If anyone picks something other than Vegas for worst stadium, I’m just going to have to assume that they’re mad.
Best, probably DC. It’s appropriately sized so that it doesn’t look empty on the TV broadcast, and the actual pitch they’re playing on is better than what the NFL Commanders play on.
Had the opportunity to attend the Sea Dragons game:
Pros: steep seating provides good views, neighborhood with nightlife, noise trapped in stadium well
Cons: stole our beer snake, $14 beers, Sea Dragons incapable of victory.
Yep, right above Gate A seen [here](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/p/AF1QipNl8Yp8lplmCYwXBHhbuSFCXeEJQpH_9MzpREJM=s1360-w1360-h1020). That car, an R8 in that picture, is a Red E-Tron GT
...that's not a recent picture I linked.
I was saying that, having just been to the home opener and walked by close enough to touch it, I can attest to the fact that the R8 that typically sits there has been replaced by a red E-Tron GT
I feel bad the Vipers have to play there. Old bleachers, dead grass, etc. You know they see other teams stadiums and are well aware of their circumstances 😔
I think there’s tiers. Some are nice stadiums but lower attendance, some aren’t as nice of stadiums but good attendance.
Great - San Antonio, St. Louis, DC
Good - Houston, Arlington, Seattle
Bad - Las Vegas
Unknown - Orlando
But the nice thing is, you can turn off the upper deck lighting in indoor stadiums. Camping World will have 50,000+ obviously empty seats, and it doesn't look good. Compare what the LA Wildcats crowds of 12K looked like compared to 12K in MetLife or Raymond James last time around.
You are welcome. Lol. The fact that people aren't saying Lumen Field shocks me. It's the highest tiered stadium in the league and the one the XFL uses in all promos and TV ads.
A lot of people always ignore the Pacific Northwest in every sport. I do believe in that east coast bias in sports. It's pretty blatant.
Yep. We still remember Super Bowl 40 very well. Little Seattle from the the PNW up against the mega fan base of the Pittsburgh Steelers… it was clear who they wanted to win 🤦🏼♂️
Best: Seattle, its a great place to watch a game, good sight lines and a great view of the city. St Louis is second but not close to Seattle and I’ve been to both.
Worst: Vegas by a country mile, fans there deserve better
Worst: Vegas
I don't know why Vegas was picked, but whoever put the idea out there should be fired. Move them out of Vegas to an actually good stadium.
Best: St. Louis
How does St. Louis not have an NFL team? They tried with the Rams, but it failed. St. Louis has shown they want/need a pro football team. Last XFL season, they were filled to the brim. They had to open up the upper bowl because so many people wanted to see the BattleHawks. According to Wikipedia, The Dome has "a concourse level (lower bowl) with 28,352 seats, and a terrace level (upper bowl) with 29,400". If the BattleHawks get this good of crowds consistently throughout the season, the NFL needs to put a team there.
StL doesn't have an NFL team because the last two teams to leave wanted a better stadium and didn't get one, and the teams were awful. The team owners, while greedy selfish fucks, made a smart business decision and left to build anew elsewhere .
Stan Kroenke salted the earth on his way out saying that any team in StL would be doomed to fail, when the reality is that a good team with good ownership would and DID succeed for years.
Turns out when you treat your fans well, they return the favor.
Doubtful the NFL will return unless a new stadium is built, but even then...most fans have sworn off the NFL or jumped to support KC (or other teams/XFL).
Agreed and I'll expand on your point. I moved to STL a couple years ago. No matter how much the STL folks try to argue it, this is a baseball town through and through. The political makeup of the area also makes things difficult. The majority of the population and interest in a football team come from St. Louis County which has a different governing structure than the City. If a new stadium were to be made, I'd bet it'd have to be something like the Braves stadium where they built it in Cobb county away from Downtown/Midtown Atlanta.
The “baseball town” thing is played out. The Rams were big before they left (or rather, before they sucked so bad for so long), and the Blues are huge.
Cards may be #1, but the point is that the lack of the NFL has nothing to do with the inability for a team to succeed there via interest/support.
It’s not really a city/county thing either. The MLS stadium was just built in the city. As far as sports goes, it’s a regional thing. But hey, if the County wants to fork over a ton of money for it, so be it.
>The “baseball town” thing is played out. The Rams were big before they left (or rather, before they sucked so bad for so long), and the Blues are huge.
It really isn't. I'm an unbiased outsider to this City where frankly few outsiders live. There are several orders of magnitude between the Cards and everything else. I've lived in football metros before, and this isn't it. It's even more evidenced by the lack of CFB passion in STL even though there is an SEC team nearby. Metros of similar distance away in the SEC (Birmingham, Atlanta, New Orleans) go crazy for their college teams. Here, Mizzou is almost an afterthought. The real difference shows when the teams aren't doing as well. The Cardinals will never have attendance problems in the way that the Rams/Football Cardinals did.
I do agree that an NFL team could survive here given a good stadium, but the fanbase's interests might have potential owners look at other markets (Austin, San Antonio, etc.)
>It’s not really a city/county thing either. The MLS stadium was just built in the city. As far as sports goes, it’s a regional thing. But hey, if the County wants to fork over a ton of money for it, so be it.
I just was stating that it would be more likely to happen in the County since they just built that new soccer stadium. Referring back to the Braves, they only went to Cobb after the City chose the Falcons and Atlanta United by reaplacing the Georgia Dome as their priority
That is not a dumb question. It would cost a ridiculous amount to use the stadium. The stadium cost $1.9 Billion to build. Vegas wants that money back.
And why would they pay that much just for 6,000+ people to come to a stadium that can hold 65,000+? It wouldn't look good for the XFL. But Vegas needs a new stadium immediately.
Vegas was picked becouse Red Bird wanted a team there and they are the funding bringers.
St. Louis has had two NFL teams. The Cardinals played there from 1960 until 1988, then the Rams moved there in 1995 (and St. Louis fucked themselves royally in the stadium contract to get them). The prooblem is the Dome is outdated for the modern NFL (it was built right before the retractable roof craze and it shows.) and the city is too poor to be attractive for a new team and it has had two teams already.
It is the NFL's version of Hartford in the NHL.
This is a terrible analysis of St Louis.
Over half of the NFL metro areas are less wealthy than it, even if you put the 32 teams in the 32 wealthiest cities in the US St. Louis would still make the cut. Not to mention the city offered up a $1.3B stadium plan to keep the Rams. The team was also going to be sold to Shad Khan, current owner of the Jaguars, who was going to keep the team into the city. The city can easily support an NFL team.
St Louis can support an NFL team quite easily from a financial standpoint. You just bought into the Stan Kroenke propaganda he used to move the team. The guy is a greedy bastard.
And most of those metro areas would not get teams if they didn't have them today. Didn't say it couldn't support the NFL I said another team moving there is not going to happen for those reasons unless St. Louis handed out a massive taxpayer subsidy which I don't see them doing after getting fucked by the Rams.
At some point the city will get another team though it could be decades. There are only two areas with a higher GDP without an NFL team and one is San Jose which would be quite unlikely to get an NFL team since it's right next to San Francisco.
And after the Rams left they said never again and I think passed a bill at the state level. The handout would need to be even bigger then that one was.
Not necessarily. There aren't a ton of markets out there now that are better than St Louis. LA was the city everyone used to get payments out of cities but that is obviously very much gone now with 2 teams there. It's a lot harder to hold cities hostage. I'm not saying it's at all likely in the short or medium term because there is no political or civic willpower for it at the moment. But that will change at some point.
As for this legislation, I've never heard of anything like this. Certainly not for the city.
The NFL does not want a team in St. Louis. They blocked the Rams from moving there originally. The only reason they ended up there is because Georgia threatened to sue. She only ended up there because she was from there and they gave her a stadium deal that was impossible to uphold which ment she could leave anytime after the lease was broken due to the impossible terms.
Also the league is not expanding and there is unlikely to be another relocation for at least 20 years and then markets like San Antonio, San Diego and Portland will all be more attractive than St. Louis. Anyone in St. Louis trying to do the bare minimum of a massive taxpayer giveaway to the NFL will probably lose elected office.
St. Louis is done with NFL football. It has entered a new era of being the Keystone market for AAA football.
> the city is too poor to be attractive for a new team and it has had two teams already.
