Never happen... the owners won't take a loss. By your own admission the NFL really isn't a game for export. In the end I expect the NFL to realize that and focus on North America exclusively.
Cheese Curds, 3/24: For Aaron Rodgers, the truth is out there
- Thread starter Da-news-now
- Start date
- Messages
- 13,783
- Reaction score
- 6,616
You getting ads like that in another language is simple behavioral targeting or paid banners. Very standard stuff. The problem is bandwidth space. Now the next question is who does it. It's either Google or Apple. That's my guess. Now how that's priced out us not up to the NFL.
- Messages
- 13,783
- Reaction score
- 6,616
I think North America is a bigger challenge than Europe. Europe has Sky Sports and the BBC. The rest of North America is limited sans the US Canadian broadcast is basically TSN. Rest is very restrictive. TV rights fees are close to a tipping point. Streaming will be the global access. It's not just TV. It's merchandise. It's sponsorships. Crystal ball?Never happen... the owners won't take a loss. By your own admission the NFL really isn't a game for export. In the end I expect the NFL to realize that and focus on North America exclusively.
- 2 UK teams in 20 years
- 1 will begin play in 10 years but play "home" games in US for 5 years
- Exclusive global streaming rights awarded by 2020
- Partnership with EPL by 2020. EPL regular season games in US.
- Joint Stadium project
- Global sponsorshop deals.
- Super Bowl in London
We have beat this to death.... the UK won't support an NFL franchise. The NFL isn't soccer and doesn't have that appeal. Besides the logistics nightmare it would cause it's just not a feasible plan. Canada yes.. Mexico maybe. The rest is a pipe dream.
- Messages
- 13,783
- Reaction score
- 6,616
Support takes a back seat to $$. Global rights are worth billions. Without a team there value goes down. Canadian TV is a mess. Toronto is out due to Buffalo. Only major TV markets are Montreal and Vancouver and Seattle could block it. Mexico has major financial hurdles. Follow the money
I tend to agree with Mark on this. Adding teams in England just won't happen. Not that it's impossible, just that it's problematic enough to make it "not worth the trouble" to the owners. Likely pitfalls:
- many players won't want to play overseas away from home, so those teams might be at a severe disadvantage
- there is no homegrown talent to cheer for, which also adds to the issue above
- you can't play any day games or you lose your primary viewing market (they are 6 hours ahead, so a noon or even 3pm game is in the early morning here, not to mention the West Coast)
- they can never be on Monday night or Thursday night football, so those teams don't get equal treatment. A weekday night game in London is an early weekday afternoon game here - you just lost a ton of your audience.
- travel is a problem, especially to and from the West Coast where we are now talking 9-11 hour flights
- the current games are well attended, but is that because of the novelty? If there are games in England every week, will the novelty wear off and attendance lag
In the end, I believe you will have to grow the sport through expanded viewing opportunities for Europeans and others around the world who are interested. You can't make it free, but I think it would be a sensible to do it as cheaply as possible. There is little risk in increasing the exposure and not reaping a ton of immediate profit from places where you see essentially near zero money from right now. As technology allows, via satellite and cable/internet, the league would be wise to grant cheap access to foreign markets to see where pockets of interest take hold and then exploit those markets in other ways from a profit perspective.
The only way football succeeds in non-US countries/regions is if they have their own leagues and then it will never succeed to the degree it has in the States. Soccer, baseball, hockey and basketball have become much more international because there are pockets of interest around the world and high levels of local participation, both amateur and professional. Football is not in the same position as those sports globally. You can't artificially plant the NFL in a foreign county. The best the "NFL" could do would be maybe some limited expansion into Canada and Mexico.
The other thing that hurts football is that it's not a sport where you can easily expose naive fans through high level exhibition type play. Soccer, baseball and basketball lend themselves much more easily to that. English Premier League teams for example are willing and able to play in other countries in exhibition games utilizing their front-line players. Can you imagine asking the Packers or Patriots to play a couple of exhibition games in the off-season in Germany to show off the sport, and to play your starters for a majority of the game!?!?
- many players won't want to play overseas away from home, so those teams might be at a severe disadvantage
- there is no homegrown talent to cheer for, which also adds to the issue above
- you can't play any day games or you lose your primary viewing market (they are 6 hours ahead, so a noon or even 3pm game is in the early morning here, not to mention the West Coast)
- they can never be on Monday night or Thursday night football, so those teams don't get equal treatment. A weekday night game in London is an early weekday afternoon game here - you just lost a ton of your audience.
- travel is a problem, especially to and from the West Coast where we are now talking 9-11 hour flights
- the current games are well attended, but is that because of the novelty? If there are games in England every week, will the novelty wear off and attendance lag
In the end, I believe you will have to grow the sport through expanded viewing opportunities for Europeans and others around the world who are interested. You can't make it free, but I think it would be a sensible to do it as cheaply as possible. There is little risk in increasing the exposure and not reaping a ton of immediate profit from places where you see essentially near zero money from right now. As technology allows, via satellite and cable/internet, the league would be wise to grant cheap access to foreign markets to see where pockets of interest take hold and then exploit those markets in other ways from a profit perspective.
The only way football succeeds in non-US countries/regions is if they have their own leagues and then it will never succeed to the degree it has in the States. Soccer, baseball, hockey and basketball have become much more international because there are pockets of interest around the world and high levels of local participation, both amateur and professional. Football is not in the same position as those sports globally. You can't artificially plant the NFL in a foreign county. The best the "NFL" could do would be maybe some limited expansion into Canada and Mexico.
The other thing that hurts football is that it's not a sport where you can easily expose naive fans through high level exhibition type play. Soccer, baseball and basketball lend themselves much more easily to that. English Premier League teams for example are willing and able to play in other countries in exhibition games utilizing their front-line players. Can you imagine asking the Packers or Patriots to play a couple of exhibition games in the off-season in Germany to show off the sport, and to play your starters for a majority of the game!?!?
- Messages
- 1,176
- Reaction score
- 574
LA has proven 3 times that it couldn't support a team and ended up losing the team all 3 times. Now they have 2 moving there. I tend to agree with packinatl in the sense that money is the driving factor.
