The NFL and London

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,213
Name
Burger man
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/a...but-the-league-has-a-surprising-no-1-concern/

While much of the chatter surrounding the recent NFL owners' meeting in Carolina focused on Mark Davis's dalliances with Las Vegas, and awarding three new Super Bowl host cities, there was plenty of talk once again about London. Chances are you didn't hear about it. But it was going on.

Although it hasn't been receiving much public attention recently, with the owners voting to allow multiple teams to relocate to Los Angeles a few months back and with the stadium situations in Oakland and San Diego still very much in the news, don't be fooled: The movement to London is alive and well.

It was a major topic of conversation among the owners last week, according to numerous league sources. Mark Waller, who heads the NFL's International arm, gave a detailed progress report and presentation to the owners at that meeting that led many teams to come away more convinced than ever that this is something Park Avenue very much wants to happen.

According to those privy to the presentation, there was discussion of some of the obvious potential ongoing hurdles -- how players will be compensated, the ability to recruit players and coaches there -- but those seem like labor issues that can be fairly easily mined. Sources said the NFL continues to fine tune how it will approach these quandaries, but they are not considered to be deal-breakers to any degree. I could see a guy like Tom Coughlin being willing to coach a team in London right now. There are only 32 of these jobs and only 32 of these teams, and there will be enough money over there to get players and coaches to come.

Believe it or not, what the league is most concerned about sorting out lately is how it would handle a London franchise once it inevitably reached a playoff round and faced a team from beyond the Midwest. Yes, that's how far down the line the NFL is in addressing London contingencies, and these are the types of things owners are being asked to consider as further preparations are made toward moving a team to England.

nfl-london-regent-street.jpg

Will the NFL soon have a team in London? USATSI
Nothing is imminent; it's all still years away. But more regular season games being played over there every year, and teams now aren't guaranteed a byewhen they return to the U.S. The games in London are being played within a short frame of time to replicate the feel of a season over there, and more stadiums are becoming involved in hosting the games. It's easy to see the direction the wind is blowing at the league office.

And it remains a riddle how to handle scheduling and broadcasting should a London team hypothetically have to go to somewhere like San Diego or San Francisco during a playoff round. How can you accommodate both clubs in terms of rest and travel during a period of the season in which no bye is possible? Do you build in buffers to play games on a Tuesday or Thursday, say, if the two teams involved prefer that? How amenable would the networks be to such a fluctuating situation?

There would obviously be some significant logistical obstacles for both teams involved, as well as whoever is broadcasting the game, and the NFL is considering how to best sort through that from a competitive standpoint. Let's face it, every extra 12 hours off is a huge factor come the postseason, and the schedule needs to be as fair and balanced as possible.

"That was the thing they seemed to have the most difficulty figuring out," said one team exec who closely watched the session. "They aren't sure how to handle that from a competitive standpoint, but judging from how Waller spoke about, it's definitely something they are spending a fair amount of time working on."

So, yeah, if owners are being briefed on matters that seem as esoteric and potentially remote as this (a London vs. L.A. hypothetical playoff game), then it's safe to assume they are trying to plan for everything as the march across the pond intensifies the deeper we get into this decade. As for how to solve this riddle, maybe you give the road team the option of playing the game a few days sooner or later than the norm? The teams I spoke to guessed maybe something like that eventually carries the day, but rest assured, there will be plenty more work done behind the scenes preparing and planning for it.
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,213
Name
Burger man
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
I think it will happen eventually.

But; it also feels like the "LA replacement" to leverage stadium development in existing cities.

I don't see expansion happening anytime soon.
 

OntarioRam

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 22, 2015
Messages
3,176
It would be far less than ideal logistically, and football is not overly popular in England. I think it will happen eventually, but I hope other cities get teams first.

If the NFL wants to expand, there are at least a few markets in the USA that would be better suited than London, England (including St. Louis, which our Rams just left....).

If it is expansion beyond the United States the NFL seeks, Toronto should come before London. And I say that with zero bias. NFL football is far more popular here than in England. It has a huge following (even if it still clearly lags behind hockey as the #1 sport). Geographically, Toronto is extremely close to pretty much all major U.S. cities on the east coast. And Toronto is a huge market to tap - it's the bigger than any American market not named New York, LA, or Chicago. I don't think many people outside of Canada realise the Greater Toronto Area has a population of over 6 million.
 