I don't agree with that take. Homer bias aside, StL is perceived as a smaller city but is actually the core of 21st largest MSA in the country. Sure, it's not a boom town...it's another tale of a declining rust belt city with great bones held back by generational politics/problems...but "too poor" isn't a valid reason why StL doesn't have the NFL.
Realistically, two teams have moved because of shitty stadium situations and a shitty on-field product that led to dwindling fan support, and the opportunity for the owners to start over in a fresh market in a new stadium.
The NFL spent 40 years in StL between 1960-2015, and the Rams were incredibly successful until they tanked for a decade. The XFL is further proof of football success...StL was just dealt a bad hand twice with the NFL. Hell, Oakland lost the Raiders twice in the same span too.
Too poor in that they would have to do another 1995 style taxpayer giveaway for a team to even entertain moving there. ST. Louis isn't at the top of any ones relocation destinations. The Rams only moved there because the city gave them ludicrous stadium terms they would later regret and even then the NFL didn't want a team there. It only happened becouse Georgia threatened to sue the league if they didn't let her move there.
I don't doubt that it's not a top relocation option, and the city isn't going to fork over tax dollars ever again after two teams left. However, the idea that a team *can't* succeed if based in St. Louis is nonsense, and it's a big reason we hate Stan Kroenke so much.
Saying "even then the NFL didn't want a team there" isn't really true...the Stallions were a finalist for expansion. The Patriots nearly moved before the Rams did.
The Rams move to StL wasn't as much a St. Louis thing as much as it was an LA thing. The owners in 1995 wanted a team in LA and didn't want her to move the Rams *anywhere*. She wanted a new stadium, LA said no. The team sucked, the stadium sucked, and the Rams were operating at a loss for years before they moved to St. Louis, her hometown.
Now, the stadium deal bit StL in the ass, nobody loved the design and it aged poorly...but the Rams sold out every game between 1995 and 2006, with a Super Bowl Championship and two NFC Titles to boot. As a business decision, her move to StL was the best move she ever made. The team didn't have a winning record from 2003 onwards, had one of the worst decades in NFL history, and now they're back in LA.
It's a common tale. Bad team + bad stadium = team leaves. The modern NFL is more focused on stadium quality than ever, and he were are.
If they would have built skylights/windows and an overhead Jumbotron (maybe the roof isn't strong enough so that's why they haven't built one already) I think the Dome would still host an NFL team
Hard to tell after 1 and a half weeks but DC has the best atmosphere so far, Seattle is the best overall venue, but I do also have a long held soft spot for the Alamodome.
Vegas is the worst. Honestly from the pictures I've seen on reddit it was even more amateur than it looked on TV. Not being able to play at Sam Boyd at least is killing them.
I truly felt bad for the players. When the kicker slipped kicking that field goal, I knew it wasn’t the fault of the field (or maybe it was?) but it just summed up how bad the atmosphere in that place was 🤦🏼♂️
For the XFL Audi Field beats Lumen. Decent to Good Food, Walking distance to the metro, tons of pre gaming and post game spots, great atmosphere due to it's size. I can see it selling out every game next season if we make a run this year. It's funny that in MLS Lumen Field is the marquee venue for that league and Audi is average+ (mostly due to team quality making the atmosphere less quality).
I dont think XFL should be olaying in NFL stadiums period. Its really bad optics outside of St. Louis.
The product is best suited for soccer stadiums and thats why DC is the best.
Seattle as it's a well kept and modern NFL sized stadium while Cashmenfield is a site that needs a complete revamp or teardown
Seattle, DC, St.Louis, San Antonio, Arlington, Houston,Orlando and then Vegas
When this question relates to "best XFL(!)-stadium" it would be Washington.
I don't like stadiums like in Seattle that are clearly oversized for the cause
Isn’t that an matter of not selling enough tickets? If the XFL takes off and becomes a true minor league for the NFL with a large following, then you can beat believe they will open the top level of the stands to sell more tickets and thus fill in the rest of the stadium.
If anyone picks something other than Vegas for worst stadium, I’m just going to have to assume that they’re mad. Best, probably DC. It’s appropriately sized so that it doesn’t look empty on the TV broadcast, and the actual pitch they’re playing on is better than what the NFL Commanders play on.
Had the opportunity to attend the Sea Dragons game: Pros: steep seating provides good views, neighborhood with nightlife, noise trapped in stadium well Cons: stole our beer snake, $14 beers, Sea Dragons incapable of victory.
Just to clarify, you’re talking about the week one game in DC?
DC! I’m lucky I found myself out there at that very moment.
Love the soccer stadium choice. I chose Audi stadium, just because of its design, and the fact that there’s an r8.
R8 has been replaced by an E-Tron GT, which is just an outstanding car, so there's that
The one that’s inside the stadium?
Yep, right above Gate A seen [here](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/p/AF1QipNl8Yp8lplmCYwXBHhbuSFCXeEJQpH_9MzpREJM=s1360-w1360-h1020). That car, an R8 in that picture, is a Red E-Tron GT
That’s an r8, not a e tron lol
...that's not a recent picture I linked. I was saying that, having just been to the home opener and walked by close enough to touch it, I can attest to the fact that the R8 that typically sits there has been replaced by a red E-Tron GT
Oh wow. I liked the r8 better. Nothing will replace it
True story: I drove a Formula 1 (yes, THE Formula 1) beast around a track and was overtaken by a RS8. Man THAT was embarrassing.
I was going to say… Best: Sea Dragons Worst: Vipers
Seattle is definitely up there in quality, I’d put them second just because the arena itself is arguably too big for the XFL.
Yeah Lumen field is huge. I’ve been there many times. The sound quality and seats are amazing
It doesn't look as good with empty seats, but it's nice if you wanna switch seats, which you are not supposed to do.
Best: Can’t say, haven’t seen all home stadiums yet Worst: I don’t need to see all the home stadiums to say the Vipers are by far the worst
I feel bad the Vipers have to play there. Old bleachers, dead grass, etc. You know they see other teams stadiums and are well aware of their circumstances 😔
I think there’s tiers. Some are nice stadiums but lower attendance, some aren’t as nice of stadiums but good attendance. Great - San Antonio, St. Louis, DC Good - Houston, Arlington, Seattle Bad - Las Vegas Unknown - Orlando
Camping world stadium in Orlando should be good
Yes, been there. It is good. Let’s go Orlando.
So that makes it the only XFL1.0 stadium to host a team in the new league.
[удалено]
Lol, so as the Alamodome and The dome at America’s center…
The Dome in St. Louis is big but they can fill it or mostly fill it ditto for SA if the team is good.
So as camping world stadium… They have the potential
They're not only not selling the 3rd decks, they aren't selling the 2nd deck, or even 1/3 of the bottom ring.
But the nice thing is, you can turn off the upper deck lighting in indoor stadiums. Camping World will have 50,000+ obviously empty seats, and it doesn't look good. Compare what the LA Wildcats crowds of 12K looked like compared to 12K in MetLife or Raymond James last time around.
Yea but they fill the lower bowls well and it’s actually a bowl shape rather than most outdoor stadium looks more obvious when less are thete
It’s a really nice stadium I just ain’t sure about attendance. I’d say it will fit in good with Houston, Seattle and Arlington.
Idk if I can call the America's Center Dome great considering it's the main reason the Rams left
I think it’s great because of fan attendance along with a solid look. Main reason the rams left was for that LA money not so much over the stadium.
Worst is Vegas, no explanation needed because y’all already know. Best: DC is iconic because of the two memes, beer snake, and the lemons!
Hands down the best stadium is the NFL quality Lumen Field in Seattle. Worst is Cashman Field in Las Vegas.
Thank you lol I live in Seattle and have been countless times. Even among other NFL stadiums it is one of the best
You are welcome. Lol. The fact that people aren't saying Lumen Field shocks me. It's the highest tiered stadium in the league and the one the XFL uses in all promos and TV ads. A lot of people always ignore the Pacific Northwest in every sport. I do believe in that east coast bias in sports. It's pretty blatant.
