Jump to content

NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay


duma

Recommended Posts

Not until they can get a transatlantic flight from New York under two hours. And even then, television rights would cause havoc.

The NFL isn't really interested in a London team. They're interested in the English market, for merchandise and broadcasts. For that, they don't need a permanent team.

I'm not sure that this means the Rams couldn't move to LA. If they can get out of the St. Louis lease, surely they could transfer a home game or two to another team?

Yeah. On that note, please see how the Rams' lease in St. Louis goes year to year after 2014 at the latest.

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hadn't realized that - Kroenke's hedging his bets, committing to one game a year in London for as long as he's tied to the current stadium.

And wait, wouldn't you see a price break on season tickets? I've never had season tickets for an NFL (thanks for nothing Lambeau Field generational queue), but my Arsenal season ticket is calculated based on the face value of the individual game tickets.

I would presume that St. Louis season ticket holders would be charged "7 times [x]" instead of "8 times [x]" when they ordered. That's one of the reasons you do this, reduce the price of packages that you can't move at eight games.

What do the Bills do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, wouldn't you see a price break on season tickets? I've never had season tickets for an NFL (thanks for nothing Lambeau Field generational queue), but my Arsenal season ticket is calculated based on the face value of the individual game tickets.

I would presume that St. Louis season ticket holders would be charged "7 times [x]" instead of "8 times [x]" when they ordered. That's one of the reasons you do this, reduce the price of packages that you can't move at eight games.

You're correct. Team will only charge for 7 regular season games instead of 8.

A huge class-action lawsuit would come into play if teams required fans to pay for a game that they had little chance to attend.

Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hadn't realized that - Kroenke's hedging his bets, committing to one game a year in London for as long as he's tied to the current stadium.

And wait, wouldn't you see a price break on season tickets? I've never had season tickets for an NFL (thanks for nothing Lambeau Field generational queue), but my Arsenal season ticket is calculated based on the face value of the individual game tickets.

I would presume that St. Louis season ticket holders would be charged "7 times [x]" instead of "8 times [x]" when they ordered. That's one of the reasons you do this, reduce the price of packages that you can't move at eight games.

What do the Bills do?

Season ticket holders are getting refunded THIS year (not sure if that refund also counts PSL pricing).

I was just speculating that the Rams wouldn't drop the price of season tickets and PSLs next season-the other games would just cost more. <_<

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm waiting for it to be archived, but in the meantime you can find the chat linked below. This is with the Rams VP of Football Ops and COO. He's not JUST PR, but it's pretty clear he IS PR. Still, I don't think the guy is lying. Not sure he's telling the whole truth either, though.

Anyways, while talk is cheap, he certainly does a good job sounding committed to getting it to work in St. Louis. While this may indeed be lip service, it was interesting how he responded to a question by saying that the Rams could come out and say everything is good we're definitely staying but that he didn't think fans deserved just lip service. His point of view, or spin, or whatever you choose to believe it to be, is that the Rams really want to have a successful franchise in St. Louis, but they won't pretend there's not some uncertainty.

I, of course, like reading it. But, and I know I'm becoming a broken record here, we'll see what the actions actually are soon enough.

http://chat.nfl.com/front/index/1656?a_id=2

Oh, and one other note. Apparently on a radio interview today, Demoff allowed for the possibility (more certainty! lol) that Kroenke would put some of his own capital into the stadium resolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not until they can get a transatlantic flight from New York under two hours. And even then, television rights would cause havoc.

I don't see why TV rights would be such a problem? A potential London Rams home games would all be scheduled as current Wembley games are, and away games would be more open to primetime scheduling. I don't see an issue.

That being said, I don't see an NFL team being able to fill Wembley 8 times a year. Once or twice, maybe, but 8 times a year over a prolonged period? Nope. (Its worth remembering that the Scottish Claymores lasted longer than the London/England WLAF (or whatever it was called lol) franchise.)

Wembley-1.png

2011/12 WFL Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A London team could never play its road games in prime time, or the home fans couldn't reasonably watch them on television. How do you build a market when road games are broadcast in the middle of the night?

And US prime time is out, for the same reason. The London Jaguars could never play Monday Night Football. Or Saturday, or Thursday. The marquee games are out.

That's a lot of restrictions to place on a schedule. Much more burdensome than the East Coast/West Coast setup we have now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A London team could never play its road games in prime time, or the home fans couldn't reasonably watch them on television. How do you build a market when road games are broadcast in the middle of the night?

