Super Bowl in London in 2014?

[RedskinPete]

Just say no untill they get a full time NFL team! Then will talk!

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

I love the idea. Wembly stadium is beautiful. Then again it would be the first cold weather Super Bowl in a long time.

Same. Who gives a shit, it's not like the majority of us go to the Super Bowl either. It's way too expensive. This way it helps the UK and the NFL in popularity.

I think it is very closed-minded and conservative to make arguments like "this is OUR game", it is "American not British", etc. Basketball at once was only a game played in the US. But now look at it's popularity all over the world. People are crazy about ball overseas. There is nothing wrong with spreading the game.

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

What a horrible awful idea. And what about the time difference? I doubt this will happen.

It's not like the game will be played in China. The jetlag isn't that bad. It would take a couple days, max to get over. Plus teams get to the Super Bowl town a week before.

Non-issue IMO.

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by saden1

Do people not understand how to rate threads? This is actually one of the better threads of late and I don't understand why it warrants one star.

Just some bigot getting offended because we "selling out" America's game. I still can't stand that argument. No American will be denied the opportunity to see the game. If you are gonna throw out the bones to watch the game I am sure you can afford a plane ticket.

Only problem I see is the airfare for the family members of the players. But even then the NFL could and should cover those costs if they are gonna take it overseas.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by jsarno

I think it's time the NFL build a SUPER BOWL STADIUM. Which ever state gets it, they can use it for their own purposes, but the sole existance of the stadium is to host the Super Bowl. The walls can have the history of the game, and no matter what, it will always be neutral and in the USA. I orginally thought that Hawaii should get it every year, but they already get the pro bowl, and their stadium is too small. I'd still go for this, but they need to renovate the stadium.

Place it right in the center of the country, in Kansas.

[REDSKIN1]

The Superbowl should be played in the United States, why would we want to go to another country to watch the championship game to a sport thats played in the United States. That makes no sense to me, you don't see England having their Croquet championships here in the United States. Will someone please tell the commissoner that he can take off his dumb dumb hat now....

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by REDSKIN1

The Superbowl should be played in the United States, why would we want to go to another country to watch the championship game to a sport thats played in the United States. That makes no sense to me, you don't see England having their Croquet championships here in the United States. Will someone please tell the commissoner that he can take off his dumb dumb hat now....

Very good point. Who else plays the regular season in one country then plays the championship in another?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Lotus

But then they couldn't rake in the future money (they think) by expanding the NFL overseas. Are you willing to build your Super Bowl Stadium in Paris?

They already tried that, it failed miserably. Don't you remember the NFL Europe?

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Same. Who gives a shit, it's not like the majority of us go to the Super Bowl either. It's way too expensive. This way it helps the UK and the NFL in popularity.

I think it is very closed-minded and conservative to make arguments like "this is OUR game", it is "American not British", etc. Basketball at once was only a game played in the US. But now look at it's popularity all over the world. People are crazy about ball overseas. There is nothing wrong with spreading the game.

Explain how taking the largest sporting event in our nation, from a sport that is supported solely by American fans all season (unless someone flies into the country for a ticket on Sunday) and whose teams are ALL in this country...and outsourcing it to a foreign country that cares more about soccer, doesn't understand the game for the most part, has no real team loyalties and doesn't spend their money all season to pay the players through ticket and merchandise sales...is somehow "close-minded" or even more ridiculous, "conservative"?

Our citizens really love and understand the game, they work hard all year to afford their tickets and merchandise to support their team and even though a lot of corporations do buy the Super Bowl tickets, many fans do save up to get a ticket when their team makes the big game. How can you not understand how it would be insulting to ship the Super Bowl out of the country and cutting out a lot of fans from being able to attend...and probably filling the stadium with many fans who probably have no clue what's going on or who the players even are?

Think of it this way...the Redskins finally make the Super Bowl in a couple of years. It's been 20 years! The game is in London. You could afford a ticket and road trip if the game were in New Orleans, Phoenix or Florida, but not a plane trip and accommodations to Europe, with the added expenses and hassle of getting a passport. Wouldn't you be even the slightest bit disappointed and probably even angry at the league for cutting you out of the most memorable game in your life, that you've waited 20 years to see happen again?

Meanwhile, some guy wearing a Manchester United jersey to the game is sitting in your seat, talking to his buddies how the game is so confusing and is "inferior to futbol".

It would be equally ridiculous to have a championship soccer match between Manchester United and Barcelona in the Pro Bowl stadium in Honolulu for no real reason. They'd be equally and as legitimately angry.

Leave your blind political insults out of this. It's about fairness to the fans who already spend a ton of money to make the NFL the most successful league in the world. Sure, you're right that there's nothing wrong with exposing the rest of the world to the game we love, but to give them the biggest game of the year is quite insulting and will lose more fans than it gains. Give them more preseason games that won't interfere with travel, rest and practices for the next week's games...but regular season games give the teams who are forced to play for foreign fans an unfair disadvantage...to give them postseason games would be unfair to the fans who supported their team all year long.