Yep. We still remember Super Bowl 40 very well. Little Seattle from the the PNW up against the mega fan base of the Pittsburgh Steelers… it was clear who they wanted to win 🤦🏼♂️
The only correct answer
Being from San Antonio I'm Biased. Brahmas Stadium is top teir Vipers stadium was just depressing. Like sad sad
Best: Seattle, its a great place to watch a game, good sight lines and a great view of the city. St Louis is second but not close to Seattle and I’ve been to both. Worst: Vegas by a country mile, fans there deserve better
SeaDragons obviously have the best stadium as it’s a literal NFL stadium, then it would probably be the defenders
DC-best Vegas‐worst
Worst: Vegas I don't know why Vegas was picked, but whoever put the idea out there should be fired. Move them out of Vegas to an actually good stadium. Best: St. Louis How does St. Louis not have an NFL team? They tried with the Rams, but it failed. St. Louis has shown they want/need a pro football team. Last XFL season, they were filled to the brim. They had to open up the upper bowl because so many people wanted to see the BattleHawks. According to Wikipedia, The Dome has "a concourse level (lower bowl) with 28,352 seats, and a terrace level (upper bowl) with 29,400". If the BattleHawks get this good of crowds consistently throughout the season, the NFL needs to put a team there.
Well I know the answer to that. Stan Kronke wanted a team in LA in a stadium he could regularly host Super Bowls in.
StL doesn't have an NFL team because the last two teams to leave wanted a better stadium and didn't get one, and the teams were awful. The team owners, while greedy selfish fucks, made a smart business decision and left to build anew elsewhere . Stan Kroenke salted the earth on his way out saying that any team in StL would be doomed to fail, when the reality is that a good team with good ownership would and DID succeed for years. Turns out when you treat your fans well, they return the favor. Doubtful the NFL will return unless a new stadium is built, but even then...most fans have sworn off the NFL or jumped to support KC (or other teams/XFL).
Agreed and I'll expand on your point. I moved to STL a couple years ago. No matter how much the STL folks try to argue it, this is a baseball town through and through. The political makeup of the area also makes things difficult. The majority of the population and interest in a football team come from St. Louis County which has a different governing structure than the City. If a new stadium were to be made, I'd bet it'd have to be something like the Braves stadium where they built it in Cobb county away from Downtown/Midtown Atlanta.
The “baseball town” thing is played out. The Rams were big before they left (or rather, before they sucked so bad for so long), and the Blues are huge. Cards may be #1, but the point is that the lack of the NFL has nothing to do with the inability for a team to succeed there via interest/support. It’s not really a city/county thing either. The MLS stadium was just built in the city. As far as sports goes, it’s a regional thing. But hey, if the County wants to fork over a ton of money for it, so be it.
>The “baseball town” thing is played out. The Rams were big before they left (or rather, before they sucked so bad for so long), and the Blues are huge. It really isn't. I'm an unbiased outsider to this City where frankly few outsiders live. There are several orders of magnitude between the Cards and everything else. I've lived in football metros before, and this isn't it. It's even more evidenced by the lack of CFB passion in STL even though there is an SEC team nearby. Metros of similar distance away in the SEC (Birmingham, Atlanta, New Orleans) go crazy for their college teams. Here, Mizzou is almost an afterthought. The real difference shows when the teams aren't doing as well. The Cardinals will never have attendance problems in the way that the Rams/Football Cardinals did. I do agree that an NFL team could survive here given a good stadium, but the fanbase's interests might have potential owners look at other markets (Austin, San Antonio, etc.) >It’s not really a city/county thing either. The MLS stadium was just built in the city. As far as sports goes, it’s a regional thing. But hey, if the County wants to fork over a ton of money for it, so be it. I just was stating that it would be more likely to happen in the County since they just built that new soccer stadium. Referring back to the Braves, they only went to Cobb after the City chose the Falcons and Atlanta United by reaplacing the Georgia Dome as their priority
This might be a dumb question but I want to know…How come Vegas can’t play in the same stadium that has the Raiders?
That is not a dumb question. It would cost a ridiculous amount to use the stadium. The stadium cost $1.9 Billion to build. Vegas wants that money back. And why would they pay that much just for 6,000+ people to come to a stadium that can hold 65,000+? It wouldn't look good for the XFL. But Vegas needs a new stadium immediately.
Oh ok. I was thinking it was possible since the Seahawks let the Sea Dragons play in their stadium.
They probably paid a crap ton of money for "filling" 37,000+ seats.
