PDA

View Full Version : London NFL team 'a decade away'


SteelersMongol
07-09-2009, 05:55 AM
London is expected to have its own NFL team within the next 10 to 12 years, according to a senior league official.

NFL boss Roger Goodell suggested the possibility of a team during the annual game at Wembley last October.

And Mark Waller, NFL head of sales and marketing, said: "The commissioner and I have talked about 10 years so that's mentally how we're framing it.

"Would we be hugely disappointed if it's not 10 and it's 12? No, but that's the goal," he told BBC 5 Live.

Waller was speaking in Tampa Bay, where Pittsburgh and Arizona are preparing to do battle in Super Bowl XLIII this Sunday.

This week, tickets for the NFL's third competitive game at Wembley have sold more quickly than the previous two, with 20,000 snapped up in the first seven minutes.

"It is proof of a growing audience for the sport," said NFL UK managing director Alistair Kirkwood.

"We have been delighted with the way fans have got behind the game, especially considering the challenging economic climate."

The initial 70,000 allocation for the 25 October clash between New England and Tampa Bay has gone and another batch is only available until after Sunday's Super Bowl XLIII.

In October 2007, the NFL staged its first regular-season game outside the Americas, with 81,176 fans at Wembley watching the New York Giants beat the Miami Dolphins 13-10 before going on to win Super Bowl XLI.

Last year, the New Orleans Saints were 37-32 winners in a thrilling meeting in London with the San Diego Chargers, watched by 83,226.

The NFL has also staged games in Mexico City and Toronto over the last few years and said it is all part of a bigger plan to ensure planning is correct and that fans respond positively.

"We plan rigorously. There is a view for the future. We've taken a west coast team [to London] this year in San Diego and we've proved the logistics of that work," he explained.

"This year we're going to have games going on in London and Toronto at the same time so we definitely have a way forward."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/american_football/7856008.stm

I know U guys R not so thrilled about how NFL is trying 2 expand 2 Europe, but people like me who like the idea, this is very good news. :thumbsup: Only 10 to 12 years. :applaudit:

(It's kinda little old news, but I don't think this was posted. If it was my apologies)

stlrtruck
07-09-2009, 07:55 AM
Goodell can barely manage, wait - I'm sorry - he can't manage what he's got on his lap now. What do you think he's going to do with teams in countries that have different guidelines for living, different standards on drugs (prescriptions and otc)?

What's he going to do mandate that all foreign drug companies meet the NFL guidelines?

KeiselPower99
07-09-2009, 08:18 AM
Im sorry but the NFL needs to stay in America. The UFL is saying by year 2 or 3 they want teams in London and Germany.I just dont like the idea of globalizing the NFL.

fansince'76
07-09-2009, 08:24 AM
Hey dipshit, concentrate on getting a new CBA in place first.

revefsreleets
07-09-2009, 08:39 AM
That's fine on ONE condition: They need a superfast, trans-sonic jet, even faster than the mothballed Concorde so the players won't have to spend 12 hours on a flight...even then, playing on the road in London will be hugely disruptive for any stateside team as they'll still have to deal with a huge time change.

Steel Head
07-09-2009, 08:51 AM
just move one of the loser Ohio teams there

revefsreleets
07-09-2009, 09:02 AM
489...I don't think you're gonna see 500...

SteelCityKing
07-09-2009, 09:27 AM
if they decide to expand to other regions, why not stay inside the United States? if they want to venture further, go to Canada. atleast it'll stay in the same 4 hour time zone differential period.

i'd rather see a Super Bowl in London before a team in London. period.

if they were to expand stateside, go for Las Vegas, Portland, Oregon, Salt Lake City, Utah, New Mexico, Virginia, or even a new New York team....or...go back to Los Angeles, California, or even Vancouver, Toronto, or Montreal. i know Canada has their own football league. but apparently the USA teams playing in Canada is a huge deal. so, it'd be worth it.

there are plenty of places that could house a football franchise. but not London. PLEASE! i can just picture it now, the London Werewolves...with the theme song by Warren Zevon playing nonstop! haha!

tony hipchest
07-09-2009, 09:44 AM
Hey dipshit, concentrate on getting a new CBA in place first.you know why he is doing this and what its all about right?

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/108412-pats-owner-interested-in-nfl-london-team

Pats owner interested in NFL London team

Owner Robert Kraft told Britain's The Times last week that he believes an NFL team based in London would be a success and that he'd be interested in an ownership stake through his sons if possible. Kraft was in London promoting the team's October game against the Buccaneers.

of course its possible. commish will see no conflict of interest there. its not like warkraft would ever be caught up in throwing games or any other cheating scandal.

we have dan rooney publicly disclosing his paltry $2.2 mil profit from the steelers and robert is out trying to buy more teams. :dang:

goodell must have been pissed when dan didnt sell to drukenmiller. he probably told dan to get the fuk out of his way and he is better off in ireland. now dan is deep in debt and many others besides him are partial owners.

pretty sickenning.

steelreserve
07-09-2009, 11:19 AM
Oh yeah, this is a great idea. You know, since the WLAF and NFL Europe showed us how well American football sells in Europe once the novelty wears off. Kind of like MLS in this country. Where's the "fail" smiley when you need it?

Edman
07-09-2009, 11:34 AM
It doesn't matter for the long term growth of the league, it's all about the quick buck in the end. As per usual with Deh Fur...er The Commish Goodeal.

RodWoodsonwasprettycool
07-09-2009, 01:16 PM
just move one of the loser Ohio teams there

Oh yeah because the NFL would love to damage their reputation again like what happened in 1995. :rolleyes:

If the NFL were to ever leave Cleveland again I wouldn't ever watch a single pro game ever again, and I'm sure pretty much any other Browns fan would say the same thing.

Again even when the Browns are terrible they still mean a lot to this city, more than most outsiders would understand. It's pretty bad that even with the greatest player in basketball in the world currently on the team the Cavs still can't jump over the Browns as the Favorite son of the city.

Godfather
07-09-2009, 02:18 PM
commish will see no conflict of interest there. its not like warkraft would ever be caught up in throwing games or any other cheating scandal.

It would be hilarious if the Patriots got the Cleveland Spiders end of the deal...even more so if Bellycheat and Brady got left behind in Foxboro.

RoethlisBURGHer
07-09-2009, 02:42 PM
That means in 22 years we will have a team in Los Angeles.....when the London team moves there because London can't support a football team full time.