Skip to content

Jags may play one home game, one road game in London

Jaguars AP

With conflicting views around the NFL about just how likely the Jacksonville Jaguars are to become the London Jaguars, one incremental step toward an overseas move could be playing a second annual game a year at Wembley Stadium. But for the immediate future, it appears that the second annual game would be a road game.

The Jaguars are already committed to giving up one of their eight home games a year to play a “home” game in London for the next four years. But while the Jaguars will only play that one game in London this year, Jaguars.com writer John Oehser suggests that starting next year, the Jaguars may also be the visiting team in the NFL’s second annual London game.

“The best way to put it is that in 2014-2016, yes, there is a chance for a second game overseas,” Oehser writes. “It almost certainly will not be a second Jaguars home game. As for what happens after that, four years is a long time and much can change.”

If the NFL wants to see whether London fans will embrace the Jaguars, the best way to find out is to put the Jaguars in London as often as possible and see whether they start to build a fan base. So if it’s not feasible for now to have the Jaguars play two “home” games in London and six in Jacksonville, the Jaguars may start playing one “home” game in London and one “road” game in London each year.

There could be complications with that approach, especially if the Jaguars’ road schedule doesn’t feature any teams that want to give up a true home game to play a “home” game at Wembley. But don’t be surprised if the Jaguars play two games a year in London starting in 2014, as a baby step toward playing eight games a year in London eventually.

Permalink 57 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Jacksonville Jaguars, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
57 Responses to “Jags may play one home game, one road game in London”
  1. valentino8100 says: Jun 6, 2013 11:07 AM

    A loss is a loss is a loss. You won’t win with Gabbert at the helm, so get over it.

  2. tcmiller30 says: Jun 6, 2013 11:09 AM

    “When I think exciting teams that could garner the most international interest, the Jags are definitely #1 on my list.”

    -Nobody

  3. Bretterson says: Jun 6, 2013 11:11 AM

    Goodell continues to show an impeccable understanding of what the fans want.

  4. blackandbluedivision says: Jun 6, 2013 11:11 AM

    What’s the likelihood of them being renamed the Shaguars with Khan dressed as Austin Powers?

  5. indycolt45 says: Jun 6, 2013 11:11 AM

    Seriously? If you want to build a fan base around a team, why the hell are you going to send the awful Jaguars? Nobody in THIS country wants to watch them, let alone across the ocean!

  6. ronworthdubbs says: Jun 6, 2013 11:13 AM

    They probably should just buy Gabbert one-way tickets.

  7. mobuccsfan says: Jun 6, 2013 11:16 AM

    This is so stupid. NFL is going to be the death of The NFL with all these dumb, profit-driven tactics. Sure, it might work for a season or two but it won’t long-term and then what? Terrible, terrible. Goodell really needs to go.

    I personally see this is unfair to all 32 teams in the league–as it will cause all kinds of problems long-term. Having a team in L.A. is one thing, but having a permanent franchise in London, Mexico or Canada or another country just isn’t smart. Toronto at best would be the only place I could think of as working. SMH…

  8. marty2020 says: Jun 6, 2013 11:16 AM

    The handwriting is on the wall. We are going to lose our team. Even though we sell more tickets than Tampa or Miami, and sell more tickets than 10 other teams, for some reason, Roger Goodell doesn’t want Jacksonville.

  9. ksiner says: Jun 6, 2013 11:17 AM

    One sure way to lower attendance is to start talking like this. If I were in Jax and going to to games I would stop going and supporting a team that is flirting with this idea. FAHK you Roger and Haji the owner. If you want to move a business to London go buy a fahking 7-11

  10. cheapglazers says: Jun 6, 2013 11:17 AM

    So many reports that the Bucs will move to London! This will not happen! The Glazers already made the lower income tax payers fund 100% of their stadium! How could they just leave after taking all our money?

  11. mrpresident2 says: Jun 6, 2013 11:18 AM

    What if the NFL cut the preseason to 3 games, so the regular season was 17. Then have every team have 8 home games, 8 away games, and 1 London game? I wonder if that would work.