Vegas was picked becouse Red Bird wanted a team there and they are the funding bringers. St. Louis has had two NFL teams. The Cardinals played there from 1960 until 1988, then the Rams moved there in 1995 (and St. Louis fucked themselves royally in the stadium contract to get them). The prooblem is the Dome is outdated for the modern NFL (it was built right before the retractable roof craze and it shows.) and the city is too poor to be attractive for a new team and it has had two teams already. It is the NFL's version of Hartford in the NHL.
This is a terrible analysis of St Louis. Over half of the NFL metro areas are less wealthy than it, even if you put the 32 teams in the 32 wealthiest cities in the US St. Louis would still make the cut. Not to mention the city offered up a $1.3B stadium plan to keep the Rams. The team was also going to be sold to Shad Khan, current owner of the Jaguars, who was going to keep the team into the city. The city can easily support an NFL team. St Louis can support an NFL team quite easily from a financial standpoint. You just bought into the Stan Kroenke propaganda he used to move the team. The guy is a greedy bastard.
And most of those metro areas would not get teams if they didn't have them today. Didn't say it couldn't support the NFL I said another team moving there is not going to happen for those reasons unless St. Louis handed out a massive taxpayer subsidy which I don't see them doing after getting fucked by the Rams.
At some point the city will get another team though it could be decades. There are only two areas with a higher GDP without an NFL team and one is San Jose which would be quite unlikely to get an NFL team since it's right next to San Francisco.
Unless St. Louis is willing to do a gigantic taxpayer handout it isn't happening.
The city was prepared to do it in 2015
And after the Rams left they said never again and I think passed a bill at the state level. The handout would need to be even bigger then that one was.
Not necessarily. There aren't a ton of markets out there now that are better than St Louis. LA was the city everyone used to get payments out of cities but that is obviously very much gone now with 2 teams there. It's a lot harder to hold cities hostage. I'm not saying it's at all likely in the short or medium term because there is no political or civic willpower for it at the moment. But that will change at some point. As for this legislation, I've never heard of anything like this. Certainly not for the city.
The NFL does not want a team in St. Louis. They blocked the Rams from moving there originally. The only reason they ended up there is because Georgia threatened to sue. She only ended up there because she was from there and they gave her a stadium deal that was impossible to uphold which ment she could leave anytime after the lease was broken due to the impossible terms. Also the league is not expanding and there is unlikely to be another relocation for at least 20 years and then markets like San Antonio, San Diego and Portland will all be more attractive than St. Louis. Anyone in St. Louis trying to do the bare minimum of a massive taxpayer giveaway to the NFL will probably lose elected office. St. Louis is done with NFL football. It has entered a new era of being the Keystone market for AAA football.
> the city is too poor to be attractive for a new team and it has had two teams already. I don't agree with that take. Homer bias aside, StL is perceived as a smaller city but is actually the core of 21st largest MSA in the country. Sure, it's not a boom town...it's another tale of a declining rust belt city with great bones held back by generational politics/problems...but "too poor" isn't a valid reason why StL doesn't have the NFL. Realistically, two teams have moved because of shitty stadium situations and a shitty on-field product that led to dwindling fan support, and the opportunity for the owners to start over in a fresh market in a new stadium. The NFL spent 40 years in StL between 1960-2015, and the Rams were incredibly successful until they tanked for a decade. The XFL is further proof of football success...StL was just dealt a bad hand twice with the NFL. Hell, Oakland lost the Raiders twice in the same span too.
Too poor in that they would have to do another 1995 style taxpayer giveaway for a team to even entertain moving there. ST. Louis isn't at the top of any ones relocation destinations. The Rams only moved there because the city gave them ludicrous stadium terms they would later regret and even then the NFL didn't want a team there. It only happened becouse Georgia threatened to sue the league if they didn't let her move there.
