NFL looking at playing two regular season games abroad each yea

[G. Host]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-nfl-internationalexpansion&prov=ap&type=lgns
The NFL has proposed playing two regular-season games outside the United States starting in 2008, league officials said Saturday.

Mark Waller, head of NFL international development, said the proposal to play abroad was put to team owners Tuesday in Denver. It came after the 49ers and Cardinals played last October before a regular-season record crowd of 103,000 in Mexico City.

The owners will discuss the issue again in October. The games would be played in Mexico, Canada, the United Kingdom and Germany, where five of the six NFL Europe teams play.

I know this is designed to keep interest in NFL Europe high but how will revenue will be shared from those games? How are fans going to react to paying season ticket PSLs and not being able to see games?

[ICE74129]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-nfl-internationalexpansion&prov=ap&type=lgns
The NFL has proposed playing two regular-season games outside the United States starting in 2008, league officials said Saturday.

Mark Waller, head of NFL international development, said the proposal to play abroad was put to team owners Tuesday in Denver. It came after the 49ers and Cardinals played last October before a regular-season record crowd of 103,000 in Mexico City.

The owners will discuss the issue again in October. The games would be played in Mexico, Canada, the United Kingdom and Germany, where five of the six NFL Europe teams play.

I know this is designed to keep interest in NFL Europe high but how will revenue will be shared from those games? How are fans going to react to paying season ticket PSLs and not being able to see games?


I have to agree here. If I am a panthers fan and pay for a PSL I want 8 games in my stadium. I am not going to fly to Europe to watch them play. They would have to drop the cost of the PSL's and season tickets 1/8th of their prices or fans will have a legit reason to possibly take this to court.

Now how do they make it work? Preaseason games only.

[Philagape]

Not one minute of regular-season play should be outside of an NFL stadium.

[ICE74129]

Not one minute of regular-season play should be outside of an NFL stadium.

Agreed. We have a screwed up revenue sharing now as is!

[Mr. Pink]

Actually PSLs don't matter in this equation at all. The PSL is a ONE time bill/payment. As long as you hold season tickets you pay this once in order to technically "own the right to the seat" year after year.

This wouldn't hurt fans at all. Season tickets are based upon a price per game, you get season tickets you'd save on one game. Seeing you'd be paying based off of 9 games and not 10.

The only thing it would effect would be the owner of the team, it would cut into his sales on concessions.

[Philagape]

It would hurt fans because they'd get to see one less game live.

[Mr. Pink]

It would hurt fans because they'd get to see one less game live.

You're right...I wasn't specific enough.

Meant it wouldn't hurt fans in the pocketbook....in fact it would do the opposite.

[G. Host]

Not true. For example take suites at Bills - you need to pay for multiple years when you get it (3, 5, 10, etc) and for that money your get tickets to seats in a suite but ticket price is only part of it.

Suppose you sign a 3 year deal costing you $2000 per year per ticket. If you take away one of those games to play in Europe is the team going to refund you $200? Not likely for they will divide the cost up refunding you cost of ticket (say $100) and the rest of the cost will be kept as part of the suite cost.

Figures may be different and I'd like to know what did happen in cases like San Diego's game moved to Arizona and the Arizona game moved to Mexico. New Orleans case was different in that entire season was gone but there are still people squabbling about losses.

The team is going to lose concessions, merchandise sales, parking, advertising revenue, etc also.

[Mr. Pink]

PSLs are a one time price....when you first get tickets you have to pay for the PSL. Which is a "personal seating license." It's set up in a way to make it that you "own the seat" basically, which is BS. It's just an additional 1 time amount of money a team can phenangle from a "fan." I was a Browns season ticket holder in 99 and 2000 then moved back here to Buffalo so I didn't renew due to the fact that driving through PA in winter is a pain in the ass. But I only paid the PSL once in 99.

But you only pay that price once, not every year you renew. You pay a price based off each game. Say the team dictates the seats are 43 dollars a game at the "discounted" season ticket rate, you pay 430 because you're paying for 10 games. If the team takes away a home game you're paying 387 for those seats.

Merchandising would take a miniscule hit because most people are going to buy jerseys, hats, etc regardless of when they can. Programs obviously the team loses out on that money. Advertising? I fail to see how that is really effected. The most serious thing is that the team loses out on concessions and parking but some of this is offset due to the team not having to pay for people who work in the stadium that day. Which also then effects the local economy somewhat.

Suites are a different story, I have no idea how those work or would be effected. My assumption is it's also based on a per game rate like the rest of the seats although I could be completely wrong so I'm just speculating.

[The_Philster]

PSLs are entirely different from what we have in Buffalo, G.Host...Thank God

[Mr. Pink]

I have to agree here. If I am a panthers fan and pay for a PSL I want 8 games in my stadium. I am not going to fly to Europe to watch them play. They would have to drop the cost of the PSL's and season tickets 1/8th of their prices or fans will have a legit reason to possibly take this to court.

Now how do they make it work? Preaseason games only.

By the way with your arguement you're also paying for the preseason games as part of your season ticket package, so they'd have to lower prices anyways. So that part of your argument is moot.

Now if you're talking that the NFL just adds an additional game to 2 teams a year to play out in mexico city, toronto, japan, china etc....then yes that makes sense. It adds to the NFLs overall exposure, brings in more revenue and gets more fans globally without the expense of disrupting any teams revenues. Problem is this, most people and players think preseason is too long as it is and how do you get the NFLPA to agree to players having to play 1 more game a year? Additional wear and tear, another meaningless game that could lead to injury and more travel.

[Scumbag College]

Why don't the Arizona Cardinals just play all of their games abroad? No one goes to their games anyways.

[G. Host]

Why don't the Arizona Cardinals just play all of their games abroad? No one goes to their games anyways.

Arizona Cardinals have a new stadium and are trying to turn it around so Arizona fanbase has been increasing including season ticket sales.

Maybe LA will get a team and they will create one more team the NFL version of the Globetrotters to play overseas to reduce number of teams impacted for this "great" marketing idea.

[Turf]

Very stupid anti climatic waste of an NFL football game.

[ICE74129]

Bottom line, it wont' work. They need to have a couple pre season games wherever but that would be the most they could do.

[Mitchy moo]

The reason for this is simple, they want to expand football worldwide & get in new TV money from abroad. They know it may take 25 years but look how well the US is doing now for them.

[Michael82]

If they do this with a Buffalo home game, I will be really ****ing pissed. We only have 8 home games as it is now. I don't want to lose another. :mad: