Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

What?

 

No week-to-week travel, just three homestands split between two homes. That's a sweet gig. 

No way the London games are road. They've got to be Jaguar homes. That means all the US games are road. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, rjrrzube said:
3 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

No week-to-week travel, just three homestands split between two homes. That's a sweet gig. 

No way the London games are road. They've got to be Jaguar homes. That means all the US games are road. 

 

It seems to me that every London game would be a designated home game for the Jaguars' opponent, which means that all the Jaguars' road games would take place in the same city, for eight consecutive weeks.

 

This would be the best quality of life that an NFL player could possibly experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

It seems to me that every London game would be a designated home game for the Jaguars' opponent, which means that all the Jaguars' road games would take place in the same city, for eight consecutive weeks.

 

This would be the best quality of life that an NFL player could possibly experience.

Now you're asking each opponent to give up a home game. Don't know about that. 

 

Ok enough Jag-jacking! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EddieJ1984 said:

Why are the Redskins being bought up? Are they changing or something?

 

No they're not. It came up from the Jaguars London/Jacksonville talk, when SFGiants58 said that thee Jags and the Washington team should be contracted, and then a bunch of people started playing around without saying the actual Redskins team name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*reads thread up to this point through email. Wonders WTF.*

 

I usually just call 'em, but thanks Urinating Tree, I find myself calling them the Deadskins.

 

Hail to the Deadskins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AndrewMLind said:

That reminds me of the first football video game I played as a child: Madden ‘92 on Sega Genesis. It was unlicensed, so the Jets were just “New Jersey” with two shades of green. It’s been years since I played, so I don’t remember any other oddities. I do recall the ambulance that would run everyone over when there was an injury, though. 

And Bill Walsh football had the colleges use the name of the city the campus was in. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

It seems to me that every London game would be a designated home game for the Jaguars' opponent, which means that all the Jaguars' road games would take place in the same city, for eight consecutive weeks.

 

This would be the best quality of life that an NFL player could possibly experience.

I think the biggest issue for London games is that they don't give either team a true home advantage. If you announce the Jags, Bengals, Browns or Ravens or any other NFL as the home team, the only advantage they get is the locker room and choice of uniform. Maybe the Cowboys and Raiders have a big enough reputation, but no other team would come close. If the Jags became the London Jags, they'd have to put in a ton of marketing that they don't really do well. There are pennants that dot Piccadilly at the start of September, but other than possibly the areas around Wembley and Twikingham I have yet to see anything that screams, "Hey come watch these guys play"! There's also a large ex-pat faction that come into town for these games. IF they aren't Jags fans and it's a game against another team that they aren't interested in seeing the numbers would slide downward. That's why I don't see the NFL letting one team move in when they can have 15 teams play there each year instead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AndrewMLind said:

That reminds me of the first football video game I played as a child: Madden ‘92 on Sega Genesis. It was unlicensed, so the Jets were just “New Jersey” with two shades of green. It’s been years since I played, so I don’t remember any other oddities. I do recall the ambulance that would run everyone over when there was an injury, though. 

I believe the Raiders were Oakland despite being in LA at the time. My guess of why they made it this way was so they could separate the two LA franchises at the time. Sure, they could have made the Rams "Anaheim" but Madden coached the Raiders in Oakland. So it made for an easy choice to make the Raiders "Oakland".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2020 at 7:36 PM, MCM0313 said:

FWIW, Wikipedia has separate pages for “gold” (with description of separate shades) and “shades of yellow” - and while no single color is on both lists, there is considerable overlap in tones. 

 

Well Portland could cure that issue quickly... or more likely a Portland XFL team. But Portland Seattle games would be Dallas/Washington from the 70's. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JayMac said:

I believe the Raiders were Oakland despite being in LA at the time. My guess of why they made it this way was so they could separate the two LA franchises at the time. Sure, they could have made the Rams "Anaheim" but Madden coached the Raiders in Oakland. So it made for an easy choice to make the Raiders "Oakland".

 

I didn't play it until a few years later (I was just 2 years old when it was released), so they were back in Oakland at the time and that part never registered until now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

I think the biggest issue for London games is that they don't give either team a true home advantage. If you announce the Jags, Bengals, Browns or Ravens or any other NFL as the home team, the only advantage they get is the locker room and choice of uniform. Maybe the Cowboys and Raiders have a big enough reputation, but no other team would come close. If the Jags became the London Jags, they'd have to put in a ton of marketing that they don't really do well. There are pennants that dot Piccadilly at the start of September, but other than possibly the areas around Wembley and Twikingham I have yet to see anything that screams, "Hey come watch these guys play"! There's also a large ex-pat faction that come into town for these games. IF they aren't Jags fans and it's a game against another team that they aren't interested in seeing the numbers would slide downward. That's why I don't see the NFL letting one team move in when they can have 15 teams play there each year instead. 

