Scout200 Posted December 15, 2010 Report Share Posted December 15, 2010 There's been a lot of talk about the NFL expanding internationally... Do you think the NFL will give up home games in order to reach out to a larger base? How do you think this will impact the NFL? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted December 16, 2010 Report Share Posted December 16, 2010 No offense to our members across the pond, but I don't want to see an NFL team overseas.I think the fans of the teams here miss out and you know the jetlag has to kill the players.Many people think it's a done deal, I just would rather it stay the way it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scout200 Posted December 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2010 No offense to our members across the pond, but I don't want to see an NFL team overseas.I think the fans of the teams here miss out and you know the jetlag has to kill the players.Many people think it's a done deal, I just would rather it stay the way it is.Very true! IMO, I'm pretty split on the idea.As you know, there are only 16 games during a 17 week season. Typically, a team plays 2 home games in the pre-season, and 8 home games in the regular season. It's nothing like the NBA where 82 games are played by each team and half of those are home games. Taking away one home game from fans is a big deal. Yet, many believe that giving the brand an international presence will actually help provide a better experience for the fans and help local economies in the long run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted December 17, 2010 Report Share Posted December 17, 2010 Yes, the NFL should expand internationally.This expansion should begin with the relocation of the Cincinnati Bengals.Here is my suggested destination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted December 17, 2010 Report Share Posted December 17, 2010 No offense to our members across the pond, but I don't want to see an NFL team overseas.I think the fans of the teams here miss out and you know the jetlag has to kill the players.Many people think it's a done deal, I just would rather it stay the way it is.what was wrong with nfl Europe anyways Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 what was wrong with nfl Europe anyways My guess is that European fans wanted to see the best players same as we do. They didn't get it, and the league went down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalPimp Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 F*ck that Sh*t............How the hell can you have NFL teams overseas, when they are ignoring one of the largest media markets in their own country??? Los Angeles!!!!!L.A. needs to be Priority #1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK Bengal Posted January 1, 2011 Report Share Posted January 1, 2011 well I am from over the pond and a NFL franchise in the UK would be a bomb. They tried it with the world league and that failed I certainly wouldnt change my alligence to a UK team as I'm a bengals fan and thats the way I stay.The limit should be 2 games overseas and 2 preseason games with an 18 game season and the teams that travel get a bye week afterwards. That is as far as the NFL should go IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjakq27 Posted January 1, 2011 Report Share Posted January 1, 2011 It would be a bitch for a west coast team. I am not sold on all of the benefits or increased exposure for the NFL either. I would prefer to see a team in Toronto first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.