London Team

[FirebreathingMonkey]

My personal feelings towards having a team in London are pretty simple, DO NOT DO IT!. I just feel teams on the west coast (Seattle) would be at to far of a disadvantage having to travel so far. We already lead the league in air travel every year but could you image having 9 to 10 hour flight both ways.

Also what division would this team even fit into, NFL east? Now one division has five teams while everyone else has four. That doesn't seem like a very good idea. Or course they could add Cal/los but still the divisions would be messed up.

I know the NFL wants this badly because there looking at the NBA and drooling at the international ratings they get but I don't think this is ever going to work if they just add London. To me they would need to add their own division in Europe to work and I don't think Europeans care enough about the game to have a league survive.

 

[blstoker]

The pervailing thought is that they'll take a team from somewhere that is already in place. The team I have heard speculation on is Jacksonville. I just think it's a bad idea overall. Even without Seattle's issues with road games, this team would be murdered with its travel. They would by far blow every other teams travel out of the water, more than doubling the next closest traveler. You can't do that.

I understand the desire to open the NFL to new markets, but putting one team on another continent just won't work, and creating a secondary league on that continent didn't work. I know in the business climate the idea is to milk as much money out of everywhere that they can, but maybe the NFL should be content with the $9 billion in revenue they are already getting.

 

[C.Adl.C.Hox.Fan]

Mexico, Alaska and Canada should be utilized first.
I know about the CFL and that pesky lack of revenue from down south, but the spread/distance should not be so abrupt. Make it more of a gradual spread thing out from the epicenter instead of a hyper-jump to London.

Moving a current team from its spot here in the continental? Kiss my sorry ass NFL. Don't do it.

 

[FirebreathingMonkey]

The pervailing thought is that they'll take a team from somewhere that is already in place. The team I have heard speculation on is Jacksonville. I just think it's a bad idea overall. Even without Seattle's issues with road games, this team would be murdered with its travel. They would by far blow every other teams travel out of the water, more than doubling the next closest traveler. You can't do that.

I understand the desire to open the NFL to new markets, but putting one team on another continent just won't work, and creating a secondary league on that continent didn't work. I know in the business climate the idea is to milk as much money out of everywhere that they can, but maybe the NFL should be content with the $9 billion in revenue they are already getting.

Well that would explain why for like the last three years Jac has kept having to go to Lon, still I don't think it's going to work with only one team. That if the NFL really wants this to work they need to create a separate division, that way a team could rotate though Europe before going back.

How bad would a playoff be, Seattle to London, we win next week go to ALt/Wash/New York. How crazy would that be.

 

[HawkSquatch]

Even without Seattle's issues with road games, this team would be murdered with its travel. They would by far blow every other teams travel out of the water, more than doubling the next closest traveler.

All, except the London team. Can you imagine their road schedule?

 

[JDM]

Ignoring the issue of getting people to attend if the team were a good one, they would have issues with road trips. One thing to consider, though. While they would have issues with road trips, other teams would have even more trouble in my opinion. Road trips could be consolidated to maybe two to three trips, staying in the US for a couple week stretch at a time. This would pose its own issues but staying on the west coast for a multigame road trip, for example, is not unheard of, so arrangements could be made. On the other hand, every road team they faced would be at a significant disadvantage, coming off an absurdly long trip.

If the team were to get home field advantage through the playoffs, they would have by far the easiest road possible to the Super Bowl. This is balanced to some extent by the disadvantage of road playoff games, but the logistics are too much to handle efficiently.

 

[Jikkle]

The logistics from top to bottom are a complete nightmare so this is never going to happen.

Their best bet is to just send a handful of games over there like they have been doing.

And if they are really bent on doing it they need to send marquee matchups over there and not the Jaguars.

I mean matchups like

Redskins vs 9ers
Seahawks vs Giants
Pats vs Broncos

Redskins vs 9ers would showcase two of the hottest and upcoming QBs in the league.

Seahawks vs Giants would showcase one of the top NFC teams against one of the classic franchises of the NFL from the US' largest market. Hawk vs Giants games have been typically entertaining as well.

Pats vs Broncos especially because off hand I believe the Broncos and 9ers are two of the most popular teams in England and it would feature two 1st ballot HOFers and long time rivals. It's something causal fans would be intently interested and curious about.

 

[HawkSquatch]

The logistics from top to bottom are a complete nightmare so this is never going to happen.

Their best bet is to just send a handful of games over there like they have been doing.

And if they are really bent on doing it they need to send marquee matchups over there and not the Jaguars.

I mean matchups like

Redskins vs 9ers
Seahawks vs Giants
Pats vs Broncos

Redskins vs 9ers would showcase two of the hottest and upcoming QBs in the league.

Seahawks vs Giants would showcase one of the top NFC teams against one of the classic franchises of the NFL from the US' largest market. Hawk vs Giants games have been typically entertaining as well.

Pats vs Broncos especially because off hand I believe the Broncos and 9ers are two of the most popular teams in England and it would feature two 1st ballot HOFers and long time rivals. It's something causal fans would be intently interested and curious about.

*like*


excellent points...

If we could crush the Cowboys again, playing our game in England, would be toooo funny. F'rinstance some entertaining games from "botched placekicks" to "opening drive puntblocks for TD's"..ooo oo ooo that dumbfounded look on Romo's face is priceless!

 

[JDM]

I like your point on marquee matchups, but I would stray far away from any division matchups. One home game lost in a division situation is far too much of a disadvantage IMO.

 

[Jikkle]

I like your point on marquee matchups, but I would stray far away from any division matchups. One home game lost in a division situation is far too much of a disadvantage IMO.

Completely agree which is why I left off 9ers vs Seahawks, Steelers vs Ravens, Green Bay vs Chicago, NFC East vs Cowboys and other big division rival games.

 

[seahawksfan234]

I think the NFL would have to be pretty stupid to put a team in London. I get the impression they're trying so hard to expand the NFL over there but I feel like it's just a waste of time and they're trying to force a sport over there that they don't care about.

They should do the smart thing and focus on a closer area that they would have more success in like Canada. Baseball doesn't seem to have much of a market in Europe and it seems to do just fine in Toronto. Instead of putting a team in London put one in Toronto and L.A.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I agree.^^^^^^^

 

[wazzu31]

The pervailing thought is that they'll take a team from somewhere that is already in place. The team I have heard speculation on is Jacksonville. I just think it's a bad idea overall. Even without Seattle's issues with road games, this team would be murdered with its travel. They would by far blow every other teams travel out of the water, more than doubling the next closest traveler. You can't do that.

I understand the desire to open the NFL to new markets, but putting one team on another continent just won't work, and creating a secondary league on that continent didn't work. I know in the business climate the idea is to milk as much money out of everywhere that they can, but maybe the NFL should be content with the $9 billion in revenue they are already getting.

They gave them their own fricking league to support and they couldn't. Europe, Asia or any country not named the US, it isn't a bad idea to put one novelty game there. Sending the Jags from one financial mess to London where it would be another financial mess would be more idiotic than the idea of Buffalo playing half their home games in Toronto. If the NFL loves Toronto so much give them the Jags. At least it's reasonable and the television revenue makes sense because their is no ad on television that a British person would just say, hey I'm going to buy that.

 

[JDM]

They gave them their own fricking league to support and they couldn't. Europe, Asia or any country not named the US, it isn't a bad idea to put one novelty game there. Sending the Jags from one financial mess to London where it would be another financial mess would be more idiotic than the idea of Buffalo playing half their home games in Toronto. If the NFL loves Toronto so much give them the Jags. At least it's reasonable and the television revenue makes sense because their is no ad on television that a British person would just say, hey I'm going to buy that.

To be fair, NFL Europe had similar issues to the MLS here. Even if you're into the sport the quality available is so far below what you're used to there's not a comparison.

 

[gowazzu02]

To be fair, NFL Europe had similar issues to the MLS here. Even if you're into the sport the quality available is so far below what you're used to there's not a comparison.

That argument doesn't really fly on the Seattle board. The Sounders constantly put 40K in the stadium for mls games.

It's a nightmare scenario with the travel....

 

[Kyle]

It looks like Jacksonville is trying to play 4 games over there in 2014.

 

[Jikkle]

It looks like Jacksonville is trying to play 4 games over there in 2014.

What better way to show you don't care about winning or your home town fans by putting yourself at a disadvantage 4 times a year.

Like this year with their game against the 9ers they are basically giving the 9ers an extra home game because there are waayyy more 9er fans in London than Jag fans.

 

[Kyle]

I 100 percent agree Jikkle.

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

I've never liked putting a game or two in London for one reason. The fans of those teams that pay thousands of dollars for season tickets lose out on a home game. That's a lot of money to spend and not see a full slate of home games.

 

[dude82]

It looks like Jacksonville is trying to play 4 games over there in 2014.

Can't say I blame them. They're likely to draw more fans in London than they draw in Jacksonville.


Still... putting a team permanently in England is just a really dumb idea and while I get why they want to do it, it won't take long before teams start complaining (particularly division "rivals") and they scrap the idea. Just move the Bills and/or the Jags to Toronto and/or Mexico City and there's your international expansion. One or two games a year in London is enough. The modest boost in popularity gained over there isn't enough of a reason, at least to me, to permanently relocated a team there.