Government to back Franchise (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter dongonzalos
- Start date
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
So that makes it ok then??
You ether agree with it or you don't there is no middle ground.
You ether agree with it or you don't there is no middle ground.
Otis
Well-Known Member
I don't agree with franchising. Have always said that.
At the same time though this is a different sport, in a different country with a different mindset, without the same history and heritage we have in the game of football over here.
It is different. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying that is the way it is over there.
It is not as black and white as you paint it.
New England Patriots - Formed in 1959
Minnesota Vikings - Formed in 1961
Tampa Bay Buccaneers - Formed in 1976
Baltimore Ravens - Formed in 1996
Buffalo Bills - Formed in 1960
New York Jets - Formed in 1960
Miami Dolphins - Formed in 1966
New Orleans Saints - Formed in 1967
Oakland Raiders - Formed in 1960
Dallas Cowboys - Formed in 1960
Denver Broncos - Formed in 1960
Etc. etc. etc.
The NFL has been going since 1921. It is not comparable. Different world, different system, different mindset.
You seem to detect a conflict, but there is none. I am against franchising, but have to accept that is the way of the game in the world of American Football. Teams change, merge and move all the time.
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
So because it is alright in America and as Football is also a franchise over there with people just starting up teams. If an American buys an English Club because his mindset is different then that is OK?
The IS games? Torturing, Surpressing and Beheading?
Always thought this ISIS sounded way to Corporate ,keep thinking of a Locally based Cleaning Company who Started out In Canley.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Who said it was alright?
Not going to keep arguing over it. You seem determined to beat people over the head with your view.
I have never said it is alright, I have just said that is the way it is. It is an acceptable face of the sport in the US.
So many teams have moved and changed names and merged and been franchised elsewhere. It's the way the sport is.
In no way does that make it right or mean that I approve.
Thought we had this same conversation a few weeks back. What is the point of just going over and over the same thing?
I am against franchising but accept that is the way the NFL has always operated. Simple as.
Last edited:
TheOldFive
New Member
I've just got back from today's game at Wembley. Is is the 2nd of 3 sell out games with fans from all over the UK and for that matter Europe coming to see the game. Next Season there will be 4 games at Wembley, 8 teams coming over to play and the cross Atlantic flight being not much different from coast to Coast travel for the teams meaning it's not an impractical matter for the teams to do. Today's game was especially important as the first Lunchtime (UK) game and therefore the first Breakfast TV spectacle on US TV. If that proves to be popular meaning that the NFL can book up the entire Sunday Schedule on US TV then this will be a viable future fixture. The NFL regular Season is only 8 "Home" games for franchises and so it's not much of a stretch to double up the 4 "International Series" games into a full blown London based franchise. I think this could be a sustained format without diminishing other UK sports. If CCFC liquidated and were no more I'd probably go watch this stuff before finding another football team or rugger etc. all a matter of personal choice I guess.
Otis
Well-Known Member
It was an exciting game today. Kind of like being 3 nil down and winning 4-3.
I would hope if an NFL team is to come to London that it is an expansion team, as with what the NFL did 20 years ago, when they introduced 4 new teams.
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
My View I couldn't give a toss just saying people ranting on here about the Rugger because they don't like the sport, but because it is a sport they like it is ok.
I am going to the Cov game at home next week and I may even go to watch one at the Ricoh, depends how I feel.
Otis
Well-Known Member
I like rugby and I like American Football.
As for the London NFL team, it may well be a completely new team and not involve stealing someone elses team. I do hope that is the case.
I hope it is an expansion team. Fresh start.
Can't believe some people don't think a London based NFL team would take off. The London Monarchs averaged 40,000+ for the first 2 World League seasons at the old Wembley - and that was third rate at best and was never going to work long term. At the time they were one of the best supported sports team in the whole of the UK (by average attendance). STs for a London based team would sell out within days. Not a massive fan of this sport myself, but it does have huge appeal.
Last edited:
Otis
Well-Known Member
ajsccfc
Well-Known Member
One idea put forward for it is that a London franchise would play home games here, but the base of operations would still be in the US so players would live and train there but travel for games and media stuff.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/american-football/29813017
I guess on a much lesser scale this is what our council would have been considering when faced with our main sports team intent on moving out of Coventry
I guess on a much lesser scale this is what our council would have been considering when faced with our main sports team intent on moving out of Coventry
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
ajsccfc
Well-Known Member
I think fishing?
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
Keeping an existing football team in the City where they're currently located would deliver more revenue p.a. than a nomadic rugby team coming in from 80/90 miles away.
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
Yeah, not a bad guess I suppose.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Nothing to fish about just puts it in perspective for Coventry on a far smaller scale.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Of course I agree 100%
However the football team were refusing to stay unfortunately
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
Might not be as keen if the players are paid offshore and he has no reason to hammer them for tax, but they have said today that it will be worth 102 million in profit for the country (London).
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Boy George said that help includes flexibility on the tax law.
I.e if they were based here their entire global wealth is available at full tax rate.
Boy George will instead look after the rich and turn a blind eye. So no worries on that score.
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
I read somewhere that they may be based in the US and just fly in for the games but it will be interesting to see what happens when it all starts.