Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8230ac55/article/new-resolution-allows-teams-to-return-to-uk-multiple-times?module=HP11_headline_stack New resolution allows teams to return to U.K. multiple times By National Football League Published: Oct. 11, 2011 at 04:34 p.m. Updated: Oct. 11, 2011 at 07:54 p.m NFL owners Tuesday approved a resolution to continue playing regular-season games in the United Kingdom through the 2016 season. The vote, which came during the NFL Fall Meeting in Houston, authorizes the league to schedule regular-season games in the U.K. in each of the next five years. The new resolution: » Allows teams to volunteer to play at least one regular-season game per year as a home team in the U.K. for up to five years. » Enables the league to determine the appropriate number of U.K. games per season, based on the popularity of the sport in the market and the number of teams that volunteer to play as a home team. "The response to NFL games being played in the U.K. continues to be exceptional," NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said. "Because of the outstanding support of our British fans, we are confident that hosting additional games in the U.K. will be well received and support our goal of bringing football to more fans in the U.K. and beyond." The international series of regular-season games to date has contributed to increased NFL fan interest in the U.K., with a current fan base of 11 million, including more than 2 million avid fans, a 32 percent increase in the past two years. Television ratings have also shown tremendous growth -- with Sunday viewership of NFL games up 91 percent and the Super Bowl audience increased 74 percent since 2006 -- while the league has developed new and stronger business partnerships. "When the initial resolution was approved in 2006, the thinking at the time was that we would have two new teams every year," NFL Vice President of International Chris Parsons said. "As the series evolved, we felt as though having a team return to the U.K. on a regular basis would certainly increase the fan base for that particular team, which in turn would drive fan growth for the entire league. We think there is a tremendous benefit for a team to return to the U.K. on an annual basis." NFL owners approved a resolution in 2006 to present up to two international regular-season games per season from 2007-2011. This year's game on Oct. 23 between the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Chicago Bears will be the fifth NFL regular-season game played at London's Wembley Stadium and is the final one as part of the initial resolution. NFL regular-season games played in London Date Game Oct. 28, 2007 Giants 13, Dolphins 10 Oct. 26, 2008 Saints 37, Chargers 32 Oct. 25, 2009 Patriots 35, Buccaneers 7 Oct. 31, 2010 49ers 24, Broncos 16 Oct. 23, 2011 Bears vs. Buccaneers I guess money dictates. And there's no denying the interest and passion there's for the London game. (All 85,000 or so tickets have sold in a matter of hours I believe for each game, with only the Bears, Dolphins, and '9ers having traditional strong holds on the UK fanbase.). And I somewhat get the need to expand your game further World wide by showing people the actual live action product, rather than the watered down, exhibition version. But I still STRONGLY disagree with taking our sport outside the US. According to Goodell in the video in the above link, there's been interest from many teams to continue this, with as soon as next year multiple games in London. Apparently all the money football generates isn't enough to keep it in America any more as owners get greedier and greedier. And the idea, which I can certainly see coming off given the money at play, of a London based franchise is just beyond reprehensible to me. What then? A SB outside of the States? Other Country's getting involved? Where does the pursuit of the mighty dollar end? A Country's sporting league should be EXCLUSIVE to that Country. If fans from other parts of the World chose to follow teams from that Country, then travel TO that Country to watch. Not the other way around with the teams coming to you. Hell, I hate the fact of the 'Skins playing in Toronto in a few weeks. Having to move the show lock stock 3,500 miles or so really disgusts me. And if I was still here, it would benefit me. Another blight on the record of a REAL poor Commissionership (did I just make a new word?) of Goodell. He REALLY makes you hanker for the days of Rozellel and Tagliabue. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedlamVR Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 .I am finding it hard to follow the logic - either of the origional anouncement or your xenophobic rant (i am not sure if that means more than one game in the UK - which I am not sure i would agree with - or if it means teams can come back more than once to establish strong ties with the fan base - as Tampa has but as the home team) . I am not sure how or why you are furious - Is it the travel? At the prospect of teams traveling 3,600 miles to london - are you as furious at the propect ot west coast teams playing east coast teams and their fans having to travel some 3,000 + miles (Seattle to Miami for example 3,300 miles) to watch the road team or even nearly 1500 miles supposed local divisional rivals have to travel (Dallas to Washington for example) . Is it the time difference - Well the London game is normally played at times to fit in with the American schedules .... Jet lag is no better or worse than travel east to west cost and back again ... Is it the food .. well i might be with you on that - also I think Wembely is a rubish ground for playing any kind of sport on ....not just football it is always far to slick - but okay for Britny concerts .. Or is it the fans ... well UK fans and displaced US fans kind of get the game - they know not to shout goal and wave hankerchiefs and when to cheer and the atmosphere is pretty impressive ... If they could I am sure they could fill Wembly twice over and that is for any team or combination of teams - On average London fans pay almost double the price for their tickets - and I get the wrath coming from season ticket holders for the home team - (but surely there could be a way to make sure the home fans don't have the international ticket in their season package making it that much cheeper with options and travel plans for the home fans who want to travel to London . ) WIth more