RSS Feed
PDF NOW DISCOUNTED 50%. FIND OUT WHAT YOU MISSED BEFORE THE SEASON.
Click here to buy PDF version
.Click here to buy print version.
STILL AVAILABLE
Click here to buy PDF version
.Click here to buy print version.
24 Oct 2009
The London Jaguars
This AOL Fanhouse post is entitled "The NFL Might Soon Stay in London," but to be honest, it isn't about London. It's about the Jacksonville Jaguars, who simply can't draw fans. They have more than 20,000 empty seats each week and play in America's 46th largest media market. (The 32nd largest is Orlando, just down the road, but they have to split the fans with the Bucs. When I lived in Daytona Beach, just an hour south, the town was split with Bucs and Dolphins fans.) If we count Milwaukee as Packer territory, the only team in a smaller market is Buffalo (which has its own problems) at 52. To be honest, they never should have put a team in Jacksonville to begin with. But the Jags aren't moving to London. I hate the 17-game season idea but it probably makes more sense than a permanent London team. Plus, from a rivalry and travel standpoint, if there were a London team, it would really need to be in the AFC East. What, you think London fans are getting excited by games with Houston and (post-Manning retirement) Indianapolis? Or do they want to play against Boston and New York? Let's make them the London Bills and the Los Angeles Jaguars, and then we can just chuck the stupid 17-game season idea.
105 comments, Last at 27 Oct 2009, 5:39pm by Bright Blue Shorts
Most Recent FO Features
» 2011 Defeats
Who had the most Defeats in 2012? Well, nearly setting the all-time sack record puts you in a pretty good position to claim that crown.
Comments
Re: The London Jaguars
OK fine, we get the team from Buffalo but they have a law suit Cleveland style and keep the Bills moniker. Leaving the London team to pick a new name for which I either propose the London Chavs or the London Bulldogs.
Re: The London Jaguars
I propose red-and-white jerseys with Burberry checked numbers.
Re: The London Jaguars
And there's even a ready supply of football hooligans to tap into!
Re: The London Jaguars
I saw this comment over in Pat Kirwan's NFL.com column ... "The NFL is back in London to play a regular-season game for the third season in a row. The British crowds have been great for the game and if they pack the house when the winless Buccaneers are in town to play the Patriots, then keep a close eye out for an owner that might conclude he can make more money with his team stationed in London or figuring out that selling his team to a group of investors is the right thing to do. Something more than another one-game visit to London is going on here."
I strongly believe the NFL are misjudging the British/European public if they believe it is possible to put a franchise in England. The Wembley game sells out because it's an event. We don't care what teams are playing we just want to be part of something special that only happens once per year. We don't care that the Dolphins were 0-8 going into the 2007 game because we'd already bought tickets in May. We don't care that the Bucs are winless this year because we already bought tickets in January.
But put a franchise here and we'll start to evaluate whether it's worth going to watch the team. People travel from all over Britain AND Europe to watch the Wembley game. Some come for the weekend because it's a long distance to travel and so have to pay overnight accommodation. For me it's cost over £100 last year. But because it's an event they'll do it.
For sure if there's 500,000 fans then in theory that should give enough people to sellout all the home games. But I'm not even convinced that by having two overseas games in England there won't be a dropoff. I'm pretty sure that what will happen is that the public will flock to get tickets for the perceived better matchup, and then when they can't get them some (though not all) will decide not to opt for the second match because it feels like being the backup. And no-one wants to be backup.
Look back to the history of the American Bowl series (started in 1986 to sellout crowds, finished in 1993) and the London Monarchs (started in 1991 to sellout Wembley crowds) finished in 2005 as Scottish Claymores to enthusiastic crowds of 15,000. The NFL just doesn't have as much pull as it would like to believe. We might be enthusiastic now but give it a few more years before making any really big decisions.
Re: The London Jaguars
I kinda disagree. It is an event, and the numbers will go down as time goes on. However, it's an event that sold out in 90 minutes. Whilst the demand will go down, I'm pretty sure that most owners will live with that demand going down at least to the point where games sell out in two hours, rather than 90 minutes
Re: The London Jaguars
That's a pretty simplistic analysis. If you're talking about a London franchise then that means you're probably only going to get fans from Greater London and places withing a 20 minute train journey. I don't know if there are enough people to consistently sell out a stadium the size of Wembley over a 16 game season, but i strongly doubt it.
I agree with what Bright Blue Shorts said. When the excitement of the brand dies down what you're left with is the game, and there are a whole lot of problems with the NFL as a game in the UK. For a start it's going to be a whole lot less profitable than any US franchise. You can get people who've supported the Cowboys their whole lives to shell out ridiculous amounts of money for tickets and merchandise, that's not going to be true in the UK. The prices are going to have to start low and stay low until people gain a consistent interest in the team - which, by the way, is not going to exist if the team sucks. No matter how many NFL fans there are near London, no one's going to want to watch a team play if they finished last season 3-13. I also suspect that a London team would be completely out of its depth in the free agent market. Most players are just not going to want to move to a different continent for the team, and that will make the team even worse.
After that there are the problems with the game itself compared to British sports. If you want people to maintain interest, for instance, ad breaks would have to be scrapped. You'd probably have to find some other ways to compress the total game time as well. Football and rugby matches take about two hours max. No one other than hardcore fans are going to watch a game that could last three and a half hours, especially if in most of that time not much is going on.
Now i'm British and a big NFL fan, but people have to realise how much of their appreciation of the NFL is based upon them willingly overlooking its flaws because some parts of it are great and because they grew up loving/playing the game. Nobody is going to do that in Britain, and once the excitement dies down the team will likely turn into an uncompetitive financial black hole. If you want to have an actual shot at making the team stick you'd probably have to absorb a whole lot of debt over the next 10-15 years before thinking of turning a profit. It's possibly that the NFL might want to do that in the name of making an impact on the global stage, but i wouldn't hold your breath.