  12. mazblast says: Jun 6, 2013 11:21 AM

    No offense intended towards the mass movement known as Jaguars fans, but putting a team in Jacksonville was a mistake in the first place.

    Moving part or all of their games to London is an even bigger mistake.

    However, knowing what we know of The Great Roger Goodell Himself Live And In Person, he won’t let little things like logistics, logic, or actual competitiveness stand in the way of his pre-determined conclusion. When The Great One has reached a conclusion, you can’t bother Him with little things like facts.

  13. mdagnew1 says: Jun 6, 2013 11:28 AM

    I love this…. back in 93, Tagliabue decided Carolina and Jacksonville were better spots for a new franchise, instead of Baltimore. Of course this was only because Tags and Jack Kent Cooke decided it was better for the Redskins to be the only game in town.

    Twenty years later, the Ravens are a model NFL franchise and have two Super Bowl rings. The Jags are the laughing stock of the NFL and have to tarp 20% of their stadium to avoid blackouts. Now they are taking games to London as they may move to London OR Los Angeles.

    Tags, you are a moron and always have been…great business decision keeping that franchise from Baltimore..

  14. comatrip1 says: Jun 6, 2013 11:32 AM

    I feel bad for the real Jags fans who are being robbed of a game and whoever the NFL makes play the Jags. This is a giant disadvantage to the teams for the following week’s games. That’s a lot of travel.

  15. godofwine330 says: Jun 6, 2013 11:38 AM

    @ ksiner calling Khan Haji & blackandbluedivision calling the team the Shaguars

    The NFL is alienating the fan with the typical routine of going after the two in the bush, pretty soon they will have neither. Good job, NFL. You really have a handle on what the fans want.

  16. granadafan says: Jun 6, 2013 11:40 AM

    What a great way to promote the NFL overseas by forcing London to watch the Jaguars (pronounced “Jag-you-ares” in Britain). The Jags are the equivalent of a bottom feeder team in the English Premier League (soccer) who are fighting to avoid relegation to a lower division team.

    Even the most ignorant NASCAR-loving and never-traveled, insular conservative sports fan has even heard of Manchester United or Chelsea. They’ve likely never heard of Queen’s Park Rangers.

  17. swagjag says: Jun 6, 2013 11:41 AM

    2011: Los Angeles
    2012: Tebow
    2013: London
    2014: Zombies

  18. marty2020 says: Jun 6, 2013 11:50 AM

    Jacksonville sells more tickets than Tampa or Miami, in spite of having a 2-14 team. But that doesn’t matter, apparently.

  19. evilglazers666 says: Jun 6, 2013 11:51 AM

    “mazblast says: Jun 6, 2013 11:21 AM
    No offense intended towards the mass movement known as Jaguars fans, but putting a team in Jacksonville was a mistake in the first place.”

    Funny they sell out their games and the Bucs can’t sell out the 70% of their stadium exemption rule to be broadcast on local TV.

  20. carltonbanks26 says: Jun 6, 2013 12:01 PM

    Many in the NFL community over here in the UK are rejoicing at this, but I don’t feel the same way.

    I feel sorry for the fans in the US losing their games, I really do. If I had only 8 home games to attend all season, I’d be annoyed if I lost one!

    As a British NFL fan, I like the idea of having a regular season game to attend here, but I think taking too many games away from the US is wrong. The NFL is an American league and the fans here now this and love it for that. I like it the way it is, I don’t want it to transform into something else.

  21. mobuccsfan says: Jun 6, 2013 12:09 PM

    Either way–teams would have to most likely have a bye-week after the London game, so how are you going to have Jacksonville travel there twice in a season with only one bye-week? See, this is a nightmare scenario for any team. I almost kind of like the idea of 17 game season with every team playing in London on a neutral field. Each week after that game, the teams who played, get their bye-week and do this all season.