HellRam

Starter
Joined
May 9, 2016
Messages
675
I would be dissapointed if the NFL were to ever go to Europe. I'm curious how they would handle the simple problems it imposes like Monday Night Football... would they broadcast prime time games in London or American time, same for the Thursday and Sunday games. I'd also imagine many players refusing to sign with a foreign team if drafted by that team. Just seems like too much to me....
 

Riverumbbq

Angry Progressive
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
May 26, 2013
Messages
11,962
Name
River
I think it will happen eventually.

But; it also feels like the "LA replacement" to leverage stadium development in existing cities.

I don't see expansion happening anytime soon.

Agree, ... until aircraft technology cuts flight times in half, London & Germany are far too distant. Tired players mean more injuries and mistakes, and it isn't truly fair unless every team in the division has the same experience. The idea is great, just not very practical at this time. jmo.
 

Riverumbbq

Angry Progressive
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
May 26, 2013
Messages
11,962
Name
River
It would be far less than ideal logistically, and football is not overly popular in England. I think it will happen eventually, but I hope other cities get teams first.

If the NFL wants to expand, there are at least a few markets in the USA that would be better suited than London, England (including St. Louis, which our Rams just left....).

If it is expansion beyond the United States the NFL seeks, Toronto should come before London. And I say that with zero bias. NFL football is far more popular here than in England. It has a huge following (even if it still clearly lags behind hockey as the #1 sport). Geographically, Toronto is extremely close to pretty much all major U.S. cities on the east coast. And Toronto is a huge market to tap - it's the bigger than any American market not named New York, LA, or Chicago. I don't think many people outside of Canada realise the Greater Toronto Area has a population of over 6 million.

Can't Buffalo share the Bills with Toronto ? There had been talk at one time of moving the Bills to Toronto. Maybe 4 home games in each city ? I agree that St.Louis should get a team again, and Mexico has also proven it will support the NFL. How many multi-billionaires are standing in line for teams these days ?
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,972
Name
mojo
If i'm Commissioner...

I don't ignore ludicrous logistics. No expansion to Europe, but i would re-evaluate bringing back NFL Europe. Things may have changed in the last 10 years. IDK. I hire people who know to find out for me.

Mexico(especially) and Canada are the obvious market. Good to see the NFL going back to Mexico City this season for MNF(Texans vs Raiders).

There's money to be made globally to be sure and the idea of playing games abroad is smart, but putting a team in Europe(London) is wrong for obvious logistical reasons.

Until someone builds one of these....
200.gif
...it's stupid talk.
 

ViennaMax

Rookie
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
256
i can tell you that nfl europe wouldnt work out - every country has there own league with not very good attendance.... people wanna see the best playing - there is a reason why people watch grand slam tennis and not local tournaments with average players. or why the champions league (football) is much more watched than the euro league (2nd biggest tournament with very exciting teams).

alltough i understand why many people in the usa wouldn't like a team in europe - when citys like st louis don't have a team any more..
logistical it wouldnt be very good either (jet lag etc)

but the nfl is just a business and all tough i don't like the idea from an sport standpoint this might be the best move for the business.
 

DaveFan'51

Old-Timer
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
18,666
Name
Dave
awarding three new Super Bowl host cities, there was plenty of talk once again about London. Chances are you didn't hear about it. But it was going on.
On one hand I would mind seeing a Super-Bowl Played in London, But then again it bring a lot of Money into the Host City's area, and I'd prefer to keep that in the U.S. of A.!!:D:homercrawl:
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,972
Name
mojo
logistical it wouldnt be very good either (jet lag etc)
It would be ludicrous.
LA to London 5,454 miles(8,777 km)
NY to London 3,470 miles(5,585 km)

Seattle to NY is 2,404 miles(3,868 km) and this trip is brutal...so even the Mexico thing is barely doable
Mexico City to NY 2,888 miles(4,547 km).

I get it. It's all about the dollar $igns but logistics are everything.
NFL white collar money makers are hard at work as we speak to get teams all over the globe i'm sure....
download (7).jpg
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
It would be far less than ideal logistically, and football is not overly popular in England. I think it will happen eventually, but I hope other cities get teams first.

If the NFL wants to expand, there are at least a few markets in the USA that would be better suited than London, England (including St. Louis, which our Rams just left....).

