With the Patriots and the Buccaneers preparing to square off at Wembley Stadium for the third annual NFL game in London, some folks in England want more.
Three more, to be specific.
Alistair Kirkwood, the managing director of NFL UK, told the BBC that he hopes to see two games played there in 2010, and four by 2012.
"We would like a game at the end of September and another at the end of October," Kirkwood said. "If we go to two games the next step would be to go to four games per year. I would like to do that after the 2012 Olympics."
Commissioner Roger Goodell previously has suggested that the number of London games could double to two as soon as next year.
It makes sense. If/when the NFL expands the regular season to 17 games, the league will be able to play up to 16 games at neutral sites, without reducing anyone's home schedule.
Then again, some teams might be willing to give up a home game, as the Bucs were this year.
So with four games in London, there would still be 12 games available to be played in other venues.
And we continue to think that a chunk of those games could be used to solve the Los Angeles problem without moving a team there.
London hopes for four games per year by 2012
Posted by Mike Florio on October 23, 2009 7:41 AM ET
Permalink
60 Comments 
Latest stories in: Latest News and Rumors, NFL Mobile Exclusives - Rumors, New England Patriots, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Top Stories
Latest stories in: Latest News and Rumors, NFL Mobile Exclusives - Rumors, New England Patriots, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Top Stories
I would be pissed if I had season tickets and one of my home games was in London. eff that
Am I the only person who thinks that games should only be played in this country? I mean no one in this country wants their version of football, so what in the hell makes us think that they want ours? The fact that an article yesterday said that people over there don't even know who Tom Brady is says it all. This is our sport, keep it here and stop trying to destroy the NFL.
BADdell (My lame excuse to be as funny as Vox)
Thats stupid. The day they put a superbowl overseas I wont watch out of sheer disgust with the NFL. If they want football so bad over there then let them start their own league. Is it worth the risk to alienate American fans to put football in europe or other foreign countries?
I think all this talk of 4 games a year and a London franchise is ridiculous. The average viewing figures for live NFL between 6pm and 12pm sundays is 50,000, just over half Wembley capacity.
If one of those 4 games in 2012 is say Jaguars v Texans, I can't see it selling out. Also, why not give Germany a shot, they after all kept NFL Europe going single-handedly for years.
Guess I'm in the minority here, but I don't mind it at all. I'd love to travel to a neutral site game for my team, especially if it's in London. Most of the people complaining about this probably don't go to the games to begin with, so why all the fuss? Your team will still be on TV and you'll watch it as you normally do. And if it's a 17th game, no home games will be lost.
I think it'd be great if the neutral site game was always an interconference matchup featuring the same two teams each year. So the Jets could always play the Giants, the Steelers always play the Eagles, the Cowboys always play the Texans, and so on. And the games always move around to different neutral sites, so those fans that like to follow their teams to away games can see different cities and stadiums. In addition to seeing home games, I've seen my team play five away games over the past few years. Like I said, I might be in the minority, but I'm all for this.
There is a problem with the thinking that numerous games a year in London or LA would work long term. They draw huge crowds in London because it is a once a year event. A novelty. As soon as fans become accustomed to being able to go to a game, it won't be as big a deal. Plus, with different teams each time, their will be no fan loyalty to the various teams that are playing. And if L.A. can't support one team, what makes you think they could support a turnstile of teams.
As a English NFL fan of over 26 years, I cannot understand why you guys are some down on having games over here. Every team that has played so far has enjoyed the experience and all three games are 85,000 sell outs - which is more than you can say about the Jags and Raiders at the moment!
Personally, I would like to see an NFL franchise in London at some point in the future. There is a geniune passion for the game over here.
Sports are something you grew up with. In Europe they didn't grow up with our version of football. They appreciate it about as much as we appreciate the English Premier League. The average Brit feels about the NFL what we feel about soccer.
I hate the idea of games in the UK.
Unless every team in the league has to make the trip, no teams should have to go.
I personally would be annoyed by this prospect if I was an American fan, and even as a British fan, I'm slightly concerned that we could end up with below-par matchups that suck the sense of spectacle from the event. This year's lineup is a great one, and while there is only one per year, there's always going to be a full house.
The problem will be if fans here have to prioritise which games they go to. This will lead to a Chiefs@Lions matchup looking pretty empty, whilst a Bears@Giants game might be oversubscribed.
I like the idea of neutral games being incorporated into the schedule as a 17th game. It's the only way to avoid provoking mass outrage to the situation whereby fans lose home games.
chapnasty - Hey, I don't care what you think of football, but I sure as hell care about your 'version of it', and I probably watch more of it than you do too, so keep your generalisations in your head, where they make you look a little less idiotic and xenophobic.
There is a big following over here, and it is growing steadily. Perhaps not at a rate that suggests it will ever really take off, but still, there is a great deal of interest, and I think a 'matchup' (an unfair term for what will actually take place on Sunday. Try 'Mauling') like Sunday's is a great advert for the game over here. Two of the league's best known franchises, with Two of the league's best Quarter... oh.
Oh dear.
two words - dumb idea.
why dont we just play them all in london?
this is the worst policy ever...wait all year for NFL football, LOVE going to games, and they take 1 away...nice
This "share America's sport " with a bunch of limeys that get off on that sissy sport soccer is the worst idea ever. They could care less about the NFL,just would use it as an excuse to fill a stadium and get drunk. At least when we do that,we care about the teams,game and outcome.If it must happen,best be away games for both teams because the American fans,who made this sport what it is,deserve their 8 home games period!
"This is our sport"
"alienate American fans"
"keep it and stop trying to destroy the NFL"
???
Unless you're a ticket holder losing a home game (they're going to add games to the schedule inevitably, so it'll be moot), you have no reason to be upset... that is, unless you're also a narrow-minded contrarian that hates all other countries for no reason. But than you're upset at just about everything.
Go burn some Dixie Chicks record.
All companies need to innovate to remain relevant. The NFL has to look for ways to expand beyond their current revenue base. There is a whole planet out there that the NFL could benefit financially from - especially when you read everyday that a lot of the current franchises can't or won't support their teams. You can only move so many teams so often. I am not looking forward to even more time zones as it makes it more difficult to watch games, but the reality is that the US economy is shite and it is going to get a whole lot worse....
I am totally, completely, against this.
The NFL needs to stay in America.
If I'm a big-name star, I would have it in my contract that I will not play outside the U.S..
I hope ALL NFL fans let it be known that we don't want this.
This is rediculous. I am English, I live in England and I love football but I think this idea is rediculous.
This year the amount of coverage of the NFL has been cut back dramatically. Sure, there is a global recession on, but our broadcasters have either dramatically cut or are planning to drop their coverage because the NFL gets tiny viewing figures.
Seriously, not one broadcaster was willing to pay for Monday night football, it is no longer available unless you buy one of the NFL's internet packages, and quite a few British users are finding the service from that to be incredibly poor.
The official viewing figures, published on the NFLUK website for opening night was in the 10-20 thousand range. Maybe you make allowances, it was on a subscription channel in the early hours of the morning on a work day, except that the broadcaster was getting higher viewing figures on it's other sports channels. It's also similar to the viewing figures from the previous year.
The NFL is paying for allying itself with Sky in the 90's and wasting the good start it got in the 80's on free to air.
Roger Goddell, if you want the game to grow sending games over isn't necessary. Just make it easier and cheaper for us to watch on television and the internet. The NFL is decades away from having a British fan base that could justify 4-games, let alone a franchise.
At the moment all sending games to London does is shaft American fans, and give British people who don't care about football an interesting event to take the kids to.
We have our own league over here. But it is nowhere as good as the NFL.
But I'm with you on this one. I don't think that many games should be played out of the US. 8 home games and 8 away games works just fine.
Dumbest plan ever especially when most stadiums are funded by the tax payers and now you want to take away part of the dividend on their investment ? Good luck of getting a new stadium built.
they shouldve put NFLE all in england and germany then.
Take a Jags home game or two. Lessen the ticket burden in a market that's to small and drive down the cost of season tickets so that more people can go to the games here. People that want to just watch from home win as well.
Win-win?
I live in the UK, and coach American Football over here, and i can assure you guys there is a passionate and loyal fanbase for American Football.
That being said though, i'd be pissed off too if i was American and this meant losing a home game.. and i could never conceive of the Superbowl being played outside the USA.
Guess its all about growing the sport to increase worldwide revenue. For what its worth, i think four games here a year would be too much, and i think you'd soon see the novelty wear off. The hardcore fans like myself would remain, but i imagine attendance would begin to drop..
Also we do have our own league.. the British American Football League! (although all but our best teams would be destroyed by an average high school team over there)
F off Goodell you incompetent fool.
1 "No" vote to games in London.
What's next? Afghanistan?
"London hopes for four games per year by 2012"
^^^^^^^^
I think you should be a little more specific. A select few London officials with financial stakes, the commissioner, some owners, and you, Mike Florio, are the ONLY people that hope to see four games in London.
The people of London DO NOT CARE. And the actual fans of the NFL in the United States, and the I would presume a vast majority of the players think the idea sucks.
Think the novelty of a London game was worn off already? Wait till they (god forbid) try playing more than 1 game a year there.
I said it before, Florio...your elitest attitude on the London issue appalls me more than any other issue on this site.
The Dolphins played the Giants in the first London game. I've got Dolphin season tickets and that year was the Dolphins' worst ever. I did go to the game in London and I can honestly say that was one of the most entertaining events I've been to. A great venue with wonderful people.
The game was an option for season ticket holders. We were charged for one less game and were invoiced separately for the London-game tickets.
I'm sure there are people in the UK who don't know who Tom Brady is. I can assure you, there are people in the USA who don't know who Tom Brady is (I asked my mom - no clue). So what? It's not her hobby.
Plenty of people around the world DO know NFL football, and know of many players. It's all just entertainment and entertainment is business. If stadiums are filling up, it's obviously good business.
Why would LA want a revolving door of teams coming there? If they're building the stadium I would imagine they'd want a home team to call their own? Or not!?!? Keep regular season, post season games in America. If the NFL feels they need to send teams across the pond to show off send a pre-season matchup.
This is just a bad idea. Bad, bad, bad. Im calling it now. We will see the NFL fall from the top spot in our lifetime. Whether its MMA or baseball decides to clean up their act and shorten the games(most likely MMA), the NFL is going to get a huge wake up call real soon. They need to be real careful or theyre going to end up like boxing. Boxing used to be HUGE and it got too big and too arrogant and before they saw what was coming they were knocked out cold(see what I did there? lolz) There is a reason soccer isnt popular in the states and football isnt popular in the rest of the world and thats because neither demographic understands the rules and doesnt care to take the time to learn them. This is the worst idea since putting a team in Jacksonville, it will never work and if attempted will crash and burn.
"Is it worth the risk to alienate American fans to put football in europe or other foreign countries?"
^^^^^^
Clearly it is, otherwise we wouldn't have OUR games outsourced overseas for the past 3 years.
PURE STUPIDITY ..... why in the world are you taking two teams and making them go overseas to play their game .... if London wants football so bad tell them to start their own league ....SCREW EM ....ask the players how they feel about going over there to play(without punishing them for their HONEST opinions about playing over their) .....what's the nfl becoming .... beginning with fines for hitting a guy to hard or the wrong way
@chapnasty
I mean no one in this country wants their version of football, so what in the hell makes us think that they want ours?
_________________________________
Maybe the fact that they sell out each overseas game almost as soon as the tickets are available. Maybe that the attendance record for an NFL game came from the game in Mexico when two 0-3 teams played eachother (cardinals 49ers).
The NFL is a business dude, and these games make money, a lot of money. And for teams like San Diego and Jacksonville, a home game for them in London, even as inconveniant as such a flight would be, is far more profitable. It sell out, everytime, and would not blackout those teams home games.