You'd rather gain a few casual fans overseas who still prefer another sport and probably never see that team play live again in their life than to reward lifelong, faithful fans here at home? I don't understand it.

Diversifying the fan base and expanding it worldwide are worthy goals, but not at the cost of alienating the true fans that made the league large enough, rich enough and successful enough to even considering targeting a worldwide audience.

There's a point where football must realize they'll never reach some fans in some parts of the world...just as soccer must realize the game will never catch on professionally here in the United States. Soccer has failed so many times professionally here...just as the NFL has had lackluster success in their experimental games overseas. The World League bombed, as did NFL-Europe. You can't blame the talent level for the failures, because it was the sport they rejected in favor of soccer.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Buster

Place it right in the center of the country, in Kansas.

LOL...the actual center of the USA is near a town called Lebanon. Hey, that's sounds international.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Just some bigot getting offended because we "selling out" America's game. I still can't stand that argument. No American will be denied the opportunity to see the game. If you are gonna throw out the bones to watch the game I am sure you can afford a plane ticket.

Only problem I see is the airfare for the family members of the players. But even then the NFL could and should cover those costs if they are gonna take it overseas.

You make a good point but I have not argued against the idea out of bigotry. Instead, the London idea seems to me like putting the cart before the horse. Once London has an NFL franchise, then it will have every right to host the game. Until then, however, London is not part of the NFL universe. Therefore there is no reason to make fans, players, and family members travel so far.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Lotus

You make a good point but I have not argued against the idea out of bigotry. Instead, the London idea seems to me like putting the cart before the horse. Once London has an NFL franchise, then it will have every right to host the game. Until then, however, London is not part of the NFL universe. Therefore there is no reason to make fans, players, and family members travel so far.

What, you haven't heard of the London Silly Nannies? LOL.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by Buster

Explain how taking the largest sporting event in our nation, from a sport that is supported solely by American fans all season (unless someone flies into the country for a ticket on Sunday) and whose teams are ALL in this country...and outsourcing it to a foreign country that cares more about soccer, doesn't understand the game for the most part, has no real team loyalties and doesn't spend their money all season to pay the players through ticket and merchandise sales...is somehow "close-minded" or even more ridiculous, "conservative"?

Our citizens really love and understand the game, they work hard all year to afford their tickets and merchandise to support their team and even though a lot of corporations do buy the Super Bowl tickets, many fans do save up to get a ticket when their team makes the big game. How can you not understand how it would be insulting to ship the Super Bowl out of the country and cutting out a lot of fans from being able to attend...and probably filling the stadium with many fans who probably have no clue what's going on or who the players even are?

Think of it this way...the Redskins finally make the Super Bowl in a couple of years. It's been 20 years! The game is in London. You could afford a ticket and road trip if the game were in New Orleans, Phoenix or Florida, but not a plane trip and accommodations to Europe, with the added expenses and hassle of getting a passport. Wouldn't you be even the slightest bit disappointed and probably even angry at the league for cutting you out of the most memorable game in your life, that you've waited 20 years to see happen again?

Meanwhile, some guy wearing a Manchester United jersey to the game is sitting in your seat, talking to his buddies how the game is so confusing and is "inferior to futbol".

It would be equally ridiculous to have a championship soccer match between Manchester United and Barcelona in the Pro Bowl stadium in Honolulu for no real reason. They'd be equally and as legitimately angry.

Leave your blind political insults out of this. It's about fairness to the fans who already spend a ton of money to make the NFL the most successful league in the world. Sure, you're right that there's nothing wrong with exposing the rest of the world to the game we love, but to give them the biggest game of the year is quite insulting and will lose more fans than it gains. Give them more preseason games that won't interfere with travel, rest and practices for the next week's games...but regular season games give the teams who are forced to play for foreign fans an unfair disadvantage...to give them postseason games would be unfair to the fans who supported their team all year long.

You'd rather gain a few casual fans overseas who still prefer another sport and probably never see that team play live again in their life than to reward lifelong, faithful fans here at home? I don't understand it.

Diversifying the fan base and expanding it worldwide are worthy goals, but not at the cost of alienating the true fans that made the league large enough, rich enough and successful enough to even considering targeting a worldwide audience.

There's a point where football must realize they'll never reach some fans in some parts of the world...just as soccer must realize the game will never catch on professionally here in the United States. Soccer has failed so many times professionally here...just as the NFL has had lackluster success in their experimental games overseas. The World League bombed, as did NFL-Europe. You can't blame the talent level for the failures, because it was the sport they rejected in favor of soccer.

Way to hit it Buster!

[jsarno]

To add to buster's post...lets keep in mind that the Super Bowl is almost like a national holiday for us, how can it be in another country?

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by jsarno

To add to buster's post...lets keep in mind that the Super Bowl is almost like a national holiday for us, how can it be in another country?

Because it is a tv holiday and the origin location of the tv signal doesn't really matter.