London stadium being designed as home of NFL franchise

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

But I'm sure most American NFL fans are against it, so you're on the side of the minority.

Why would you want international teams?

I don't, I'm just not opposed. I'm very opposed to what the league appears to be doing.

To really do this you'd need a division over there. For that you need more teams. For that you need to increase the talent pool. Since we all know the league would never spend money to develop talent I might as well be opposed to the whole idea.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Kraft's personal angle was to start a flag football team in Israel. Now you start up a Middle East division and stuff gets real...

 

[PatsFanInVa]

By the way, without regard to the question of whether London is a good idea, it's time to name the team. My choices are as follows...

The London Monarchs (history and all)
The Crown Royals (similar but encourages alcoholism)
The London Blitz (History and football, all in one name!)
Eastenders
The Traveling Mulberries (History, music, scheduling all in one name!)
The Spitfires (or the Hurricanes)
The Zulus (for GMT)
The Pond-Jumpers
The Old England Patriarchs

And last but not least...
Edward Milliband (Means nothing much, and too political... just sounds so good when that guy yells his name during question time)

Finally, I would suggest that if the London team gets a home-grown quarterback who gets to the playoffs and loses every year, we introduce the term "one and Donne." You know, because no man is an island. Okay it's a reach, but work with me.

 

[PatriotsReign]

Well if it's a closed shop to anyone but Americans please stop the audacity of calling the Super Bowl winners as 'world champions'.

They are world champions because the US is the only place the NFL is played!

 

[PatriotsReign]

What is so wrong about a team 3000 miles away in the opposite direction. 3 home and 3 away twice during the season and then 2 and 2 should be ok. If the Brit TV revenues are just 5% of the US TV revenues That will be about 5 mill more for the players on each team.

It has nothing to do with "distance"....we just want to keep our sport purely American. They way it's been since the beginning. We have football, baseball, hockey and basketball. None of those sports has ever been spoiled by trying to make it a global thing.

Basically, we just dont' want to share our stuff with the rest of the world and that's a good thing.

That's probably why it's extremely rare for an American to support the crazy idea of "One World Government" or a New World Order.

We do fine on our own!

 

[Mike the Brit]

Horseshit nationalism apart, there are two really big reasons not to do this:

(1) Competitive balance. I can't see any way that a team based a seven-hour flight away from the nearest U.S. teams could compete on equal terms

(2) The legal-financial framework. The NFL is a number of businesses operating as one (draft, revenue sharing) and has a complicated (but very beneficial) relationship with the regulatory authorities (anti-trust exemption). I'm no lawyer, but the number of complications that would come into play if you extend the business outside the U.S. are pretty staggering. And you can't assume that politicians in the U.K. would bend over backwards to help in the way that they do in the U.S.
​

So why do they want to do this so badly? Even if you think (like me) that Goodell is a $40 million water-boy, he's a spokesman for a bunch of very rich people, some of whom made the money themselves and can be assumed to be very, very smart (so, not Woody Johnson).

I think the answer isn't increased franchise revenue (after all, adding more franchises just dilutes things with revenue sharing) but the desire for an international profile to be associated with international sponsors.

The top soccer teams are brands that are world-wide. Their exhibition games in the Far East or anywhere else are packed out. Sponsors know that and are prepared to pay for it.

Mr Kraft and his fellow owners want a list like this:

http://www.manutd.com/en/Club/Sponsors.aspx

Not Bob's Discount Furniture and Putnam Investments

EDIT: How weird is it that Manchester United have an Official Global Noodle Partner?

 

[Brewskies]

I don't want a team in London it will spoil pro football as we know it. The source of players are in the USA. European teams will draw from the same source diminishing the quality of our teams. Expansion is for greed.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Feh, you're probably right. I think the CTE issue has to be solved before any appetite could be created outside the U.S. (or the game itself would have to change significantly in such a way as to improve safety for players). This goes to the question of the talent pipeline.

They may view it as chicken-and-egg, on the other hand: If it's cool to support your local club on Sunday, you might just want to start up a small league among your local high schools.... and so on.

Soccer in the U.S. would suck if it were entirely composed of foreign nationals lured here by big bucks. This isn't a problem in hockey because we and Canada both know we could make Canada part of America in a heartbeat, so they're not technically quite as foreign.

 

[jan08]

Can't understand why a London franchise is being pushed so hard. I'm all for a once a year weekend down there, the Falcons/Lions game was the one we went to last year, but no chance I'm going to swap teams now for a London team. I'd imagine every Brit NFL fan would be the same, we've chosen our team and that's it. Would be very surprised to see a full stadium every game for very long

 

[Jackson 2]

It has nothing to do with "distance"....we just want to keep our sport purely American. They way it's been since the beginning. We have football, baseball, hockey and basketball. None of those sports has ever been spoiled by trying to make it a global thing.

Basically, we just dont' want to share our stuff with the rest of the world and that's a good thing.