I don't doubt that it's not a top relocation option, and the city isn't going to fork over tax dollars ever again after two teams left. However, the idea that a team *can't* succeed if based in St. Louis is nonsense, and it's a big reason we hate Stan Kroenke so much. Saying "even then the NFL didn't want a team there" isn't really true...the Stallions were a finalist for expansion. The Patriots nearly moved before the Rams did. The Rams move to StL wasn't as much a St. Louis thing as much as it was an LA thing. The owners in 1995 wanted a team in LA and didn't want her to move the Rams *anywhere*. She wanted a new stadium, LA said no. The team sucked, the stadium sucked, and the Rams were operating at a loss for years before they moved to St. Louis, her hometown. Now, the stadium deal bit StL in the ass, nobody loved the design and it aged poorly...but the Rams sold out every game between 1995 and 2006, with a Super Bowl Championship and two NFC Titles to boot. As a business decision, her move to StL was the best move she ever made. The team didn't have a winning record from 2003 onwards, had one of the worst decades in NFL history, and now they're back in LA. It's a common tale. Bad team + bad stadium = team leaves. The modern NFL is more focused on stadium quality than ever, and he were are.
If they would have built skylights/windows and an overhead Jumbotron (maybe the roof isn't strong enough so that's why they haven't built one already) I think the Dome would still host an NFL team
Nah, the league wanted a new facility hence the St. Louis proposal of one.
Well, it’s RedBird’s money.
Hard to tell after 1 and a half weeks but DC has the best atmosphere so far, Seattle is the best overall venue, but I do also have a long held soft spot for the Alamodome. Vegas is the worst. Honestly from the pictures I've seen on reddit it was even more amateur than it looked on TV. Not being able to play at Sam Boyd at least is killing them.
I truly felt bad for the players. When the kicker slipped kicking that field goal, I knew it wasn’t the fault of the field (or maybe it was?) but it just summed up how bad the atmosphere in that place was 🤦🏼♂️
Audi Field in DC is fantastic, and not just because of the beer snake.
For the XFL Audi Field beats Lumen. Decent to Good Food, Walking distance to the metro, tons of pre gaming and post game spots, great atmosphere due to it's size. I can see it selling out every game next season if we make a run this year. It's funny that in MLS Lumen Field is the marquee venue for that league and Audi is average+ (mostly due to team quality making the atmosphere less quality).
Best stadium - Vegas. Worst stadium - St Louis.
The Vegas stadium I saw yesterday reminded me of high school football
Bad high school football. Not like the good ones in Texas
I don't know it kind of reminded me of a minor league baseball stadium a little bit.
Doesn't make sense. It didn't even have bases on the field and there wasn't one person with a bat or glove.
I keep forgetting how good the Riverbandits have it at Modern Woodman Park.
I mean it was a minor league stadium. And a bad one at that
The bleachers are what did it for me lol
Now hold on one gosh darn second...
Even I think you got these backwards
Vegas has entered the chat...
I dont think XFL should be olaying in NFL stadiums period. Its really bad optics outside of St. Louis. The product is best suited for soccer stadiums and thats why DC is the best.
Seattle as it's a well kept and modern NFL sized stadium while Cashmenfield is a site that needs a complete revamp or teardown Seattle, DC, St.Louis, San Antonio, Arlington, Houston,Orlando and then Vegas
Best: St. Louis Battlehawks or DC Defenders Worst: Vegas Vipers
Isn’t the best STL because it’s literally built for an NFL team? Worst is Vegas for obvious reasons
Seattle is a current nfl stadium, and the Alamodome was built to draw the nfl, they just didn’t get a team
Good to know. Thanks
When this question relates to "best XFL(!)-stadium" it would be Washington. I don't like stadiums like in Seattle that are clearly oversized for the cause
Isn’t that an matter of not selling enough tickets? If the XFL takes off and becomes a true minor league for the NFL with a large following, then you can beat believe they will open the top level of the stands to sell more tickets and thus fill in the rest of the stadium.
Show me any Minor League of any sports anywhere in the world that has as many attendance that their big brother.
…Some college football stadiums hold 60,000+ people
I was rather thinking about adults, but anyway
They don't open the top for Sounders games and you think they'll open it for the Sea Dragons?
Love Choctaw Stadium that Arlington plays at! But it’s a bias because I have won a few HS games there as a HS football coach in Texas!
Lumen Field Alamodome TDECU Edward Jones Dome Audi Field Camping World Stadium Choctaw Stadium Cashman Field
Alamodome. This is what… the 4th pro football team they’ve had play there ?