Why not move NFL Europe to the US

[Arkady Renko]

1) Arena Football sucks

2) The Destroyers were the worst team in the league

3) did I mention Arena Football sucks?

 

PTR

295510[/snapback]

 

I keep on trying to like Arena Football, but then I keep on realizing how its pure dog spluge. The NFLE is boring too, but at least you can have fun watching the excited German fans.

[/dev/null]

I keep on trying to like Arena Football, but then I keep on realizing how its pure dog spluge. The NFLE is boring too, but at least you can have fun watching the excited German fans.

295553[/snapback]

 

My opinion of the Arena League (on TV), NFLE, and even the XFL is

low quality football > no football

 

Arena League in person is a different matter. its like going to a Minor League Baseball or Minor League Hockey game, its good for a nite out. Unfortunately the AFL2 Norfolk Nighthawks (owned by Bruce Smith) went belly up

[finknottle]

The German teams all draw well, from what I understand. It's the only real receptive market for the NFL in Europe.

295502[/snapback]

 

Something like 9,500 for their opener, according to the story about the Bills players there.

 

NFLE does not exist to make money. It exists for one reason: so that the NFL can perpetuate the idea in the US that football is going global, that the world thinks football is great, and that rugby - the de facto global 'football' - doesn't exist.

 

Another example: remember the first exhibition games played in Japan a year or so ago? They made a big deal, frequently repeated in the booth, that they had to play in baseball stadiums because there were no regulation football fields. Funny, but they could have used any of the fields of the professional rugby teams there. But then the announcers would have been talking about rugby in Japan instead of baseball, which is not considered a competing sport.

 

So why does the NFL do this? Rugby is a big sport internationally, but it's not going to make professional inroads in the US - they've got short-sighted clowns in management/ownership that would make MLB and the NHL blush. However, the NFL didn't get to #1 by being complacent - it thinks very long-term. Part of their strategy against rugby inroads here is discouraging any discussion of rugby. So my theory is that the NFL considers NFLE to be a sort of inexpensive expeditionary force which lets them keep the initiative against world rugby and influence the overseas coverage by american media.

 

[For what it's worth, Germany is the most successfull country for NFLE. There are several reasons for this, one of which is that in contrast to the UK, France, and Italy, I believe there is no professional rugy played there.]

[Arkady Renko]

I had also heard that some of the German teams did well because the American soldiers stationed there would go to the games.

[Britbillsfan]

good point

 

but i think the brits understand american football, it's just they already have rugby so they don't care much for that panzy american version with pads and helmets

 

and the french, well you know 

295520[/snapback]

After all (US) football was derived from rugby football originally. The French have Rugby as well, and are very good at it. Rugby is a real wasteground of players now that it has turned professional, some top teams lose 50% of their players to injury in the course of a season. And the English national team has been stuffed from injury over the last couple of years. Ah, well, it was fun winning a real World Championship.

 

A lot of the support in Germany is drawn from having a large contingent of Americans based there.Some go to the games, others will take along German friends to show them what the fuss is about. The placement of clubs has been an issue as well (in the UK London was a nice idea but given the way the support would have been scattered accross the country a more centralised location would have been better, especially as Londoners can be notoriously fickle in the next new thing).

[Britbillsfan]

[For what it's worth, Germany is the most successfull country for NFLE. There are several reasons for this, one of which is that in contrast to the UK, France, and Italy, I believe there is no professional rugy played there.]

295625[/snapback]

Yep, there is a strong Rugby tradition in Britain, Ireland and France, and both Italy and Romania can field half way decent teams as well.

 

But Rugby is not really 'global' (although compared to the US version it is), outside of the European teams Argentina, South Africa, Fiji, Australia, Samoa and New Zealand are the main proponents of the game. Japan has a solid tradition, but they are hardly major players, comparatively.

 

Football (soccer) is the only real global team sport - it is played and supported in a majority of countries worldwide (there are a few exceptions, of course) and there is no other sport around at this point in time that has a snowball's chance of overtaking its position. No matter how much some of you lot hate that!

[MikeH]

there is no alternative in terms of a developmental league unless you want to consider the CFL.

295467[/snapback]

I always thought the NFL's Developmental League was called the NCAA.

[aussiew]

Football (soccer) is the only real global team sport - it is played and supported in a majority of countries worldwide (there are a few exceptions, of course) and there is no other sport around at this point in time that has a snowball's chance of overtaking its position. No matter how much some of you lot hate that!

 

 

Taa

[Arkady Renko]

I am confident that socccer has triple the shot of becoming a major league sport here than NFL Football has to becoming even moderately popular in Europe.

[/dev/null]

I am confident that socccer has triple the shot of becoming a major league sport here than NFL Football has to becoming even moderately popular in Europe.

296077[/snapback]

 

There already is Major League Soccer in the US. However MLS popularity in the US is similar to GW Bush's popularity in Europe