I agree with all the posts. If the Commish wants to create excitement in Europe around the american brand of football, he should buy them all season's passes to DirectTV.
Exporting football to Europe might be an attractive business proposition for the NFL, but I believe in the long run it will alienate fans in the U.S. and water down the sport considerably. I cannot fathom the day when one of our teams here has to play a European NFL team in a superbowl played in backwater Bulgaria or something. Disgusting.
I read this morning in a UK newspaper that the director of NFL European Operations or some title like that has a goal of making football a top 5 sport in the UK in the next 5 years. A top 5 sport?...child, please. Look at the UK newspapers this morning...nothing in the sporting section, news section that says anything about the upcoming game this weekend. The game may have sold out in seconds, but it certainly is not getting much press.
A more likely and smarter scenario would be to expand to 19 weeks with 17 games per team and 2 bye weeks per team. And if you're really that adamant about playing in London.... Why not give them 1-2 regular season games per conference(teams would get a bye week after London), some of the preseason games(preferably the other 28 teams who dont have to fly to London during the Regular season. Fair and Reasonable ), and the ProBowl, all provided the games are played in a retractable dome due to the atrocious London weather.
as much as I absolutely hate Goodell's direction with this, if you factor in teams relinquishing their home games, how often could the English possibly enjoy watching Chargers v. Bucs in a given season?
In a comment this morning posted on "Friday morning one liners..." Rob Ninkovich of the Patriots said that the field conditions in London would be an issue.
What is the NFL's responsibility in making sure the field conditions in London are an acceptable surface to play on? What is the NFL's responsibility should a player be permanently injured due to the field conditions in London?...
What's the answer Commish?
As an English NFL fan who has attended all the wembley games I can tell you we would be thrilled to bits to get more games. The man on the street might not know who Tom Brady is but there are a hell of a lot of British fans of the NFL who do. The games sell out within hours despite the fact that they are very expensive @ $200 + for an ordinary seat. Just hope the Bucs make a game of it on Sunday.
Just wait guys... in 2015, they will want 8 = a having a team in London.
Alistair Kirkwood should concentrate on getting the tv contracts sorted out before trying for more games. this year we have 66% fewer games and a massive increase in the cost of our games. We are forced to buy game pass that we watch on the internet and for the 1st 4 weeks it constantly crashed . It is great that we get a game but I think any more than 1 game a year would be silly after all it is called American Football
As an English fan of the Eagles in England NFL I can understand why you wouldnt want to lose anymore games to us but I can also see the desire of the commisioner to spread the great game throughout the world.
I'm from England and I've followed the NFL for over 25 years. Please ignore those stupid news reports. There is a huge, extremely knowledgable fanbase over here and it really cheeses me off the way our crappy news media trot out out the same old "Wow, look at all the funny fat guys in crash helmets, what a circus!" garbage that started when the Bears (Never mind that Payton guy, look at the size of The Fridge!) came here for an exhibition game in 86, I think. They assume their viewers are as unsophisticated as they themselves are and I would rather they didn't cover it at all. The only exceptions are Channel 5 terrestially and Sky satellite who both do a great job covering the sport for the real fans.
Every year Wembley sells out it's 70,000 tickets with ease and you can bet that the eventual number of games played here will be decided on how much saturation the market will stand. If they sell out two they'll try three. If they sell out three, they'll try four. It's all about money and the more NFL followers there are, the more merch they'll shift. Plus wider TV rights deals of course. I don't think it's unreasonable to speculate that one day the league will have expansion teams from other countries. What are the odds that one day the Bills or the Cards either pitch their tent, or play someone from, the other side of the nearest border?
Personally I wouldn't be able to unconditionally support a London team because I'm too invested in the Raiders but I would certainly go to the games, if only to support whoever's playing the Broncos ;-). The Superbowl (and it's bloated yawn-inducing half-time show) should definitely stay in the US where it's done best. Regarding season ticket holders of the teams coming here, you should absolutely get a discount for the missing game.