And US prime time is out, for the same reason. The London Jaguars could never play Monday Night Football. Or Saturday, or Thursday. The marquee games are out.

That's a lot of restrictions to place on a schedule. Much more burdensome than the East Coast/West Coast setup we have now.

I think UK NFL fans are pretty used to watching games at unsociable hours. (MNF kicks off usually around 1 am). Only the two primetime US slots would be so unsociable. I don't see TV rights as an issue. There are problems with a London franchise, I don't see that as one at all.

Wembley-1.png

2011/12 WFL Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A London team could never play its road games in prime time, or the home fans couldn't reasonably watch them on television. How do you build a market when road games are broadcast in the middle of the night?

And US prime time is out, for the same reason. The London Jaguars could never play Monday Night Football. Or Saturday, or Thursday. The marquee games are out.

That's a lot of restrictions to place on a schedule. Much more burdensome than the East Coast/West Coast setup we have now.

I think UK NFL fans are pretty used to watching games at unsociable hours. (MNF kicks off usually around 1 am). Only the two primetime US slots would be so unsociable.

You're going to want to build a permanent London-based NFL team's fanbase above the existing UK NFL fanbase. That fanbase is, realistically, a niche. For a NFL team to survive in the market you're going to have to attract new fans. Existing UK NFL fans may be willing to wait up to watch prime time games, but they're the diehards. Will the average British sports, which any UK-based NFL team will need to court in order to survive, be willing to wait up that long? I doubt it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need kids to watch and get hooked. Marketing to the die hards isn't a good way to build the kind of fan base an nfl team needs. It might work in NHL, but not NFL.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly.

And that's partially the difference between a series of one-offs designed to boost the sport's profile and a team permanently placed in the market.

To survive, a London team would need to aggressively market to people who weren't already fans of the sport. Games broadcast at midnight would be a serious handicap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least for the first few years, ticket sales aren't going to be a problem. I agree that it's not ideal for a TV audience, but TV rights is not the stumbling block. The primary issues (as I see it) are scheduling playoff games and guarateeing ticket sales over the long run. 8 games a year selling 80,000 tickets is not going to be straightforward over the long run.

Wembley-1.png

2011/12 WFL Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Data Point: Stan Kroenke may have entered a bid for the Los Angeles Dodgers.

In light of the likelihood of somebody going to the L.A. and the NFL's cross ownership rules, why would Kroenke stick himself out like that?

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Data Point: Stan Kroenke may have entered a bid for the Los Angeles Dodgers.

In light of the likelihood of somebody going to the L.A. and the NFL's cross ownership rules, why would Kroenke stick himself out like that?

Well since the rules are that "the NFL prohibits team owners (in this case, Kroenke and the Rams) from having majority ownership of another sports team outside its home market if the other sports team or teams play in the same city as an NFL team," the only risk for Kroenke would be if another NFL team moved to LA. Which given the LA situation is obviously a risk unless the Rams are going to be the team moving to LA. So to me it seems that this is just another indication that the Rams very well may be the team moving to LA long term. That or Stan has no faith that any other team will ever call LA home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an odd/interesting development, but it could mean anything.

Kroenke is a billionaire who likes toys. He might just see an opportunity to get another shiny toy, and deal with the ramifications of it later (in a way, that's what he did when he acquired the Rams).

Obviously the easy to speculation option is that he's buying the Dodgers because he has a plan to move his football team to the same market.

Or maybe he just had his name leaked or made a decent but not great bid as another ploy for leverage against the city of St. Louis. I wouldn't put it past him.

And then of course, there's the boring option: he didn't make a bid at all, and it's incorrect reporting. That is entirely possible given that most of the bidders have been released, and there's been no confirmation of Kroenke's bid as of yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure I've seen the Minnesota governor endorse three different stadium sites over the past few months. Not sure they've all been documented in this thread. I guess that tells me his mind could change again and the Vikings' preferred option in Arden Hills could be in play again. It does sound like the Minneapolis site near the church that was the previous fave is now out due to the church's concern.

The Vikings have no lease for 2012 but have yet to threaten to leave (that I'm aware of ) so I'm not sure they have much leverage ... yet. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the coming days. They've been committed to Minnesota throughout publicly, let's see if that changes now that they've been limited to their 3rd of 3 choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.