NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

[GFB]

2 hours ago, WSU151 said:

London Monarchs!

 

This is a better look than the Chargers. Change my mind.

[Sodboy13]

For both teams pictured, yes.

[hawk36]

16 minutes ago, GFB said:

 

This is a better look than the Chargers. Change my mind.

Could they actually be the Monarchs and use the branding? I believe the WLAF was owned by the NFL weren't they? That would be pretty cool. 

 

It would be interesting though to see what fans in London would want. Would they want their own team name or would they feel having an existing NFL team name was better? Like what if the Wolverhampton Wanderers moved to New York but stayed in the EPL. Would New York fans want to be the New York Wanderers and keep the existing brand, etc. or would they want to rename the team?

[daniel75]

I miss NFL Europe. There was something fascinating watching other countries becoming fans of an American sport. I think most of the time I tuned in just to see the fans and atmosphere  in the stadium.

[Krz]

32 minutes ago, GFB said:

 

This is a better look than the Chargers. Change my mind.

Disagree, this is one of the best looks in the NFL, and much better than a uniform with one of my least favorite colors, beige/Vegas gold

[dfwabel]

20 hours ago, Red Comet said:

Let's say the Chargers move to London. What rivalries do you break up to have divisions that make a modicum of sense? Personally, I'm thinking this is the way it goes:

 

AFC East

New England

New York Jets

Buffalo

London

 

AFC South

Miami

Jacksonville

Indianapolis 

Tennessee

 

AFC West

Houston

Kansas City

Las Vegas

Denver

 

AFC North

Pittsburgh 

Baltimore

Cleveland

Cincinnati 

 

This isn't nearly as gruesome as I thought.

This the second of the two concepts give by The Athletic's Vincent Bonsignore, author of the original story I linked to.

The primary one was just to swap the Texans and Chargers.

[SFGiants58]

11 minutes ago, daniel75 said:

I miss NFL Europe. There was something fascinating watching other countries becoming fans of an American sport. I think most of the time I tuned in just to see the fans and atmosphere  in the stadium.

Hey, they even had murderer/eyebrow maintenance expert Eric Naposki (91)!

 

 

I wish I had the time/patience to get my eyebrows that good-looking.

[dfwabel]

1 hour ago, colortv said:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28014633/chargers-owner-dean-spanos-says-london-relocation-report-bs

 

If you read the report it's basically, "well IF the NFL went to the chargers to talk about it, the Chargers would consider talking about" ie nothing really.

NFL UK's Managing Director, Alistar Kirkwood was quoted more than once in the Bonsignore story, including:

Quote

“The fact (is) we can sell out games for pretty much any type of matchup, and that the fanbase will come out and support it, so I think that test has been met. I think from an operational and logistics perspective, we have a lot of experience in transportation and managing timezones. There’s hotels and practice facilities. I think there’s an awful lot of opportunities there.”

 

And the following data points*:

Quote

• There are more than five million NFL fans in the UK, including four million avid fans.

• Overnight TV viewership, including RedZone, is up 32 percent from the 2018 season.

• Sky Sports’ weekly ratings have doubled over the past decade.

• UK social-media followers (measured on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter accounts) is up 16 percent over the last year.

• More than 24 million people watched NFL programming on UK television during the 2018 season.

• Streams of NFL programming on BBC iPlayer (on-demand) increased 150 percent in 2018 season over 2017.

• The NFLUK’s email database has risen from 35,000 prior to the start of the London series in 2007 to 490,000 today, with NFL UK having a total digital community of 1.9 million.

And Kirkwood acknowledges the taxation and immigration issues to be resolved, but isn't like they haven't thought about it.

 

*-I'd link for citation, but I'm not giving away my subscription for nothing.

[GFB]

1 hour ago, KRZYBDGRZ said:

Disagree, this is one of the best looks in the NFL, and much better than a uniform with one of my least favorite colors, beige/Vegas gold

I like the Chargers uniforms. The powder blue and lightning bolts are definitely iconic. However, there are a few problems with the Chargers’ brand that I’d be interested in hearing your (or anyone else’s) opinion:

 

Problem #1:

Everyone seems to agree the Chargers have iconic uniforms, but it’s hard to find majority on what the best Chargers uniform is. Is it the modern swoopy-bolts, the 90s navy uniforms, the “Air Coryell” royal blue and gold era, or the original powder blues?

 

To me, every iteration of the Chargers look has its strength and weaknesses. Personally, I value consistency in the bolts, so I prefer the 90s and the originals. Other people value the shade of blue or the success of the team or the color of the face mask.

 

I think this hints at a greater problem: that the Chargers’ identity, while flexible, has never been completely figured out. The Chargers have had several B+ looks, but never an A+ uniform that the majority agrees upon.
 

Problem #2:

While the helmet is almost always awesome, the Chargers have never had a great logo to pair with the uniforms; like a mini-Cleveland Browns disease. Personally, I’ve never had a huge issue with the Browns not having a (good) logo, but it does limit the identity in certain regards. 
 

Is the bolt strong enough to use as the Chargers primary logo? If not, what should their logo be (that embodies the Chargers brand)?

 

Problem #3

To put it nicely, has the Chargers brand been poisoned to the point of being unsalvageable? Between all the on-field disappointments and, well, choke-jobs in Charger history and the off-field tone-deafness that has isolated the entire fanbase and moved on from potentially two cities, why would you want to saddle a new city/country/fanbase with that burden?

[Old School Fool]

2 hours ago, hawk36 said:

Could they actually be the Monarchs and use the branding? I believe the WLAF was owned by the NFL weren't they? That would be pretty cool. 

 

It would be interesting though to see what fans in London would want. Would they want their own team name or would they feel having an existing NFL team name was better? Like what if the Wolverhampton Wanderers moved to New York but stayed in the EPL. Would New York fans want to be the New York Wanderers and keep the existing brand, etc. or would they want to rename the team?

 

I'm assuming the NFL still owns all the rights to the NFL Europe teams. In the Madden games you can relocate to London and become the Monarchs so that says to me the NFL is alright with it because they control how that game is put out.

[jn8]

Welp, this didn't take long to get shot down...

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28014633/chargers-owner-dean-spanos-says-london-relocation-report-bs

 

[Red Comet]

4 hours ago, dfwabel said:

This the second of the two concepts give by The Athletic's Vincent Bonsignore, author of the original story I linked to.

The primary one was just to swap the Texans and Chargers.

 

I'm not surprised that such a solution was already proposed. I don't have the money to spend on The Athletic. Hence why I'm trying to become a homeowner so I can actually enjoy life rather than just put up with it. In a total :censored:hole like Kansas City, the American Dream isn't a fantasy. Aside from that, fair enough. I mean, at least you have Super Bowl triumphs from the Clinton Administration to remember. My Dad wasn't even out of diapers when the Chiefs last won the Lombardi. And my socially awkward autistic ass managed to slide into home plate before the Chiefs won a playoff game that I could even begin to remember (I was 3 when Joe Montana got us to the AFC title game). Yeah, if it weren't for the Royals pulling a couple pennants out of their ass, my hometown would compete with Cleveland for most miserable markets in American pro sports.

[guest23]

24 minutes ago, jn8 said:

Welp, this didn't take long to get shot down...

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28014633/chargers-owner-dean-spanos-says-london-relocation-report-bs

 

 

I've heard on the radio that spanos is dragging his feet in terms of paying for construction costs and they are half-assing their season ticket sales and selling at such a low price kroenke is beyond pissed...so stan or even the league may have leaked this to the press just to give dean-o some heat.

 

For those who are still keeping score, the nfl has been popular in returning to LA bu it's driven by the visiting teams and their fans...the chargers are now the washington generals of the nfl and have no home and the rams still are not even close to being the most popular team in town...will ticket brokers be able to pick up all the slack on the sky high prices of tickets at the new stadium...lastly tv ratings were already strong which means no incremental viewership gains.

 

This statement is far from polished but I'm going with it.

[dfwabel]

21 minutes ago, Red Comet said:

s

I'm not surprised that such a solution was already proposed. I don't have the money to spend on The Athletic.

Which is why I gave the * as opposed to link to it.  I am not giving that away now.  I don't give away my SBJ/SBD links either, if it is on their podcast, I'll link that. 

 

And last week, SDSU raised their offer for the Qualcomm site since that deal is NOT done!

Quote

San Diego State University is now offering to pay $19.5 million more than before to purchase the city’s Mission Valley stadium property.

 

In a new offer letter, delivered to Mayor Kevin Faulconer on Monday, the university presented a revised purchase price of $86.2 million for 135 acres of land, plus an estimated $1.5 million to account for a portion of the site’s appreciation since 2017, for a total of $87.7 million.

 

In addition, SDSU is proposing to take over the portion of Murphy Canyon Creek immediately adjacent to the site without requiring the city to pay for any past-due maintenance.

The updated sale terms seemingly put to an end a factious difference in opinion as to whether the deal points were consistent with a voter-approved initiative.

 

“The proposal represents a significant step forward in allowing the parties to reach consensus on purchase and sale terms, setting the stage for the city to transfer this property to SDSU,” Faulconer wrote in a Monday letter addressed to SDSU President Adela de la Torre.

 

The mayor also noted that he was “pleased” to move the offer letter forward to the city council and the city attorney for further review. Council members are expected to publicly weigh in on the terms during a Nov. 18 meeting, a spokeswoman for the mayor’s office said.

 

[Walk-Off]

21 hours ago, leopard88 said:

If this were to happen (extremely large if), I think the most likely realignment scenario would be:

 

1.  Chargers to AFC South

2.  Texans to AFC West.

 

Your suggestion makes the most geographic sense.  However, I think the league would do as much as it could to maintain the existing AFC East rivalries and would also be hesitant to split up the AFC North.

