Kraft stumping for London team (say it ain't so, Bob)

mgteich · Jul 18, 2014

It is not clear at all that there could be 2 successful teams as close as Toronto and Buffalo, or Vancouver and Seattle. Besides, that would kill the CFL. We would end up needing to have NFL teams in more Canadian cities.

As someone has said, there has been discussion of moving Buffalo to Toronto. It is not clear that this would be a major plus for the NFL.

Froob said:
Then they are making a big mistake. NFL is huge in Canada. Toronto could absolutely support a team. Vancouver could as well. Hell I wonder if they could just let the Argonauts into the NFL.

SB39 · Jul 19, 2014

mgteich said:
I don't know how to keep a league profitable. I think that Kraft and those who have literally billions of dollars in NFL assets DO INDEED understand the business. Personally, I think thinking that they are senile because they don't agree with internet posters is simply silly.

So, yes, I think that if the required percentage of owner believe that say thrusady night football, or 18 regular season games or a team in London makes economic sense, I would tend to believe that they are likely correct.

Well I can't say I subscribe to your "the owners are infallible and always right" maxim.

Besides, as I have stated several times, my criticism of relocation to London is not financial. It would probably be financially successful (at least at first). My criticism is from a competitive standpoint. No team in London will be able to compete with the rest of the league.

Heck, a big part of me hopes they do it so they can have it blow up in their faces. Nor would I mind playing in a division where 1 team was essentially eliminated before the season even began (insert Jets joke here).

SB39 · Jul 19, 2014

mgteich said:
The middle ground between growing and not growing is stable revenue, which means ever decreasing profits in a competitive world with any inflation at all.

While I don't exactly agree with that simplistic take, I do give props for admitting there is a middle ground between "constant expansion" and "death."

SB39 · Jul 19, 2014

mgteich said:
You are free to make any comments you want. Just be prepared to be ridiculed when you suggest that the owners know nothing about the business of the NFL.

Sure thing, but please tell me where I ever suggested that? Please note that, believe it or not, disagreeing with someone does not imply you claim they "know nothing about the business of the NFL."

I guess in your mind none of should dare criticize the owners for going to 18 games, expanding the playoffs, Thursday night football and having a team in London. They want all those things and they're always right so the rest of us just have to shut up and take it.

BritPat · Jul 19, 2014

Joker said:
Look, I may sound like a paranoid security freak but it would be easy for an Al Qaeda cell to hijack a European jet and crash it into an English football stadium filled with fans. It's a far easier strike against the "American imperialists!!!!' than making an operation against the US here in the states. You actually think the group that carried out orchestrated jet hijackings and the murder of thousands simultaneously at different targets IN the US couldn't hit a target right in their backyard so to speak?

I would not give them that chance. ...but that is only one of a number of reasons an NFL team in London is a horrible idea. Who is going to want to PLAY THERE when a US based location gives you and your career a hefty number of serious advantages, not the least of which is M-O-N-E-Y and the British taxation system. London is what, the third most expensive city to live in worldwide? What you'll end up getting is the bottom of the barrel talent that's been cut in the states trying to latch onto their last hope, a London team. That would be BAD football.

BTW, I in no way mean to imply that you or ANY other Pats fan from anywhere in the world is a lesser fan...quite the contrary, sometimes I think we Yanks could use a refresher course given by you guys on how to be a real Patriot fan. For real.

I'm just cynical in my old age. Perhaps the younger generation will latch onto the idea of NFL World. THIS old dog fails to see how.

J, as I've already said in this thread, the NFL should stay in America and what you've posted there I'm mostly in agreement with. But security concerns are the last thing any prospective owner or fans should be concerned with. We've already had a shed load of IS games not to forget either.

If you've never looked, have a look at NFLUK.com, by the way. You'll see that almost all of the fans on there don't like the idea of a London franchise, and certainly wouldn't be switching allegiances.

The idea itself is horrible anyway, I feel dirty just for discussing it. The NFL is America's game - keep it that way.

BritPat · Jul 19, 2014

One more thing - if they did create a Franchise in London, certainly for the first few years, I think you would see incredible revenues from sponsorship deals and merchandising from potential new fans. You're looking at one of the richest, sports mad, metropolitan areas in the world. Economically, the move IS a no-brainer.

AzorianPats · Jul 19, 2014

moosekill said:
It is all about the TV revenue and growning that. A team in LA or a team in Alabama, isn't going to expand that at all. The NFL has to find a new market and they are looking at Europe. England is the only place that makes sense. Economics 101 is grow or die for any business, if the NFL doesn't grow it will stagnate and die.

A lot of people here keep equating teams in new cities to expansion in the NFL, but all that does is reshuffle the same deck, not make it bigger. The NFL wants to make it a much bigger deck.

