General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI do not understand why the NFL plays games in London but not in Mexico City
Mexico City would be a logical choice for expansion, not London.
itsrobert
(14,157 posts)Europeans can afford more expensive seats and better advertising revenue
RB TexLa
(17,003 posts)mythology
(9,527 posts)Mexico City is far more economically stratified than London is. Also there are far more corporate sponsorships available from Europe than in Mexico.
GDP per capita in Mexico is a bit under $11,000. It's a bit over $41,000 in England. Sure that number isn't as precise as parity purchasing power, but it's a pretty large difference.
There's the language barrier, which is important in a league that wants to sell accessibility to the players and coaches through things like NFL Hard Knocks or player interviews.
There's the awful air pollution and the rampant crime.
brush
(53,776 posts)The NFL played a game in Mexico City in 2005 a regular season game just as they did recently in London (and there have been others).
It was sold out, no problem with that.
Who knows why the league seems to favor expanding to Europe and not Mexico?
Could be the obvious reason language.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)That's why NFL Europe folded after two or three seasons(IIRC).
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Just a guess...
VScott
(774 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)could have something to do with it, too.
sP
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)but DAAAAANG it's nasty.
sP
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)And the Rams, certainly, date back before Smog Check.
ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)i can't imagine playing in those conditions (but at least they don't have the altitude to deal with)... I am pretty sure they had to cancel a game or two in L.A. because of the smog... but I am not certain...
sP
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)LeftInTX
(25,315 posts)waddirum
(979 posts)at the Estadio Atzeca.
2000 was Colts versus Steelers
2001 was Cowboys versus Raiders
Iggo
(47,552 posts)english is are national lanaguage!!!!!!
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)It's sort of the opposite of logic. Mexico is part of North America, and the idea of this expansion is to expand outside of North America. The UK has a fairly healthy number of American style football fans buying up tickets at good prices. The UK series of games has been a big success.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)both for NFL teams flying there & the London team. There is also the possibility of the team sucking decreasing fan support and the NFL & team losing money there.
Also they don't subsidize stadiums for owners profits there and even if they played in Wembley, you'd have to deal with scheduling conflicts with soccer teams.
Also tax & immigration laws would probably have to be changed then the market would have to attract players to London and I'm not sure how that would work for free agents. I'm sure the travel alone would discourage many prospects.
The only way I'd see is if they expanded for a European division to negate the jet lag but that would also uneven the conferences, dilute the talent pool, etc.
I honestly don't see it but wouldn't doubt the possibility in the history of Goddell bad ideas but 1 extra team I don't see happening anytime soon. Oakland is exploring San Antonio or LA so I don't even see future relocating franchises giving the London idea a serious consideration.
goldent
(1,582 posts)I remember watching some games - interesting but sub-NFL level of play as well as the officiating.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)It was interesting since it acted as kind of a farm league for the NFL.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)season of NFL games being played in the UK, not about a team franchise for London. I was addressing 'why London not Mexico City'. Flying to London from much of America is much like flying to Mexico City. It's not Sydney. It's a few hours in bed and you arrive. Just like Mexico City.
And the games are being played at Wembley this year. They sold really well. So I don't see why the OP thinks they were a bad idea. They went great.
Your whole franchise thing is another barrel of fish entirely.
Ampersand Unicode
(503 posts)for extending an economic olive branch to "those dirty Mexicans."
There would be a massive boycott of "America's new pastime" and the NFL doesn't want to risk that. Something along the lines of "they already have 'futebol,' we call it soccer and we don't care." There would be massive protests and cries of REMEMBER THE ALAMO if you held a "Cowboys" and "Patriots" game south of the border. You'd see plenty of people dressed like Massachusetts Minutemen, except they wouldn't be Pats fans, they'd be tea-party types shouting USA USA USA USA and hurling beer at the Univision broadcasting booth. The halftime show would be an equestrian performance by "Clive Bundy and Los Bandidos Ilegales."
I seem to recall (albeit from second-hand conversations, as I was not alive yet) that there was some unrest when the MLB expanded into Canada. Despite having won the World Series (albeit only once), there's still a subtle notion that the Blue Jays aren't a "real" baseball team because they're not American. There was disappointment in 1992 that "we" had "lost" the World Series, almost as though the Americans had been defeated by the Russians in 1980 and the Miracle on Ice never happened. The irony, of course, is that the "World" Series is only played in one country, and FFS, it's Canada, not the USSR or some other "evil empire." You'd think we had lost to the Iraq team or Nazi Germany or something.
But nobody watches the international baseball championships where the U.S. team plays against Japan and the Dominican Republic. Note also that the Montreal Expos no longer exist, having moved "back" to the U.S. and turned into the Washington Nationals. Located right in "our" nation's capital, of course.
So, definitely nationalism/racism has a role to play in this, I think. And I'm not playing the race card. There's just this idea that football is "our" game, and London (even though they have "football" aka soccer too) is still considered "American" enough to go there, because it's not as brown or Spanish as Mexico and not as French as Canada. (Even though they too have a CFL, which nobody here cares about here either, though.) You'd see Fox News drumming up fear that Tom Brady would get tackled by a bull.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)JonLP24
(29,322 posts)San Francisco & Arizona did several years ago in front of a sell-out I believe.
RB TexLa
(17,003 posts)I think we are more culturally aligned with Mexico than England and the geography make lots more sense.
treestar
(82,383 posts)There were Canadian baseball teams. The Montreal Expos are gone but the Toronto team might still exist.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)The far better analogy is, of course, hockey; the NHL includes 23 US teams and 7 Canadian teams.
It's also true that a football culture already exists in Canada, though Canadian football is, admittedly, weird in all the usual Canadian ways.
brush
(53,776 posts)the CFL, played on a slightly larger field with only three downs.
It's an exciting brand of football. Their championship game is called the Grey Cup.
treestar
(82,383 posts)They must score a bit less.
do they give up the ball if they don't make 10 yards on the third down? Or can they kick to the other side like American football?
brush
(53,776 posts)on 3rd down if they don't make 10 yards, but because they only have 3 downs there is more passing and thus, scoring, which the larger field contributes to.
The field is 110 yards instead of 100, 65 yards wide instead of 53, and the end zone is 20 yards deep instead of 10 which makes for more scoring in the red zone.
Sometimes you can catch games on cable, especially the Grey Cup Championship.
We've had players, QBs especially, go to that league if they don't get drafted out of college and come out with great passing numbers and hook on with NFL teams Joe Theisman, Doug Flutie and Warren Moon for example.
ProfessorGAC
(65,018 posts)One offensive player is allowed to be moving forward toward the line of scrimmage at the snap and multiple guys can be moving laterally at the snap.
This makes pass patterns more difficult to identify for the defense. If the NFL did this, with the superior athletic ability, the scores in the US game would go up a lot.
brush
(53,776 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)And there had been talk that the new ownership might move the Bills to T.O., but it doesn't look like that's happening.
I'd consider far more likely if outside-the-US expansion were to happen but London will probably happen under the history of Goddell bad ideas but either way, I think an across-the-pond expansion is very doubtful.
kiva
(4,373 posts)Maybe it depends on who you are talking to, but I don't think that would be a majority.
Dreamer Tatum
(10,926 posts)pipi_k
(21,020 posts)it's always about "racism".
Except when it's not.
One of my stepdaughter's in-laws are first generation Mexican Americans living in Texas. Even THEY won't go across the border into Mexico.
Why?
here...
Next to last paragraph:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/hot?id=6965230
Inkfreak
(1,695 posts)As a massive Syracuse Chiefs fans back in the day, I can assure you we all believed the Jays to be a real team. Since the Chiefs were the farm team for them.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)You should self delete to spare yourself further ridicule.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Just to see all the "real American" heads that would have exploded.
