Welcome to PatsFans.com

Would you support the Patriots playing a HOME GAME overseas?

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Tunescribe, Oct 27, 2009.

?

Would you support the Patriots playing a HOME GAME overseas?

  1. Yes

    20 vote(s)
    21.7%
  2. No

    69 vote(s)
    75.0%
  3. Perhaps under certain circumstances (please specify)

    3 vote(s)
    3.3%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Tunescribe

    Tunescribe PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    16,218
    Likes Received:
    209
    Ratings:
    +449 / 5 / -10

    #61 Jersey

    I'm posting this to make a point. Goodell and the owners are trying to force-feed the league to overseas markets in a cynical grab for dough at the EXPENSE of domestic fans. As a season ticket holder I'd be livid if Kraft ever agreed to send a Pats home game to London or Mexico City. I'm also AGAINST extension of the regular-season schedule for the purpose of accommodating this. So we get nine home regular-season games instead of eight? OK, that would mean MOST teams have nine games at home whereas an unlucky one or two would still lose a game to Goodell's marketing scheme. It disturbs me to see Bob Kraft so enthusiastically endorsing this nonsense. There is absolutely nothing in it for U.S. fans. Goodell and owners like Kraft seem either oblivious to or downright dismissive of the fact that most American fans OBJECT to what they're trying to do! How can we make ourselves heard?
  2. italian pat patriot

    italian pat patriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,955
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +16 / 1 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    personally of course yes but i have to admit that if i was living in US i will not support it

    anyway the idea of 1 or 2 NFL regular season games playied overaseas is acceptable

    but i am not in favour of anything more then that

    i like the NFL as an 'American sport'
  3. Jimke

    Jimke Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,701
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    I'm not in favor of playing overseas games because of the wear and

    tear on the players. You and I will have little effect on the owners.

    They are looking at Europe as a way to add European TV dollars to their

    bankrolls.
  4. nashvillepatsfan

    nashvillepatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    3,213
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    I think if i was a season ticket holder, i would be pretty annoyed if this happened. You only get 8 RS games, and then they take one, and play it somewhere that you maybe cant afford to go to.
  5. Nonentity

    Nonentity Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    549
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Disable Jersey

    Actually, TV money is the one thing that probably won't change. The NFL already shows plenty of games in most European countries. The big change, financially, would be merchandising. Hardly anyone here buys NFL jerseys, it would be a good revenue stream for them if they could change that.


    But I completely agree that the 16 game season shouldn't be extended. It'll kill the players, they struggle to make it through 16 games as it is.
  6. PatsSox363804

    PatsSox363804 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    2,636
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    Not only that, you still pay full price for the season tickets and they don't include a discounted ticket to the overseas game if you can go.
  7. nashvillepatsfan

    nashvillepatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    3,213
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    Now if they said you could fly with the team, then that would be ok :D
  8. Pats726

    Pats726 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    I agree totally with this...My sentiments are that they need to leave this all alone..and it was an idea of a writer that a traveling team of four could be put together for these purposes..made up of players younger older...and THAT THAT would be what was needed. It was a great plan and one which made a heck more sense than what Goodell was doing. With 4 teams, they could play a bunch of games in Europe, Canada, Central and South America and the Far East...and play 8 weeks...meaning 16 games.. I THINK that would make MORE sense than what Goodell is doing.
    It makes no sense logistically to have ONE team in Europe...what they would need is 4..and then it doesn't even make sense. 16 games to me is enough games as there is plenty wear and tear on players..extending that at all will only make it that the healthiest team will win not the best. (There is a bit of a difference....)
    I really would like to have Kraft explain his reasoning beyond what he has said about this working..many ideas are good, but one has to carry it deeper to make some sense...THIS ONE really doesn't!!
  9. patsox23

    patsox23 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,387
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +9 / 1 / -0

    I'm confused. Where's the "absolutely not, are you high?!" option?
  10. PATSYLICIOUS

    PATSYLICIOUS Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    11,022
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +42 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    No way no how. I think the teams that agree to this are stupid.

    You are losing a home game, it can only hurt you.
  11. Pats726

    Pats726 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

  12. JR4

    JR4 In the Starting Line-up PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,758
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +22 / 0 / -2

    How can this poll be unbiased? Every season holder who pays big bucks
    has a lot to loose.
    If Mr Kraft wants his team to play overseas one home game then he should
    be willing to reimburse every season ticket holder the cost for that season
    ticket for that week.
    Then it is a good idea. Get NFL in Europe would only make the NFL stronger
    I believe.
    Scheduling is also something that should and could be worked out.
    For example, a team only plays overseas the week before it has a bye.
  13. Tunescribe

    Tunescribe PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    16,218
    Likes Received:
    209
    Ratings:
    +449 / 5 / -10

    #61 Jersey

    In my OP I stated I was posting the poll to make a point which is: American NFL fans don't like regular-season games shipped overseas. So of course it's biased. And being reimbursed for the one game sent to Timbuktu isn't what I'm after either. With only eight home games to look forward to out of 52 weeks a year, cutting it down to seven is pretty damn drastic in my opinion. I haven't heard anything about how Tampa Bay fans felt losing a game this year, but I imagine if the Bucs were good there would've been quite an uproar about it. Imagine if they were undefeated going into the game vs. New England and were robbed of the chance to see it live because of Roger Goodell's "bright idea." Or what if one of their players had a spectacular record-setting performance? If Goodell keeps monkeying around with things with the owners' blessing, eventually something will happen to REALLY piss off U.S. fans.
  14. PatsDeb