Re: The London Jaguars
You make some good points - especially about the commercial breaks. I love that a soccer game is unlikely to last more than 2 hours, no matter what happens - rugby too. My wife will watch soccer with me, but not football - and we're from the heart of US football country.
The difficulty of getting players to stay, well, that's big, and a good point. Plus there is a huge cost of living adjustment to consider. London has manifold attractions, but it isn't cheap to live there - I don't think a nice little (by US standards anyway) flat in central London for US$2 million, is the dream of many NFLers.
It is only 10 games (8 regular season) that you have to worry about selling seats for, and remember, you only have to do better than Jacksonville, not as well as Dallas. All the same, I think there are better places to move in the US first. I'd imagine the NBA would have a much better shot at expanding globally - or even MLB, but not to Europe, of course.
Re: The London Jaguars
For today's Patriots-Bucs games, the clocks have gone back overnight so there's only a 4-hour time difference. The jet lag issue is interesting though. Bear in mind that when East coast teams play on the West Coast for night games it's the equivalent of playing at 9pm whereas for the West Coast teams playing early games on East Coast on Sunday it's 10am. That's an eleven hour difference in your metabolism and prematch preparation.
I'd guess the only way to schedule London games would be to give them blocks of 3-4 weeks in the States. Obviously teams visiting would want the bye week off afterwards. The big question is HOW BIG WOULD HOMEFIELD ADVANTAGE BECOME IN THE PLAYOFFS? My guess is a London team would prefer either to be seeded #1 or #6, so that they're guaranteed to be all at home, or all away.
Finally I have to say, as a Brit, that many of the issues levelled at American football by Brits can be pure rubbish. Indeed soccerball and rugby last only two hours, but cricket is an 8-hour day, this year's Wimbledon's men's final lasted 4 hours. Both are stop-start games by their nature. In fact if you watch soccerball or rugby, you'll find those games very stop-start with all the whingeing players do at referees. But that's why I like the NFL because I don't feel a need to be tied to what is familiar.
Re: The London Jaguars
Yes, of course it was a simplistic analysis - my larger point, if I have one at all, is that whilst I agree with BBS that the demand will inevitably decline, it's starting from a very, very high point - certainly much higher than the London Monarchs.
For the Monarchs, the World Bowl was a sell-out, but the first Monarchs game I attended (the week six encounter versus the Skyhawks) was on a free ticket (from buying cans of sprite), and Wembley was maybe half full.
I'd also query the 20 minutes train ride from London - I've attended all three NFL games (including today) coming in from Reading - and that's certainly a journey I'd be happy to do 10 times a year. Extending out to half an hour's travel, and I believe you have a catchment area in excess of 8 million people.
Finally, I agree with your point about people not growing up with the game, but the only way that will change is if a team is sited in the UK.
Re: The London Jaguars
All true - but all a team has to do in London is outperform Jacksonville. The travel to play western teams would be bad, but if you look at the (now) Super 14 rugby league split between Australia, NZ, and South Africa, long travel isn't necessarily a deal breaker.
I suppose my questions for FO's UK readership are:
1. Wouldn't being part of the NFL, rather than a secondary league, make a difference to you?
2. Wouldn't the limited schedule (10 home games a year w/o playoffs) be appealing to fans - ie every game is an event, and there aren't that many of them?
For everyone else, I ask - LA has no NFL team, it could probably support 2, as it does in every other sport. Doesn't this need to be fixed before anyone talks about Europe? I know the stadium thing is supposedly an impossible quagmire, but wouldn't Jacksonville do better in whatever existing facilities they could patch together for little money in LA?
Also, I've heard Toronto for the Bills, is that dead? It makes a lot more sense to me than London. As do Sacramento, San Antonio, Portland, Las Vegas, Birmingham
Re: The London Jaguars
Excellent point about the Super 14s. I'm not a rugby league fan, but there must be a template there that can be followed.
For myself (as part of FO's UK readership):
1. Yes, definitely. The Monarchs were great, but the thrill rapidly palled with the extreme player turnover, making it hard to support a "team", rather than laundry.
2. Again, for myself, yes. 10 games is not that many, and sufficiently few that they would remain events.
For today, I am travelling in with 5 other friends, and it's a grand day out. If we had season tickets, this would be an excellent excuse for that adventure 8 times in four months. I'm not convinced about preseason, mind...
Re: The London Jaguars
Rugby Union ;-). Argentina are being included now too i believe, certainly in the Tri-Nations. I think the jetlag point is a bit overrated. When NZ or Aus travel to SA they usually say "You've got a choice between arriving the day before the match or arriving a week before the match". The willingness of the players to live in a different country seems like a much larger problem.
Re: The London Jaguars
Argentina will be in the tri-nations? I didn't know that. Maybe that will make the Argentines better, but Quad Nations just sounds weird. Why not add a "Super Island" team instead/also (Fiji+Tonga+W. Samoa)? That would be a much more competitive team than Argentina, I'd imagine.
I think the unwillingness to live overseas can't be overstated with the NFL. While there is a certain demographic in the US that would be thrilled to make big money and live in London, that demographic is largely not "NFL player". The NBA had terrible issues getting players to want to play in Vancouver BC, which is a delightful and cosmopolitan city that isn't not far from the US. Toronto still has problems, too, despite the strength of the Can$.
Re: The London Jaguars
Well, the Chargers started out in LA, and the Rams and Raiders both moved here and moved out. And this wasn't that long ago. So the "LA will support 2 franchises" is suspect, since they have had and lost three so far. You'd think some other metro area should get a shot.
