Skip to content

Goodell: We haven’t talked about expansion at all

Divisional Playoffs - Houston Texans v Baltimore Ravens Getty Images

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is in the middle of his annual “State of the League” Super Bowl address. And I’m sitting in the audience, furiously typing like a dork.

The first interesting response to Goodell came after a question about Los Angeles and possible expansion.

“We haven’t talked about expansion at all,” Goodell said. “I don’t see that in foreseeable future.”

Asked about moving a team to Los Angeles, Goodell repeated his usual line that “We want to keep teams where they are.”  Of course, if there is no expansion and no teams moving, then there won’t be a team in Los Angeles.

But Goodell wants a team in Los Angeles. He talked about the ten-year CBA and re-signed television contracts as providing a “foundation” to come up with solutions for a team in L.A. He said the league has a ten-year runway to make a deal.

Goodell tried to back off his comments on Costas Live Thursday. He said Thursday night that expanding by one team would never be an option. If the league ever expands, it will be by two teams.

Permalink 25 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories
25 Responses to “Goodell: We haven’t talked about expansion at all”
  1. maxvv says: Feb 3, 2012 11:56 AM

    32 is the perfect number. If the league is around for another thousand years, there should be 32 teams the whole dang time.

  2. harrisonhits2 says: Feb 3, 2012 11:58 AM

    The talent level is already diluted with 32 teams, adding any won’t help that in the slightest.

    Plus 32 teams makes for great scheduling with 16 games and 4 division teams. As soon as you add teams to the mix it screws up scheduling.

  3. mjbulls45 says: Feb 3, 2012 12:04 PM

    the Raiders get first dibs to move to LA,

    or have to be compensated in some way or form.

    Al Davis tried to move the team to LA permanently,

    and the league blocked the move and did NOTHING to help him,

    he then sued the NFL, and won.

    Rozelle had other intentions of having his own team in LA after his retirement as commish, why wouldnt he, LA – big market – big money.

    so the NFL cant block the Raiders from LA, then years later put 2 teams there that are NOT the Raiders or at least consult the organization or compensate them.

    bottom line is , the whole issue was taken to court, and Al won.

  4. norcal031 says: Feb 3, 2012 12:07 PM

    Brazil, Spain???? Mexico!?!?!?!? Just like any profession in the America TD nfl is going to be outsourced. Tv makes it possible. How many people go to games compared to how many watch at home. Who cares where fee game is played and some 80k see it if you know a billion will watch it and you make more money off of tv. It amazes me sometimes how much television and the media run the world…..

  5. dontouchmyjunk says: Feb 3, 2012 12:14 PM

    Look around the league. There aren’t 32 NFL caliber starting quarterbacks as it is. Let alone 32 NFL caliber back-up quarterbacks. Expanding to 34 would just be ridiculous. The entire product would be watered down.

    I’m not suggesting the NFL should contract to 30 teams, but that would actually be better for the quality of football than expanding.

    Look at the players currently on the street without a team. Then, imagine 106 of them actually having NFL jobs. Not a pretty picture for the league. And not the kind of football that I’d be interested in watching.

  6. whatnojets says: Feb 3, 2012 12:19 PM

    NFL TV contract worth 18-20 billion dollars

  7. mrgdawg says: Feb 3, 2012 12:25 PM

    LA has had repeated chances at a team and they cant keep them. Why set a team up for that failure again? California has enough professional teams, why not go into a new market.

  8. zoxitic says: Feb 3, 2012 12:35 PM

    The future of the NFL is 64 teams with international teams being amongst the 64.

  9. bigperm33 says: Feb 3, 2012 12:45 PM

    Dear Roger – what has really hurt MLB – overexpansion. What has really hurt the NHL – overexpansion. What has really hurt the NBA- overexpansion. David Stern, a many who has made a long list of mistakes as commish, calls expanding to Vancouver his biggest mistake. You are already changing the game bu changing all the rules and by handing out fines for almost any penalty. You really want to dilute the talent by adding two more teams? This is a QB driven league – is there enough talent for two more teams? Do not, do not, do not, do not expand.

  10. batyuki says: Feb 3, 2012 12:46 PM

    And that second expansion team would be located in London right ?

    I think there is plenty of talent amongst free agents that goes undetected because these guys just never have a real shot at proving themselves and having 34 competitive teams doesn’t sound totally unrealistic to me.

    That being said, the 32 teams format is perfect, don’t mess with it please…

  11. joetoronto says: Feb 3, 2012 12:52 PM

    I hear the “watered down” argument and I understand the thinking.

    I saw it happen in the NHL many years ago, too many teams, not enough quality players, however, consider the thousands of football players coming out of college every year that are passed over and never get a chance to play.

    Better and or broader scouting seems to be the key to me, the players are out there.

  12. 1captain1 says: Feb 3, 2012 1:08 PM

    Put a team in LA and London.

    Build stateside facilities for the London franchise to where they can travel and play the AFC east in 4 consecutive weeks then head back to London.

    The other AFC East teams can play in London following a bye week.

    4 game here, 4 games there, 4 games here, 4 games there… problem solved!

  13. dontouchmyjunk says: Feb 3, 2012 1:13 PM

    @joetoronto — hockey, basketball, and to an extent, baseball… are international sports. The talent pool for new young players is exponentially greater than our measly 320 million citizens for American football.

    Yes, there are thousands of players who don’t play professionally. But it is not for lack of opportunity. 300 + players get cut from an NFL team every summer. There just aren’t enough exceptionally good football players.

    I DO NOT want to watch mediocrity.

  14. jwlemarine says: Feb 3, 2012 1:13 PM

    One team to LA, and one team to OKC! No need for a team all the way in London. Make them create there own football league like Canada.

  15. dickroy says: Feb 3, 2012 1:23 PM

    I think the current four team divisions in each conference is perfect. Expand by one or two and you screw up the equalization of the competition.

    I say lets get a new comish and send Goodell to Europe and let him start his own world league.
    I have been all over Europe and they love round ball soccor over there.

  16. andygraham says: Feb 3, 2012 1:23 PM

    And then once there’s a franchise in L.A., they’ll start working on moving one to Newt Gingrich’s moon base by 2020.

  17. nejerseygirl says: Feb 3, 2012 1:28 PM

    batyuki says:
    Feb 3, 2012 12:46 PM
    I think there is plenty of talent amongst free agents that goes undetected because these guys just never have a real shot at proving themselves and having 34 competitive teams doesn’t sound totally unrealistic to me.
    ____________

    The Patriots will take ‘em..

  18. nomorewhodey says: Feb 3, 2012 1:31 PM

    I think the NFL could manage 2 more teams either in California, New York, or Texas. Teams there do well. But moving Jacksonville to one of those cities should be an option. There is still enough talent in the pool for more teams with out totally screwing up the league. Look at New England rolling in the Super Bowl with 18 undrafted free agents. Talent is there it just needs to be developed.

  19. klunge says: Feb 3, 2012 1:45 PM

    andygraham says:
    Feb 3, 2012 1:23 PM
    And then once there’s a franchise in L.A., they’ll start working on moving one to Newt Gingrich’s moon base by 2020
    ————————————————–

    Janikowski will play there and set a new FG record of 700yds.

  20. brainhair says: Feb 3, 2012 2:29 PM

    They should definitely stay at 32.
    When you think about it, there are really only two threats to the NFL: 1) over expansion equals watered down products easily skipped over on your cable box and ; 2) American health insurance (most counties pick up the insurance with gate recepits FWIT). Insurance stays astronomical and parents, even tho they watch on Sunday, don’t want their kids feeling the detrimental health effects that are in the news. In a generation the talent withers on the vine, gone off to play “safer” sports like soccer or basketball. Football is big now, but it can easily get choked out by larger societal issues.

    That said, I’m a big Panthers fan. If they ever relocate, it can only be the Moon. Moon City Panthers in 2030. Then that silver in their unis would finally make sense.

  21. raidersfreak says: Feb 3, 2012 2:45 PM

    Goodell is Bi-Polar he had a slip of the tongue and now is retracting. I knew he was on that J. Russell magic syrup last night.

    He is not a great commissioner by a long shot he is a lame duck at best. The guy is money hungry mongrel that rips his players of hefty fines that any normal mid -class person couldn’t even fathom a penalty as such.
    A lot these helmet to helmet hits were clearly not and the Referees would not re examine them on the playing field so why should some these players pay a fine for a mis call is beyond me but at the same time it is a good rule if applied correctly.

    They have the film right on front of them the fans can see what happened on the TV why can’t the Refs see it in the booth ???? Rodger likes the money and would rather have a player go threw the appeals process because of chance collecting a players salary.

  22. qj1984 says: Feb 3, 2012 3:09 PM

    @dontouchmyjunk

    You call it watered down football, the NFL calls it parity. The more teams there are the harder it becomes to compete. I don’t know if that’s good or bad for the game but from a social stand point. 106 more guys with jobs can’t be THAT bad.

  23. chocopoppy says: Feb 3, 2012 3:19 PM

    @bigperm33:

    I think David Stern’s comment about Vancouver was not that he regrest going there, he regrets leaving there. He didn’t like the ownership situation in relation to the city and the corporate support. I believe he felt it could have been handled better and that the team may have thrived there if things were handled differently.

    In short, let’s send a team to London!

  24. rdawg911 says: Feb 3, 2012 3:42 PM

    I agree that having 32 teams keeps the schedule clean, and I’d be against adding 1 or 2 teams because it would create imbalances in divisions/conferences.

    With that being said, I do believe that it is ridiculous that LA and Toronto don’t have teams right now, considering how big their cities/markets are. I don’t want to be inconsiderate of other fans either, but if two teams had to go right now, I’d say that Jacksonville, and San Diego would be the leading candidates given their poor attendance.

    It would also be interesting to maybe add 8 new franchises (maybe even London, San Antonio, Mexico City, etc) to push the amount of teams to 40…maybe then we could add 4 teams to the playoff mix making it 8 from each conference.

    I digress….just brainstorming…I like the NFL the way it is.

  25. brainhair says: Feb 3, 2012 4:05 PM

    Guessing in order:

    1 LA Knights
    2 Oklahoma City Red Riders. They would probably have more fan support from day 1 thru 365. LA is fickle. Counting that the Chargers started in LA, they’ve lost 3 teams in a generation.
    3 San Antonio Stallions
    4 Toronto Denim Dions
    5 London Royals
    6 Mexico City Aztecs
    7 Little Rock or Nebraska Pocketknives
    8 West Virginia Internet Hacks. Their helmets would be coal ducked taped to their bare heads

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!