and more games being blacked out because small market teams cannot attract crowds of more than 40,000 in some cases including traving support- it seems a little churlish to say to those teams they cannot travel and play to packed out stadium for fear of upsetting fans who cannot be bothered to come out . In some parts I understand the anger . I really dont think the Superbowl should ever move out of the US - I really cannot support more than one game a season being in the international series - I don't think the London franchise has legs . I am not sure it would be able to maintain the levels of support if it went through multiple loosing seasons and I am not sure US teams would want to travel to a play a loosing team 3 or 4,000 miles away on a regular basis to less than sell out stadia . Also there are many cities in the US where frnachises would be better placed . - More sites could be covered in international week, a game in Brazil, Japan for example or Germany, but I totally believe the NFL should stay predominantly US based ...( hell I think it is a mistake to take the pro bowl out of Hawaii) But even considering that it does not cover the hate in the OP and by a good number of NFL fans have for the international game - So it comes to down right xenophobia - "its our game it should stay in the good ole USA" I hear it and I understand it but what an ignorant attitude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 I completely dislike the idea of playing games overseas. Or in any country other than the US. The Bills playing in Toronto is even frustrating, but at least it's right next door. It's not ignorant just because its not convenient for the English, bedlam. It takes a home game away from a team's fans, I don't care how many people are coming out to the games. A lot of these stadiums are built with tax dollars, and a lot of these people are paying for season tickets. And we're shipping one of eight games for some of these teams over seas. I don't like it because it's a gateway to more of it. Sure, right now, it's four teams playing outside the US. Two in England, two in Toronto. But where does it stop? Brazil? Japan? Mexico? Germany? Meanwhile keeping Toronto and England as annual sites? I'd be better with it if there was a game once every few years on foreign soil. But every year... And with surely more sites on Goodell's mind. That's more my problem than anything else. Goodell won't stop at England and Canada. Pretty soon every team will be playing an international game every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted October 12, 2011 Author Share Posted October 12, 2011 Excuse me bedlam? I'm xenophobic because I believe a Country's sporting league, whatever that Country may be, should be played WITHIN that Country? Just where in the heck do you get, from your inference, I'm fearful of England and everything there? Even more bizarre considering I'm English and live in the Country. I don't know if you care for soccer or not. But if you did, and where say a season ticket holder at Utd or Citeh (for the purpose of argument given your location); and you lost a home game you'd paid for if they decided to take it to the US, Far East or wherever; how would you then feel? Ala the ridiculously proposed '39th Game' idea. All for the purpose of making as much money as you possibly can at the expense of your own fanbase? (Which is ALL that is at play here, however they try claim otherwise.). American season ticket holders lose out in this way. Besides that most teams lose the 'home' advantage as the Wembley crowd is made up of most every NFL teams 'fans', all out for a good time and the experience of regular season football. Why should our fans and team suffer that if they were picked as the home team? I guess you could label me a traditionalist. Maybe even insular in my thinking in the modern, global, money dominated World of 2011. But a xenophobe couldn't be further from the truth and a pretty darn insulting thing for you to throw out there. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 But even considering that it does not cover the hate in the OP and by a good number of NFL fans have for the international game - So it comes to down right xenophobia - "its our game it should stay in the good ole USA" I hear it and I understand it but what an ignorant attitude You know, the more I think about it, the more this bothers me. What "international" game? Last time I checked, the only football worth watching is the NCAA and the NFL, and heck, even our HS football could probably hang with "pro" teams in other nations, and all of those are played in the USA. International game my hiney. And you're referring to it as xenophobia... Being that I'm not all that intelligent, I had to look it up... This is the definition of xenophobia: an unreasonable fear or hatred of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange. It's not a fear... It's not a hatred towards any people. It's not xenophobia. It's a hatred of taking OUR game overseas when most people overseas don't fund any of these stadiums, or really line the pockets of these owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted October 12, 2011 Author Share Posted October 12, 2011 You know, the more I think about it, the more this bothers me. What "international" game? Last time I checked, the only football worth watching is the NCAA and the NFL, and heck, even our HS football could probably hand with "pro" teams in other nations, and all of those are played in the USA. International game my hiney. The inference being KD that football is becoming more and more popular the World over, and the best way to continue to market that and expand your product is to showcase the fully fledged, top end product, a regular season game. Ultimately, it's all down to two things. The all mighty dollar and greed, And it stinks. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointyfootball Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 Funny, the English are saying the same thing about the prospect of EPL games being played in USA, Asia, etc. I'm against both, as I like that NFL is the USA's game and I'm not for globalization of sports. Unfortunately, money rules the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 I don't think it's all that bad at all. The US Market is tapped out. Mexicans don't have any money, Canada has their own league. The numbers in the UK as far as growth are undeniable. A game or two a year over there isn't going to kill anyone. I for one would like to see the great American sport expanded. That said, it would be nice if the owners would repeal the stupid blackout rule as a bone to throw to stateside fans if they're going to continue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 The inference being KD that football is becoming more and more popular the World over, and the best way to continue to market that and expand your product is to showcase the fully fledged, top end product, a regular season game. They can say that all they want. But that doesn't make it any more true. It's not an international game. Fans in England want to see a NFL game live? And get the proper experience? I respect the hell out of that. But, you want the real experience, you hop on a flight to a NFL city and watch the game amongst it's fans. That's the true experience. Not sitting in a completely bipartisan crowd (I'm assuming they allow tailgating in London, but in Toronto, there is NONE, which totally crushes the American experience, but a ton of Bills fans make that trip, so they get more of the actual "game" atmosphere). Funny, the English are saying the same thing about the prospect of EPL games being played in USA, Asia, etc. I'm against both, as I like that NFL is the USA's game and I'm not for globalization of sports. Unfortunately, money rules the world. I think the Premier League should be similar to the NFL as well. If there's an American soccer fan that wants to see the EPL, then hop on a flight. I'm fine with exhibition games crossing over on both sides. But neither league should have league games that count played on foreign turf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted October 12, 2011 Author Share Posted October 12, 2011 Hey KD man, I'm 100% in agreement with you, as exemplified by the OP and my subsequent threads. And I'm glad I wasn't the only one seemingly offended by bedlam's ridiculous, and highly insulting, 'xenophobia' slur. Hail. *Edit* There is tailgating at the London game BTW. But you TOTALLY lose the homefield advantage as it's made up of most every team's fan. Most experiencing a live football game for the first time in their lives. And a lot of the naivety that goes along with that as you can imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptr77 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 The NFL plays games in other countries, there is nothing new in this. It isn't the AMERICAN Football League. Just like the NHL isn't the Canadian Hockey League. Games have been played in the US, Canada, Mexico, and UK. Canada has a professional football league, largely made up of failed NFL prospects. Football is actually played in other countries and followed contrary to what many think. I highly doubt any American High School team would compete with a CFL team seeing as how guys like Cameron Wake, Mike Sellers, and Ricky Williams all were recently in the CFL. The NFL is a business, it's going to grow the sport and their brand to other countries, it should be painfully obvious that's what's going to happen. When some cities like Jacksonville, Miami, Minneapolis, San Diego and others can't build new stadiums and some keep getting games blacked out I don't see why some American fans fear teams moving or franchises being established in other countries. Even a massive American market like Los Angeles has lost a team twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointyfootball Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 I think the Premier League should be similar to the NFL as well. If there's an American soccer fan that wants to see the EPL, then hop on a flight. I'm fine with exhibition games crossing over on both sides. But neither league should have league games that count played on foreign turf. I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 I highly doubt any American High School team would compete with a CFL team seeing as how guys like Cameron Wake, Mike Sellers, and Ricky Williams all were recently in the CFL. The NFL is a business, it's going to grow the sport and their brand to other countries, it should be painfully obvious that's what's going to happen. When I said that, I said other foreign countries. Sometimes, I forget Canada is a foreign country. You're right. HS teams aren't beating CFL teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptr77 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 When I said that, I said other foreign countries. Sometimes, I forget Canada is a foreign country. You're right. HS teams aren't beating CFL teams. I forget to. I travel all over the US and parts of Canada and there's not a huge difference really when you get down to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanboyOf91 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 The Washington Redskins should respectfully decline to volunteer. Let the other NFC East teams give up their home games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted October 12, 2011 Author Share Posted October 12, 2011 The Washington Redskins should respectfully decline to volunteer. Let the other NFC East teams give up their home games. The problem is, the leagues making so much money out of this experiment, that before long they won't be asking teams id they want to participate, they'll have it in the calendar for every team to give up a home game. Either on a yearly basis, or every three of four rotating so every club is included in that sapn. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.T.real,lights,out Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 I completely dislike the idea of playing games overseas. Or in any country other than the US. The Bills playing in Toronto is even frustrating, but at least it's right next door. It's not ignorant just because its not convenient for the English, bedlam. It takes a home game away from a team's fans, I don't care how many people are coming out to the games. A lot of these stadiums are built with tax dollars, and a lot of these people are paying for season tickets. And we're shipping one of eight games for some of these teams over seas. I don't like it because it's a gateway to more of it. Sure, right now, it's four teams playing outside the US. Two in England, two in Toronto. But where does it stop? Brazil? Japan? Mexico? Germany? Meanwhile keeping Toronto and England as annual sites? I'd be better with it if there was a game once every few years on foreign