Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 57
  1. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Perry Hall
    Posts
    2,869

    Re: the NFL in London



    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    I think he means the games, not the city.
    Yep. Nothing against our British pals.




  2. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,108
    Blog Entries
    4
    Oh nvm




  3. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    21,577

    Re: the NFL in London

    Quote Originally Posted by ERey View Post
    I like the idea of playing one or two regular season games a year overseas to promote the NFL world-wide. I would like to see the Ravens play over there as well. Granted, it would suck if it was at the cost of one of our home games, and it certainly should not be a division opponent.

    With that said, there's no way the NFL places a team overseas. You're right that the logistics are to much to overcome. The timezone would not work for national TV. But a few games there a year I think is fine.
    Agreed.

    I'd love to have a chance to see the Ravens in London, as long as it's not a home game.

    And has Goodell actually said he wants a franchise there? Or is he really testing the market? I don't think a team in London is desirable. And I think he knows that. But rekindle NFL Europe and make it a true developmental league? I can see that.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  4. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    N.E. Cincy
    Posts
    3,054

    Re: the NFL in London

    Quote Originally Posted by Real Fan Dan View Post
    Is that because the Vikings overan England in the 10th century or because the NFL knows the Yinzers can't speak English?
    Bwahahaha!
    I want a Flacco jersey! Johnny Bench wore #5




  5. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Balmer Merlin Hon
    Posts
    2,819
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: the NFL in London

    Quote Originally Posted by mmi16 View Post
    In my mind the logistics issues are being overplayed. It's 3K+ miles for East Coast teams to go to the West Coast. It's about 3K+ miles from London to the East Coast. London to the West Coast would be a haul.
    Let me guess that you've never flown across the Pond. I did BWI-LHR back in August, and that's an 8-hour stretch; direct to LA or SF from here is 5. More significantly, "jet lag" only seems to have a major impact when crossing more than 3 time zones. I've never had much problem going to the Left Coast (3 zones) but have never been any damn good for about 36 hours after deplaning in Yerp (5-6 zones).

    The biggest problem with expanding the NFL outside of North America is creating a fan base. The NFL would be competing with sports that everyone plays as a kid that require no complex equipment & have no complex rules (soccer, basketball, tennis, golf, motor racing, ice hockey in the colder climes) as well as more complex ones that are played by kids because they are deeply rooted in the particular culture (cricket in the Commonwealth, rugby for them plus the Celts, hurling in Ireland, etc.). US-based complex sports like baseball have really only been successfully spread via expats, commerce & occupation (Latin America, Japan, Korea); football only put down roots in Canada, but even there the rules were significantly altered.

    Which is a long-winded way of saying that the NFL is only going to succeed in Europe when & if there are fathers who played (something like) the sport as kids teaching their kids to play & watching the games with them. That's at least a generation away.

    IMO, if the NFL wants to expand its demographic reach, it should concentrate on Hispanics first in the US and then Mexico & Central America. If it can't sell the game to them, it's got no chance across the Pond.




  6. #18

    Re: the NFL in London

    Nothing against our allies as being a military man I've dealt with them on many a deployment. But I can't stand the whole games over there and couldn't explain how furious I'd be if we lost a home game by playing there. Sorry just a dumb idea overall.




  7. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,049
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: the NFL in London

    Quote Originally Posted by Real Fan Dan View Post
    Is Pittsburgh the "Home" team this year?

    Does anybody know how that works for PSL owners? If (God forbid) the Ravens got picked and designated the "home" team, if I flew to London could I get in Wembley with my regular $70 ticket or would I have to pay more?
    Good question. I would have to think the Ravens would sell 9 home games that year (2 preseason and 7 regular). How can they possibly expect fans to buy airfare and hotel for London. Plus I'm sure seating is arranged by the people that run Wembley Stadium.




  8. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Eastern Shore
    Posts
    1,803

    Re: the NFL in London

    Totally against.
    maybe--maybe--a preseason game every year, but definitely not a 'real' game.

    a London franchise? absolutely not.

    if NFL Europe didn't make it (it's been tried twice I think) no good trying a single franchise. imagine how the good folks in San Antonio or LA would feel since they can't get a team. and which market will they take the team from? Jacksonville? here come the lawsuits.
    Baltimore Ravens, 2012 NFL Champions!




  9. #21

    Re: the NFL in London

    I would like to see the Ravens have a London "home" game just to see the absolute melt down it would cause here.




  10. #22

    Re: the NFL in London

    Meh ... if the Ravens were to play in London, I'd probably use that as an excuse to hop over the Pond for a week's vacation -- two weeks if followed by the bye. While greedy me would prefer that it were a road game to get 9 games in a season, I wouldn't miss anything because I'd still be attending 8 games in a season - not counting any domestic road trips. If the Ravens were to not play there, its no BFD - I can travel to the UK anytime I wanted, although there are still many places in Europe I haven't yet seen which would take precedence.

    I think that the concern about logistics is baloney and fears of players not wanting to play there are just bullshit. Similar concerns when the NFL added SF and LA, which wound up being non-issues despite the media and fans' hysteria.

    Instead of a London franchise, I'd rather see the 17 game season implemented with one rotating neutral turf game - London could receive a handful few of the neutral site games. But if a London franchise were awarded, the NFL may be better off because of the wealth of adding British large audiences to TV viewershp. Sky TV or whatever y'all Limeys use to watch NFL today would be dwarfed by a home-team supported by millions of Brits. And, we Americans who think that Brits would not support American "gridiron" football because soccer is so popular there underestimate British sports enthusiasm.

    The following quote from up above hits the nail on the head:

    Quote Originally Posted by mmi16 View Post
    In my mind the logistics issues are being overplayed. It's 3K+ miles for East Coast teams to go to the West Coast. It's about 3K+ miles from London to the East Coast. London to the West Coast would be a haul.

    If a team were to be placed in London, it should most likely be paired with another Western European city. That was things 'could' be scheduled for the teams to make two week swings on either side of the Pond and minimize the excess travel.
    In a 2003 BBC poll that asked Brits to name the "Greatest American Ever", Mr. T came in fourth, behind ML King (3rd), Abe Lincoln (2nd) and Homer Simpson (1st).




  11. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales, Uk
    Posts
    18

    Re: the NFL in London

    Quote Originally Posted by Mista T View Post
    Meh ... if the Ravens were to play in London, I'd probably use that as an excuse to hop over the Pond for a week's vacation -- two weeks if followed by the bye. While greedy me would prefer that it were a road game to get 9 games in a season, I wouldn't miss anything because I'd still be attending 8 games in a season - not counting any domestic road trips. If the Ravens were to not play there, its no BFD - I can travel to the UK anytime I wanted, although there are still many places in Europe I haven't yet seen which would take precedence.

    I think that the concern about logistics is baloney and fears of players not wanting to play there are just bullshit. Similar concerns when the NFL added SF and LA, which wound up being non-issues despite the media and fans' hysteria.

    Instead of a London franchise, I'd rather see the 17 game season implemented with one rotating neutral turf game - London could receive a handful few of the neutral site games. But if a London franchise were awarded, the NFL may be better off because of the wealth of adding British large audiences to TV viewershp. Sky TV or whatever y'all Limeys use to watch NFL today would be dwarfed by a home-team supported by millions of Brits. And, we Americans who think that Brits would not support American "gridiron" football because soccer is so popular there underestimate British sports enthusiasm.

    The following quote from up above hits the nail on the head:
    Agreed. A london franchise would not struggle to sell out wembley. You have a massive population in and around london. Add to that the uk fans and you have a huge pool of potential punters. Yes our footie stadiums are full each week in the premier league, but then our pubs are still full to watch the live games so there is huge interest in live sport hear. The premier league would not be a competitor really as hardcore football fans would not consider moving accross and tge wembley matches that currently run are unlikely to have many premier league football fans there. Its a different fanbase.. you would probably pick up a lot of rugby fans though. The 6 nations tournament is only 3 home games each in january and those are always 80k sellouts. As for players. Money talks so I am sure players would be fine playing over here for half the year and I would guess the nfl would subsidise income in some way. It woukd be exciting and the atmosphere at a london based game might surprise you guys. Our football style chanting would transfer over and add to the experience.. I just wouldnt like it if we git a team at an american fans expence...




  12. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    65

    Re: the NFL in London

    Like many other Brits, I don't think a London team would be a good idea, nor do I think it would be financially viable. I do like the regular season games (2 this year), especially because fans from all teams attend and its a great atmosphere. If this is increased to 8 games, I don't think you see the crowds you're about to see on Sunday. But I would absolutely love to see the Ravens come over.

    Having said that, the UK does have a nationwide amateur league, as well as university leagues. The NFL should invest in growing these leagues, and improving the skill level in this country by recruiting young athletes from rugby. If the domestic scene grows, I'm pretty sure interest in the NFL would too




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland