Jump to content

NFL games out of USA


KevinMcD

Recommended Posts

If I was a season ticket holder for a team and this happened I'd be mad, and if I was a member of a team and one of my home games was moved to a different country I'd be mad.

Seeing as I'm neither sounds like a good idea ^_^

But the whole thing seems kind of dumb and unfair to the team, but seeing as it rotates evenly I don't have too big of a problem with it. Plus it is kind of interesting to gage out interest and see games played in a totally different place.

I can see a Buffalo game in Toronto or Seattle in Vancouver definately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the majority of their money is coming from people who's butts aren't in the seats anyways...and by trying to open up more markets that means they can earn more money.

I'm just wondering where they'll play in England - Twickenham, the national rugby stadium, or Wembley? I guess that depends on whether Wembley's being used by one of the soccer clubs as a home ground...same with Germany, I could see the game being in December or so because that's when the German Bundesliga goes on a six-week mid-season break, so all the stadiums would be open and, more importantly, the NFL game would attract all the attention...I think in that case Dortmund's Westfalenstadion or Kaiserslautern's Fritz Walter Stadium, with the latter being a possibility because of the large American military population nearby - the Americans played Poland there before the world cup and it was almost a US home game the crowd support was so huge.

I can't wait to see this happen, but at the same time I wonder if it's something that shouldn't be contained to the pre-season. Perhaps having two to four pre-season games overseas, like a mini-tour, would be better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't all those countries hate American football with a fiery passion? "Rugby for Girls?"

Do the opposite and give us an FA Premier League game.

It's not as if soccer is in demand here. This whole thing makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't all those countries hate American football with a fiery passion? "Rugby for Girls?"

Do the opposite and give us an FA Premier League game.

It's not as if soccer is in demand here. This whole thing makes no sense.

But we'd accept one of their games way before they'd accept one of ours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, it just so happens nobody in the entire Greater Los Angeles metropolitan area actually likes professional football! Remember, "In Los Angeles, footballs are black and white."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole idea is pretty selfish for the NFL. It doesn't help the teams (lose a home game, travel 7-10 hours in the middle of the season to play in Europe) and it doesn't help the fans (lose a home game). The NFL is the one that directly reaps the benefits ($$$) without any of the inconvenience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm of two minds on this.

I understand that if you want to expand the league's popularity overseas, you have to do something like this. I'm assuming that the team giving up a home game each season would be heavily compensated by the NFL through additional revenue sharing and the like, and both teams would probably have a bye the week after the game (to allow the players a better chance to recover).

On the flip side, I wouldn't like the Rams to give up a home game and risk being tired and disoriented for a couple of weeks, and I'm sure other fans would feel the same way about their favorite team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This wouldn't be a problem if the NFL dropped from 4 preseason games to 3 preseason games, added a 17th game to the regular season and made that 17th game a neutral site game, thus providing 16 non-NFL cities a chance to host a meaningful NFL game every year. You could play these games in a number of overseas venues plus major college stadia outside of NFL markets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NFL just did this two seasons ago with the Cardinals in Mexico. They avoided any real outcry from dedicated fans because no one gives a damn about the Cardinals.

I don't like the idea of taking home games away from teams -- most of them need concessions, merchandise, etc. to stay profitable. What's so bad about moving preseason games to other countries? It'd be the same premise as the NBA's practice of playing preseason games in neutral sites and I'm sure the locals would be happy enough just to get the NFL product without worrying what kind of game it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like the idea of taking home games away from teams -- most of them need concessions, merchandise, etc. to stay profitable. What's so bad about moving preseason games to other countries? It'd be the same premise as the NBA's practice of playing preseason games in neutral sites and I'm sure the locals would be happy enough just to get the NFL product without worrying what kind of game it is.

I was going to type a reply to this thread and then I read this and can pretty much just say "ditto." Revenue-wise I am sure the "home" team is compensated. People buy hot dogs in other countries too. My beef is not about the revenue but about the loss of a home game/road game for schedule reasons. I don't like things that take away the integrity of the schedule and playoff run. And having one team lose a home game and another lose a road game does just that (particularly if division rivals). For this reason, I don't think they'll usually have the best teams involved in these games, but in the NFL last year's 6-10 can be this year's 11-5.

I don't think the Cardinals will lose another home game over this because of the new stadium, so look for the Vikings to be the "home" team in one of these. If I were a season ticket holder, I would not care (though if there is an annual deposit, that should be cut by 1/8) about the way it affects my attendance. I'd be happy to save one game ticket price. But as a fan, I'll be upset if they lose a home game because it affects the integrity of the schedule. If they lose a road game, it's an advantage I do not want either.

And I agree 100% with the idea of playing preseason games elsewhere. Season ticket holders would love it so they can pay for one instead of two preseason games and I don't think it would matter much to the fans whether the game counted or not. They should pay preseason games in all the nuetral sites they can find, in the US and abroad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think this is fair to people who have season tickets or teams that earned a home game. NFL isn't that big in Europe and soccer isn't that big here. This is going to have teams at a disadvantage. Say you're the away team, your home game is in Europe, and then away for 2 more. You've just played 4 straight on the road...not to mention jet lag, familiy, etc. Why? So the NFL network and some owners, who are billionaires, can make more? Pre-season..fine. regular season...bad idea. Also, if it's Europe, am I going to watch my team live at 4am or will they show the game delayed when I already have it spoiled for me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we can't have an NFL team in Toronto because, well, just because... and they can't play a game here because "it's not fair for season ticket holders to only see 7 games instead of 8 per season".

I'd like to have, i dunno, 1 game, per decade maybe.

The greed seems to be from the fans posting in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 for Chris. Because we all know the financial sacrifices (read: enormous credit card bill) made for those precious season tickets should not go to nought if someone in another country wants to see the NFL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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