soil. But every year... And with surely more sites on Goodell's mind. That's more my problem than anything else. Goodell won't stop at England and Canada. Pretty soon every team will be playing an international game every year. I couldn't agree more with you. I hate when they play over there i just hope we dont lose a home game b/c of it. And last thing i want is to see them put a team over there FT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK_HOG Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 And last thing i want is to see them put a team over there FT. That would be a huge mistake and would flop. I very much doubt that the UK would be willing/able to support a franchise full time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedlamVR Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Xenaphobia is the fear of something strange or foreign - not necessarily a fear of foreigners - In this case the strange or foreign was used in the context of playing NFL games outside the US . At the end of the day the NFL is an entertainment business - The Superbowl for example is a lot less about the best teams of the AFC and NFC playing in single game to decide who the best team in the NFL but more about a week long spectacle of Americana and commercialism - the game is disrupted for commercial breaks the halftime is a 30 minute show, specific adverts are constructed simply for 30 second slots in the game ...it is a show ... not a soley a pure sporting event . At the end of it the winners are not crowned the best in the NFL or the best in America - but WORLD CHAMPIONS . The game is televised in over 90 countries and is generally has one of the highest TV and radio audiences for a sporting event each year, on a level of a world cup or olympic games but on an annual basis . The international series gives the opportunity for other countries fans to experience the NFL product and build the brand overseas. The games have improved the revenues TV audiences and income of the league - money that goes back into the league and back to the teams under the collective bargaining agreement that could help service the loans on the state funded stadium - and should help the teams give better deals to home (US) fans . If this was a money drain on the league then I could understand the anger but it is a net gain ..... and at the moment is a single game out of the schedule . I don't think it should go to more than that . In a time when American attendance figures are dropping the London game is garunteed to sell out . I have said I am not sure there should be more than one London game or a London franchise because I think that might water down the event - The audiences come from all over the UK and Europe to watch the International series game - sustaining that on a 8 week basis is hard to imagine . The fans who want to forgo that money and exposure are entitled to those views . Maybe they should petition the league to discourage international audiences by not selling TV rights overseas as well keep the game pure and based soley in the continental United States . The fact more and more games are being blacked out because they cannot draw local audiences or interest is irrelevant, right ? The bottom line is the International game in Europe, Canada and Mexico bring in more money, fans and exposure for the NFL and that can only be a good thing as that money goes back to the teams as an extra income - That should feed back to a better experience for the fans ....it sucks that the fans loose a home game and I understand that but generally the NFL sees these games as a net gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 I understand the attitude of US fans who resent games being taken overseas - especially if they are a season ticket owner who is losing a game. However the NFL is a business and a big one at that. As with most businesses it wants (needs) growth in revenue and profit. In the US the NFL is in a mature market - its already the major US sport by some distance and while it can continue to take some market share and dollars away from other sports and maybe see growth from online coverage its opportunity for growth is limited. If the NFL wants to see significant growth then International expansion is important and taking the game to new audiences and opening new revenue streams is key to achieving that. They need to be careful they manage this in a way that does not alienate their core US audience but this type of International activity is going to increase not go away IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 I'm very OK with preseason games. I'd like us to keep our regular season games at home. The NBA, NHL and MLB have all started doing the same thing the first games of their seasons in recent years. Buffalo and the LA Kings started the NHL season in Europe. I want to say San Diego and Houston started the MLB season in Japan or something a couple of years ago, or maybe it was Mexico. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 so how long before Goodell moves the Superbowl to Europe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted October 13, 2011 Author Share Posted October 13, 2011 so how long before Goodell moves the Superbowl to Europe? Skeerily, that's been muted on more than one occasion through his time in the hot-seat, on both sides of the Atlantic. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brave Little Toaster Oven Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 so how long before Goodell moves the Superbowl to Europe? I actually wouldnt mind that - Superbowl week is nothing but corporate **** anyways....if youre lucky enough to get a ticket, why not enjoy some place like London for a week? regular season games though? no. I dont like it at all. preseason? yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 I'm very OK with preseason games. I'd like us to keep our regular season games at home. The NBA, NHL and MLB have all started doing the same thing the first games of their seasons in recent years. Buffalo and the LA Kings started the NHL season in Europe. I want to say San Diego and Houston started the MLB season in Japan or something a couple of years ago, or maybe it was Mexico. What's the difference between hockey, baseball, basketball and football? Baseball has around, oh, 76 more home games a year. Hockey/BBall have around, what, 33 more home games a year? They can afford to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.