Anyone that thinks the NFL isn't worried about soccer is crazy. Have you seen how many kids are playing soccer, it is huge! At the same time, the media is driving home the dangers for your kids playing football. Soon there will be more kids playing soccer than football,if there aren't already, and when those kids grow up, what are they going to be watching? NFL or FIFA? That is why the NFL has to grow, a smaller percentage of a much larger pie is better that a smaller percentage of a smaller pie.

OK I agree about Alabama, but you don't think putting an NFL franchise in the second biggest market in the country is gonna help? When LA gets a franchise, and God forbid if they get a contender that team will explode their. A successful NFL team in LA= big $$$ for the league.

I don't think the NFL is worried about any other sport at this moment. The NFL is so far ahead from the other sports its ridiculous. Their closest competitor is college football. As the years go, I'm telling you, we're becoming more and more a one sport country. Popularity in baseball, basketball, and hockey are declining, and has been the last 10 + years, while football sky rocketing. I love soccer, and im glad ots growing, but its nowhere close to being on the same level as football.

I do agree that less and less kids are playing pop warner though, but I think eventually because of the whole concussion issue, PW leagues will be flag football, until a certain age limit.

Marinlik · Jul 19, 2014

SB39 said:
They already did something very similar to this. It was called NFL Europe. Didn't work.

Not really similar as nfl Europe had far from as good players as the actual nfl. Doesn't really say anything about how well an actual nfl team would do in London

AzorianPats · Jul 19, 2014

BritPat said:
J, as I've already said in this thread, the NFL should stay in America and what you've posted there I'm mostly in agreement with. But security concerns are the last thing any prospective owner or fans should be concerned with. We've already had a shed load of IS games not to forget either.

If you've never looked, have a look at NFLUK.com, by the way. You'll see that almost all of the fans on there don't like the idea of a London franchise, and certainly wouldn't be switching allegiances.

The idea itself is horrible anyway, I feel dirty just for discussing it. The NFL is America's game - keep it that way.

Of course they won't!!!

Just like American soccer fans wouldn't like to have one PL team. Imagine NYC F.C representing us over in the BPL, you think Boston, Philly, Chicago fans could ever root for a NY team? Just like I can't see Liverpool or Manchester residents rooting for a London team!

If they want to expand to Europe, they need more than one team. Pats wicked Pissah is right, they need their own division. A team in London, L'pool, Cardiff etc...

moosekill · Jul 19, 2014

AzorianPats said:
Of course they won't!!!

Just like American soccer fans wouldn't like to have one PL team. Imagine NYC F.C representing us over in the BPL, you think Boston, Philly, Chicago fans could ever root for a NY team? Just like I can't see Liverpool or Manchester residents rooting for a London team!

If they want to expand to Europe, they need more than one team. Pats wicked Pissah is right, they need their own division. A team in London, L'pool, Cardiff etc...

I believe the long term goal would be to have a division in Europe, but the NFL won't start that way. They will move Jacksonville there, see how successfull it is and then decide what is next.

As far as LA goes, the issue to me is always that the people that live there already follow one NFL team or another. It isn't like they don't get to watch games there. If Jacksonville suddenly moved to LA would a bunch of new fans suddenly discover the NFL and start watching them on tv? I don't really think so. Could that team be more successful than Jacksonville, of course, but really it doesn't really suddenly expose 740 million people (Europe's population) to a sport they currently only have limited access to. That is what has the NFL owners licking their lips.

Put it this way, I understand both soccer and football. Football is so much better to watch on tv, it is a sport that is perfect for television. If the NFL can get Europeans to understand the game they will watch it. The best way to get them to understand it is to get a team into Europe and expose them to it.

Ivan · Jul 19, 2014

SB39 said:
Since you asked: Very dumb.

My oh my, what an angry little man you are.

voluntarysaftey · Jul 19, 2014

Economically this is a no-brainer for the NFL, like the above poster said.
It would suck for the players, and for the owner/management that would have a harder time recruiting players -- but the NFL is a business and as a business if I were an owner, I'd gladly welcome the additional revenue share that would come from capturing a new country's fan base.

mgteich · Jul 19, 2014

voluntarysaftey said:
Economically this is a no-brainer for the NFL, like the above poster said.
It would suck for the players, and for the owner/management that would have a harder time recruiting players -- but the NFL is a business and as a business if I were an owner, I'd gladly welcome the additional revenue share that would come from capturing a new country's fan base.

While it may shock you, I suspect that there are lots of players (and families) that would rather live in London than in Cleveland or Minnesota.

RecoveringCowboy · Jul 19, 2014

Late comer to this thread, but I see three big issues:

The jet lag of 5-8 time zones (heavily discussed)
Scheduling - When do you play a London at LA game? Maybe @ 1 PM in LA, but it's 9 PM in London. It gets worse for Monday or Thursday night games. Add a team in Paris? Add an extra time zone. Add a team in Warsaw? Now the jet lag is 7-10 time zones crossing the pond.
Cost of living. London is one of the most expensive cities to live in. Then there are the taxes. Just a guess, but what if playing for London is effectively a 30% cut in pay? They would be at a distinct disadvantage on the free agent market.

Ivan · Jul 19, 2014

mgteich said:
It is not clear at all that there could be 2 successful teams as close as Toronto and Buffalo, or Vancouver and Seattle. Besides, that would kill the CFL. We would end up needing to have NFL teams in more Canadian cities.

As someone has said, there has been discussion of moving Buffalo to Toronto. It is not clear that this would be a major plus for the NFL.

If they are going to go international Canada should be the first stop, and they should use failing NFL franchises to go there, such as Jacksonville and Buffalo, but if they can't even manage to have a franchise in LA then they shouldn't even consider Europe. Buffalo to Toronto and Jacksonville to LA should be their next moves. I hate to see the Bills go north but that area really doesn't have the ability to sustain and NFL franchise anymore.

AzPatsFan · Jul 19, 2014

SB39 said:
I think the NFL feels there are already enough teams packed into that part of continent. I don't see any way they throw another team in there. IMHO, the only chance Toronto gets a team is if Buffalo relocates.

For many years the Green Bay Packers played part of their schedule in Milwaukee and were thought of as a Wisconsin franchise. Buffalo has occasionally given Toronto a single yearly game.

To keep the upstate new York team there for its fans, it really needs to become a regional football franchise like the New England Patriots. The Patriots are actually closer to Providence R. I. then to Boston Mass. I would not be averse to a regional game or two in Hartford or elsewhere in New England, if suitable facilities were there.

Toronto Canada, San Antonio Texas, Mexico City, Mexico as well as Metro Los Angeles, California are all of sufficient size to merit representation by a NFL franchise, while Jacksonville, and Buffalo are too small, and perhaps bombed out Detroit as well.

The Bay area in California is probably over represented, and could be a source of a team, as the Raiders tried to move and I think are prepared to do so again, when/if a suitable facility exists in metro LA.

RecoveringCowboy · Jul 19, 2014

^ San Antonio is the size of Dallas and Houston (close), but lacks the metro area and per capita income of the two bigger cities.

Meanwhile, they are enjoying the fifth Spurs championship in 15 years. And with a methodical Croatian for a coach.

AzPatsFan · Jul 19, 2014

RecoveringCowboy said:
^ San Antonio is the size of Dallas and Houston (close), but lacks the metro area and per capita income of the two bigger cities.

Meanwhile, they are enjoying the fifth Spurs championship in 15 years. And with a methodical Croatian for a coach.

But San Antonio is a Top Ten metropolitan area in population and growing; and Mexico City dwarfs even LA for size. Toronto is the premier city of Canada. It is surprising that the NBA claimed San Antonio before the geniuses in the NFL. They also did that to Phoenix too. The population of the country is shifting, moving South and West.

AzorianPats · Jul 19, 2014

AzPatsFan said:
But San Antonio is a Top Ten metropolitan area in population and growing; and Mexico City dwarfs even LA for size. Toronto is the premier city of Canada. It is surprising that the NBA claimed San Antonio before the geniuses in the NFL. They also did that to Phoenix too. The population of the country is shifting, moving South and West.

I think San Antonio could make an awesome football town!

I must say if there was a state that should have 3 NFL teams, wouldn't football mad Texas be the favorite over California, Florida and New York?

SB39 · Jul 19, 2014

Marinlik said:
Not really similar as nfl Europe had far from as good players as the actual nfl. Doesn't really say anything about how well an actual nfl team would do in London

He wasn't talking about an actual NFL team in London, which I have already said would be financially successful (at least at first, before a decade of 3 win seasons beat down the local populace). He came up with an idiotic plan to have a 4-team European minor-league division with mostly local players playing an abbreviated schedule. Setting aside the fact that forcing locals onto those teams means the quality of play would be atrocious, there is nothing in there which is significantly different from anything we've already seen fail. If anything, it would be worse than what we've already seen fail.

Kraft stumping for London team (say it ain't so, Bob)

PatsFans.com Veteran

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

In the Starting Line-Up

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

Hall of Fame Poster

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

PatsFans.com Veteran

In the Starting Line-Up

Hall of Fame Poster

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

In the Starting Line-Up

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

Similar threads