Photo

NFL International Series


  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

#1 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:46 AM

ESPN: Steelers to play Vikings in London in 2013

http://espn.go.com/b...in-london-in-13

Looks like they are expanding from the annual game. Basically it sounds like if you can't sellout every game and/or don't have a great stadium situation(for the time being in Minnesota's case) -- play a game overseas.
@levineps

#2 BobPhelan

BobPhelan

    OTV

  • Moderators
  • 14,615 posts
  • LocationBel Air, MD

Posted 17 October 2012 - 02:34 PM

I'm not a fan.

#3 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 17 October 2012 - 02:36 PM

I got little problem with this, the Vikings are getting a new stadium some years down the road. It makes sense somewhat, considering they don't exactly have a waitlist.
@levineps

#4 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 27 October 2012 - 10:40 AM

ESPN: Robert Kraft: London ready for team

http://espn.go.com/b...-ready-own-team
@levineps

#5 You Play to Win the Game

You Play to Win the Game

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,511 posts
  • LocationMaryland

Posted 27 October 2012 - 10:42 AM

Well, if Kraft says it, it must mean it'll happen. Seems like that guy has a ton of pull for whatever reason.

Also, if I had a dollar for every time Fox, CBS, ESPN or NBC showed him in his sky box every damn Patriots game, I'd have enough funds to start that new team in London by now. It's maddening.

/End rant.

#6 Chris B

Chris B

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 22,238 posts
  • LocationBaltimore, MD

Posted 27 October 2012 - 10:47 AM

I really don't care that the NFL plays a game or two per season in England. It gets them more exposure, and if I were them, I'd probably do the same.

But I am not a fan of a team being in London. It would just be awful. Scheduling and travel would be a nightmare.

#7 You Play to Win the Game

You Play to Win the Game

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,511 posts
  • LocationMaryland

Posted 27 October 2012 - 10:52 AM

I really don't care that the NFL plays a game or two per season in England. It gets them more exposure, and if I were them, I'd probably do the same.

But I am not a fan of a team being in London. It would just be awful. Scheduling and travel would be a nightmare.


For 8 games a year, the team in England would have a huge advantage. For 8 games a year, they'd also be at a pretty severe disadvantage. You would obviously lose a whole practice day, at least, for a west coast game.

To me, that's just not very realistic.

#8 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 27 October 2012 - 10:54 AM

Well, if Kraft says it, it must mean it'll happen. Seems like that guy has a ton of pull for whatever reason.

You have a ton of pull, when your team is a SB contender year in/out. Not to mention he is widely respected around the league since he helped broker the current CBA. Credit where it's due with him, he saved football in New England and greatly enhanced the product. They had a to of blackouts before he took over.
@levineps

#9 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 27 October 2012 - 10:56 AM

For 8 games a year, the team in England would have a huge advantage. For 8 games a year, they'd also be at a pretty severe disadvantage. You would obviously lose a whole practice day, at least, for a west coast game.

To me, that's just not very realistic.

It would be annoying for the teams in that division, that would have to play there every year.
@levineps

#10 You Play to Win the Game

You Play to Win the Game

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,511 posts
  • LocationMaryland

Posted 27 October 2012 - 11:00 AM

You have a ton of pull, when your team is a SB contender year in/out. Not to mention he is widely respected around the league since he helped broker the current CBA. Credit where it's due with him, he saved football in New England and greatly enhanced the product. They had a to of blackouts before he took over.


I'm much more impressed (and biased) with Modell/Bisciotti than Kraft, and it's not particularly close. The Ravens are a model franchise, transformed from the misery that was the Cleveland Browns, into a whole new market. The Pats new stadium is nice, and I'm sure that was a key for them which Kraft influenced, but at the same time, they've had Belichick and Brady to work with.

#11 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 27 October 2012 - 11:06 AM

I'm much more impressed (and biased) with Modell/Bisciotti than Kraft, and it's not particularly close. The Ravens are a model franchise, transformed from the misery that was the Cleveland Browns, into a whole new market. The Pats new stadium is nice, and I'm sure that was a key for them which Kraft influenced, but at the same time, they've had Belichick and Brady to work with.

And it was Kraft who hired Belichick, so doesn't he get credit for that? Along with Brady, who was drafted. I'm not sure why he should be penalized for that? Bisciotti isn't as vocal though, but when you compare resumes between Kraft/Bisciotti it's not even close, looking at it objectively. I'm sure Dan Snyder would have the same clout if he had Kraft's resume.
@levineps

#12 You Play to Win the Game

You Play to Win the Game

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,511 posts
  • LocationMaryland

Posted 27 October 2012 - 11:08 AM

And it was Kraft who hired Belichick, so doesn't he get credit for that? Along with Brady, who was drafted. I'm not sure why he should be penalized for that? Bisciotti isn't as vocal though, but when you compare resumes between Kraft/Bisciotti it's not even close, looking at it objectively. I'm sure Dan Snyder would have the same clout if he had Kraft's resume.


No, but getting a couple guys of legendary status is also a little lucky, not something that puts him over the top and above an excellent owner like Bisciotti.

How is it not close? The Ravens have been the most consistent winner over the last 4 years. They are absolutely every bit a model franchise as New England is.

Kraft is a good owner, and he's also granted quite a bit of favoritism, so for that, I personally cannot stand the guy. I really wish the networks would take an oppo-viagra so their camera crews aren't shooting every Patriots game with a massive Kraft boner. It's freakin' annoying.

#13 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 27 October 2012 - 11:19 AM

No, but getting a couple guys of legendary status is also a little lucky, not something that puts him over the top and above an excellent owner like Bisciotti.

How is it not close? The Ravens have been the most consistent winner over the last 4 years. They are absolutely every bit a model franchise as New England is.

Kraft is a good owner, and he's also granted quite a bit of favoritism, so for that, I personally cannot stand the guy. I really wish the networks would take an oppo-viagra so they're camera crews aren't shooting every Patriots game with a massive Kraft boner. It's freakin' annoying.

The Ravens are a model franchise, they just haven't had the same success as the Patriots. And that matters, when having these debates.

I think making six SBs and winning three of them, puts you a different category than someone who hasn't made one yet. Just my opinion. And I'm sure if you asked someone who had no ties to either Boston or Baltimore, they'd tell you they'd rather have Kraft. It's one of those good players --> good coaches --> good front office --> good owners. Fair or unfair, it's a bottomline business (well what isn't) and he's achieved more success than just about any other current owner during his time in charge.

Kraft isn't media shy, Bisciotti stays out of the limelight for the most part so that plays a factor as well.
@levineps

#14 You Play to Win the Game

You Play to Win the Game

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,511 posts
  • LocationMaryland

Posted 27 October 2012 - 11:21 AM

Yeah, I think that's ultimately what it is, IMO, is that Bisciotti just doesn't choose to be a Jerry Jones, Robert Kraft, Al Davis type of owner. And I'm OK with that, but I'm annoyed at how highly regarded Kraft's opinion is held.

#15 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 27 October 2012 - 11:23 AM

Yeah, I think that's ultimately what it is, IMO, is that Bisciotti just doesn't choose to be a Jerry Jones, Robert Kraft, Al Davis type of owner. And I'm OK with that, but I'm annoyed at how highly regarded Kraft's opinion is held.

I got no issues with Kraft, he's been a great ambassador for the game (and I hate the Pats). The other two you listed I have much lower opinions of.
@levineps

#16 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,680 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 27 October 2012 - 12:13 PM

If you're going to have a team in London, you have to have a second team in Europe, too. Maybe in England (Birmingham?), maybe elsewhere (Berlin or Frankfurt, Germany?).

#17 PD24

PD24

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,070 posts

Posted 27 October 2012 - 03:39 PM

I hope this happens so I can bet on London every week at home and against them every week they're on the road. (Kinda like the Seahawks now)
@PeterDiLutis

#18 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,481 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 27 October 2012 - 05:11 PM

For 8 games a year, the team in England would have a huge advantage. For 8 games a year, they'd also be at a pretty severe disadvantage. You would obviously lose a whole practice day, at least, for a west coast game.

To me, that's just not very realistic.


I think it would be a logistical nightmare. You'd almost need a whole 4-team division in Europe to lessen the impact of the travel. And good luck attracting free agents. With the Dollar-to Pound exchange rates, distance from family, and the long flights, what player will want to go over there unless they have absolutely no other choice?

EDIT: Forgot, Great Britain isn't part of the Eurozone....but the exchange rate is still unfavorable for Dollars.

#19 PD24

PD24

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,070 posts

Posted 27 October 2012 - 05:25 PM

I think it would be a logistical nightmare. You'd almost need a whole 4-team division in Europe to lessen the impact of the travel. And good luck attracting free agents. With the Dollar-to Euro exchange rates, distance from family, and the long flights, what player will want to go over there unless they have absolutely no other choice?


Very good point about ability to attract free agents. Hadn't thought about that but I can't see how anyone disagrees with that.
@PeterDiLutis

#20 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 27 October 2012 - 07:22 PM

Very good point about ability to attract free agents. Hadn't thought about that but I can't see how anyone disagrees with that.

I highly doubt were going to have professional US-based sports leagues in Europe or any other non-North American city. This gimmick works once (maybe twice) a year. Goddell, Kraft, and others are trying to grow the game. I doubt they'll reach basketball in terms of worldwide appeal, which Stern(and others) successfully have done. I got no problem with the current system, using teams that don't usually sellout and allowing their fans to save $$$ and get a non-blackout game. It's a win-win if you ask me.
@levineps




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=