Part of my reasoning about how the NFL might realign the AFC if the Chargers move to London is a belief in the notion that if the league is so eager to do something as risky as put a team in London, and especially if the league's powers that be are wondering nowadays if they can resolve the Chargers' lack of fan support and revenue as a Los Angeles team by steering that franchise toward London, then Goodell et al. might be feeling a lot of pressure to make sure that a London-based version of the Bolts play in a division with teams that are (a) the most desired regular opponents among gridiron football fans in Greater London, (b) in markets which Londoners would have the greatest desire to visit for an away game, and (c) in markets whose own teams' fanbases are large enough, geographically close enough, and wealthy enough to be the most likely sources of people traveling to London for rivalry games.  Therefore, I think that, within the AFC (if not in the NFL as a whole), the best possible trio of divisional rivals for a London-based franchise may well be:

• the Patriots -- a perennial championship contender since 2001, the league's closest team to both the British Isles and continental Europe, and a team based in a part of the United States with a particularly rich history and high income per capita;
• the Jets -- who play near a city that is not only the largest in the United States, but also London's main rival worldwide as a center of finance and culture; and
• the Dolphins -- who play close to a glamorous and cosmopolitan city that, particularly in the winter, draws many middle-to-upper-class visitors from the across the British Isles and the European mainland.

 

On the other hand, while I am a Titans fan, I have strong doubts that the AFC South would be a smart choice of division for a London NFL team resulting from a relocation of the Chargers.

• Jacksonville may be in Florida, but its attractiveness to the average Londoner might be hampered by its having cooler winters, having noticeably fewer tourism draws, and being generally less sophisticated than Miami.  In the other direction, I have at least the impression that the average person in the Jacksonville area is poorer, and thus less able to attend an away game in a place as far away as London, than the typical resident of the Miami area.
• Nashville might be comparable to Boston in terms of appeal and popularity among travelers from the London area.  However, it seems rather obvious to me that the country, bluegrass, and Southern gospel genres of music -- the bedrocks of the contemporary global image of Nashville -- are decidedly acquired tastes, particularly among Europeans.  Meanwhile, the Nashville area is more populous and possibly richer per capita than the Jacksonville area, but is still very much in the shadows of the New York City, Boston, and even Miami areas in terms of both population and income per capita.
• Indianapolis anchors a metropolitan area with a population size comparable to that of the Nashville metro area, and it would not surprise me one bit if the Indianapolis area enjoys a higher income per capita than either the Nashville area or the Jacksonville area.  However, I suspect also that the Indianapolis area's income per capita is, at best, no higher than that of the Miami area.  Furthermore, what can Indianapolis really offer to a visitor from Greater London, especially in the fall and winter months?

[dont care]

Well dean spanos went on an explosive filled tirade on how they aren’t moving. But if they were to, AFC south is the only place to put them. All 4 AFC East teams have 60 year old rivalries that can’t be broken up. If the south lost the Texans it’s not a big deal because none had that big of a rivalry during the past 20 years outside of a fist fight between the titans. London doesn’t need a team and should be happy with what ever teams they get to play there.

[FiddySicks]

I mean, honestly. Are we really all that concerned about keeping that “storied” Dolphins-Jets rivalry?

 

Both of those teams are garbage and have been for so long that any “rivalry” has been dormant for YEARS if not completely dead already. You could move ANY of those teams other than the Pats and it wouldn’t make a bit of difference in the world. None of those teams are good enough to merit having to “save” those rivalries. 

 

Move the Dolphins to the South, Chargers to the East, Texans to the West.

 

[JH42XCC]

We can all agree that the Chargers moving from LA to London makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Especially when they should be going back to San Diego, where they rightfully belong.

 

If the NFL wanted to bring a team to London so badly, they should just bring back NFL Europe instead.

[bosrs1]

34 minutes ago, JH42XCC said:

We can all agree that the Chargers moving from LA to London makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Especially when they should be going back to San Diego, where they rightfully belong.

 

If the NFL wanted to bring a team to London so badly, they should just bring back NFL Europe instead.

 

I mean barring moving back home to San Diego, a London move makes perfect sense. As they’re not wanted in LA. Which is a new look for the NFL, and one they can’t be happy with. 

[BBTV]

The flight from east coast to London is only 20 minutes longer than from Tampa to Seattle. If the schedule is made so that  playing in London play in NY, PHL, NE the previous week then I don’t see that being too big a deal.
 

They probably need a bye the following week since returning to their home city would be very tiring and they’d be at too much of a disadvantage either playing right after that journey or having three straight road games (if not based in one of those cities) while dealing with that travel.

 

the London team itself would be in a tough spot since they’d have to play long stretches of road games where they’d have no permanent base, and be out of their home fans minds for weeks at a time.  

 

it’s rather silly to unnecessarily create a situation where all of the logistical concerns exist at all, especially on what’s essentially a gamble.