Living out here, I don't get the sense that there is any real yearning for a team. And the city is so spread out a team in City of Industry might as well be on the moon from some of the suburbs. I'm not sure if Goodell's marquee game of the week idea will fly, but it probably has a better shot than some 2-14 team transferred from Jax or Buffalo. If LA wants to see a crummy team they can watch Oakland, and it isn't blacked out like the Raiders were when they played out here and were actually good.
Re: The London Jaguars
I thought teams left LA over stadium issues particularly, and Al Davis petulance, specifically. The Chargers were so long ago I think it doesn't really count - like the KC Chiefs once being in Dallas. Dallas lost a team eons ago, does Dallas lack the ability to support an NFL team, (or Houston, or Baltimore etc - point being teams leaving usually has to do with stadia/ownership issues).
I think a new state-of-the-art stadium located a reasonably easy to reach spot would go gangbusters. Put it this way, if I had the money, I'd be very very happy to take my chances in LA with an expansion team. I think the NFL has made huge mistakes in not making an LA club a priority, but once reestablished, I think it would work well.
Re: The London Jaguars
I hope the NFL front office listens to Bright Blue Shorts.
If Manchester United and Arsenal played an annual match in D.C. or New York City, it probably would sell out, just as the NFL game sells out at Wembley. That doesn't mean that the Wolverhampton Wanderers could make a go of it if they moved that Premier League team to the United States. Similarly, the London Jaguars (three syllables) wouldn't succeed financially, either.
Re: The London Jaguars
Screw that, why should Buffalo lose the Bills when they sell out every game - in a large stadium, mind you - no matter how pitiful the team is? It may seem easy to pick on the Bills because they suck and are mismanaged, but in no way does the fanbase deserve to lose its team when there are places like Jacksonville and San Diego where the fans don't appreciate their teams' recent successes.
Re: The London Jaguars
If the Bills move to London, it's going to be Ontario, not England.
Having a team in London isn't much worse than having a team in Seattle, and we've already got one of those.
(I also like the Eagles)
Re: The London Jaguars
The Jaguars relocating to London and still being part of the NFL? Sorry man, but I just can't get a a nano particle of logic out of an NFL team outside of the continent. An NFL team within border proximity to US in Cananda or Mexico, maybe. But the UK or Europe? Just crazy. They would definitely need their own league. Intercontinental NFL competition would probably require the traveling team to have a bye week after each away game to shake off the jet lag. Imagine a London team playing interconference in California. What a flight. US sports in the UK as an exhibition is troubling enough. Let them keep their Cricket, Soccer and Rugby. I can imagine the concession stand: Jellied Eel, Fish & Chips, and Steak and Kidney Pie. Bleaach! I love the UK, but keep our NFL here! Just send some of their beer.
Re: The London Jaguars
Actually, for as long as you've only got one team outside the continent, a bye week for every team after playing the London team is probably reasonably do-able. I think you'd have to be thinking about all the London away games being at least two week trips - no one week there-and-backs
Re: The London Jaguars
Byes don't start until week 3 and they end after week 10. That's 9 away games for either the London team or for American ones with no possibility of a bye. You have to make a pretty drastic adjustment to the schedule to make that work. Their last 7-8 games would all have to be against East Coast teams, and they would all just have to suck it up.
Re: The London Jaguars
The year the NFL had 31 teams, at least one team had a bye each week. You could make it an incentive thing for teams; teams with the worst records will have byes in weeks 1, 2, 12-17 with the worst two teams having byes the first and last weeks.
Re: The London Jaguars
More generally, there could be a rule that teams get a bye after a trans-Atlantic trip (although this couldn't apply to a London team) or before a Thursday game. Which week it is is less important.
Re: The London Jaguars
Actually, even if this doesn't happen I believe that the NFL should lengthen the season by a week and give everyone an extra bye week. Serious injuries are so common at this point that I believe we should be trying to let everyone have as much rest as possible during the season.
Re: The London Jaguars
Sorry, but I can't go with that idea unless they shortened the preseason. They're pushing the season too long now. And truly serious injuries aren't going to be helped out by a week off.
Re: The London Jaguars
The "east coast in the last 8 weeks" is definitely an option. I think that the extra bye week would definitely be implemented, though, giving the 18 week season.
Re: The London Jaguars
A London team is always gonna have to play in the early game to allow fans to get home from the stadium using public transport.
Assuming the away side flies home either Sunday night or Monday morning, would it be plausible to allow them to then play on the primetime game Sunday or on Monday night the following week and thus negate needing to give every team a bye week after playing in London?
Incidentally do any of the UK posters go see their local British amateur team play?
Re: The London Jaguars
Personally, I'm violently opposed to the London team, should we receive one, being the Jaguars. After the sheer torture that was five years of listening to Americans mispronounce "Monarchs", I'm not sure I can go through that again with "Jag-wahs"
Re: The London Jaguars
Good Lord yes...
Re: The London Jaguars
what Americans misproncunce name? Name was pronunved MOn- Arks. What so hard to say bout it? Never heard anyone say it wrong.
Re: The London Jaguars
I come for the football analysis and insightful commentary, but I stay for little surprises like the misspelling of "mispronounce."
Re: The London Jaguars
Plus, SKED-u-ling would be a nightmare.
Re: The London Jaguars
Just for you, we'll make them the Aluminum Jaguars.
Re: The London Jaguars
Um, In England it is pronounce jag-ew-ars
Re: The London Jaguars
Jag-u-arse?
Re: The London Jaguars
I like the idea of having a team in London, and I think it would be a reasonable proposition if the league were realigned into western and eastern conferences, so travel would be less of an issue.
If I recall correctly, though, the Germans were more taken with American football than any other country during the World League / NFL Europe days. Why not start with a team in Germany?
Re: The London Jaguars
The general feeling is that it was the large american expatriate community in Germany that was largely the reason for the growth of the game in Germany, where in the UK was largely homegrown.