    In the end though, look at the scheduling issues the NFL had this year. What if Jacksonville had to go to London for their home game, and then travel the next week to say San Fran/West Coast or even if it was their away game–to have to have two away games in a row isn’t the problem–its the amount of time for travel and preparing/practice, etc. Just not wise, I think in the end and I hope this doesn’t happen. I’m with one of the commentators from the other day. I will start watching hockey and/or baseball/basketball and give up on the NFL if they keep killing this league and game with dumb ideas. It is bad enough they are already so greedy. Sadly, all of the sports leagues are today and its hard for us common folk to go and enjoy it the way we used to.

  22. jwag777 says: Jun 6, 2013 12:12 PM

    Goodell is completely insane….

  23. emma333 says: Jun 6, 2013 12:14 PM

    So Goodell, what if London doesn’t embrace the Jaguars? Are you still going to make them be the home team. As a Jaguars fan, I support Khan’s decision to play one home game in London. He made it clear when he bought the team that he wanted to increase visibility. In his first year, he wanted to be on Hard Knocks, and trade for Tebow. Already, he no longer thinks that these should happen. He may also see that more than one game in London has diminishing returns. Additionally, this is all at least a decade away, if it ever occurs….Stop stirring up a fan base that is tired of the nonsense.

  24. zoxitic says: Jun 6, 2013 12:15 PM

    There are 10 teams in the NFL with worse attendance records than the Jaguars but somehow, with a 2-14 record no less, WE should not have gotten a franchise.

    It’s easy to have sellouts when you are winning. Try doing it when your team is having lousy records year after year.

    The REAL story is how great Jacksonville fans are supporting their team no matter what their record is.

    And before you geniuses spout off about the tarps, it has nothing to do with TICKETS SOLD. We are still better than 10 other franchises.

  25. jagsrock3 says: Jun 6, 2013 12:22 PM

    I dont think that the jags should be the ones moving what about the bucs, browns, dolphins, raiders, or the chargers we sell more tickets than them but what ever I still dont think its going to happen

  26. zoxitic says: Jun 6, 2013 12:24 PM

    2012 Average home attendance:

    20 Jacksonville
    64,984
    21 Buffalo
    64,950
    22 Detroit
    63,769
    23 Chicago
    62,329
    24 Cincinnati
    61,188
    25 Pittsburgh
    61,141
    26 Arizona
    60,890
    27 Minnesota
    60,725
    28 San Diego
    59,964
    29 Miami
    57,379
    30 St. Louis
    56,703
    31 Tampa Bay
    55,102
    32 Oakland
    54,216

  27. Stiller43 says: Jun 6, 2013 12:26 PM

    I think the miami or tampa vs jax comes down to history…

    With the dolphins, you have one of the best QBs to every play the game, undefeated season, etc…

    Tampa, you have a bunch of HOFers on that defense from the 2000’s and a super bowl…

    Jacksonville, youve got….jackson de ville?

    Florida seems to be a terrible market for most sports teams (all of the football teams reportedly have attendence problems, the heat barely have fans in the stands by the 2nd quarter, the hockey teams have crap attendence, about 60 pple go to marlins games and the rays games arent much better), and yet the sports leagues keep putting them there anyway…

  28. jaxasc84 says: Jun 6, 2013 12:30 PM

    Fun Fact: One of the strongest supporters of Touchdown Jacksonville’s bid for an expansion franchise in the early-90s was then Vice President Roger Goodell.

    So why is he so committed to using the Jaguars for his business experiments after less than 20 years of existence? That’s like opening a store in the morning and then shaking up the staff at noon.

  29. fafaflunky says: Jun 6, 2013 12:36 PM

    cut deals on air fare have the brits come here to watch the game..jac fla hotels increase profits transportation, restaurants,etc..maybe they watch a nascar race too..on second thought how about goodell moves to England and watches the nfl from there..

