NFL in Europe

[wdleehi]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4588350


I know it is not going away, but the more I hear them talk, the more I hate the talk.

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell says the league hopes to start playing multiple regular-season games in Britain in the next few years.

Why take away the home field advantage for teams in a league with so few home fields? 

And worse, why take away a game from the loyal season ticket holders?

He also says putting an NFL franchise in London is of "tremendous interest."

Goodell says "every indicator" shows the British market can support more games, but stopped short of giving a timeline for expanding the NFL's overseas presence.

No, no, no.


Bad idea. 

[Chris]

I really don't know how well the NFL would do in England once the novelty wears out.  This is a bad idea.

[yall hate]

not to mention teams already complain about the east-west travel and vice versa.  Flights to London are twice as long.  Horrible idea.

And I am left wondering whether playing in London permanently for a team would have a negative effect on Free Agents wanting to play for the team

[indeedproceed]

I think whether or not its a bad idea, it ought to be tried by someone.

Whether it is basketball or football (baseball I doubt would work), someone is gonna get a leg in the foreign market, and I don't mean Canada.

[Chris]

not to mention teams already complain about the east-west travel and vice versa.  Flights to London are twice as long.  Horrible idea.

And I am left wondering whether playing in London permanently for a team would have a negative effect on Free Agents wanting to play for the team

Well, it just means more work for the "Sleep Doctor".  First he is helping out the Blazers, and now the C's.

http://www.nesn.com/2009/10/celtics-hope-extra-zzzs-put-more-spring-in-their-step.html

[yall hate]

I think whether or not its a bad idea, it ought to be tried by someone.

Whether it is basketball or football (baseball I doubt would work), someone is gonna get a leg in the foreign market, and I don't mean Canada.

I guess my question is why?  For the same reason you said no to baseball I assume that would also exclude basketball (too many games, too much travel).  So why do it with football, a sport that doesnt have a 'huge' following over there. 

Why ot put a football team in Mexico (which does have a huge following).  It's closer travel wise than Europe...

[pbak63]

I live in Watford, some 17 miles NW of London and I'll be going to see the Patriots as they are the only Boston/NE sports team I've not seen live yet.

I can get from my house to Wembley Stadium in less than an hour by using the
Underground(tube) train network so it's a great opportunity for me and other NFL fans.

But I have to agree with the original post in that with only 8 home game a season, to lose 1 is not good.

I support Watford Football Club and we have 23 home games a season and I wouldn't be happy if I had to travel further than my 15 minute walk to the stadium for a home game.

Unfortunatly, money dictates a lot within sports, and the fans are always the last people to be considered.

I actually could see the NBA starting a European team in the next 10 years or so.

Paul