    PatsDeb PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +40 / 0 / -1

    No. Home field advantage is too crucial, and giving away a home game, plus scheduling a big week of travel on top of that (suppose we didn't have a bye this week and had to recover from a weekend in Europe?) is too much to give away. Badell and Krafty should put the kibosh on this idea.
  15. Pats726

    Pats726 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    I think all fans of a team have a LOT to lose when their home game is hijacked and moved to an international location..NOT FAIR at all.
    I think Goodell wants expansion..spreading the NFL...THAT has a lot of monetary value...which is WHY I wanted to mention Kirwin's idea of barnstorming teams...I will quote a bit from that piece as I THINK it has merit in that 1) Those outside the US will have a chance to see some top notch players and 2) It does NOT interfere with the US NFL schedule..in other words, it's a win-win situation.
    "Build two teams that become the ambassadors of the NFL and sell the game around the world...My plan solves those issues as well as providing players employment opportunities, developing the minority coaching program, keeping some high-profile coaches in the game and building a talent pool the NFL can tap into in the second half of the season..."
    I think two teams playing each other gets tired quickly...I would make it four teams so that they can play each other twice...and then have a two game playoff for champion.
    "Offer the top 100 out-of-work players the opportunity to join one of the two 50-men rosters that will play an eight-game schedule against each other around the world. While some players will respectfully decline to participate, there are another 100 waiting for the chance. Wait until you see the players who could join these teams."......Again..make that 200 four teams with some good coaches so that they all can be ambassadors of the game..Is that such a bad idea??
    Start off on a European tour of 4 games..maybe two at Wembley..or games the same day in different venues...Paris..Germany...and then Scandanavia or Italy..a week off and then start things up in North America..with Canada..Tokyo..Hawaii..Final games there or maybe back in Europe. If a location can only have one game, split between two near places so more can see the NFL players.
    "The players are home by Nov. 9 and NFL teams would be free to sign them for the second half of their season and the playoffs.."

    I think it's an interesting concept that pleases BadL and those that wish to expand...and also pleases fans who wish that their NFL is not tampered with.
    It's a novel idea and really serves much thought....
  16. Synovia

    Synovia Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    3,922
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I dunno.


    A >16 game season would clearly have to mean an expanded roster, which the NFLPA would love. The cap percentage would have to go up to accommodate bigger rosters.

    One of the big problems in the NFL is that you can only carry 45 guys, and roughly 30 of them are "starters", so its almost impossible to get everyone out of the game in a blowout. (22 starters, 2 K+P, 3 or 4 special teams guys, WR3 who is kind of a starter, 3 down Back, etc).
  17. PatsWickedPissah

    PatsWickedPissah PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    23,054
    Likes Received:
    348
    Ratings:
    +789 / 8 / -10

    Disable Jersey

    While I am usually pro business, pro capatalism, I think I'll pass on overseas home games for the NFL. I'm a fan and those games benefit the billionaire boys club at the expense of the home fans. The only fans for this understandably would be those living overseas.

    Business wise the NFL faces a problem. Their domestic market is approaching saturation. New franchises in LA and maybe Toronto are stopgaps at best. They're desperate for new revenues to continue their rapid growth.
  18. jmt57

    jmt57 Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2005
    Messages:
    13,090
    Likes Received:
    70
    Ratings:
    +172 / 0 / -0

    Obviously fans are not going to like the idea. If you attend games live, you miss out on up to 12.5% of your team's meaningful games. And even if you only watch on television, your favorite team loses home field advantage in that game.

    But the NFL is not a charity being run for the sake of the fans. It is a commercial business seeking avenues to maximize profits for its investors. They are looking to increase revenue streams, and two ways of doing that are by increasing the size of their fan base (i.e., the amount of customers for their product) and by increasing merchandise sales (more sales to those additional customers.)

    While I as a fan/customer may not like it, I do understand the business reasons for doing this. The number of fans/customers that the NFL is going to lose with this decision is negligible. If anyone actually did decide to not renew their season tickets based on one game being played in Europe, there most likely is another person in line ready to take their place - so no net loss there. Meanwhile more fans are added every time the NFL plays a game overseas. In other words the risk (of losing customers) is worth the reward (additional customers and increasing revenue) to the business.

    The reality is that though we fans may not like the idea, I can't imagine there being a huge backlash. NFL fans in the USA are still going to attend games, watch them on tv, and buy team merchandise.
  19. Nonentity

    Nonentity Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    549
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Disable Jersey

    Don't turn the NFL into a squad game, which English football has turned into. Whether it's Week 1 or Week 15/16/17, you want to see the best players playing at their position in the team. Injuries ruin seasons and absolutely murder playoff runs.
  20. Tunescribe

    Tunescribe PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    16,218
    Likes Received:
    209
    Ratings:
    +449 / 5 / -10

    #61 Jersey

    What does this mean? :confused:
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>