If it is expansion beyond the United States the NFL seeks, Toronto should come before London. And I say that with zero bias. NFL football is far more popular here than in England. It has a huge following (even if it still clearly lags behind hockey as the #1 sport). Geographically, Toronto is extremely close to pretty much all major U.S. cities on the east coast. And Toronto is a huge market to tap - it's the bigger than any American market not named New York, LA, or Chicago. I don't think many people outside of Canada realise the Greater Toronto Area has a population of over 6 million.

Well said...

...for a Canadian.:sneaky:
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
They could extend the season with an additional bye week to handle the coordination of travel.

Having more than one team in Europe would help too. Play multiple games over there in a row.

@OntarioRam is right though, Toronto would be a much better choice.

It would be terrible to jet lag teams every week.
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,972
Name
mojo
NFL Expansion To England Would Be A Disaster … So Expect Roger Goodell To Make It Happen
By Mike In Woburn, Sports Hub Contributor


BOSTON (CBS) — This weekend, Roger Goodell’s never-ending quest to destroy the NFL while simultaneously making the most money possible continues, and we will be treated to yet another neutral site, regular-season game in London. The New York Jets will play the Miami Dolphins in a game that serves mainly as an excuse for NFL fans to start drinking at 9:30 a.m. on a Sunday.

For British sports fans, however, it’s just a mildly interesting oddity. But don’t tell that to NFL ownership. The more time and capital the NFL spends doing these exhibitions in London, the louder the scuttlebutt gets about the NFL actually moving a franchise there permanently.

To put it bluntly, an NFL franchise based in London would be the crown jewel in Roger Goodell’s illustrious career of terrible ideas.

The only reason why the NFL would want to do this is cash. It’s a completely new market, with new TV licenses to sell, advertisers to cater to and fans to fleece. This isn’t about expanding the game or making the sport an international phenomenon. It’s about creating another payday for the owners at the expense of their fans. And it’s doomed to fail.

Great Britain isn’t some wannabe metropolis with football craving bumpkins like Charlotte or Indianapolis. It’s a country with a culture and interests that do not include the NFL or American football in general. There is only a “market” for the game here because the NFL wants there to be one.


This will not work for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is they already have a similar and superior product: Rugby.

As Americans who grow up as slaves to NFL Sundays, this seems like pure blasphemy, but to the British, it’s a stone cold fact. Rugby (from which American football originates) is a very similar game, with better officiating, played at a faster pace, with fewer interruptions. The refs are wired for real time sound and are actually competent. Rugby has a faster and more transparent video replay system. There are no helmets, so star players are identifiable and easier to relate to. The game hasn’t been bastardized for fantasy leagues.

There are far fewer breaks between plays, and most importantly, no commercials! Rugby has two 40-minute halves of non-stop action, just like soccer has two 45- minute commercial-free halves. Because of this, the English are culturally conditioned to expect constant gameplay with passive advertising (on-field graphics, sponsorship-riddled uniforms). You think the Brits are going to tune in for a slower, poorly adjudicated contest that stops every five minutes for the same commercials for one-day fantasy, pizza, cars and insurance? Goodell’s better off selling them toothpaste.

Long term, the location itself won’t allow London to field a competitive team. You think a big name free agent is going to London? Ha! Forget it. The tax rate is hideous, the food is terrible and the Jets actually feel the need to airlift in acceptable toilet paper. It’s obvious that the only players London will attract are the guys they grossly overpay, the washed-up, looking-for-one-more-check player and the guys they draft. Players thought getting franchised was bad in America? Guys who get tagged by the London Fog will be defecting on road trips like Cubans.

Oh, and speaking of road trips, how do you think a West Coast team is going to feel about a 10-hour plane flight with an eight-hour time zone difference? West Cost teams playing 1 o’clock games on the East Coast already lay a Hot Peyton. San Diego and Oakland might be better off forfeiting because they’re going to need more than a sleep coach and a few rolls of Quilted Northern to cope with travel this punitive.

But they’ll only have to make that trip once a season. The London team will be completely legless on the road but lucky for them, nobody in jolly old England will be watching. A 4 p.m. West Coast game will air at 9 p.m. in England, and you can literally never have the London team in a prime-time match up. No Thursday Night Football, no Sunday Night Football and no Monday Night Football. Only Roger Goodell would be dumb enough to invest in a flagship European franchise that could never be on any of its three weekly ratings showcases because you can’t sell pizza at 3 a.m. GMT. Even Papa John sleeps.