That's probably why it's extremely rare for an American to support the crazy idea of "One World Government" or a New World Order.

We do fine on our own!

Yeah, you're right. Ice hockey has never been a "global thing.". Holy crap...

 

[Jackson 2]

It makes so little sense on so many levels that it's hard to imagine how so many of these accomplished businessmen keep pushing for it.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yeah, you're right. Ice hockey has never been a "global thing.". Holy crap...

Outside of Canada and the U.S., could you please list all the countries that have, or have had, MLB, NHL or NBA teams?

 

[PatriotsReign]

Yeah, you're right. Ice hockey has never been a "global thing.". Holy crap...

International hockey competition hasn't been very popular since the 80's.

American teams don't compete with foreign teams in the NHL...I don't consider Canada to be a foreign since the game started there.

My point is, most Americans are very, very happy with the way our professional sports teams are. Americans aren't big on sharing our sports. Why would we?

 

[Jackson 2]

International hockey competition hasn't been very popular since the 80's.

American teams don't compete with foreign teams in the NHL...I don't consider Canada to be a foreign since the game started there.

My point is, most Americans are very, very happy with the way our professional sports teams are. Americans aren't big on sharing our sports. Why would we?

Ask a Canadian if s/he considers ice hockey a US sport, LOL. Particularly a Canadiens' fan whose team has *****-slapped the Bruins forever and giggled all the way back to Quebec.

 

[PatriotsReign]

Ask a Canadian if s/he considers ice hockey a US sport, LOL.

Ask a Canadian which nation has more NHL fans!

I didn't say it was a US sport, I said it was a US/Canadian sport.

You must have missed this post.

International hockey competition hasn't been very popular since the 80's.

American teams don't compete with foreign teams in the NHL...I don't consider Canada to be a foreign nation since the game started there.

My point is, most Americans are very, very happy with the way our professional sports teams are. Americans aren't big on sharing our sports. Why would we?

 

[PatriotsReign]

It has nothing to do with "distance"....we just want to keep our sport purely American. They way it's been since the beginning. We have football, baseball, hockey and basketball. None of those sports has ever been spoiled by trying to make it a global thing.

Basically, we just dont' want to share our stuff with the rest of the world and that's a good thing.

That's probably why it's extremely rare for an American to support the crazy idea of "One World Government" or a New World Order.

We do fine on our own!

Which part don't you agree with PFiVA? Because we both know only a minute number of Americans support "A New World Order" or one world government! That's crazy....

 

[Jackson 2]

Which part don't you agree with PFiVA? Because we both know only a minute number of Americans support "A New World Order" or one world government! That's crazy....

Look, my post about the Canadiens/Bruins was a knee-jerk semi-cheap shot for which I apologize. My larger point is that our attempt to claim exclusive ownership of these sports is wrong. Basketball is clearly a global sport, baseball has been huge in Latin America for more than a century and ice hockey is multi-national as well and, despite some jingoists' (not you) attempts to claim otherwise, has its roots in Canada not the US. As I posted earlier, I consider the NFL venture into London a foolish waste of time. But, that doesn't mean we can claim exclusive rights to all four major sports.

 

[Tunescribe]

You bagged on English cuisine (sic) without mentioning a single organ-meat based dish. Absolutely negligent.

You think they'd serve haggis at football games?

 

[PatsFanInVa]

You think they'd serve haggis at football games?

Maybe not at the game but you KNOW the Scottish tailgaters would be wolfin' it down...

I'm thinking no sheep's head broth, no sweetbreads, no steak-and-kidney pie... well that just ain't a party

 

[patsbrasilpatriotas]

East to refute? Ridiculous. Jacksonville is part of the US...NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE. I'm not knocking any great cities worldwide,of course YOU take it that way. I'm not saying have all the goddamned football you want anywhere, I'm saying this decision CHANGES the National Football League. Then you use semipro baskeball players as YOUR proof that an NFL team would be welcomed by NFL players. Please...don't start with the "we are the world" bullshyt. THis decision will CHANGE the NFL as it is currently constituted. Great for you I guess. I think it sucks.

You said: what NCAA football player of any repute whatsoever will want to be drafted and play in a foreign country? . Thats easy to refute. Ask any small market player if they want to live in London for a couple of months. They dont have to live there, they have to play there. I dont agree with it, im just saying its POSSIBLE. I agree with you NFL is american, period. If they want a Europe league they should start a new one, and maybe the two champions play a match to see the world champion.

And how do they plan on signing players? From what I understand their taxes are insane, they have a permit and a fee for just about everything imaginable including -owning a tv-, the cops dont even need to pretend to have a reason to stop and search you. Yeah, i can see a lot of american college kids getting in line to have these huge money contracts confiscated by the royal family to live their life of leisure. england? nice place to visit but living there, oh hell no.

Thats easy too, they will have a bigger salary cap to balance the rate differences . Again I 'm not advocating changing the league for Europe only claiming to be possible.

They are world champions because the US is the only place the NFL is played!

World NFL champions?