NFL: NFL Considering Expansion

[Hoggins]

No player is going to want to move to Mexico. They would lose every player once they are eligible for free agency. They would have a nightmarish time signing free agents. Mexico City and London would be horrendous for the players.

I think the idea is that the teams would only play games at those sites and not actually live there. So in London, the team offices and practice facilities would be in New York for example. They’d play 2 games in the US and then have 2 home games in London. In an 18 game schedule, that means you only spend 9 weeks in London out of the year

 

[DeereClone]

I think the idea is that the teams would only play games at those sites and not actually live there. So in London, the team offices and practice facilities would be in New York for example. They’d play 2 games in the US and then have 2 home games in London. In an 18 game schedule, that means you only spend 9 weeks in London out of the year

Even just the travel from week to week though - why sign up for that flight if you don't have to?

 

[Hoggins]

Even just the travel from week to week though - why sign up for that flight if you don't have to?

Money. Whoever owns a London team is going to have to be willing to spend a lot. Mexico City would not be as bad as you can set up operations in Texas.

 

[VeloClone]

Why do pro leagues always recycle the same cities? “Oh, it didn’t work these other two times, but I’m sure THIS time it will work out and be successful!”

Because once in a great while it does work so hope springs eternal that "we can capture that market".

It will be disappointing if LA doesn't work this time given the huge investment in that stadium.

 

[ISUCyclones2015]

No player is going to want to move to Mexico. They would lose every player once they are eligible for free agency. They would have a nightmarish time signing free agents. Mexico City and London would be horrendous for the players.

Says a guy who has probably never been to Mexico City. There are plenty of safe parts, especially Polanco which is where the teams stay when they visit there.

 

[cyfanatic]

Because once in a great while it does work so hope springs eternal that "we can capture that market".

It will be disappointing if LA doesn't work this time given the huge investment in that stadium.

And it isn't always that a team tied to a certain city moves because it didn't work. In some cases it was working just fine until the ownership decides to declare themselves free agents due to stadium issues or whatever. NFL teams don't move due to not making money...they move due to trying to make even more money!

 

[VeloClone]

Even just the travel from week to week though - why sign up for that flight if you don't have to?

Probably would need a practice facility in the states so they can spend 2 or 3 weeks in the states at a time for road games, and then 2 or 3 weeks in Britain for a slate of home games.

Or they can drag a couple of Concordes out of retirement.

They have been grooming that London market for some time so this should come as no surprise.

 

[jackrabbit]

Having a team in London would be a logistical nightmare

If the NFL were to expand to Great Britain, they need to place two teams over there. That way when teams traveled over the pond, the would play two away games over two weekends and then travel back to the States. The two teams from Great Britain would then do the reverse. You could have two teams in London (aka NYC and LA). Or one in London and one in Birmingham or Dublin Ireland. I don't think it would be economical to only have one team.

 

[Rabbuk]

If the NFL were to expand to Great Britain, they need to place two teams over there. That way when teams traveled over the pond, the would play two away games over two weekends and then travel back to the States. The two teams from Great Britain would then do the reverse. You could have two teams in London (aka NYC and LA). Or one in London and one in Birmingham or Dublin Ireland. I don't think it would be economical to only have one team.

Is there an appetite for American football outside of London? Didn't NFL Europe fail pretty badly

 

[CYCLNST8]

Great opportunity to bring back Oilers and Redskins.

 

[ISUCyclones2015]

Is there an appetite for American football outside of London? Didn't NFL Europe fail pretty badly

It was popular in Germany.

 

[BMWallace]

Why do pro leagues always recycle the same cities? “Oh, it didn’t work these other two times, but I’m sure THIS time it will work out and be successful!”

They want to put the teams where people are. More people in a metro area means more potential fans to bring in.

If we look at the largest US metros, and eliminate the ones that already have a football team, we get the following top-11:

17. San Diego
21. St. Louis
22. Orlando
24. San Antonio
25. Portland
26. Sacramento
28. Austin
32. Columbus
37. Virginia Beach-Norfolk
40. Milwaukee
41. Oklahoma City

 

[cyrocksmypants]

They want to put the teams where people are. More people in a metro area means more potential fans to bring in.

If we look at the largest US metros, and eliminate the ones that already have a football team, we get the following top-11:

17. San Diego
21. St. Louis
22. Orlando
24. San Antonio
25. Portland
26. Sacramento
28. Austin
32. Columbus
37. Virginia Beach-Norfolk
40. Milwaukee
41. Oklahoma City

Great, let’s try it in some of those that haven’t had a team instead of trying it for the fourth time in a place that’s had teams leave.

 

[jackrabbit]

Is there an appetite for American football outside of London? Didn't NFL Europe fail pretty badly

From a quick google search: On 29 June 2007, the NFL announced the end of NFL Europa after a reported $30 million loss per season, and having multiple teams such as the inaugural league champion London Monarchs having gone defunct over the years.

But if the NFL is seriously considering 'expanding' over the pond, I think having only one team would be financially 'more expensive' than if you were to divide the cost of a team's trip by two games.

As a previous poster said, I think Canada would try to block the NFL from crossing the border. NFL preseason games in Mexico City have always been well attended but would players want to play and live down there?

If you expand in the states, the TV money will stay the same unless you increase the number of games being broadcast (two early and two late afternoon games on both Fox and CBS?).

 

[Jer]

They really should look at putting a NFL team in Detroit. Oh wait......

I was going to say Minnesota but you beat me.

 

[ISUTex]

Agreed. Mexico City and Toronto would be fine, but crossing the pond, no thanks.

Not sure I'd want to live in Mexico.

 

[jackrabbit]

They want to put the teams where people are. More people in a metro area means more potential fans to bring in.

If we look at the largest US metros, and eliminate the ones that already have a football team, we get the following top-11:

17. San Diego
21. St. Louis
22. Orlando
24. San Antonio
25. Portland
26. Sacramento
28. Austin
32. Columbus
37. Virginia Beach-Norfolk
40. Milwaukee
41. Oklahoma City

From a 'new' Big 12 and Iowa State perspective, skip putting a team in Orlando (UCF) and place two to four new teams in Columbus, OH (OSU), OKC (OU), Austin (UT) and Portland (Oregon). Historically when cities that have both pro and college teams, the college team has suffered.

 

[VeloClone]

From a quick google search: On 29 June 2007, the NFL announced the end of NFL Europa after a reported $30 million loss per season, and having multiple teams such as the inaugural league champion London Monarchs having gone defunct over the years.

But if the NFL is seriously considering 'expanding' over the pond, I think having only one team would be financially 'more expensive' than if you were to divide the cost of a team's trip by two games.

As a previous poster said, I think Canada would try to block the NFL from crossing the border. NFL preseason games in Mexico City have always been well attended but would players want to play and live down there?

If you expand in the states, the TV money will stay the same unless you increase the number of games being broadcast (two early and two late afternoon games on both Fox and CBS?).

A big difference is NFL Europe was a developmental league akin to minor league baseball or the NBA D(now G) League. There might be a bit more interest if European fans could go to games and see the best American football players in the world playing at their local stadium.

 

[CoachHines3]

Not sure I'd want to live in Mexico.

Mexico City would be a terrible place to live.

 

[DeereClone]

Money. Whoever owns a London team is going to have to be willing to spend a lot. Mexico City would not be as bad as you can set up operations in Texas.

I was talking from a player perspective, why sign up for that as a free agent when you can just stay state-side? The team will have the same cap so money is a hard argument, unless the endorsement deals over there would be better than in the US.