And even if British fans took to American football, it will be tough fielding a team when half of the players are getting deported, because the NFL has a little bit of a crime problem. As it is, franchises in America have their hands full keeping their players out of the pokey. Now take a team of the same high-strung, violent guys, feed them terrible food and keep them sleep-deprived and jetlagged for six months in a foreign country. The overtime that Scotland Yard is going to have to put in will be staggering.

Plus, every time a player goes on a TMZ-worthy party cruise or terrorizes a pub and ends up locked in the Tower of London, it’s going to be an international incident. Goodell and the NFL can barely grasp this country’s legal system. Now Roger is going to send general counsel Jeff Pash and Ted Wells in powdered wigs to get Josh Gordon out of the Old Bailey because he just tried to take a bushel of pot through customs? Good luck, barrister.

Bottom line: It’s fairly obvious that Goodell’s plan is to move the Jaguars to England, but it’s just repeating the same mistake over again. Expansion to Jacksonville looked promising at first but it ultimately ended up being a town that preferred the local product (college football) over what the NFL offered them. With a similar situation in London coupled with so many more negative variables than Jacksonville ever faced, only an irredeemable simpleton would regard expansion to England as anything other than a greed-driven pipe dream.

So naturally I expect to see Goodell and the Spice Girls opening the 2017 season in Wembley Stadium.

God Save the Queen.

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/10/02/nfl-expansion-to-england-would-be-a-disaster-so-expect-roger-goodell-to-make-it-happen/
 

KNUCKLEHEAD

I won't say it unless you don't.
Joined
Sep 11, 2014
Messages
553
Turrible... turrible plan. It's just un-workable. I wish they'd scrap the whole idea.
 

OntarioRam

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 22, 2015
Messages
3,176
Can't Buffalo share the Bills with Toronto ? There had been talk at one time of moving the Bills to Toronto. Maybe 4 home games in each city ? I agree that St.Louis should get a team again, and Mexico has also proven it will support the NFL. How many multi-billionaires are standing in line for teams these days ?

Although theoretically possible, I don't think the Bills will ever become shared with Toronto. For one, Buffalo would never want it to happen. Moreover, I doubt Toronto would want to pay the cost required to get only half-ownership of a team.

I also think the NFL vastly over-estimates the amount of fan support for the Bills in the Greater Toronto Area. Yes, they are popular, but this perception the Bill's are "Southern Ontario's team" is completely flawed. All of the usual suspects are far more popular - New England, Pittsburgh, Dallas, Green Bay, etc. Then you also have lots of fans supporting teams at random since we have no geographic ties to any team (Seattle, Baltimore, Oakland, etc.... and of course Los Angeles ;) ). There is a reason the Bills don't ever get overly amazing attendance when they come play here - most people don't want to fork over big time cash to watch an NFL game that doesn't involve their team (myself included). Then people claim: "See! Canada doesn't like football!". In reality, it is that Canada is only luke-warm to Buffalo Bills football. If you gave Toronto its own team, I guarantee you'd fill the stands. Many people (maybe even most?) would immediately jump ship from their American franchise to the local team. Other, myself included, would simply support both. I would remain a Rams fan but would for the first time in *any* sport actually have a close "2nd team" that I follow intensely. I'd definitely tune in on Sundays, go to the games, buy the merchandise, and strongly support them against every team but the Rams.
 
Last edited:

Merlin

Enjoying the ride
Rams On Demand Sponsor
ROD Credit | 2023 TOP Member
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
37,487
It's gonna happen, and it's gonna be the Jaguars. They'll use blocks of home and away games to help minimize the travel, but it's gonna be a "suck it up" thing for the teams just like it is now. NFL is doing games there now to serve notice, plain and simple.

Mexico city will be in the future too. They're crazy about American Football and it's only a matter of time.

Not so sure about Canada. Since they have their own teams and all. Think the league would be wise to use them as AAA teams where they stash players of greater talent from larger overall rosters with them and have some minimum call-up abilities.
 

Riverumbbq

Angry Progressive
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
May 26, 2013
Messages
11,962
Name
River
It's gonna happen, and it's gonna be the Jaguars.

Not so sure about Canada. Since they have their own teams and all. Think the league would be wise to use them as AAA teams where they stash players of greater talent from larger overall rosters with them and have some minimum call-up abilities.

Doubt it would ever happen, but i'd prefer to see a CFL merger with the NFL, bringing in 8 of 9 of the Canadian teams to, thru realignment, add one additional team for each NFL division. Hamilton would be absorbed by Toronto and the BC Lions, by virtue of being in Seahawks territory, would move to St.Louis. jmo.