Add in the language barriers, and I can see why the UK is ahead of Germany. I expect one of the *two* overseas regular season games next year to be in Germany
Re: The London Jaguars
The Jaguars have not historically have that drastic of a problem getting fans out to the stadium. This year is the first time they've routinely have that many empty seats. I'm not making excuses, but even last years' 5-11 team attracted enough fans week in and week out to sell out the majority of stadiums. There were a ew thousand unsold general tickets. I hate that a third of the way into 2009, this year's struggles have been retroactively applied to the entire history of the franchise.
--
sam! or the original sam from the old FO
Re: The London Jaguars
I've been hearing jokes about the Jags not filling the stadium for at least three years now. Foxsports doesn't maintain any kind of archive, but this bit from an old Rundown tickled me: "C'mon, Jaguars fans! Make some noise! Bang on the empty seats to your left and to your right!" (In response to I think Henderson pleading with fans to be louder when the defense took the field, though I quote from memory)
Re: The London Jaguars
ESPN puts JAX over other 11 teams in attendance in 2008; over 6 in 2007; and over 9 in 2006...
Just click on my name.
Re: The London Jaguars
Here's an article from last 2004 where the Jaguars covered off almost 10,000 seats ... http://jacksonville.com/apnews/stories/121504/D870EKFO0.shtml
Re: The London Jaguars
As a result of having a ludicrously oversized stadium for the market.
Re: The London Jaguars
I still feel like the NFL betrayed Mexico.
We've filled our stadiums every single time the NFL has bothered to come here (setting the attendance record the very first - and only - time we hosted a regular season game, and still holding the attendance record in any game by a huge margin). We have a whole lot of fans that not only like the game but also know it deeply, given our long tradition with college football. We view football not as a novelty, but as a tradition.
And this is what we get? Three years in a row England gets a game, the NFL basically forgets all about us, and we're left with 'hoping' for another NFL football game? After that 2005 game (which pitted SF vs Arizona, for christ sakes!) I was sure we'd see another one, maybe not on 2006 but for sure in 2007 or 2008. Instead we get the shaft.
We'll probably fill Azteca Stadium again when/if they come back, given all I've already said about our love for the game, but this is IMO just pathetic reciprocity by the NFL.
-- Go Phins!
Re: The London Jaguars
Do not forget that this also apply to Germans as well. If there is an European country that likes football it's Germany, not the UK!
The problem here, it seems to me, is money. The Brittish just paid more.
That's the only reasonable explanation.
Re: The London Jaguars
Mexico definitely deserves better. I'd like to see a Cowboys game played there. Having a franchise there is logistically easier than the UK, and comes with lots of easy marketing tie ins, but the language barrier would be tough on the players, I'd think.
Of course I think there should be no moves, or expansion, unless it is to LA. This is the gaping void in the facade of NFL superiority.
Re: The London Jaguars
There's much more money to be made in marketing and TV rights by playing in England.
I agree 100 percent that Mexico deserves better. I always move my team in Madden to Mexico City.
Re: The London Jaguars
Unlike Madden Jerry Jones, real life Jerry Jones will not approve.
Re: The London Jaguars
I move them to Anchorage for the snow, small market be damned!
Re: The London Jaguars
Raiderjoe AFC relaignment plan-
afc east
New england Pates
new York jets
London teabags
Baltimore Ravens
Afc
Pittbsurgh Steelers
Cleveland Browns
Cincinnati Bengals
Indiamapolis Clots
AFc West
San Diego or Los Angeles Chargers
Oakland Raiders
KC Chiefs
Denver Broncos
AFC South
Tennessee Titans
Housotn Texamns
miami Dolphins
Jakconsville Jaguars or ,move to LA if Sda does not go there
Re: The London Jaguars
NFL Realignment plan-
AFC
East
Pats
Jets
London (Bills)
Tuna
North
Ravens
Steelers
Browns
Bengals
West
Chargers
Raiders
LA Jags
Broncos
South
Colts
Titans
Moo-Cows
Chiefs
NFC
East
Gints
Skins
Eagles
Girls
North
Cheese
Bears
People-Eaters
Pussycats
West
Cards
Bluemen
LA Rams
49ers
South
Dirtybirds
Who-dat
Buckos
Panthers
(yes 2 LA teams)
Miami,NY and Boston all make better sense for London because they're direct flights and bigger markets.
Re: The London Jaguars
If a franchise does relocate over here, it MUST be called the London Teabags. It simply must.
Phil Simms is a Cretin.
Re: The London Jaguars
I fear the touchdown celebrations. Taunting wouldn't begin to cover it.
Re: The London Jaguars
I can only imagine the results of the "Submit Your Logo Idea!" contest.
Re: The London Jaguars
I'd love to have a franchise here in London, of course. Like anyone else from this side of the Pond who posts on these forums, I'm probably pretty close to being as hardcore an NFL fan as exists in Britain. But I would only ever support a London franchise as a "second" team - I'm a Texans fan, and that wouldn't change with the arrival of the Bulldogs (props to Jimmy - that's the best realistic name suggestion I've heard). I also wouldn't go to games that clashed with Chelsea playing at home - which would probably happen at least twice a season. That's probably indicative of some potential problems with such a scheme - if they can't rely on me, how many people can they rely on? On the other hand, Greater London is a huge market, and people would come from outside it (I live outside Oxford, which makes Wembley a two, maybe two and a half hour trip via public transport, and I don't see that as a problem). Ultimately, the decider will be whether the NFL thinks a London team would make money, not whether London "deserves" a team or Jacksonville, Buffalo or anywhere else "deserves" to lose one, and not whether it will be optimal in competitive terms with regards to travel. The NFL's test for whether the team will make money will be multiple games a season at Wembley, for a period of perhaps three years. I honestly don't know which way that will go, and neither do they - but they're clearly optimistic.
PS. Joe, the English tend to pronounce "monarch" "MON-erk". Quazi, we'd love to flog you more beer, booze being about the only thing we do still physically export, but draft ale really does not travel well, which is why you can't even get proper English beer in anglophone pubs in France, much less on the other side of the Atlantic. Bottles of London Pride and Newcastle Brown, while certainly drinkable, are not the same thing.
Re: The London Jaguars
Mr Shush, the flaw in your argument is the belief that an NFL franchise will be based at Wembley. The FA ain't gonna let that happen. One game a year, two maybe is fine, but eight? That's a non-starter. So where do the Teabags play?
Twickenham has the capacity, but that's not going to happen, and given the scheduling problem none of the Premier League grounds are feasible. Which would leave the Olympic Stadium, but that has issues, including a permanent capacity of about 30,000 and the need to host athletics from time to time. Assume that can be overcome, and you're still left with a significant bill for reconstruction and upgrade.
Alternatively, you can buy the land in the Greater London Area and build a new stadium with the appropriate capacity. That option will make Jerry Jones's $1BN palace appear like a bargain.
So the Teabags will need a home-and then players to play there. I'd love it to happen, but realistically-well, I won't be holding my breathe.
Phil Simms is a Cretin.
Re: The London Jaguars
The stadium issue is pretty significant, no doubt. I don't think it's insurmountable, however; so long as there's a permanent training ground, you can get by with a couple of games a year in each of the major facilities around London, perhaps with pre-season games elsewhere in the country. Scheduling is obviously a pain with cup and European games so difficult to predict, but if you had a pool of stadiums and a good working relationship with the FA you should always be able to find *some* place to play, particularly if you didn't insist on Sundays. (There should always be a major stadium available in London on a Monday or Friday, except perhaps around Christmas.)
Re: The London Jaguars
Seriously?
Here are some venues in London:
Wembley
Emirates (Arsenal)
Stamford Ridge (Chelsea)
Here are some outside London:
Old Trafford (Manchester)
St James' Park (Newcastle)
Stadium of Light (Sunderland)
Anfield
Villa Park
That's 8 40k + stadiums
But they can rotate Emirates (60K) & Wembley (90K) ( and throw in Old Trafford at 75k) and not have any problem with the Premiership,FA Cup,UEFA or UCL.
Re: The London Jaguars
Stamford Ridge is almost raiderjoe-esque in its better-than-the-original spelling.
Re: The London Jaguars
So posting at 1:30 am gives me insight into the brain of raiderjoe? Cool that explains some interesting internet discussions.
Also forgot about Twickenham. So 3 60k plus stadiums in london proper without having to give a cent to the Blues.
Re: The London Jaguars
The Monarchs rotated stadiums in their last season, and I think it was the main reason why that *was* their last season. Pick a stadium, and stick with it. I do agree with the above posters that the stadium is an *enormous* issue.
I'm figuring Twickenham...
Re: The London Jaguars
An NFL is not going to alternate stadiums. That is simply too bush-league. Plus, that would be denying a true home field to a team that was already going to face some significant disadvantages on the road. No owner is going to sign up for that.
Re: The London Jaguars
The Packers did it. Played at Lambeau Field and Milwaukee County Stadium for 42 years. Just bush league QBs like Bart Starr and Brett Favre got to play in both ...
Re: The London Jaguars
The FA spent 800 million quid on Wembley, I don't think they're in a financial position to turn down a big-money tenant. Sure, they'd have to schedule around England games, but no big deal, that's no different than teams who share with baseball teams.
As long as the NFL's check clears, they will find a home at either Twickenham or Wembley.
Re: The London Jaguars
Twickenhams's a non-starter. It's smack in the middle of a residential area, and is hugely restriced on the number of events allowed there annually. That's why the FA went to Cardiff and the England team went on tour around the UK when Wembley was being built. Twickers just isn't going to happen.
I don't think that Webley will either. Money may talk , but Wembley is the home of our football, and there are already a number of complaints about what an NFL game does to the pitch. 8 Games a year at a time when England will be playing meaningful matches? I can't see it. The Baseball comparision is misleading because the overwhelming majority in the UK have no affinity whatever with the NFL.
Nomadism will kill a team dead. So it's a new arena or the Olympic site, and both will cost.
Phil Simms is a Cretin.
Re: The London Jaguars
A new stadium won't happen, not unless the owner of the team is willing to stump up every penny themselves. The chance of any public money being spent on a stadium in England in the next 20+ years is somewhere on the slim side of none.
I think if it was going to happen in England it will have to wait a good five or so years. This country is mildly on its arse thanks to the recession and the NFL tends to appeal to existing sports fans who generally speaking like football or rugby or whatever. The people likely to buy tickets and especially season tickets for an NFL team are similar to the people likely to buy them for a football or rugby team, and that's a very dear do. 2 or 3 years ago I think you'd have sold out pretty much any stadium in London quite easily with season tickets at about £320-£400 (£40-£50 per game), but now? Not so much IMO.
But if it did happen it'd be Wembley. 8 games a year isn't much, especially given that its basically during the off-season for Wembley - once the footy season starts in late August we tend to have one home friendly or qualifier in September and one or two home friendlies or qualifiers in October, with possibly a friendly in November, all of which will be either midweek evening or Saturday daytime. Other than that Wembley is only really used for concerts, and there's not many of them. There's no cup finals, no playoffs, no semi finals, no nothing there. There's plenty of football teams who share ground successfully with rugby teams, the key is a special kind of grass apparently. At the first Wembley game they had just normal grass grass down which cut up lots (and we lost to Croatia, which was the main reason for the complaint). At the second one it was apparently different stuff and less of a problem (largely to do with having a competent England manager!).
Wembley cost what, £800m? Even conservatively estimating at 40,000 per week at £40 each comes in at £12.8m from gate receipts each season. A sell out of 80,000 per week at £50 works out to £32m per season. I don't know how much of that the FA would manage to negotiate for (given past performance probably about 20p, but that's not the point), but they'd be foolish to turn it down IMO.
Re: The London Jaguars
We are talking about the FA, right? Since when have the FA ever given a crap about public relations? They need the money, and they've always looked out for #1.
Re: The London Jaguars
This doesn't look to be much more than a one-off marketing ploy to get the Britons to think that there could be a permanent relationship across the pond. Sell more jerseys, make more money, establish the brand and then leave for another year. The logistics of a full time team are insane. As others have noted it's just not possible to have a West Coast team fly across seven or eight time zones (depending on the time of the year, including playoffs) and expect to be 100% ready for games in consecutive weeks. Let Los Angeles or Salt Lake City snatch the Jags and let London swill the weekly hype once a year. Take it all for what it is: a masterful marketing ploy that lasts for no more than a week.
Re: The London Jaguars
Whilst I agree with part of your reasoning (I don't think that there will be a single franchise in the UK while there are 31 in the US for logistical reasons), I think you are *drastically* underestimating the extent to which the UK already swells the NFL's coffers. Merchandising is one thing, but last season I could watch six NFL games per week, live, and more when the the Thursday games kicked in.
This has been reduced this year to three, but I think this is due to ESPN wanting to penetrate the UK market more.
Point is, the UK is a clearly established market for the NFL. The Wembley game is a nice bonus for the NFL, not a one week marketing ploy
Re: The London Jaguars
to heck with a euro nfl franchise! imagine if the london fish n chips made the playoffs and actually hosted a game. i would be pissed if my team (pats, btw) had to go that far and back (if they won) only to have a shortened week of preparation because of the travel. it would be a double wammy of suckitude. first, playing on enemy territory, and second, a shortened week. blech! now imagine if they were going to host a west coast team?! haha, the nfl would never hear the end of it from those fans. especially, if they lost that week or the week thereafter. it's a bad idea, phooey.
Re: The London Jaguars
So your team had better make sure they earn home field advantage and it's the London Pigeons playing with jetlag, hadn't they?
Re: The London Jaguars
The distance from Boston to London isn't that much different to the distance from Boston to LA is it?
Re: The London Jaguars
Boston - LA = 2605 miles
Boston - London = 3280 miles
Not that much different really. So honestly, I can't the difficulty of a trip to/from London. Happens in the NFL every week for the West Coast teams travelling almost as far to get over to the East.
Yeah sure a West coast team will have a big trip to get to London, but those teams could be given a bye before/after - their choice. But as long as London was with an Eastern division, at least the interdivision games wouldn't be outrageous, travel-wise.
Re: The London Jaguars
I don't understand the eagerness some journalists express at the prospect of any community losing their team.
Re: The London Jaguars
I don't either. But of course, I wasn't all that sorry to see Bud Adams take his show on the road. It's not always bad.
Re: The London Jaguars
I was discussing this last year with a friend, and we decided if the NFL wants to go expand overseas, it needs to quickly go to a full division in Europe with some East/West conference realignment:
1) with a full division of European teams, the European teams have to play only 5 regular season games in the US. One 3 game swing, and one 2 game swing, with bye weeks after (if they weren't East Coast cities, they'd train in the US during the trip...this wouldn't be much worse a road trip than baseball players sometimes go on). US teams would never have more than 3 games in a season in Europe (If they like, in a row, with a bye week after). Many years, they wouldn't play any.
2)Conference realignment means the worst playoff game sequence before the Superbowl would be something like Dallas-Berlin-Chicago. That's a bad 3 week stretch, but not nearly as grueling as San Diego-Berlin-Oakland. Of course, there would be 2 weeks before a Superbowl; enough time to get there early.
3)Conference realignment also means less West Coast-Europe trips during the regular season, which means less really long distance travel during the season.
4)With a division of 4 Europe teams, that would be 12 games a year that feature 2 Europe teams playing each other. The NFL could find a good time to schedule these (Saturdays? Fridays? Earlier Sundays?), and sell them as a new TV package to European stations to try and get more exposure (and eventually, more money) for the NFL. It would also be at a better time for Africa, Asia & Australia, so it could increase exposure for the NFL around the world. I think this is how the NFL could turn European teams into a money maker in the long term.
5) I think the only reason Mexico isn't being looked at for a franchise right now is because of the reputation for crime. Just one team has a lot of employees, many of them young, making over $100,000. Any incident would be widely reported in both countries. Still, I'll put 2 franchises there in my fantasy expansion plan:
_NFC_
Europe
-London
-Frankfurt
-Berlin
-Amsterdam
East
-Dallas
-NYG
-Phil
-Was
Atlantic(?)
-Boston
-NYJ
-Buf/Toronto
-Miami
North
-Chi
-GB
-Min
-Det
South
-Ind
-Hou
-Jac
-Ten
_AFC_
West
-Den
-Oak
-SD
-KC
Trailblazer
-SF
-Ari
-St. Louis
-Seattle
North
-Pit
-Cle
-Cin
-Bal
South
-NO
-TB
-Car
-Atl
Southwest
-LA
-San Antonio
-Monterrey
-Mexico City
If Arizona wants, it could trade with LA (more geographic sense), but I'm leaving everyone in there current divisions otherwise.
Re: The London Jaguars
good plan and good thought out thoughts but udner plan league would have 40 teams. That seems like too amny. nFL expanding that much (8 new teams0 seem like too hard to do. Cant really happen all at once. Maybe have to remake Lodon Monarchs, Berlin Thunder, Amsterdam Admirals, frankfirt Glaxy, but how does eahc of them get 53 players right awya/ Maybe have expansion drafts and eac h curent NFl team have to leave 20 players unprotected. becausuee if only make 5 unprotcued (was 5 the number when Housotn Texams drafting? maybe somebody hera have anser) then the europe divison teams not going to have full rossters.
Re: The London Jaguars
I think this may be the answer, and also the reason why there won't be an NFL team in London any time soon. The only way to make it work is to have an all-europe division, which means either tearing 4 teams out of the US (unlikely...), or expansion and further dilution of talent
Re: The London Jaguars
Yeah, that's why I thought it was odd to hear talk in the press of an expansion team in London. Certainly Goodell wouldn't be so stupid as to break up all the work that went into creating a structure that is so nice for scheduling purposes ... would he?
Without moving a team, it does seem as though you'd have to go all-out to at least partially address alignment, but it's pretty clear that the NFL doesn't even have 32 stable franchises now. Add in too many and you've got the NHL: underserved markets that can't get a team and want one, disinterested markets that care not whether or not they have a team, some teams that are never competitive ...
Do that many NFL employees really make six figures? I wouldn't have thought so. Then again, I've never worked for an NFL team ... I can see that it might be a concern, but given some of the things that are happening to players in the US, there could definitely be a "glass house" effect if something were to happen in Mexico that caused an outcry in the US.
It's too bad, because Mexico is certainly a much better geographic match than England.
Re: The London Jaguars
I wouldn't be so radical with realignment:
NFC
Europe
-London
-Frankfurt
-Berlin
-Amsterdam
East
-Dallas
-NYG
-Phil
-Was
North
-Chi
-GB
-Min
-Det
West
-SF
-Ari
-St. Louis
-Seattle
South
-NO
-TB
-Car
-Atl
_AFC_
East
-Boston
-NYJ
-Buf/Toronto
-Miami
South
-Ind
-Hou
-Jac
-Ten
West
-Den
-Oak
-SD
-KC
North
-Pit
-Cle
-Cin
-Bal
Southwest
-LA
-San Antonio
-Monterrey
-Mexico City
Schedule: 6 games, intradivision; 4 games, vs. division in Conference; 4 games, in Conference by past season campaing; 2 games, interconference.
Re: The London Jaguars
Since there is an obvious flaw in my schedule rules, let's propose another one!
Schedule: 6 games, intradivision; 8 games, in Conference by past season campaing (1st and 2nd v. 1st and 2nd; 3rd and 4th v. 3rd and 4th); 2 games, interconference (first two years, EAST v. EAST; NORTH v. NORTH; EUROPE v. SOUTHWEST; etc.).
This way, the new comers would play eight games against each other in their first two season; and the divisional champions wouldn't probably finish with a record that shows how bad they would actally be.
Playoffs: the 5 divisional champions (1-5) and 3 wild cards (6-8) would make it. There would be an extra playoff round inspired on Australian leagues playoffs.
First Round (home game decided by season record)
Qualifying: 1v4, 2v3; (the winners become 1-2, and they get a bye)
Elimination: 5v8, 6v7. (the winners become 5-6, and the losers are out)
From the second onwards, it follows as today (WC, Divisional, Conference, SB).
Re: The London Jaguars
No one changes the NFC East, but I'd love to drop the Cowboys for the Pats or Ravens. More realistically, probably the Panthers or Bucs. But we can't give up the NFCE grudge games, so it stays.
Re: The London Jaguars
Geographically you're right as there are currently 2 anomalies in the alignment: the Colts in the AFC South and the Cowboys in the NFC East. Swap the Cowboys with the Panthers, and do a 3 way swap with the Colts, Dolphins and Ravens. Colts to the North, Dolphins the South and Ravens the East.
Screws the rivalries a bit, but if the Cowboys and Saints, for example, suddenly had a couple of high scoring close games, it wouldn't take long to ignite something.
Re: The London Jaguars
No chance the Colts get into the AFCN. The Rooneys don't want it, and neither do any of the other teams. All 4 teams have real personal grudges going back a long ways.
Steelers vs everyone - everyone hates the Steelers on principle, and they are the most consistent winners
Ravens vs Browns - Ravens are the old Browns and both sides remember it. Cleveland still hates that the Ravens left town and got good.
Browns vs Bengals - Battle of Ohio, and Battle of Paul Brown franchises. Bengals formed to get even with Model for firing Paul Brown.
Bengals vs Ravens - Model's team, so there's the Paul Brown grudge. And this is the team Cincy is designed to match up with. We are the anti-Ravens.
Re: The London Jaguars
I'm from Jacksonville, (but was raised a Dolphins fan as my family goes back a few generations in Miami) and the lack of fan support is absolutely true. I still have family and friends there and there is a LOT of resentment of that team and the strings that W Weaver pulled to get the team in place--provincial local politics BS, true, but the kind things that matter to folks that are on the fence. Plus it is a HUGE college football town, and that siphons off some of the football enthusiasm. (Great high school teams, too).
Re: The London Jaguars
what about the salary cap? england taxes the hell out of their rich, why do you think so many live here.
if you were an nfl player would you rather play in texas or florida and pay no state tax or go to england and pay 72% in taxes.
Re: The London Jaguars
Absolute rubbish. Where do you get 72% from? The top rate of income tax is 40%.
Re: The London Jaguars
Actually...
Unless the training camps were held in the UK as well (unlikely), the players wouldn't be domiciled in the UK for more than six months, and would not be UK citizens, so they wouldn't be subject to UK taxation
(I believe, I am not a tax lawyer, but I do work closely with an american company that has lots of american employees in the UK)
Interestingly, one thing that may come out of the expansion to the UK would be the new laws that the NFL would become subject to, including a freedom/restraint of trade law that may spell problems for the College Draft.
Employment laws can spring strange surprises in sport - just ask Jean-Marc Bosman
Re: The London Jaguars
Why do Tennis players get their winnings at Wimbledon taxed then?
Re: The London Jaguars
Probably because its competition winnings rather than salary at a guess.
I'm sure there'd be exemptions from things like UK and EU law that would need to be sorted.
Re: The London Jaguars
In LA, the only team that could move there and make it would be the Chargers, and I don't see that happening.
In LA there are lots of transplants (NYG, Den, Dal, etc) who will always keep their teams, and lots of Raider and Ram fans. The Rams were one of the most consistent teams for a very long stretch and could not survive when their team went south. THe Raiders are/were very popular but were never adopted by the city.
Keep the Bills in Buffalo and move the Jags to Salt Lake City. Look at the fanatical support the Jazz get, I guarantee an NFL team would get the same support. That area would have so much pride in getting a team that they would succeed. The only problem there could be with the Mormon church and the distraction/conflict with Sunday football and church attendance.
Re: The London Jaguars
In LA there are lots of transplants (NYG, Den, Dal, etc) who will always keep their teams
Isn't this the same in Arizona, though?
It would certainly be the case in London. As already mentioned by a poster above (I think it was BBS), he would remain a Texans fan first, and a London fan second. I've supported the 49ers for 20 years, and I'm pretty sure that in a game between a London team and the niners, I'd be cheering the red and gold.
However, I'd still go to see the London games, and cheer for them when they weren't playing the niners, because I'm a football fan, and I'd rather travel 50 miles to see football, than 3,000
Re: The London Jaguars
In LA you not only have the transplant factor, but you have people who still follow the Rams and Raiders. Despite those being historically (talking long term) winning franchises, they still didn't have the ability to generate enough revenue to stay.
Imagine if the Jags go into a 10 year free-fall like the Lions or Browns. Even if they are mediocre they won't be successful. The Chargers have enough of a fan base and are close enough to San DIego to make it work.
Re: The London Jaguars
In LA you not only have the transplant factor, but you have people who still follow the Rams and Raiders. Despite those being historically (talking long term) winning franchises, they still didn't have the ability to generate enough revenue to stay.
Imagine if the Jags go into a 10 year free-fall like the Lions or Browns. Even if they are mediocre they won't be successful. The Chargers have enough of a fan base and are close enough to San DIego to make it work.
Re: The London Jaguars
I'm off to the Pats/Bucs game shortly and reckon amongst the 85,000 fans, that I will see jerseys for all 32 teams on the backs of diehard UK NFL fans.
I'm really not sure that the NFL can assume that just because there's a franchise in London, that those fans will dump their allegiances that go back years and support a London franchise.
I've followed the Vikings since the mid 1980's and would trade 8 home seats at a London franchise for a long trip to Minneapolis to catch one home game. I daresay many of the other supporters tonight would feel the same way.
Re: The London Jaguars
I always assume that as well. In three years I don't think I've ever seen a Texans jersey, though.
Re: The London Jaguars
To be fair, I've never encountered, in person or online, another British Texans fan, and while I have attended all three games, I don't own a jersey.
Re: The London Jaguars
I saw a Schaub jersey this year. There's hope, even for the Texans... ;)
Re: The London Jaguars
Well, come to Houston and catch a game, you'll be well treated, the stadium is very nice as well, though Jerry Jones typified Dallas/Houston rivalry by seeing what Houston did and spending about 3x as much to do better. (And he has. I'd like to see a game there, simply to take in the spectacle.)
I'm one of the few Texan fans on this site (at least that posts regularly) so solidarity matters much more than nationality. Do you have some connection to Houston (ie energy) or did you adopt Houston out of sheer perversity (you know our painful NFL history I assume)?
Re: The London Jaguars
Can't see how this works. The business model of American sports (and the NFL in particular) are almost opposite of those in England and Europe in general. The stadiums are privately financed for the most part over there and do not contain club seats and luxury boxes at anywhere near the level we have here. So even widely successful they will be on the bottom in profits from ticket sales.
Re: The London Jaguars
That may be true of UK stadia in general, but Wembley has a vast club section and a lot of luxury boxes. True, an NFL team would be paying rent not mortgage interest, but given the risk that it won't take I'd say that was a good thing from their point of view.
Re: The London Jaguars
Thanks, I tried to see if Wembley had club seats and luxury boxes before I posted yesterday but could not find any source that said they did. Do you by chance know the number of each?
Re: The London Jaguars
Sorry forgot to mention this part, there is no way that Jax moves to Orlando. The Glazers and Miami ownership will just not allow it.
Re: The London Jaguars
My son and I were talking about this yesterday (he lives in London and I flew 400 miles from Edinburgh to go to the game with him). In our view they either need a team in London or keep it at 1 game. 2 or 4 is a silly compromise - its not like having your own Team and it's not such a special event where you know all your mates will be there.
8 games - 6 at Wembley (The FA can't afford to say no), 1 at Cardiff and 1 at Edinburgh (Murrayfield) might work. No pre-season games over here just have camp somewhere near a usable stadium in the Sates.
Re: The London Jaguars
I wonder if we all missed the point with a bit of misdirection, sleight of hand, smokes and mirrors from Roger ... there's recently been a lot of talk about a 75,000 seat NFL stadium being built in L.A.
Perhaps he's just using the possibility of a London franchise as an incentive for L.A. to get their act together.
Ultimately of all the options, expanding the league is least favourable as it means realigning divisions, the nice balanced schedule goes out the window; if you have 33 teams you either get a 34th or have one team on bye week every week. The talent pool and money pool both get spread a bit thinner.
Re: The London Jaguars
Wouldn't it just make more sense for one team to play a home game every year in London? I think peter king or someone mentioned this as a possibility. If the Jaguars just said we will play one home game a year in London, the city can get behind one team, and no logistical nightmare. And most likely the season ticket sale losses would be offset by a game at Wembley. This could also work for a number of other teams such as Cle/Columbus (though Cinci would probably fight it), Buffalo/Toronto, Arizona/Mexico City.
Post new comment