These London games are terrible. Screw our horrible "neighbors" across the Atlantic. This is our sport and Gooddell and some specific owners are robbing us of it. All Europe does is take, take, and take more from us all while criticizing and ripping this great country behind our backs. Keep football in The States and let them play their awful soccer matches - what a stupid f***ing game that is.
I think the season should be 17 games with one neutral site game for non intra division matchup per year. These neutral games should go to the highest bidder while keeping America's time zones in mind.
I'd prefer the extra games are played in Mexico or Canada or US sites that have a stadium, the desire to host a game, and the money and attendance to make it work.
But if London can pack 85k in a site and enough people truly have passion for watching the game then why the heck not let them have one of those 16 neutral site games. Note that I am not a fan of the current setup where teams have to forfeit a home game to play there. That's stupid.
But the idea of having a team there in London? I disagree with that big time. Just too much of a problem with time zones and traveling back and forth. Players would be less inclined to go there. Just a competitive mess.
But yeah go to 17 games and have a neutral site game to spread the love.
I just don't understand the business strategy. What is it the NFL is trying to accomplish here exactly?
Are they hoping to put an NFL team in Europe? That's crazy. The logistics would be a constant nightmare. Better to target Canada or even Mexico than the UK.
Are they hoping to sell more NFL merchandise in Europe? Do you really need games in the UK to accomplish that? Wouldn't it be better to improve TV coverage of US based games and try to develop "sister-city" type relationships instead?
Are they hoping to resurrect NFL Europe as a Farm league? If so, shouldn't why haven't they started that process to take advantage of the existing games?
Again, I keep trying to understand the motivations and the expectations. All we get is the standard, "grow our sport", response without explaining how this particular approach accomplishes that or what global growth even looks like.
Personally, I think they've latched on to advice from a Management Consultant firm like McKinsey that told them to grow they must "go global" without understanding for minute the practicality of it.
F off Goodell you incompetent fool.
I have no problem with the London games, and think it would be a good idea to try two games per year since the single game has been so successful. I do think the game should always be between a pair of playoff teams from the previous season though, so the fans over there can at least have a better chance to see a decent game.
Out of fairness, any further expansion should be tied to having a 17th, neutral site game...and teams should get an additional bye week during the season. Have a couple games every year in England, Ireland, Germany, Spain, Austraila/NZ, South America, Mexico City, and Canada.
I have no idea how popular US Football is in the UK & continental Europe. To me it seems that it's a sport that could easily be popular over there, but I suppose Brits probably feel the same about Soccer over here.
@ Shaun Lowrie
Sir, or Maam, let me be clear. I dedicate 12 hours if not more every Sunday, and several hours a day, maybe 8 to this website sifting through Florio's garbage for NFL news. You my friend are beyond out of line. I can gurantee you that there is as many fans of our Football in Europe as there are our your SOCCER here.
@ DC fan
The NFL is American, I am all about making money but a lot of people make great arguments about how they sell out because its a "once a year" event. and I agree, if we were there too much it would lose interest. Especially since the NLF Europe fell flat on it's face
I'm from the U.K. I have my tickets to the game this Sunday and I really can't wait. Why? Because, I, like many, many other English people follow this sport as much as anyone in America. And frankly, this may be the only time I ever get to watch an NFL game in the flesh, let alone get to watch the Patriots whom I support.
The sport is big in the UK. It's growing. I don't agree with 4 games a year. The one game a year makes it a novelty enough to have it be a better one off experience.
I just hate reading all the whiney people on here. Business-wise it makes a ton of sense. Loads of money and an expanding fan base. Why do you think Soccer teams like Manchester United are one of the richest sports clubs in the world? Very few people in Manchester actually support them, but EVERYONE around the globe does.
the ignorance on the comment board is fantastic. my favourite is the limey call. its a good thing americans have no ancestorial history with england, or that the term limey didnt come from the fact that the english travelling overseas to some "foreign" country were getting scurvy due to lack of vitamin c, and thus drinking an abundance of lime juice to combat it.
who knows moron; these could have been your great- grand fathers
@ Jay
Soccer sucks! But everything else makes sense. Of course you have to be a Patriots fan.... damn bandwagon readhed over the pond!
If Goodell is striving to make the NFL a more exotic league by taking it outside the US, why doesn't he get some bang for his buck? Why not NFL Indonesia or NFL Middle East? How about NFL Central America? That would make a lot more sense in terms of logistics, more people may want to follow them to the game (depending on the location), and there will likely be audible gunfire around the arenas.
Actually, the only reason I'm a Patriots fan is through complete random luck. I turned on Madden for the first time and it asked me which team I supported. I plumped for the Patriots for no viable reason and now I'm Pats to the core. No bandwagon for me.
If there is so much resistance to international games when do the Superbowl winners insist on calling themselves "World Champions"?
This tells you The NFL is all about the money. Why would you play an American game in a foreign country??
I agree with other posters if England wants football then heck start you own League.
This is the NFL once again spitting on them that brought them. From the lousy play calling that doesn't get corrected to cheating coaches that don't get kicked out to thugs, rapist, animal killers any every manner of low life that get reinstated no matter what the offense. Yeah players get fined for unsportsmanlike behavior on a ref's dumb call , but all these thugs just get bigger pay checks. You don't think stabbing you wife doesn't merit a fine instead of higher contract negoations.
why would you play an american game in a foreign country?
wow. maybe for the same reason they play baseball in every country, or the reason hockey, which is a canadian game, is played in the states? as soon as you people realize the sun doesnt rotate around the u.s. the better off you'll be
"I just don't understand the business strategy. What is it the NFL is trying to accomplish here exactly? "
*****
To become the most popular sport in the world.
I sincerely don't understand why people are against this, unless it means one less home game for them to go to. Baseball and basketball are two American sports that enjoy worldwide popularity.
But I guess only Americans deserve to watch the greatest game in the world.
you guys are all so damn short-sighted.
complaining about expanding the sport & league.... really?
growing and going international can only help the NFL and make it a world power. I can't imagine if soccer had faced such stagnation from it's fans....
be more open-minded guys. this is a good thing. for those complaining about losing a game for the season-ticket holders, they are talking about adding a game to the season to accomodate this, so essentially you'd be getting the same number of games. chill ;)
the really good news is you'll opening the door to have a lot of fans of your team overseas. that is very cool.
If they to watch American football let them come here and watch it.
If London really wants NFL games, couldn't they just ask the NFL to bring back NFL Europe instead? That would be more convient then having teams travel half way across the world just to play a game.
KEEP THE GAME HERE!!! STOP WASTING TIME & MONEY!!! GOODELL YOU SUCK!!!
I think you can't just put one franchise over there; you have to put an entire division in Europe. Four teams, say, one in London, one in Frankfurt, one in Berlin, and one more somewhere else in Europe. That way, for each of the teams all of their eight home games and three of their away games--eleven in all--will not require traveling over the Atlantic. That leaves just five trips overseas.
By putting just one team over there, ALL of their away games will require overseas flights; eight in all. That could be brutal.
Personally, I'm pretty excited about this idea. All of you jackasses saying "this is an American sport keep it in America" need to scrape the sand out of your vaginas and take the chew out of your mouths. Your closed-mindedness is preventing you from seeing the AMAZING rivalries that could be built if NFL football became international.
"the really good news is you'll opening the door to have a lot of fans of your team overseas. that is very cool."
^^^^^^^^^
Is it? I am relatively certain that the Patriots will have overwhelming support in Wembley Stadium this coming Sunday, even though its a "road" game.
Guess what...I couldn't care less. Honestly, what difference does it make to me or any other American if some kid in London is wearing a Patriots jacket?
Globalism has proven to be a scourge, and globalizing and outsourcing our sport will have zero positive effect on you, me, or any other average fan. America first, second and third.