I think London/England would embrace a team that was more theirs than anywhere else (even if they were sharing a bit with Jacksonville). Sure there are fans from all teams there but I don't see it as that much different than what we'll see in Las Vegas. Local NFL fans will grow to love their team if it's named London. Add to it that the Jags owner also owns a very popular and historic Fulham soccer team in London, and I'd say the pieces are in place. It's not optimal, but the Jags situation is better suited than ever before to become London's team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You want to kill interest in Jacksonville? That’s how you do it. You’ve basically moved a team that was once exclusively theirs and are drumming up potential fears of abandoning Jacksonville altogether.
 

It’s no different than the Expos playing “home games” in San Juan, the White Sox doing the same in Milwaukee, or when the Bills rested the Toronto waters. It has the potential to kill the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hawk36 said:

I think London/England would embrace a team that was more theirs than anywhere else (even if they were sharing a bit with Jacksonville). Sure there are fans from all teams there but I don't see it as that much different than what we'll see in Las Vegas. Local NFL fans will grow to love their team if it's named London. Add to it that the Jags owner also owns a very popular and historic Fulham soccer team in London, and I'd say the pieces are in place. It's not optimal, but the Jags situation is better suited than ever before to become London's team. 

 

I'm not sure at all that's the case.  Right now Londoners can see a series of teams play, including some that already have a small following in the city.  If you take away the rotating roster of teams playing, and give London a "home team" that's not very good, it's a much harder sell.  Even if their owner does also happen to own one of the city's sixth or seventh-most notable soccer clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hawk36 said:

I think London/England would embrace a team that was more theirs than anywhere else (even if they were sharing a bit with Jacksonville). Sure there are fans from all teams there but I don't see it as that much different than what we'll see in Las Vegas. Local NFL fans will grow to love their team if it's named London. Add to it that the Jags owner also owns a very popular and historic Fulham soccer team in London, and I'd say the pieces are in place. It's not optimal, but the Jags situation is better suited than ever before to become London's team. 

Not at all, you're giving far too much credit to the NFL interest in London.  I know folks that have gone to the "home" games there throughout the seasons, Including locals that have adopted the team and a number that have come here for games as well. But the general interest is still lukewarm at best and even still don't know what is going on, and interest has grown but still as a novelty.

I'm not going to dispute London would be much more financially solvent opinion but it's still a logistical nightmare. People discount the fact Jacksonville has only seen 4 winning seasons this millennium and just over 40 wins in the 2010's that's gonna sour about any fanbase. I know it's a market with challenges but they can be answered here and with a winning product and a sunshade over the stadium wouldn't hurt. 

Rant over. 😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Claystation360 said:

Not at all, you're giving far too much credit to the NFL interest in London.  I know folks that have gone to the "home" games there throughout the seasons, Including locals that have adopted the team and a number that have come here for games as well. But the general interest is still lukewarm at best and even still don't know what is going on, and interest has grown but still as a novelty.

I'm not going to dispute London would be much more financially solvent opinion but it's still a logistical nightmare. People discount the fact Jacksonville has only seen 4 winning seasons this millennium and just over 40 wins in the 2010's that's gonna sour about any fanbase. I know it's a market with challenges but they can be answered here and with a winning product and a sunshade over the stadium wouldn't hurt. 

Rant over. 😀

I agree with this. Almost every unsuccessful franchise's fanbase has been threatened by relocation. 

 

Take the inverse of London's interest in the NFL, America's interest in the Premier League. The PL is wildly popular in the United States but if Bournemouth or Watford were to move to New York or LA, would there be sustainable interest in these clubs? I'd tend to say no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/10/2020 at 1:11 AM, Ashes of Astroworld said:

*reads thread up to this point through email. Wonders WTF.*

 

I usually just call 'em, but thanks Urinating Tree, I find myself calling them the Deadskins.

 

Hail to the Deadskins.

MOD EDIT

Edited by LMU
How many times do we have to tell you that this is off limits?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

I'm not sure at all that's the case.  Right now Londoners can see a series of teams play, including some that already have a small following in the city.  If you take away the rotating roster of teams playing, and give London a "home team" that's not very good, it's a much harder sell.  Even if their owner does also happen to own one of the city's sixth or seventh-most notable soccer clubs.

Hey now, Fulham is THE London soccer club. All else fall far behind, not that I'm a huge Fulham fan or anything :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PSA: The Washington Redskins is still the team name and no one cares what you call them. Whether or not you agree with that is up to you, but there’s no need to call attention to yourself by deliberately emphasizing that you call them something else

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jn8 said:

PSA: The Washington Redskins is still the team name and no one cares what you call them. Whether or not you agree with that is up to you, but there’s no need to call attention to yourself by deliberately emphasizing that you call them something else


Also, no need to pressure somebody into saying something they don’t want to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, the delicious irony if the Patriots were to play in London and wear red throwbacks.

Share this post


Link to post
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.