Does that make me a bad person?
joeglow3
(6,228 posts)shenmue
(38,506 posts)The league has the money.
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)Maybe the NFL got sick of having to pay all the extortion fees to mexican government officials and the drug cartels... who knows. But the bottom line as you correctly point out is dollars. England must be a better investment than mexico according to their analysis.
shenmue
(38,506 posts)dilby
(2,273 posts)And it was very popular, I think the NFL is looking for a country to establish a franchise team so they will stick with countries where English is the primary language. You would think they would go to Canada but Canada already has a football league that is pretty popular.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)in recent years except for 2014 which was put on hold after the smallest crowd in the Toronto series. Bills owner seems to be trying to get back to all home games in Buffalo.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24786921/bills-owner-wants-all-home-games-in-buffalo-trying-to-end-toronto-series
Godhumor
(6,437 posts)It was/is disgraceful.
CK_John
(10,005 posts)AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)The most prominent Hispanic football player was/is Tony Gonzalez anf I am not sure of his ancestry. There was Aaron Hernandez but he is in jail and will never get out.
So, why London not Mexico City? American Football came from rugby. Rugby is big in England, especially among the upper middle class types that are the public school crowd. Australian rules has sent a few punters to the NFL, also a rugby offshoot.
There is no rugby culture in Mexico. Might as well complain the the All-Blacks don't play a nationwide Mexican tour.
Also, in general, Mexican folks are short. Not a liability in their national game, metric football. Helps in real football, tho.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,314 posts)There have been one or two rugby players who have given it a go, I think, but on the whole the fan bases are separate. Rugby league has tentatively imported a few tropes from American football, like names for the teams like 'Warriors' or 'Rhinos', and cheerleaders.
American football gained British fans in the 1980s, when Channel 4 TV was launched. Its mandate was to be 'alternative', so its sports coverage was sports that other channels hadn't used - as well as American football, they did some NBA too, but that didn't catch the imagination in quite the same way (and Kabaddi disappeared without trace) - it seems like the more glitz, the more successful it was.
It did disappear off broadcast TV for a few years, and came back, but overnight - the Sunday and Monday night games, broadcast live (ie in the middle of the British night). But it's on satellite TV now, and most sports followers have that. I wouldn't say it's the "upper middle class types that are the public school crowd" that are keen, though - they stick with rugby.
That's been enough to fill Wembley Stadium for up to 3 times a year - some people are just general fans, and some have picked a team (sometimes from who was successful when they started watching - so Miami, Washington and San Francisco are well represented from the 1980s' start; sometimes from places in the USA they've been, so tourism cities are also popular). NFL Europe didn't take off in the UK, though - I think the fans felt that since it wasn't the top league, it wasn't exciting.
Whether the support is strong enough to keep 8 home games going each year, I don't know - people may travel to London from other cities once or twice in a season, but 8 times would be a lot for that, so they'd need to get most of the fan base from London or close by. There's also the question of whether the turf is up to it; they've had some problems already, and while they should be able to get it good enough for the American football (import a groundsman from the USA if necessary, or from rugby), sharing it with the England soccer team during the season would be a big problem - it's already a concern for a soccer match 6 days after last week's Cowboys-Jaguars game (soccer needs a flatter surface, but doesn't put as much wear on it).
The contract to host all England home soccer matches expires in 2017; rumours are that they might try to do deals for a franchise that uses Wembley during the American football season, and any England soccer matches during that time can be held elsewhere (which has some advantages anyway - a lot easier for fans in the north of England to get to Manchester, say). Wembley could still host soccer matches after the pitch has been reconditioned/relaid, from Feburary to August.
SolutionisSolidarity
(606 posts)Mexico, China, Japan, Ireland, Australia, and Germany have all had games, but since 2007 it's just been Toronto and London.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Football_League_games_played_outside_the_United_States
moondust
(19,981 posts)Doesn't he own the country?
ret5hd
(20,491 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)MFrohike
(1,980 posts)To date, 7 games have been played in Mexico. 5 of them have been played in the Estadio Azteca itself.
Some of the replies in this thread are damned disgusting. Something like 40-45% of the US names pro football as their favorite sport. Some people here need to realize that it's very much a cross-section of the population, so when those particular posters decide to deride all NFL fans as rednecks, they're making asses of themselves.
RB TexLa
(17,003 posts)Their focus is the same as always, extracting every last dollar from fans and local governments possible. Given their distinct lack of interest in domestic expansion, which would be far easier and more certain to accomplish, I think it's ridiculous to claim racism is the reason they've played games in London recently and not Mexico. NFL Europe was mostly a failure, so I wouldn't be too quick to assume they're looking to try it on a bigger scale.
a la izquierda
(11,794 posts)in bars and restaurants that had satellite. Which was pretty much every decent sized place.
Dreamer Tatum
(10,926 posts)It is more likely that football will take off in Europe than in Latin America. There is a more diverse sports culture in Europe, more countries in which to put teams, more people to buy stuff and go to games, wealthier fans, better television economics, a more compelling travel proposition for American fans and European fans alike, and indeed a MUCH larger fan base.
I swear, some people can't get out of their own trying to find political answers to economic questions.
Ex Lurker
(3,813 posts)IDK why they haven't played a regular season game down there but it is clear the NFL is paving the way to get a team in Europe. So far there hasn't been much interest in moving a team permanently into Canada or Mexico. Although The Bills almost went to Toronto. There appears some fear small market teams would be history if they did...
bravenak
(34,648 posts)No les gustan futbol americano? I noticed they like soccer better. I've seen babies playing soccer.
RB TexLa
(17,003 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)and there is a much greater possibility of 4 expansion teams in Europe than in Central America.
Besides, American football is more popular over there (as I understand it).
RB TexLa
(17,003 posts)with realignment and you have a "Mexican" division.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)Now, if you want to somewher ein North America that needs an expansion baseball team, it would be Mexico, or Puerto Rico. That stadium would be PACKED..even the Cubans in Havana love the game.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)While there is a fan base, the major problem is distance. A European team would be at a huge disadvantage having to travel so far for 8 of their away games. If they had to travel to the west coast of the US, you are talking about a 10 hour flight.
With Mexico the average income is too low to be able to afford to actually go to a NFL game. Plus as some mentioned the pollution is bad. Another possible problem would be whether the Mexican Government could curb illegal gambling (yes, while it does go on here that is one of the reasons why cities like Las Vegas aren't even on a possible list of expansion cities).
IMHO the NFL needs to start looking at the other big cities in the US that don't have teams in the top 50 largest cities (note: I left out cities in states that already have at least one NFL team in addition to Las Vegas which would be a non-starter)
A short list: Los Angeles #2, Oklahoma City #27, Portland (Oregon) #29, Albuquerque #32, Omaha #42
Instead of 8 divisions go to 6. Add four teams (see above or some close variation of that) and you have 6 teams per division and 18 per conference. For the playoffs you have 3 division winners (top 2 are byes) and 3 wild cards.
The playoffs are the same structure, but there would be more regular season games (36 X 16) instead of (32 X 16).
theboss
(10,491 posts)That is a miserable place to play any athletic contest, and the crowds for soccer can be frightening.
Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)the idea of playing regular season games abroad anyway because these games basically rob a team of a home game. My suggestion is for the NFL to designate the Super Bowl as the international game if they really want one. The way I understand it, Super Bowls are typically intended to be held in neutral settings and where there is a hot spot for tourism, anyway. Plus, the fans outside the country would get to see the very best teams every year in a championship game (which is more likely to boost ratings) instead of just some run-of-the-mill teams.