries for on and off-air employees.

Hotel stays for visiting fans and teams

Landing fees at Burke (I counted 25+ private planes on the Landmark ramp yesterday--this number doubles for a larger market visiting team)

Taxi/Uber revenue on game day

RTA revenue on game day (Browns games are one of the single biggest contributors to park-n-ride rail fares from what I've seen)

 

I've spent 3 minutes on this list--I'm sure there are many more. 

 

The fact remains, a winning Browns team would erase all this talk.    We've lived through the drive and the fumble.  We'll make it through this.  I just hope in my lifetime. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...but to lose them all together would be a blow to the economy and prestige of our town.

 

Because the Browns bring such prestige to the city of Cleveland...

 

And I'd actually be curious to see how much of an economic impact the Browns have on the city. I'd expect it's less than most people would think

  Less.  Much less.  Much much less.  Think about the opportunity cost of the land the stadium is on and what could be done there, be it more Port activity or more multi use development

...but to lose them all together would be a blow to the economy and prestige of our town.

 

Because the Browns bring such prestige to the city of Cleveland...

 

And I'd actually be curious to see how much of an economic impact the Browns have on the city. I'd expect it's less than most people would think

  Less.  Much less.  Much much less.  Think about the opportunity cost of the land the stadium is on and what could be done there, be it more Port activity or more multi use development

 

You really think a multi-use development, say like the Flats East Bank (similar size and land-use), would generate more than an NFL team?    I'd like to see the numbers.

Here's an article from January about the prospect of St. Louis losing the Rams. St. Louis is obviously not a direct comparison to Cleveland, but it's close. Also, there's a difference between the two in that we already have a stadium and their conversation revolves around whether to build a new one. But nonetheless, some paragraphs about the economic impact of the team:

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2015/01/10/losing-rams-would-be-blow-to-st-louis-pride-not-economy/21554185/

 

 

Edit: I realize this conversation is a bit tongue in cheek. I obviously am not totally serious when I advocate getting rid of the Browns. But I think we should recognize the fact that it's not a foregone conclusion that having the Browns here is better than not to have gotten them back

...but to lose them all together would be a blow to the economy and prestige of our town.

 

Because the Browns bring such prestige to the city of Cleveland...

 

And I'd actually be curious to see how much of an economic impact the Browns have on the city. I'd expect it's less than most people would think

  Less.  Much less.  Much much less.  Think about the opportunity cost of the land the stadium is on and what could be done there, be it more Port activity or more multi use development

 

You really think a multi-use development, say like the Flats East Bank (similar size and land-use), would generate more than an NFL team?    I'd like to see the numbers.

 

Hell yes.  Not even close.  Employment taxes, corporate taxes, property taxes.  What does Browns stadium generate on any of those levels?  A number of the parking & concessions workers are volunteers.  How many police does the City pay for to direct traffic around the stadium on that day?

 

Edit:  The only real employment taxes is on the players and they pay taxes in other cities half the games in the season.  The main offices for the team are not at the stadium, they are elsewhere.  The property taxes are basically nothing since the city owns the stadium and leases it to the team for next to nothing.

Only on UrbanOhio does a thread in the "sports" section about a football team turn into a conversation about urban development and economics...

mccown out for season w/broken collarbone?

 

johnny football is back.

One might think so.  But it seems like Pettine would rather embarrass him than play him.  I'm not a Johnny fan, I just see no value in publicly sticking it to him.  Too much spillover damage for the team. 

mccown out for season w/broken collarbone?

 

johnny football is back.

 

McCown is one tough sonofabitch.  It seems like the offense runs better with him at QB

mccown out for season w/broken collarbone?

 

johnny football is back.

 

Nope: Browns' Austin Davis named starter over Johnny Manziel for Bengals game

Good. Actions have consequences, and the locker room probably is relieved that putz is benched.

heheheh

Pettine doesn't want this job

You're probably right.  So fire him now, let the OC finish out this season as interim coach?

Good. Actions have consequences, and the locker room probably is relieved that putz is benched.

 

I've heard mixed reactions on Manziel.  I heard from insiders that Mccown was a total team player and had a ton of respect among the other players.  I also heard many in the locker room wanted to see Manziel play because the felt he gave them best chance to win

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2015/12/inglewood_rams_chargers_nfl_stadium.php

 

"Two NFL Teams Could Relocate to Proposed Inglewood Stadium"

 

If only two could become three

http://www.chatsports.com/cleveland-browns/a/exclusive-browns-preparing-offer-urban-meyer-biggest-coaching-contract-nfl-history-24607

 

"Following numerous conversations exclusive to Chat Sports over the last month with several of our most trusted sources, we have learned that the Cleveland Browns have plans to fire head coach Mike Pettine and offer Ohio State football coach Urban Meyer the largest coaching contract in NFL history. The contract would also likely include an option for a small equity ownership in the Browns' organization. The sources are close to Browns ownership and have ties to several Big Ten athletic departments."

^ Not picked up by any major outlets.  I'm calling BS.

^ Not picked up by any major outlets.  I'm calling BS.

 

Channel 19 and NJ.com both ran the story

Channel 19 will run anything.

Calling Bs as well.  No way Haslam pays huge money for Urban Meyer and fires Pettine already.  Plus I don't think Urban leaves OSU

The Browns shouldn't want Urban and he shouldn't want them.

 

Give me Hue Jackson. And then spend some $$ on an experienced D-coordinator

 

 

 

Does Petine  just not give a crap anymore Personnel wise? Is it all just a big f you to Farmer?

Interesting rumor floating around.  Supposing they do fire Pettine (which I think they should), who takes over.  O'Neil should be packing his bags with Pettine.... no excuse for this defense with the heavy investment on that side of the ball.  DeFillipo has not been terrible considering the complete lack of talent he was given at the skill positions, but he's just so young.  So.... how about ST coach Chris Tabor?  He was the one member of the staff they kept from the last regime.  He's a fiery guy too.  I like the idea.

http://www.chatsports.com/cleveland-browns/a/exclusive-browns-preparing-offer-urban-meyer-biggest-coaching-contract-nfl-history-24607

 

"Following numerous conversations exclusive to Chat Sports over the last month with several of our most trusted sources, we have learned that the Cleveland Browns have plans to fire head coach Mike Pettine and offer Ohio State football coach Urban Meyer the largest coaching contract in NFL history. The contract would also likely include an option for a small equity ownership in the Browns' organization. The sources are close to Browns ownership and have ties to several Big Ten athletic departments."

 

IIRC this wass one of the sites spreading the borderline libelous rumors about Joe Haden awhile back.

Manziel is the starter again.

Browns name Manziel starting quarterback

 

ESPN NFL reporter Chris Mortenson said Manziel will return to the field after a two-game benching, according to Mortenson's sources.

 

The Cleveland Browns have named Johnny Manziel the starting quarterback again, according to an ESPN report.

 

 

http://www.wkyc.com/story/sports/nfl/browns/2015/12/07/browns-name-manziel-starting-quarterback/76921810/

Only on UrbanOhio does a thread in the "sports" section about a football team turn into a conversation about urban development and economics...

 

Not just on UrbanOhio anymore....

 

What's the economic impact of the Browns? Not as much as you might think

December 08, 2015

KEVIN KLEPS 

SPORTS BUSINESS

 

Economists often disagree, but they are pretty much in unison when it comes to the economic impact of sports teams.

 

The reason, as former Cleveland State dean Ned Hill told us in 2014, is “spending on sports in a community is just a reallocation of the entertainment dollar.”

 

If you’re spending more on Cavs seats, you’re probably doling out fewer dollars on non-basketball date nights, the theory goes.

 

Mark Rosentraub — a former Cleveland State professor and dean, and current chair of the department of sports management at the University of Michigan — said the optimal way for a sports team to have an economic impact is if there’s a “real estate development strategy that makes the venue part of a larger economic play.”

 

MORE:

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20151208/BLOGS06/151209807/whats-the-economic-impact-of-the-browns-not-as-much-as-you-might

Only on UrbanOhio does a thread in the "sports" section about a football team turn into a conversation about urban development and economics...

 

Not just on UrbanOhio anymore....

 

What's the economic impact of the Browns? Not as much as you might think

December 08, 2015

KEVIN KLEPS 

SPORTS BUSINESS

 

Economists often disagree, but they are pretty much in unison when it comes to the economic impact of sports teams.

 

The reason, as former Cleveland State dean Ned Hill told us in 2014, is “spending on sports in a community is just a reallocation of the entertainment dollar.”

 

If you’re spending more on Cavs seats, you’re probably doling out fewer dollars on non-basketball date nights, the theory goes.

 

Mark Rosentraub — a former Cleveland State professor and dean, and current chair of the department of sports management at the University of Michigan — said the optimal way for a sports team to have an economic impact is if there’s a “real estate development strategy that makes the venue part of a larger economic play.”

 

MORE:

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20151208/BLOGS06/151209807/whats-the-economic-impact-of-the-browns-not-as-much-as-you-might

 

I think it's a mistake to base a story on the economic impact of the Browns solely on restaurants and bars.  Football by nature attracts tailgaters no matter what city the game is held in, which takes a significant portion of fans in parking lots rather than bars.    But the surrounding bars also do quite well--there is just no currently develop-able land around the First Energy stadium site.    If the port were to free up some land and the economy was ripe, I'm sure some developers would include restaurants and bars that would do amazing business on game days.

 

Beyond food & beverage, there are many more revenue streams that it brings in, in a post I listed above.  Admission taxes, cops, employees, ad revenue for local media...the list goes on and on.  Imagine the payroll taxes and what they mean for the cities of Cleveland and Berea? I'd really like to see a complete and comprehensive study of ALL economic impact.

 

The article ended with an accurate summary of all this.  If the Browns became perennial contenders, these conversations would go away.  But it's about as bad as it's ever been.  Without football to talk about, everyone focuses on the negatives.  And that is truly sad.

 

 

^But most of those other things you list are just rearranging local spending. They aren't net additional economic activity. You can't just look at payroll, team revenue, admissions taxes, etc. and call it "economic impact." The net economic benefit would come from outside money being spent in Cleveland, either visitors buying hotel nights and meals or team spending that exceeds all the locally generated revenue. It's not just about counting up the activity- the new activity has to exceed the amount of subsidy if there is to be a real economic case, as opposed to an amenity case for it.

^But most of those other things you list are just rearranging local spending. They aren't net additional economic activity. You can't just look at payroll or ticket sales and call it "economic impact." The net economic benefit would come from outside money being spent in Cleveland, either visitors buying hotel nights and meals or team spending that exceeds all the locally generated revenue.

 

I'm guessing of the 70,000 at a Browns game more than 50% are from outside Cuyahoga County.  I would also guess that a significant percentage DO NOT come downtown for anything other than Browns games.  I know from tailgaiting that there are tons of guys from Medina, Lorain, Lake, Summit counties that aren't spending their entertainment dollars here otherwise.

 

And that's just a small piece of the puzzle.  Let's go back to the Cleveland Browns office, coaches, trainers and players (if we are going to call them that these days), who get their payroll via the NFL/Haslem.  Easily $120 million+ a year.  And hopefully more some day ;)

 

 

 

 

Mike Holmgren is living proof that the Browns are an economic goldmine.

^^Here's a summary of the 1997 book compiled in part by Andrew Zimbalist, the leading economist who's researched this topic:

 

In our forthcoming Brookings book, Sports, Jobs, and Taxes, we and 15 collaborators examine the local economic development argument from all angles: case studies of the effect of specific facilities, as well as comparisons among cities and even neighborhoods that have and have not sunk hundreds of millions of dollars into sports development. In every case, the conclusions are the same. A new sports facility has an extremely small (perhaps even negative) effect on overall economic activity and employment. No recent facility appears to have earned anything approaching a reasonable return on investment. No recent facility has been self-financing in terms of its impact on net tax revenues. Regardless of whether the unit of analysis is a local neighborhood, a city, or an entire metropolitan area, the economic benefits of sports facilities are de minimus.

http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/1997/06/summer-taxes-noll.

 

Here's a 2001 report by the St. Louis Fed:

 

The short answer to this question is "No." When studying this issue, almost all economists and development specialists (at least those who work independently and not for a chamber of commerce or similar organization) conclude that the rate of return a city or metropolitan area receives for its investment is generally below that of alternative projects. In addition, evidence suggests that cities and metro areas that have invested heavily in sports stadiums and arenas have, on average, experienced slower income growth than those that have not.

https://www.stlouisfed.org/Publications/Regional-Economist/April-2001/Should-Cities-Pay-for-Sports-Facilities

 

These aren't cherry picked. These are the only pieces by top shelf economists I could find in a quick search.

 

There are tons of press hits saying essentially the same thing and quoting disinterested economists. Like this one written in connection with the LA area's upcoming NFL stadium: http://www.scpr.org/news/2015/02/17/49831/new-nfl-team-would-likely-have-little-economic-imp/

 

There are a lot of things economists disagree about, but the economic impact of sports stadiums is not one of them.

 

“If you ever had a consensus in economics, this would be it," said 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,” said Leeds.

 

We talk about sports a lot, and we pay a lot attention to them, but when it comes to the actual revenue teams generate, the impact is minuscule.

 

 

^I just don't buy the Chicago example. Maybe it would be a smaller percentage of the Chicago economy, but those have to be some huge numbers--just in organizational payroll.

 

Let's try to extrapolate in Cleveland.  The combined payroll of our pro sports teams.  Somewhere in the neighborhood of $350 million just for players.  Throw in all the support staff and let's call it $400 million.  All of these people live and work here at least part of the year, buying houses, cars, groceries, etc.

 

Progressive Insurance was the 5th largest employer in Cuyahoga Country last year with 9001 employees.  Assuming an average salary of 50,000, that's $450 million.  Would you just tell them to up and leave?  Please Progressive insurance, we don't want your payroll, and oh--by the way, you're welcome for the I271 express lanes we built for you!  Imagine the howls from our politicians (rightfully so). 

 

So while there is some validity in these economists findings, I think the answer lies somewhere in between.  In the end they are just non-sports fans, and their views are skewed by that.

 

 

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2015/12/donte_whitner_calls_for_jimmy.html#incart_2box

Donte Whitner calls for Jimmy Haslam to keep Browns coaching staff: 'We've let them down'

 

This quote jumped out a bit:  "With all of this adversity we have to be able to block this out, go out there and get our jobs done no matter if we're 2-10 or 10-2 and that's what we're paid to do,'' he said. "If you love the game of football it really shouldn't matter about record or playoffs or anything. It should be about the love of the game, going out there and having pride and not laying down and that's what we have."

 

Well Donte, as a longtime suffering Browns fan, I disagree with you and hope the other players and coaching staff have a different outlook.

Progressive Insurance was the 5th largest employer in Cuyahoga Country last year with 9001 employees.  Assuming an average salary of 50,000, that's $450 million.  Would you just tell them to up and leave?  Please Progressive insurance, we don't want your payroll, and oh--by the way, you're welcome for the I271 express lanes we built for you!  Imagine the howls from our politicians (rightfully so). 

 

So while there is some validity in these economists findings, I think the answer lies somewhere in between.  In the end they are just non-sports fans, and their views are skewed by that.

 

Progessive has 10x the number of employees as the Browns organization and they likely spend a much higher percentage of their salary on expenses. And the region (mostly Cleveland) will have spent a half a billion dollars in debt service, maintenance, and renovations on the Browns stadium by the time it's retired. And doesn't Berea own the Browns office space? There is no direct comparison to a regular company.

Progressive Insurance was the 5th largest employer in Cuyahoga Country last year with 9001 employees.  Assuming an average salary of 50,000, that's $450 million.  Would you just tell them to up and leave?  Please Progressive insurance, we don't want your payroll, and oh--by the way, you're welcome for the I271 express lanes we built for you!  Imagine the howls from our politicians (rightfully so). 

 

So while there is some validity in these economists findings, I think the answer lies somewhere in between.  In the end they are just non-sports fans, and their views are skewed by that.

 

Progessive has 10x the number of employees as the Browns organization and they likely spend a much higher percentage of their salary on expenses. And the region (mostly Cleveland) will have spent a half a billion dollars in debt service, maintenance, and renovations on the Browns stadium by the time it's retired. And doesn't Berea own the Browns office space? There is no direct comparison to a regular company.

 

Perhaps apples to oranges, but how does the stadium compare to I271 express lanes and other infrastructure for the corridor Progressive resides in?   

 

My point is the Browns constitute big enough number that the city shouldn't just kick them out and tell them to go away.  Negotiate a new rent deal?  Perhaps.    And perhaps we should also be tolling on 271 to help recoup those costs. 

 

 

^Given that most of the subsidy to the Browns has already been paid out, I agree that it makes no sense to force the Browns out now. The point is that the economic argument for bringing them back in the first place was complete bullshit, and this will be a very live question again in 20 years or whenever it is that the team comes knocking again for a new "state of the art" home to keep up with the joneses.

 

But like I said before, I think it's fine if voters say yes. They are an amenity that people love. Given the ongoing race to the bottom with public subsidies for sports facilities, having the Browns is exactly like the county arts tax voters just re-upped. There is no principled difference.

oh toshy boy yr such a jackass lol

 

 

ha!  :mrgreen: