PDA

View Full Version : UK NFL TEAM..


broncoblue
06-28-2012, 01:45 PM
I AM A BRONCO TIL I DIE!! (http://www1.skysports.com/american-football/news/12118/7846803/Kraft-calls-for-UK-team)

Miss I.
06-28-2012, 01:50 PM
okay fine, let's send New England permanently to Old England..they could be called the London Ex-Patriots. ;D

ClamChowdah
06-28-2012, 01:51 PM
You couldn't have one European based team, you would have to have 4 of them and have a Euro Division, that's the only way i could ever see it working.

Miss I.
06-28-2012, 01:53 PM
By the way, not sure if Kraft is senile or full of bollocks, but his quote about Brady is not the way Brady said it went down. Brady went to introduce himself and Kraft didn't know who he was, he called him Kyle Brady.

broncoblue
06-28-2012, 02:03 PM
You couldn't have one European based team, you would have to have 4 of them and have a Euro Division, that's the only way i could ever see it working.

In my opinion,i wouldnt go unless its against us.Everyone has their teams now and it would be a novelty at first but if its at wembley i doubt if anyone could afford 8-10 wembley visits a year.Once every blue moon is too expensive.

BroncoMan4ever
06-28-2012, 02:20 PM
Canada having a team is fine but overseas where NFL Europe already failed is a ****ty idea

maher_tyler
06-28-2012, 02:22 PM
I think it'd be a terrible idea to have a pro team in any sport that far away. Talk about home field advantage. Not to mention the costs of flying that team as well as the teams that go there to play. A round trip there in back has gotta be over $1k...

WolfpackGuy
06-28-2012, 02:27 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPwB8t2DXI8#t=0m16s

Miss I.
06-28-2012, 02:34 PM
I think it'd be a terrible idea to have a pro team in any sport that far away. Talk about home field advantage. Not to mention the costs of flying that team as well as the teams that go there to play. A round trip there in back has gotta be over $1k...

no it's a bad idea and there is not enough market to merit it to be honest. It would be brutal for all the reasons you mention, though homefield is not so much as you might think because most fans would probably not really be rooting for a home team but show up in whatever team they do support. The team in the UK would have it pretty brutal going to away games. they could start something like the EFC, the Euro Football Confereance but only play the other conferences come playoffs I suppose, but it's still going to be a bit lopsided.

orange crusher
06-28-2012, 02:50 PM
Kraft is looking at it as a way to fatten his wallet. It doesn't seem fair to the players, coaches and others within teams to ask them to go live in another country if they want to live out their dreams.

Kaylore
06-28-2012, 02:54 PM
You couldn't have one European based team, you would have to have 4 of them and have a Euro Division, that's the only way i could ever see it working.

I completely agree. Not to mention you would ruin the divisions. Right now we have two conferences each with four divisions with four teams. It's perfect. Adding a fifth would be stupid.

And it was nice to see you post something normal and not your usual boring rhetoric crap.

Archer81
06-28-2012, 03:02 PM
So to make it even, you would need to expand the NFL by 8 teams, add two new divisions and extend the schedule.

I see that happening...

Teams in London, Berlin, Amsterdam, Rome (Euro Division), and then teams in San Juan, Mexico City, Los Angeles, Cancun (Latin Amer. Division)...now make the draft rounds 40 picks long...and boom. Magic.

...

:Broncos:

Drunken.Broncoholic
06-28-2012, 03:14 PM
Football should be played on American soil. Game over. They have all year to prep a field over there for one game and it looks like candlestick after a flood AND a hurricane. Not only should they not have a team, they need to stop having the one game a year over there.

Pendejo
06-28-2012, 04:02 PM
Football should be played on American soil. Game over. They have all year to prep a field over there for one game and it looks like candlestick after a flood AND a hurricane. Not only should they not have a team, they need to stop having the one game a year over there.

I'm with this guy.

