More Games for U.K as Stadium sold out (1 Viewer)

[fenboy73]

seven times over! Shows a good fan base in the U.K. but not sure what you guys think of this. Obviously I think it is great!
http://www.nfluk.com/news-latestnews.php

 

[FFSaint]

Honestly, I don't really mind the games in the UK. I mean seriously, does anyone unless its the Saints? The only problem I have with the game being played against the Chargers is that for 2 years now I have been telling a bunch of people here in SD that we were going to go to NOLA for the Saints and Chargers game......and then SPLAT.

....but the article mentions playing several games in the UK and possibly adding a game to the schedule to play games in the UK.

Now that is something I have a problem with. Players going over there to play one game a year is fine by me, but when you add a game to the already grueling schedule, what does that do for the players' overall health going into the playoffs? Another week of wear and tear is not what I want the Saints to have to endure if we are jockeying for playoff positioning or whatever. IMO, that is too much of a sacrifice to globalize the NFL.

 

[jrdbrn]

Honestly, I don't really mind the games in the UK. I mean seriously, does anyone unless its the Saints? The only problem I have with the game being played against the Chargers is that for 2 years now I have been telling a bunch of people here in SD that we were going to go to NOLA for the Saints and Chargers game......and then SPLAT.

....but the article mentions playing several games in the UK and possibly adding a game to the schedule to play games in the UK.

Now that is something I have a problem with. Players going over there to play one game a year is fine by me, but when you add a game to the already grueling schedule, what does that do for the players' overall health going into the playoffs? Another week of wear and tear is not what I want the Saints to have to endure if we are jockeying for playoff positioning or whatever. IMO, that is too much of a sacrifice to globalize the NFL.

$$$ cures everything

 

[Saintree River]

With a 17 game schedule, that would mean an 18 week season. I can see every team having to go over there once per season (16 matchups). Make it the first 16 weeks of the season, leaving the last 2 off limits from international travel. Then no one loses a home game and everyone in the league has to go to some international location. Spreads the game (which the NFL is going to do anyway) and doesn't do it at the expense of the fans. And they should get rid of 1 if not 2 of the preseason games.

 

[bossalinie563]

i say screw the uk they have there own football
it really ****** me off to cuz i wanted to see the chargers wish tomlinson was a saint!!

 

[DomeDude]

I think it is absolutley ridiculous to take home games away from cities who have paid dearly for their respective franchises. In today's NFL where taxpayers pay for new stadiums, and incentives to keep their teams there, it is completely wrong to take these games away from them and send them overseas to people who have spent diddly-poo for the right to have teams play there. If they found a way to keep both teams from losing home games, then I would not really have a problem with it. The problem I have is that taxpayers here in the states are being robbed when they lose a home game. Of course the NFL compensates the team for their loss of income, but the city losses all of its income from the lost game. Not to mention the businesses that get screwed by losing a game. If the NFL wants to expand to Europe thats fine, just dont do it at the expense of the American cities who have paid their dues to keep their teams.

 

[Dart]

Obviously only speculation at this point, but if they can pull it off without increasing the general wear and tear on teams and staff then as far as I'm concerned, it's great! And I think it'd be good for the sport too. I believe the NFL is the most exciting and competitive professional league in world sports and this would give the NFL a great platform on which to prove it.

 

[Dart]

I think it is absolutley ridiculous to take home games away from cities who have paid dearly for their respective franchises. In today's NFL where taxpayers pay for new stadiums, and incentives to keep their teams there, it is completely wrong to take these games away from them and send them overseas to people who have spent diddly-poo for the right to have teams play there. If they found a way to keep both teams from losing home games, then I would not really have a problem with it. The problem I have is that taxpayers here in the states are being robbed when they lose a home game. Of course the NFL compensates the team for their loss of income, but the city losses all of its income from the lost game. Not to mention the businesses that get screwed by losing a game. If the NFL wants to expand to Europe thats fine, just dont do it at the expense of the American cities who have paid their dues to keep their teams.

It's TV revenue which brings in the majority of the teams' income. By playing a handful of games in 'Europe' that market is suddenly opened up dramatically. I'm sure if there are more games played abroad the NFL and the franchises will find a way to accommodate all parties (including the respective cities) fiscally and I believe that's the right thing to do. But don't labor under the delusion that your $30 on a Sunday is what's buying new stadiums, because it isn't.

 

[bclemms]

I think it is absolutley ridiculous to take home games away from cities who have paid dearly for their respective franchises. In today's NFL where taxpayers pay for new stadiums, and incentives to keep their teams there, it is completely wrong to take these games away from them and send them overseas to people who have spent diddly-poo for the right to have teams play there. If they found a way to keep both teams from losing home games, then I would not really have a problem with it. The problem I have is that taxpayers here in the states are being robbed when they lose a home game. Of course the NFL compensates the team for their loss of income, but the city losses all of its income from the lost game. Not to mention the businesses that get screwed by losing a game. If the NFL wants to expand to Europe thats fine, just dont do it at the expense of the American cities who have paid their dues to keep their teams.

I agree completely.

It would be one thing if it was the NBA and we would lose one of 41 home games or MLB and lose 1 of 82 home games but in the NFL we lose one in eight games. This means the city loses 12.5% of its revenue, fans lose 12.5% of its chance to go to the game, the businesses lose 12.5% of revenue generated by the NFL and taxpayers lose 12.5% of the value of the franchise each year.

I think the better solution would be to add one more week to the NFL schedule and each team plays an away game at neutral site. The last two weeks of the schedule all teams would play a normal schedule because those games tend to become magnified so close to the playoffs. I don't think London should get them all either. The NFL would benefit greatly from having a few in Europe, a few in Mexico City and a few in Tokyo. I'm sure the west coast teams would just assume fly to Tokyo as they would to Europe since the mileage is nearly identical. If they want to try and expand internationally then that is fine, just don't do it at the expense of the fans and cities that are footing the bills.

Many of the players complain about the preseason being too long and the players will make more money by expanding globally.

 

[bclemms]

It's TV revenue which brings in the majority of the teams' income. By playing a handful of games in 'Europe' that market is suddenly opened up dramatically. I'm sure if there are more games played abroad the NFL and the franchises will find a way to accommodate all parties (including the respective cities) fiscally and I believe that's the right thing to do. But don't labor under the delusion that your $30 on a Sunday is what's buying new stadiums, because it isn't.

You do realize that cities pay for these brand new stadiums that the teams hold them ransom for don't you? You do realize that these cities generate the money from the taxpayers to pay for these standiums right?

BTW, tickets for 4 to a game, parking, a couple dogs and drinks and the cost is much closer to $500 than $30 but that really isn't what the Domedude was talking about.

New Orleans has to pay the Saints some $20 million annually, provide them with a rent free practice facility, provide them the dome and give them all the revenues just to keep them here. $20 million is not cheap especially for a city that can use all the help it can get.

 

[Broadmoor74]

I'm all for American Football in the UK. Make it a 17 week schedule with 2 byes. Shave off a preseason game or two.

 

[RobG]

The Saints will come out ok on the trip to the UK but NOLA really loses out on the revenue from one weekend of tourism revenue and at this point that hurts.....the upside is that the city may gain some additional exposure in the UK which ultimately could more than make up for the one lost game.....the big question is how long until the city realizes the benefits. I think it was too soon after Katrina to have NOLA lose a home game.

 

[Furor]

New Orleans has to pay the Saints some $20 million annually, provide them with a rent free practice facility, provide them the dome and give them all the revenues just to keep them here. $20 million is not cheap especially for a city that can use all the help it can get.

I don't think New Orleans pays the Saints $20M annually. I also think it was the state that pitched in for the practice facility.

 

[bclemms]

I don't think New Orleans pays the Saints $20M annually. I also think it was the state that pitched in for the practice facility.

Yeah, the state pays them. Thanks for the correction.

 

[skymike]

I hate it, and I dont have to explain why. I'm busy.


BCLEMMS, whats w/ the Cowboy stuff? Did you lose a bet?