  30. theravenlives2 says: Jun 6, 2013 12:43 PM

    This is so stupid. NFL is going to be the death of The NFL with all these dumb, profit-driven tactics. Sure, it might work for a season or two but it won’t long-term and then what? Terrible, terrible. Goodell really needs to go.
    I personally see this is unfair to all 32 teams in the league–as it will cause all kinds of problems long-term. Having a team in L.A. is one thing, but having a permanent franchise in London, Mexico or Canada or another country just isn’t smart. Toronto at best would be the only place I could think of as working. SMH…
    =======================================================
    Why is this stupid? Stop thinking like a parochial US football fan and think like a businessman. The NFL put a team in the Jacksonville market (over Baltimore, St. Louis and Memphis) because the thought the market – which was small at the time and still is – would grow to embrace the team. After the novelty wore off, it hasn’t. Yes, they’ve sold out for the last four years…barely (and because the people of Jacksonville believe the threat of moving is real – much to their credit).

    Let’s look at what could happen:

    The NFL moves the Jaguars to London and the gamble works: The league gets million dollars more revenue than it could ever get in Jax, they open the product up to a new group of fans, get a decent TV contract in England, and the sport grows. I love the folks who say, “the NFL will never be the #1 sport in England. Duh..it doesn’t have to be! The NHL is the #4 sport in the US, and it still makes money.

    The NFL moves the team to London and it doesn’t work: They leave the team there 5-10 years, then shop it to the highest bidder in North America. You don’t think Toronto, Vancouver, Las Vegas, Portland (OR), San Antonio or L.A. (in no particular order) would love an NFL team? Any of those places (with the possible exception of Portland) would support an NFL team with a larger fan base and market than Jacksonville.

    See, so even if the NFL loses in London, it still wins. Not that hard to figure out, from a business perspective.

  31. theravenlives2 says: Jun 6, 2013 12:48 PM

    I love this…. back in 93, Tagliabue decided Carolina and Jacksonville were better spots for a new franchise, instead of Baltimore. Of course this was only because Tags and Jack Kent Cooke decided it was better for the Redskins to be the only game in town.

    Twenty years later, the Ravens are a model NFL franchise and have two Super Bowl rings. The Jags are the laughing stock of the NFL and have to tarp 20% of their stadium to avoid blackouts. Now they are taking games to London as they may move to London OR Los Angeles.

    Tags, you are a moron and always have been…great business decision keeping that franchise from Baltimore..

    ============================
    You can dis this post all you want, but no one can logically argue the fact that Baltimore is a better market for the NFL than Jacksonville. The Ravens have sold out EVERY home game in their history. Every one (and, yes, their were 4-12 and 5-11 years in there, too). In the beginning, Jackosnville used to beat the Ravens twice a year, every year.

    Like it or not, the Ravens are absolutely a model franchise, on and off the field.

  32. ivedoneyourwife says: Jun 6, 2013 1:01 PM

    mdagnew1 says:Jun 6, 2013 11:28 AM

    I love this…. back in 93, Tagliabue decided Carolina and Jacksonville were better spots for a new franchise, instead of Baltimore. Of course this was only because Tags and Jack Kent Cooke decided it was better for the Redskins to be the only game in town.

    Twenty years later, the Ravens are a model NFL franchise and have two Super Bowl rings. The Jags are the laughing stock of the NFL and have to tarp 20% of their stadium to avoid blackouts. Now they are taking games to London as they may move to London OR Los Angeles.

    Tags, you are a moron and always have been…great business decision keeping that franchise from Baltimore..

    Ah, the typical whiny Ravens fan. In the mid to late 90’s Jacksonville was one of the most valuable franchises. Two coaches later they are irrelevent?! Losing does that to a team. I remember how it took the Browns/Ravens 6 seasons to finally win against the Jaguars and that was their Super Bowl year. But we all know that title belongs to the city of Cleveland!

    The only SuperBowl championship’s you deserve under the name of Baltimore was V as the Colts, who damn near moved to Jax in 1979 and this past one. The one in 2000 belongs to the fans of Cleveland.

    So sad you didn’t get an expansion team, boo hoo, wah, wah, wah! Instead you had to steal someone else’s. Too bad we aren’t in the same division anymore, cause you’d still be our whipping boys. At least Pittsburgh would split wins every year against us. You are still second fiddle to the Steelers. If you were in our division, we’d of been 4-12 instead of 2-14.

  33. deacon75 says: Jun 6, 2013 1:04 PM

    It is over Johnny ,, Jag fans don’t worry about the Tarp covering up your stadium seats , they have just changed it into a Union Jack

  34. rextraordinaire says: Jun 6, 2013 1:16 PM

    I love Jags fans who point out teams that have lower attendance records, without mentioning that those teams either dont need to cover any seats with tarps, or simply play in a low-capacity stadium.

    Buffalo and Chicago have stadiums that only hold about 65,000, so of course the Jags have more show up to their games

  35. ivedoneyourwife says: Jun 6, 2013 1:26 PM

    1995 NFL expansion

    Supporters of Jacksonville’s bid included NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, President Neil Austrian, Vice President Roger Goodell, Bud Adams of the Houston Oilers, Rankin Smith of the Atlanta Falcons and Ken Hofmann of the Seattle Seahawks.

    Jacksonville was considered the least likely expansion candidates, for several reasons. The Jacksonville metropolitan area and television market were smaller than those of nearly every team in the league.[2] Although Jacksonville was the 15th largest city in the nation at the time (it has since grown to become the 11th-largest), it has always been a medium-sized market because the surrounding suburbs and rural areas are far smaller than the city itself. There were 635,000 people in Jacksonville proper according to the 1990 census, but only 900,000 people in the metropolitan area.[3][4] Additionally, the Gator Bowl was outdated, and the ownership group struggled to negotiate a lease with the city. As such, in July 1993, the ownership group withdrew from the bidding.[2]

    However, Jacksonville had other assets and a number of powerful supporters. It had a very strong regional football culture, evidenced by the high level of support for the Florida State University Seminoles and University of Florida Gators college football teams, as well as a solid ownership group and a location in the growing and attractive Southeast region. Supporters of Jacksonville’s bid included NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, President Neil Austrian, Vice President Roger Goodell, Bud Adams of the Houston Oilers, Rankin Smith of the Atlanta Falcons and Ken Hofmann of the Seattle Seahawks. Encouraged by Tagliabue, Jacksonville interests revisited the issue, and the city agreed to fund $121 million in renovations for the Gator Bowl including sky boxes and club seats. The stadium’s 10,000 preferred seats were sold in just ten days, and Jacksonville officially returned to the bidding.[2]

  36. mogogo1 says: Jun 6, 2013 1:28 PM

    Lost in all this infatuation with London is the fact that the Monarchs folded up shop prior to the rest of NFL Europe. Not only did they begin as the flagship franchise but the league offices were also in England. But they were closed down and the league went on for several more years without them. (And things got so bad they actually changed their name from London Monarch to England Monarchs prior to their last year. Does that sound like a city just dying to get an NFL team?)

    In fact, ask fans in Europe and most will tell you that Germany has more NFL fans than England, yet Goodell only wants games in London for reasons clear only to him.

    I get that every NFL game has been well-attended in London, but the circus can also sell out large venues on a single visit or two per year. That doesn’t mean your city could support a circus being based there forever.

  37. crappygovernment says: Jun 6, 2013 1:29 PM

    No reason to watch the Jags without Tebow!

  38. dolphin80 says: Jun 6, 2013 1:53 PM

    math was never my strong suit…can somebody help me see the forest through the trees and understand WHY both teams going to London can’t be road teams? WHY must a team give up a home game?

    What am I missing? Am I that dense?

  39. ronnielottspinky says: Jun 6, 2013 2:06 PM

    @Stiller43

    “the hockey teams have crap attendance”

    The Lightning were 8th in attendance this past season.

    And stop with the tarps nonsense, 11 stadiums are smaller with EverBank in its current configuration at 67,246.

    The stadium would be 5th in capacity without the tarps.

  40. godofwine330 says: Jun 6, 2013 2:26 PM

    @ mogogo1 post Jun 6, 2013 1:28 PM

    I’m not gonna quote it all but you laid the hammer right on the head of the nail, brother, and your closing was right on the money:

    “I get that every NFL game has been well-attended in London, but the circus can also sell out large venues on a single visit or two per year. That doesn’t mean your city could support a circus being based there forever.”

    That is a full fledged BURN for Goodell

  41. goatcheez says: Jun 6, 2013 2:27 PM

    @rextraordinaire

    Funny how you claim Ralph Wilson Stadium in Buffalo only holds 65k when it in fact holds 73,967 — which is more seats than available in Jacksonville. So yes, Jags fans do have a right to point at them too because they are indeed outselling them.

    Also, is it a coincidence nearly every new stadium built recently is exactly around the capacity of Jacksonville’s stadium WITH the tarps? The only exceptions are Reliant, Cowboys, and MetLife stadiums. Gillette Stadium, Lincoln Financial, CenturyLink, Heinz, Ford, Mall of America, University of Phoenix, Lucas Oil all newer stadiums recently built in bigger markets with about the same or even LESS capacity than EverBank stadium in Jacksonville. This proves the tarps (which were lifted for 3/8 home games last year btw) holds no weight as a criticism about Jax selling tickets. Because even with the tarps, the stadium is still the same or bigger than new stadiums. Why are these big markets building smaller stadiums than in Jax?

    Also, no one harps on how the Redskins COMPLETELY REMOVED 6,704 seats from their stadium in 2011. Close to the same amount covered by tarps in Jacksonville. So lets point at the Skins and laugh at them for having to take out seats right? That’s what we do when a team makes a conscious decision to readjust their capacity to market demand right? Or how about the Raiders, who are removing 10,000 seats THIS YEAR. Where’s the jokes about them? Is it because they actually REMOVED the seats instead of just tarped them off? Is that where Jax went wrong? By not removing the seats? Because obviously you can just remove seats and escape getting mocked, even if its more than the team with the tarps, who’s out still selling you. Total tickets sold wise, AND capacity % (how much of the stadium is filled) wise.

  42. ghengy says: Jun 6, 2013 2:31 PM

    Are they taking their tarp with them? LOL

  43. checkleybucs says: Jun 6, 2013 2:37 PM

    As someone living in England and gong to both games this year. I don’t think we could support an NFL franchise or have the appetite to support one. As said in a comment above, the Monarchs soon failed after the novelty wore off. I think there is a bigger market now, but really not sure it can support an NFL franchise long term. Especially, one as badly run as the Jags.

  44. mackie66 says: Jun 6, 2013 3:24 PM

    Stiller43, you sir, or sis, are absolutely correct about Fla not being a fan happy base. Have you ever priced an NFL or NBA ticket? And the fact that the NFL, NBA and Baseball are directly competing with Fla’s fishing, scuba, so many outdoor things to do on a daily basis. Why sit in a hot stadium when I can be fishing the flats and have a better chance of scoring a couple of Redfish or Snook not to mention other tasty fish. Theres always a good ocean or lake breeze. So why watch a boring baseball game, hockey or (puke, choke) NBA game ? Is not the NFL the most boring game? handoff to RB into the line,,,3yds gained. Same ole crap different Sunday.

  45. makamen says: Jun 6, 2013 3:49 PM

    Can we stop pretending us fans over here in London are so fickle? I am a Steelers fan. Because my father passed thus on to me. When he was younger, he travelled the States, wound up in LA by chance when the Steelers played the Rams in the Superbowl. Never watched a game in his life, went to a bar to watch it, happened to pick a bar where Steelers fans were meeting, despite the fact the Rams were the ‘home’ team. He met some friends for life that day, and passed this on to me. I won’t now give up this allegiance, just because another team plays more often in my home city?!? No more than a Steelers fan from Pittsburgh would change his beliefs if the Steelers left and another franchise moved to town. It’s insulting to suggest. Call me Florio, I’ll be your own London correspondent on fandom and give you a real idea of what opinion is over here

  46. hjworton46 says: Jun 6, 2013 4:37 PM

    To build any fanbase in London would take many, many, many years of playing multiple games. Playing twice a season will not encourage Londoners to become Jags fans.

    It has to be said, again, that Euro NFL fans really do not want a team based over here. We have our teams and are happy to support them. The fact that regular season games are played over here is fantastic, we are delighted with that alone. Anything else would not help the growth of football in Europe.

  47. stopthemadness101 says: Jun 6, 2013 4:41 PM

    The Jags shouldn’t be going anywhere. Neither should the Bucs, Browns, Dolphins are anyone else for that matter. The NFL is making money hand over fist. How is enough to these greedy owners?!? If they want teams in LA and London so bad award them expansion teams. Stop screwing with the emotions of the people who have made you filthy rich. Sick of this BS.

  48. jmblosser82 says: Jun 6, 2013 5:34 PM

    I see the average attendance, but what is the seating capacity of said stadiums. 64k fans can be good, but if there is 100k seats, not so much. 60k out of say 65k is still better on paper even tho its less seats. Regardless, the only way nfl Europe would work is if they have their own conference and then the winner of the nfl Europe would play the winner of the nfl, even then it would be a bad idea.

  49. onbucky96 says: Jun 6, 2013 5:40 PM

    KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!

  50. trollingforjustice says: Jun 6, 2013 6:03 PM

    AS much as the French have enjoyed Jerry Lewis, and the Germans have enjoyed David Hasselhoff, I somehow think this would be a diplomatic disaster to expose England to the Jacksonville Jaguars.
    We need to keep our allies happy!

  51. jaxasc84 says: Jun 6, 2013 6:13 PM

    rextraordinaire says:
    Jun 6, 2013 1:16 PM

    I love Jags fans who point out teams that have lower attendance records, without mentioning that those teams either dont need to cover any seats with tarps, or simply play in a low-capacity stadium.

    Buffalo and Chicago have stadiums that only hold about 65,000, so of course the Jags have more show up to their games

    ==================================

    Just because EverBank Field has more seats than other stadiums does not automatically guarantee they are filled. You may use the 2008 season as exhibit A of that. The point Jags fans are trying to make is that we’re right in there with everyone else in attendance despite the perception by most people outside of NE Florida that we’re 32nd in attendance every year. Any rational Jags fan knows that Chicago or Pittsburgh need only expand their stadium to jump us in the rankings, but we also know that there are other teams (like our state’s other two teams) who are having a hard time getting anyone to their games.

  52. prijak1 says: Jun 6, 2013 7:29 PM

    There new owner of the Jaguars Shad Kahn is a jerk ! He needs to get Tim Tebow as there QB … If not Roger Goddell needs to dans he move the team to Los Angeles. Enough said.

  53. prijak1 says: Jun 6, 2013 7:30 PM

    The Jaguars are a joke and will never be a true contender. They should just pick up Tim Tebow and sell tickets

  54. prijak1 says: Jun 6, 2013 7:44 PM

    We need a team in Los Angeles ! We are way over due ! Talk about us not London…

  55. prijak1 says: Jun 6, 2013 7:46 PM

    When the Raiders were here in L.A. They attendance was low , that’s because the colosseum for 100,000 give me a break ! How could a ghetto fan based team expect to sell out seats. Every Raiders fan would sneak into the stadium or jump the fence , all Raiders fans are into stealing , they will never pay for anything . So bring a good team but not the ghetto Raiders

  56. trollingforjustice says: Jun 6, 2013 10:40 PM

    prijaki1 says:
    “We need a team in Los Angeles! We are way overdue!
    You had the Rams and the Raiders and didnt know what to do with them!

  57. ivedoneyourwife says: Jun 7, 2013 8:50 AM

    Real bright. Put a team in London and all the post game riots will make the Oakland Raiders fans seem like cherubs.

Leave a Reply

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