Baba Booey
06-28-2012, 06:47 PM
I just don't see it working with the time difference. Plus, the London team traveling over here eight times a year?

It's a noble idea and it would be awesome, but there are too many issues with it.

eddie mac
06-28-2012, 07:38 PM
Canada having a team is fine but overseas where NFL Europe already failed is a ****ty idea

NFL Europe was a minor league for players learning the game or bums who couldn't make it in the NFL. There's a hell of a difference between that and having teams with the best players in the league on your roster.

maher_tyler
06-28-2012, 08:07 PM
no it's a bad idea and there is not enough market to merit it to be honest. It would be brutal for all the reasons you mention, though homefield is not so much as you might think because most fans would probably not really be rooting for a home team but show up in whatever team they do support. The team in the UK would have it pretty brutal going to away games. they could start something like the EFC, the Euro Football Confereance but only play the other conferences come playoffs I suppose, but it's still going to be a bit lopsided.

I've made that flight on my way to deployments...the jet lag is brutal!

Tombstone RJ
06-28-2012, 08:16 PM
I think it'd be a terrible idea to have a pro team in any sport that far away. Talk about home field advantage. Not to mention the costs of flying that team as well as the teams that go there to play. A round trip there in back has gotta be over $1k...

the logistics of it would be a nightmare for sure..

Stuck in Cali
06-28-2012, 08:23 PM
They would have to bring back the Concords or a faster plane to even make this remotely possible.

UberBroncoMan
06-28-2012, 08:28 PM
I completely agree. Not to mention you would ruin the divisions. Right now we have two conferences each with four divisions with four teams. It's perfect. Adding a fifth would be stupid.

And it was nice to see you post something normal and not your usual boring rhetoric crap.

We'd have to add more teams and go to an 18 game schedule to accommodate the extra 2 division games.

Money Money Money

thomas
06-28-2012, 11:06 PM
I think some sort of expansion is inevitable. Kraft is right that this sport is so huge, 75% of the top 30 richest franchise's in the world are NFL teams. Thats without being a global sport. They are going to expand at some point. I think they'll start with Mexico City. Canada has a league that is quite popular up there. There would have to be a euro league with at least 4 teams. You would probably have to expand even further.
It would be interesting to have the NFL not be the big dog in a big market. They could probably change that within a generation though.
I doubt any of this will have a big consideration for at least a decade though.

broncocalijohn
06-28-2012, 11:29 PM
I just don't see it working with the time difference. Plus, the London team traveling over here eight times a year?

It's a noble idea and it would be awesome, but there are too many issues with it.

A london team would probably play in the states 2 or 3 games in a row before heading back to London. I couldnt see them playing home then away then back home. Also, I doubt they would play a West Coast team unless they just came off of a bye week.
BTW, anyone notice that ClamChowda actually had a post that wasn't so full of **** and looking like a troll? Wow, amazing.

BroncoMan4ever
06-29-2012, 12:48 AM
So to make it even, you would need to expand the NFL by 8 teams, add two new divisions and extend the schedule.

I see that happening...

Teams in London, Berlin, Amsterdam, Rome (Euro Division), and then teams in San Juan, Mexico City, Los Angeles, Cancun (Latin Amer. Division)...now make the draft rounds 40 picks long...and boom. Magic.

...

:Broncos:

this is nothing more than a hopeful money grab that will blow up in the league's collective face.

europe is basically all about soccer while latin america is baseball and soccer.

neither of these regions have much affect if any on prospects drafted by the league, meaning none of these nations has a guy to root for or a team to follow because of a lack of interest in players. those teams in europe or latin america would be forced to watch american players playing on foreign soil and there is no great interest in that, unless those teams have a guy like Peyton Manning who is a megastar.

football while it is the most popular sport in the world, is not a global sport. it remains basically completely american. unless that changed there is no market for a team outside of the USA aside from maybe in canada.

Taco John
06-29-2012, 01:27 AM
I don't know how such a thing could be supported without a dedicated collegiate football system there. I love the idea of a global professional football league that extends beyond the NFL, but without the cultural infrastructure in place, you've got a top-heavy disaster waiting to happen.

canadianbroncosfan
06-29-2012, 02:24 AM
I think some sort of expansion is inevitable. Kraft is right that this sport is so huge, 75% of the top 30 richest franchise's in the world are NFL teams. Thats without being a global sport. They are going to expand at some point. I think they'll start with Mexico City. Canada has a league that is quite popular up there. There would have to be a euro league with at least 4 teams. You would probably have to expand even further.
It would be interesting to have the NFL not be the big dog in a big market. They could probably change that within a generation though.
I doubt any of this will have a big consideration for at least a decade though.
31086

We have a league that barely supports a whole 8 teams. I live in one of the 8 cities that actually has a team and I couldn't name 10 players on it. That goes for just about everyone I know. I'm at work right now and I just asked the 9 people working who the QB of the Eskimos is and only one could name him. The reality is all the star power is in the NFL, we get wanna bes, has beens or never good enoughs. Honestly I would think a team in Toronto would be more successful than anywhere in Europe, would be a lot friendlier on the players and is a city that has already established the ability to have pro level teams. I would think more people would show up to games in Toronto than Miami/Jacksonville even in the dead of winter.

And if you think I'm bias because I'm Canadian, you're wrong. There are 10 or more NFL teams that are closer to fly too from where I am than Toronto. And flying on American airlines (not the company, all airlines from the states) is a hell of a lot cheaper than flying on one of two Canadian airlines.

eddie mac
06-29-2012, 03:39 AM
this is nothing more than a hopeful money grab that will blow up in the league's collective face.

europe is basically all about soccer while latin america is baseball and soccer.

neither of these regions have much affect if any on prospects drafted by the league, meaning none of these nations has a guy to root for or a team to follow because of a lack of interest in players. those teams in europe or latin america would be forced to watch american players playing on foreign soil and there is no great interest in that, unless those teams have a guy like Peyton Manning who is a megastar.

football while it is the most popular sport in the world, is not a global sport. it remains basically completely american. unless that changed there is no market for a team outside of the USA aside from maybe in canada.

Is it really??? First I've heard of that considering the Premier League in England alone (1 league much like the NFL) gets more worldwide viewers than the NFL will ever sniff.

canadianbroncosfan
06-29-2012, 04:12 AM
I just don't see it working with the time difference. Plus, the London team traveling over here eight times a year?

It's a noble idea and it would be awesome, but there are too many issues with it.

Yeah far too many issues.

-The team in London is going to fly 11 hours to California which is 9 hours time difference then fly right back to the U.K. for a game the following week?? That's huge costs for teams and impacts players switching that many time zones.

-The inability to have viewers watch their team play at a decent time which is also going to impact television revenue

-Who is going to sign there knowing that every $1 USD of their contract is only worth $0.64 GBP?

maher_tyler
06-29-2012, 07:10 AM
31086

We have a league that barely supports a whole 8 teams. I live in one of the 8 cities that actually has a team and I couldn't name 10 players on it. That goes for just about everyone I know. I'm at work right now and I just asked the 9 people working who the QB of the Eskimos is and only one could name him. The reality is all the star power is in the NFL, we get wanna bes, has beens or never good enoughs. Honestly I would think a team in Toronto would be more successful than anywhere in Europe, would be a lot friendlier on the players and is a city that has already established the ability to have pro level teams. I would think more people would show up to games in Toronto than Miami/Jacksonville even in the dead of winter.

And if you think I'm bias because I'm Canadian, you're wrong. There are 10 or more NFL teams that are closer to fly too from where I am than Toronto. And flying on American airlines (not the company, all airlines from the states) is a hell of a lot cheaper than flying on one of two Canadian airlines.

I remember when i lived in Airdrie, the Stampeders had Jeff Garcia. My older brother could have gotten his autograph but didn't. Ironically he is a 9ers fan.
But yea, Canada lives and breathes hockey...Toranto is prolly the only city there that could support an NFL team.
I could see the NFL losing a lot of money if they ever decided to move a team to Europe with the team eventually getting the axe.

JLesSPE
06-29-2012, 07:24 AM
They would have to bring back the Concords or a faster plane to even make this remotely possible.

Not unless you want to see entire NFL teams die in plane crashes. There's a reason those planes are no longer in service.

chrisp
06-29-2012, 07:36 AM
There's no denying that there are huge risks and logisitcal issues in doing this. I'm not even sure I want it to happen myself, given that I could never be anything other than a Broncos fan. But I'm still a little bit surprised by all the cold water being poured on this idea

I can't help but feel that back in the 1920s when a bunch of people tried to set up a pro league for a game that was played exclusively in college at the time, a lot of similar sentiments were expressed, but they did it anyway and they made it work. And then some.

I personally struggled to believe that they would make the one-off games work, after seeing the sport's popularity in this country wane and die from its late-80s peak. I'm still not sure a permanent team would work as if they sucked it would be hard for people to keep coming back, whereas at least with the one-off games there is novelty value even if the teams themselves aren;t all that great, but lets be honest, the people who really stand to lose by this if it goes wrong are the people who most seem to want it at the moment: the owners. If they try, and it fails, who really suffers apart from them? Whereas if they try and somehow succeed, I personally think it will enrich the sport for all of us.

I think that its great if the league tries to expand an improve, I also think it was fantastic that I was able to watch a live regular season Broncos game for the first time ever becuase of this. But none of that means that this will definitely happen, or that if it does it will definitely work. Nothing worth having ever came without risk or downside.

Also, lets not forget this is just one owner's opinion - others may have greater reservations....but it does seem clear that they are at least giving this serious consideration.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
06-29-2012, 11:22 AM
okay fine, let's send New England permanently to Old England..they could be called the London Ex-Patriots. ;D

Piccadilly Circus Turncoats

broncocalijohn
06-29-2012, 11:40 AM
A london team would probably play in the states 2 or 3 games in a row before heading back to London. I couldnt see them playing home then away then back home. Also, I doubt they would play a West Coast team unless they just came off of a bye week.
BTW, anyone notice that ClamChowda actually had a post that wasn't so full of **** and looking like a troll? Wow, amazing.

Some of you, please read this (again). Do you really think they would have a London team fly to California and then head straight back to London to play a game the following week? Why not suggest they play in California on MNF and then play in London on a Thursday night special game? I think NFL would be much smarter than what you guys think they are uncapable of doing.

Mogulseeker
06-29-2012, 11:55 AM
I think some sort of expansion is inevitable. Kraft is right that this sport is so huge, 75% of the top 30 richest franchise's in the world are NFL teams. Thats without being a global sport. They are going to expand at some point. I think they'll start with Mexico City. Canada has a league that is quite popular up there. There would have to be a euro league with at least 4 teams. You would probably have to expand even further.
It would be interesting to have the NFL not be the big dog in a big market. They could probably change that within a generation though.
I doubt any of this will have a big consideration for at least a decade though.

Add two international divisions of four teams... one in the Americas and on in Europe.

Pendejo
06-29-2012, 11:59 AM
Some of you, please read this (again). Do you really think they would have a London team fly to California and then head straight back to London to play a game the following week? Why not suggest they play in California on MNF and then play in London on a Thursday night special game? I think NFL would be much smarter than what you guys think they are uncapable of doing.

I was going to call shenanigans until I read the part in bold type. Boy, when you say something...it certainly is something that you're saying.

broncocalijohn
06-29-2012, 12:06 PM
I was going to call shenanigans until I read the part in bold type. Boy, when you say something...it certainly is something that you're saying.

LOL! "Uncapable of doing" would be using the brains they still have left.

My points still stand. NFL would make it work.

Wes Mantooth
06-29-2012, 12:18 PM
okay fine, let's send New England permanently to Old England..they could be called the London Ex-Patriots. ;D

How about the Benedict Arnolds

Miss I.
06-29-2012, 01:19 PM
If the NFL were to make this work and I really still don't think they will, will they rename the league? Because National Football League really isn't going to work over here. Now, they could call it the American Rules Football perhaps or American Football League. But honestly this will not work. Owners should stick to gouging the pockets of hardworking Americans and leave the rest of the world alone. We can keep our bowls and they can keep their cups? Hey what is that about? Why are sports awards like dishes?Is there going to be a Golden Fork at some point? Or the Bronze serving tray?

Requiem
06-29-2012, 01:33 PM
Cause we love our fine china, Miss I.

BroncoMan4ever
06-29-2012, 02:53 PM
Is it really??? First I've heard of that considering the Premier League in England alone (1 league much like the NFL) gets more worldwide viewers than the NFL will ever sniff.

Do americans watch or care about soccer? That is a huge chunk of the worlds population that doesn't care about that sport. NFL has viewers worldwide. Every nation watches the super bowl. Not all nations watch whatever the soccer championship game is called. Based on viewers American afootball is king

KCStud
06-29-2012, 05:17 PM
Do americans watch or care about soccer? That is a huge chunk of the worlds population that doesn't care about that sport. NFL has viewers worldwide. Every nation watches the super bowl. Not all nations watch whatever the soccer championship game is called. Based on viewers American afootball is king

Yes a lot of Americans do watch and care about soccer. Just because you don't doesn't mean everybody else doesn't. Many soccer teams in the MLS get over 10k a game.

Every nation watches the Word Cup. This is nothing new.

In fact, far more people in the world care about soccer than the NFL because soccer is an international sport unlike the NFL.

Go to Europe. I guarantee you the majority of people would rather watch the Champions League then the NFL.

s0phr0syne
06-29-2012, 05:25 PM
Do americans watch or care about soccer? That is a huge chunk of the worlds population that doesn't care about that sport. NFL has viewers worldwide. Every nation watches the super bowl. Not all nations watch whatever the soccer championship game is called. Based on viewers American afootball is king


I typically try to avoid being insulting, but are you ****ing retarded?

Archer81
06-29-2012, 06:02 PM
Pretty sure the World Cup draws 2.5 billion viewers...

Just sayin.

:Broncos:

broncocalijohn
06-29-2012, 06:02 PM
Yes a lot of Americans do watch and care about soccer. Just because you don't doesn't mean everybody else doesn't. Many soccer teams in the MLS get over 10k a game.

Every nation watches the Word Cup. This is nothing new.

In fact, far more people in the world care about soccer than the NFL because soccer is an international sport unlike the NFL.

Go to Europe. I guarantee you the majority of people would rather watch the Champions League then the NFL.

10k a game? :giggle: I know that is more than what the Royals pull in but that is proof it is a joke. BTW, what the hell is the Word Cup? I hear rappers have been killing that since Run DMC took it in 1984.....WORD!
But to your point of trying to say Soccer is bigtime around the world? Yes, poster was either being stupid or sarcastic.

Archer81
06-29-2012, 06:03 PM
I typically try to avoid being insulting, but are you ****ing retarded?


Easy. Provide some rational reasons you disagree with the opinion.



:Broncos:

BroncoMan4ever
06-29-2012, 09:42 PM
I typically try to avoid being insulting, but are you ****ing retarded?

i have never met a single person who watched or cared in the least about soccer. just because in my experience i have no interest nor have never met anyone with interest towards the sport is my reasoning behind believing no one in america cares about the sport. i can name 2 current soccer players in the entire world, Beckham because he is a pseudo celebrity type and Landon Donavan because he was on a box of Wheaties Fuel that i bought.

Miss I.
06-29-2012, 10:27 PM
wow, seriously you guys. i live in Europe, they don't give a **** in general about American football. It's largely considered a watered down version of rugby which is very popular over here, though actual football (what Americans like to call soccer because we wanted to use football for a game that really involves hands rather than feet, again looking a lot more like a padded up version of rugby with men wearing tights) is supreme.

In a world of what 6 billion people (guessing here, but somewhere in there) America's numbers of around 350 million is not that big a percentage population wise, but we do spend a lot of money the rest of the world wants so there's that. Still the NFL is not that big around the world, though of course like any other sports it does have its fans (so does Rugby, Cricket, etc and I'd imagine the fan base is similar in size). But yes soccer is much bigger as a world sport. That's why the thing is called the World Cup. That's why the soccer/football leagues over here generate so much money and there are so many professional leagues at multiple levels.

As for never meeting anyone who cared about it, not that it matters really but either your scope of people is very very narrow or they arent' going to talk to you about it given your obvious disdain. Just saying. I love American Football but I also enjoy soccer for a lot of reasons, mostly it's pure athleticism combined with strategy. Scoring is not as easy which is why it is both a challenge and sometimes frustrating because it can get boring.

but everyone is entitled to express their opinion, I am just not sure why some are so openly patronizing and dismissive of the sport that at least, along with rugby is where American football has its roots.

KCStud
06-29-2012, 11:21 PM
10k a game? :giggle: I know that is more than what the Royals pull in but that is proof it is a joke. BTW, what the hell is the Word Cup? I hear rappers have been killing that since Run DMC took it in 1984.....WORD!
But to your point of trying to say Soccer is bigtime around the world? Yes, poster was either being stupid or sarcastic.

Seattle Sounders had 40+ before. That has to count for something no? And don't get me started on MLB.
MLB gives teams like the Royals no chance to win. It's ridiculous that there isn't a salary cap. Yankees have $130 million dollars more in payroll.

canadianbroncosfan
06-29-2012, 11:39 PM
Some of you, please read this (again). Do you really think they would have a London team fly to California and then head straight back to London to play a game the following week? Why not suggest they play in California on MNF and then play in London on a Thursday night special game? I think NFL would be much smarter than what you guys think they are uncapable of doing.

Oh of course they wouldn't, even with three or four games in a row it is still a hell of a lot a travel and certainly wearing. On the flip side though, you would have teams that fly there and then have to come right back.

tnedator
06-30-2012, 12:12 AM
A london team would probably play in the states 2 or 3 games in a row before heading back to London. I couldnt see them playing home then away then back home. Also, I doubt they would play a West Coast team unless they just came off of a bye week.
BTW, anyone notice that ClamChowda actually had a post that wasn't so full of **** and looking like a troll? Wow, amazing.

Yes, this is what I've heard in the past, the UK team would have two or three extended road trips, and two or three extended home stretches. Minimizing the transatlantic travel. I think it might have been Goodel that talked about it last year, or it was reports after he talked about a possible expansion to the UK last year.

For Kraft I'm not surprised he thinks it's a good idea. The NY/New England teams would have an advantage, as they can fly to London in just about the same amount of time as flying to the west coast (probably about 7 hours vs. 6 hours). However, for the west coast teams it would be 10+ to fly to London. Denver probably close to the same, because the flights go over the top.

maven
06-30-2012, 08:30 AM
Do americans watch or care about soccer? That is a huge chunk of the worlds population that doesn't care about that sport. NFL has viewers worldwide. Every nation watches the super bowl. Not all nations watch whatever the soccer championship game is called. Based on viewers American afootball is king

Not true at all. EUFA Champions League Final or a World Cup Final will draw more eyeballs. You are right as Futbol is KING. Like King James.

maven
06-30-2012, 08:30 AM
I typically try to avoid being insulting, but are you ****ing retarded?

Yes, I think he is.

Hilarious!

BroncoMan4ever
06-30-2012, 12:21 PM
wow, seriously you guys. i live in Europe, they don't give a **** in general about American football. It's largely considered a watered down version of rugby which is very popular over here, though actual football (what Americans like to call soccer because we wanted to use football for a game that really involves hands rather than feet, again looking a lot more like a padded up version of rugby with men wearing tights) is supreme.

In a world of what 6 billion people (guessing here, but somewhere in there) America's numbers of around 350 million is not that big a percentage population wise, but we do spend a lot of money the rest of the world wants so there's that. Still the NFL is not that big around the world, though of course like any other sports it does have its fans (so does Rugby, Cricket, etc and I'd imagine the fan base is similar in size). But yes soccer is much bigger as a world sport. That's why the thing is called the World Cup. That's why the soccer/football leagues over here generate so much money and there are so many professional leagues at multiple levels.

As for never meeting anyone who cared about it, not that it matters really but either your scope of people is very very narrow or they arent' going to talk to you about it given your obvious disdain. Just saying. I love American Football but I also enjoy soccer for a lot of reasons, mostly it's pure athleticism combined with strategy. Scoring is not as easy which is why it is both a challenge and sometimes frustrating because it can get boring.

but everyone is entitled to express their opinion, I am just not sure why some are so openly patronizing and dismissive of the sport that at least, along with rugby is where American football has its roots.

In my experience, family interested in sports, friends and even sports bars I have never seen the slightest in soccer. Now I apologize to any hooligans I may have insulted but I went off of my experience to guage perceived interest in the sport of soccer

Mogulseeker
06-30-2012, 01:05 PM
wow, seriously you guys. i live in Europe, they don't give a **** in general about American football. It's largely considered a watered down version of rugby which is very popular over here, though actual football (what Americans like to call soccer because we wanted to use football for a game that really involves hands rather than feet, again looking a lot more like a padded up version of rugby with men wearing tights) is supreme.

In a world of what 6 billion people (guessing here, but somewhere in there) America's numbers of around 350 million is not that big a percentage population wise, but we do spend a lot of money the rest of the world wants so there's that. Still the NFL is not that big around the world, though of course like any other sports it does have its fans (so does Rugby, Cricket, etc and I'd imagine the fan base is similar in size). But yes soccer is much bigger as a world sport. That's why the thing is called the World Cup. That's why the soccer/football leagues over here generate so much money and there are so many professional leagues at multiple levels.

As for never meeting anyone who cared about it, not that it matters really but either your scope of people is very very narrow or they arent' going to talk to you about it given your obvious disdain. Just saying. I love American Football but I also enjoy soccer for a lot of reasons, mostly it's pure athleticism combined with strategy. Scoring is not as easy which is why it is both a challenge and sometimes frustrating because it can get boring.

but everyone is entitled to express their opinion, I am just not sure why some are so openly patronizing and dismissive of the sport that at least, along with rugby is where American football has its roots.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but it seemed like people were generally intrigued by the sport when I lived over there. In London, people at the bars wanted to talk about the Broncos, and one of the more popular bars in Maastricht (Netherlands) always had American Football on some of their screens.

I went into an Irish pub once and they had Man.U/Chelsea on one screen and Steelers/Ravens on another. Most of the people there were following both.

In Spain, I found a bar playing the Broncos-Jags and the guys were really into me explaining the game to them.

KipCorrington25
06-30-2012, 05:14 PM
Kansas City has been rumored to be the team they are looking to relocate.

Stuck in Cali
06-30-2012, 05:25 PM
Kansas City has been rumored to be the team they are looking to relocate.

If Al Davis was alive, he would claim he owns the rights to the European market.

broncocalijohn
06-30-2012, 05:51 PM
If Al Davis was alive, he would claim he owns the rights to the European market.

Funny yet probably true! :strong:

Bacchus
06-30-2012, 05:56 PM
I AM A BRONCO TIL I DIE!! (http://www1.skysports.com/american-football/news/12118/7846803/Kraft-calls-for-UK-team)

Good we can move the Pats there!! The England Patriots sounds good.