Jerry Jones: We “very much” want a team in London


Cowboys owner Jerry Jones says the NFL should have a franchise in London.

Jones, in London for tomorrow’s game against the Jaguars, said thrice-yearly games at Wembley Stadium are nice, but what the NFL really needs is to have a team make its home base in London.

“On a personal basis and speaking for the Dallas Cowboys we very much would like to have a team in London,” Jones said. “It has cache. It has an air about it of international competition I think that London is probably one of two or three cities outside of the United States that really does have all of the criteria that I would look at for having an NFL team.”

Several NFL owners have expressed interest in having a team in London, and from their perspective it makes sense: The league really can’t get much bigger than it already is in the United States, so if the business is going to continue to grow, that growth will have to happen overseas.

But no one who wants a team in London ever seems to have answers for all the logistical questions that would arise with having a team in Europe. Would it be an expansion team or would an existing team move there? How would the NFL deal with the obvious competitive disadvantage the London team would face, thanks to free agents not wanting to uproot their families to live in another country? Would the team be based in London year round, with minicamps, Organized Team Activities, training camp and the preseason all in London, or would the team only be there for its eight home games? Would the London team get additional salary cap space to make up for its players having to pay higher taxes in the United Kingdom?

And, of course, the big question is whether there’s really enough of a fan base in England to sustain a team in London. Right now, the NFL is able to sell out Wembley Stadium three times a year. But that doesn’t mean the NFL will be able to sell out Wembley Stadium eight times a year, especially if the team that’s playing at Wembley stinks, as expansion teams usually do.

So while Jones wants a team in London, it’s no sure thing that it would be a hit for the NFL.

128 responses to “Jerry Jones: We “very much” want a team in London

  1. I don’t get it. Why not create their own league over there if there’s so much interest?

  2. Hey Jerry if it’s so great than take your team over there just one time. Or maybe a few years in a row. Then get back to us and let us know if it is still so great

  3. I would much rather see a team in Mexico.
    I think its more important that the USA has a healthy bond with Mexico.
    All teams live much closer to Mexico
    A mexican team would represent the whole country of mexico.
    Last time they had an NFL game in Mexico, they had over 100,000 people.
    BTW I am white nfl fan so that means I am not biased.

  4. Jerry Jones is a loathsome, greedy old miser. He doesn’t care about the NFL; he only cares about money. The sooner the NFL no longer has to be bothered by him, the better off everyone will be.

  5. Here’s what I suggest JJ, sell the Cowboys and buy the Jag’s, then move to London Baby!!

    This would make sooooo many Cowboy fans thrilled…

  6. “Great Britain’s Team” has a nice ring to it!

    I’m all for moving the Stinkin’ Cowboys to London as long as Jerruh moves there with them. My only condition is that they can not be allowed to come back when it fails.

  7. Maybe Jerrah and Robert Kraft should fight it out in the Octagon for the right to take their team there.

  8. I don’t disagree… The super bowl champions are called the world champions yet no one else plays NFL football… So it kindve seems silly overall

  9. luther6 says:
    Nov 8, 2014 9:00 AM
    Jerry Jones is a loathsome, greedy old miser. He doesn’t care about the NFL; he only cares about money. The sooner the NFL no longer has to be bothered by him, the better off everyone will be.

    The hate runs deep in this one.

  10. We would definitely know the fix is in if the team in London wins the Super Bowl within their first 3 years. There are too many suspicious winners now, to say that rigging games is out of the ordinary. Just saying…

  11. It wouldn’t be terrible to have one international game aha year. But 3? Weird number. And all in London? Have one game a year internationally and the nfl can have country’s bid on who gets it

  12. It can be problematic to put too much emphasis on expanding a business. It leads to them overreaching just for expansion’s sake — whether it makes sense to do so or not.

    I’ve seen it lead to the downfall of some great companies who would have done fine for many years had they just stuck to what made them great in the first place.

  13. There’s already disparity between teams in the NFL in regards to income taxes paid, and no adjustments are made to the salary cap. Florida, Texas and Washington have no state income taxes, while California (13.3%), Minnesota (9.85%), New Jersey (8.97%) and New York (8.82%) are among the highest in the nation.

  14. The NFL is on the verge of killing the goose that laid the golden egg. Very often, less is more. Be happy with the monopoly and windfall that you have right now Jerruh.

  15. This London idea doesn’t make football better, but it most likely makes the owners more money. Having a team in London logistically makes no sense. This is the NFL, not the IFL (International Football League). The total focus in the NFL nowadays is money and not on improving the quality of the games. How much is enough money for these guys? The entire football landscape has changed for the worst as a result of the NFL’s total focus on safety. The overall quality of games has declined and the games are really not as good as in years past. Everything is centered on offenses these days. The record books will be frozen and not defense will be better defense than the 1985 Bears because the NFL simply won’t let these guys play. Over doing it on safety is wrecking this game. Safety means less practice, less contact, shorter practices, less preparation. With less practice and training come more injuries. Then, throw in these stupid Thursday night games where players can’t turn it around (rest, heal, prepare a game plan, etc.) quickly and the quality of those games are bad and you start to realize it’s not about our great game it’s about money. How much money do these teams need? The only way we are going to return our game to the wonderful past is to get new NFL leadership that shares a common vision with the fans. It’s time for Goodell and the entire league office to be replaced. And stop this ridiculous march towards putting a team in London.

  16. If the NFL wants an international team, Canada is a better choice IMO, simply b/c of location and eliminating a game on Sunday morning at 9:30am EST!!!!!

  17. Having a team in London will be a disaster. Players won’t want to live in London and opponents won’t want to travel there. Players wouldn’t show up for OTAs and be demanding trades and holding out. Draft picks will refuse to play there like Eli and Elway. The team will be 4-12 or 3-13 every year.

  18. London is the next L.A.

    “My stadium is too old. Build me a new one or I’ll move the team to London”.

  19. They don’t really want a team in London. What they want is more money and international prestige and for some reason they think that London can give them this. Most of the NFL owners of today bought the teams or inherited them. It is one of many businesses they own. Their interest is money, not football. They have no idea what it means to bring a fledgling league up to prominence. Halas, Wilson, Davis, Hunt, Robbie, etc. were football guys who happened to be businessmen. Those guys are gone. What we have now is a bunch of businessmen who happen to own football teams. That is why the game is so different. They believe offense is what sells so all the rules now favor offense. They want arena league action and couldn’t care less about a defensive football game. What these men are doing to the game sickens me. Put the game before the dollar and bring back the football that made the game great. Fantasy football is not the game.

  20. I actually like the idea of expanding to Mexico, there’s more exposure to football being just across the border and none of the travel hassles.

    Of course, the NFL knows that there’s more money in the pockets of potential British fans than Mexican fans and there’s more appeal that comes with playing a game in London than in Mexico City or Monterrey so they’ll keep banging the UK drum for the the foreseeable future.

  21. The 2020 Week 9 NFL Schedule after Jerry Jones is finished :

    New England @New Zealand
    Pittsburgh @ Pakistan
    Seattle @ Sri Lanka
    Detroit @ Denmark
    Philadelphia @ Philippines
    Chicago @ Cambodia
    Baltimore @ Baltic States
    Indianapolis @ India
    Kansas City @ Vatican City
    Tampa Bay @ Montego Bay
    New Orleans @ New Caledonia
    San Francisco @ San Salvador

    Pick : Take the Chiefs, giving the points. The Pope is starting to show his age.

  22. I hate the idea of a team in London. But it would be a better choice than Toronto. London sells out games. Toronto gave away thousands of tickets per game and still couldn’t sell out any of the Bills in Toronto games. Toronto’s priority is hockey.

  23. free agents would never want to go there. no one would want to move their family there. Draftees would force their way out of London. its stupid. i like 930am games there but having a team there is the stupidest thing i have ever heard of. put a team in Portland, or Milwaukee or Utah instead.

  24. crewchief15 – The individual teams are NOT non-profit, they are free to make as much money as they can. The NFL is nonprofit, not the teams.

  25. Playing 8 games a year in London with teams rotating makes the most sense to me. There are a lot of teams that are struggling to sell out right now. Reducing their slate of games in their home stadium from 10 to 9 and having them play one “home” game in London would bring them a lot more money than playing all 10 games at home. Oakland, Tampa, Jacksonville, all would probably volunteer to play one game a year as the “home” team, because they need the extra revenue. London would get to see all the teams on a rotating basis, with some of them being “visitor” teams and not the “home” team. Like Dallas vs Jacksonville this year. Jacksonville makes a boatload of extra money as the home team, while the fans in London get to see the Cowboys at the same time. Win win for everyone.

  26. I have a very good friend that lives in Sheffield, England. No one over there cares. They don’t get the rules, they don’t know the players, and the local papers barely even cover the game. She and everyone she has asked was not even aware that there was a game there this Sunday.

    People there don’t want it, fans here hate it, yet the league continues to plow ahead in its quest to cram their product down the throat of every man, woman and child on the planet.

  27. They’d better start cultivating some British born talent ASAP then because regardless of how much they’re getting paid you’re not going to see very many, if not any, free agents and coaches jumping to live over there 6-7 months a year (much less uproot their families either). Three games a year over there is already too much. Blinded by the potential of more cash, how well do pounds translate into dollars again?

  28. 80 percent of US citizens don’t even have a passport. It’s the reason the majority of Americans have such a teeny tiny understanding of the rest of the world, getting their information second hand from American news organizations with corporate agendas.

    In any other business, employees would love to be assigned to Europe. Their children would benefit from living in a world culture. Their spouses would love it. Only in the world of the NFL (and their fan base) would the idea of temporarily living in another country be a negative thing. They might even discover that the National Health System, the NHS, is not run by Satan after all and actually delivers high quality medical care to everyone, even visiting Americans.

  29. Here is my thought….

    Expand NFL by two teams and two games per year…. Play in two US cities…. LA and another. Increase number of bye weeks per year to two. Play a game a week in London, rotating teams. You get the week before and week after as byes. Games are on early Sunday morning and you do away with Thursday night games. Short weeks and then long weeks after create bad football games.

    This avoids moving teams there, tax issues, etc. also gives greatest exposure to NFL to London. Don’t play games there week one or week 18. Make first and last games in London marque match ups and those teams get a second bye week during the year not the week before.

    Not sure the number of games/teams works out but you get the drift of the idea…..NFL can pay me for this new thought……haha

  30. Whats with all the hate for London?World class city.If you have the chance to live there over say contest.

  31. The logistics are no big deal. Soccer teams travel and play internationally all the time.

    These guys fly first class in a private jet, so stop pretending they’re flying cattle car economy.

    I’ve been to Europe many times and never have any problem with the time changes or jet lag.

    And to those who think players wouldn’t want to play in London or they couldn’t attract FAs to go there are you kidding ? London is a fantastic place and the people and fans there are great. There are many UK fans of US football and a team would do well there.

    Now lets see if PFT deletes this post supporting a team in London even though it meets all terms of service and does not insult anyone.

  32. Nice of Jerry not to hold a grudge about the Valley Forge winter when he and Georgie Washington almost froze their tootsies.

  33. Ok, so now it is Jerry Jones and the owners ruining the NFL?..what happened to blaming Roger Goodell

  34. So it’s settled then, the Patriots and Cowboys shall move to London! Great ideas Bob and Jerry!

  35. They already have football teams its called soccer stop it you weak chinned money grabbing pigs !

  36. @harrisonhits2

    You did not only avoid being deleted, buy you get agreement from me. I am a huge fan of the game,but many don’t understand the Business of the NFL. I travel internationally for a Fortune 50 company and trust me; those that think “american football will not do well over there or they don’t care” are dead wrong. In some regions they will outsell US city markets. If you build it they will come.

    Having said that, no one wants it to be their Team at the competitive disadvantage with excessive travel or worse losing a Home game and yet even worse losing YOUR Team to London.

    Pure and simple this is not about football, but market growth for increased earnings. It WILL happen whether we like it or not.

  37. I’m sick of greed and the notion that EVERYTHING must grow/expand. The few parts broken with the NFL have absolutely nothing to do with growth or internationalizing. Those ‘problems’ are contrived and exist only in the minds of wealthy, greedy men.

    Never wonder why class warfare exists.

  38. Why not just put more air in that NFL balloon, until it finally explodes and becomes a non-entity…..GREED is a deadly sin.

  39. seems like a dumb idea to me. the London team would already be at a serious disadvantage when it comes to signing free agents. im sure the majority of NFL players wont want to move to Europe. what about the poor draft picks?! bye kid!! what division would the team be in? would it be fair to have its division rivals have to fly to London to play a game EVERY YEAR?! its just got too much baggage to it. play a game or two there a year and be happy with that you greedy fat pig owners.

  40. THIS is why the NFL will fail, too much expansion into the wrong places.
    Europe hates us, screw them.
    Put a team in Tokyo, they LOVE the U.S. and they love American football, plus the Japanese are 100 times hotter than Brit women.

  41. Among one of the many challenges is the turf they play on. It is wonderful natural grass which is made for 160-200 lb. soccer players running on it.

    When you get the 320 lb. fatties battling on it, that’s another story. The turf doesn’t hold up. They have to figure that before anything else.

  42. Hypothetical situation:
    Ok so a team is in London, and the broadcasters mention the word “pigskin”. ALL of the muslims/islamists in the UK get “offended” and the team must bow to the European PC police and stop using anything pig-related.

  43. Translation – we, the owners (not the fans) want to make more money by taking the NFL brand international.

    The hogs are at the trough and they demand to be fed. Screw the players. Screw the US fanbase. This is just another revenue stream to 31 billionaires.

  44. Of course the NFL wants to expand in London. It fits the money making agenda of the commissioner.

    But reality is NFL fans in Jacksonville wish they had a professional football team there. It’s a bad idea right now for the NFL to try to take on London where soccer is supreme.

  45. There is no team in Los Angeles, yet they keep talking about London. Yeah, that makes sense. Stop this London talk!

  46. Why is there always such a negative reaction to moving a team to the UK from a fan’s perspective?

    As a transplanted Canadian now living in the UK, the atmosphere is great, the fan base is rabid, and the games sell out.

    I am fully convinced that an NFL team in the UK would work.

    4 games on the road to open the year, 8 home games (each visiting team gets their bye week following the London game), Week 13 bye, 4 games on the road to end the season. Take the playoffs as it comes.

    You have one of the greatest sports in the world, why shouldn’t it expand? Plus the networks get Football from 9:30am-12am on Sundays (EST). That’s a win-win.

  47. Very interesting that seeing the results of the poll, overwhelmingly almost nobody but the billionaire owners want the NFL to be in London. But since when do billionaires care what the little people want, anyway?

  48. Hmm, didn’t the NFL try European expansion in the late 80s and early 90s? Yes, they did, and it was a FLOP. But hey, it’s been a while, so let’s do it again. Ugh…

  49. From a global economics perspective, it makes more sense to have a team in London than a team in Jacksonville.

    NFL Europe didn’t succeed because it wasn’t top tier athletes. No one wanted to see a watered down meaningless game.

    If the NFL could somehow interest the youth of Europe and get kids playing the game, the NFL could open it’s self up to a new pool of athletes from Europe. Just like the NBA has with Tony Parker, Gasol, etc.

    With the internet, sports is now an international business. He who expands last will lose in the next 100-200 years.

  50. Im from the UK and do not believe that a NFL team in London is a wise idea. Personally I have been a Patriots fan since 1985 and Im sure Im not alone among UK fans when I say that switching teams to a London team will just not happen.

    A much better idea would be to put real money into a European Football League made up of European players.

    The reason NFLEurope failed was due to the fact that the turnover of players was almost 100% per season. European fans would much rather watch sub NFL standard European players that are likely to be on the roster next season than sub NFL standard American players that are almost always one season visitors.

    TV deals are fairly easy, make it part of the NFL deal (ie you want to broadcast NFL games, then you must also broadcast EFL games)

  51. There should be a team in Toronto before London.
    I will say the early morning game a couple weeks back was cool.

    All day NFL.

  52. Do not base a team in London. Instead combine this with the 17 game schedule and each team has one neutral site game. That gives 16 games to have at neutral sites. Eight are in London and eight in other international cities. Each team has their bye either before or after the game or join i.e. with the Thursday game play on Thursday then London following week.

  53. I am a football fan, but not that “football” that most of you know about. There is nothing you can tell a fool when his mind is set on money; Therefore, force yourself into England for whatever rea$ons and then just be witness to Cra$h and burn result. It will be fun to call the London nfl franchise as the “NASL” of England when it all fails. There are enough franchises in your eggball league which are not well supported, dolphins, jacksonville, Tampa just to name a few yet the American Imperialistic view$ want to conquer England in which football is already played there and Rugby, a better version of your eggball, rules there. Americans, stop exporting trash to other countries and use your recycling ways in house.

  54. As a Brit, I agree that even if there is a team in London I will not switch my allegiance… even if I am a long suffering Rams fan.

    There is also a stadium issue. No team gets public money build stadiums in the UK. At all. And the English FA are not likely to hand over Wembley stadium after they paid $1.2billion to build it.

    Logistically, including the check in and travel to and from the airport, it is a 8 hour trip to New York and 14 hours to San Francisco. As awesome a city as London is (and it really is) who in their right mind would think doing 8 to 14 hour trips 8 times per year is a good idea.

    That said, it would be silly to think that the NFL is not growing in the UK. I live away from London but there are a growing number of people I know in work and socially who now follow the NFL and regularly discuss it. They lack knowledge of the game, but the interest in the wider NFL is there, even if a permanent team is highly unlikely to succeed.

  55. Why not have an LA/London team 4 home games in each city. 2 separate Back to back home games in London. Means training camp can be based in LA as well as players being based there and they only spend 4 weeks in London so similar to playing on the opposite coast in the US

  56. sl5150 says:

    Hey Jerry if it’s so great than take your team over there just one time.

    The Cowboys are in London as we speak.

  57. People can complain about this all they want but it is happening. It makes the most business sense and unless you forgot professional football is all about business. All the complaints about moving a team there is insignificant. Travel? We are already sending 6 teams there and a regular season would be 8? Free agents? Packers don’t sign free agents and who says a player wouldn’t want to live in London over the garbage cities in this country like Cleveland, Detroit or Green Bay? You know the endorsements over there would be plenty.

    Why London over Canada? Taxes. Why London over another US city? Viewers and money. Only LA can compete with London with corporations and the number of viewers except London brings in new viewers.

    Like it or not it will happen and it will be successful, the NFL has done this very carefully over the last 20 years.

  58. If all teams in the nfl had quality gms and owners, every stadium would sell out and london would never become a viable option. i would like to see a poll of nfl fans by the the league or any media organization that actually shows fans wanting a london based team or games there. the profootballtalk poll had a 63% response saying please play no games in london. the london fascination makes no sense other than owners greed asking for more revenue for home teams that can’t sell out tickets otherwise. true fans have n interest in london games.

  59. The league doesn’t care about the fans any more than the congress cares about the voters. They’re going to do what they want to do. If they want a team in London they’ll do it no matter how skewed fan polls are against it.

  60. Just think if the NFL took all that money that they are losing to put these games on over there and put it back into the American economy. We might all stop hating on the NFL.

  61. nyyjetsknicks says:
    Nov 8, 2014 9:01 AM

    We have two Alpha ++ cities: New York and London. If we have to have a team internationally, London makes the most sense.

    You do know that Singapore (Financial/Banking capitol of the world) and Hong Kong( bigger population) are bigger than both. Plus, Jets and Knicks suck!!!!

  62. European Football Clubs and National Football teams have played and sold out many many many more stadiums than the 11 Not For Literates games spread out over a decade in England. Having said that, English Football Clubs have a better chance of success to play regular season games and even set a football club permanently in the states , a country no one cares for “soccer” ” than what n.”f”.I thinks they can accomplish there. Sure, there are thousand of US expats living in England and with the military bases there + the self loathing British individuals with the fascination to anything produced in the US that will follow the Kardashians as the Royal family if they were told that.

    Cra$h and burn, Baby!! That will be the true demise of American “football” when it mistreats their own US fans for the international ca$he or to expand their TV revenues abroad. Let’s not forget the head concussion, criminal activities cloud which seems to be a natural culture. Once an egg baller slaps or kills a British girlfriend, wife or abuses a kid, all hell will break loose.

  63. doomsdaydefensetx says: Nov 8, 2014 9:27 AM

    Los Angeles gets a new team.
    London gets a new team.
    34 teams figure it out.
    More money for pigs.


    It also means more money for the players, and they deserve it.

    These stories always leave that aspect out of it. It paints the NFL and owners as “greedy”, but the truth is for every $1 of revenue the NFL brings in, the players get $0.48.

    The players deserve MORE MONEY. Their careers, and even their lives, can end on any single play.

  64. Move Jacksonville to London and put them in the AFC East along with Pats, Bill, and Jets. Move Miami to AFC South. Traveling would not be that bad for 3 other teams in the AFC East and make a good rivalry with the London team.

    Why fight it? Would be neat.

  65. I am with “sogooda” what’s the matter with being in London? At least you don’t have to worry about being shot everytime you go out. I am a transplant from London here, and I would love to be able to see it there. 80,000 people at the games isn’t exactly “chicken feed”. That poll is a waste of time, because no one wants it happening from the USA. It’s a lopsided poll. Let the geniuses figure it out.

  66. The game is London are successful because they are novelties. Take that novelty away and they won’t be successful anymore.

    Also at issue are travel times and expenses, pay issues (English Pound vs. US Dollar), visa issues for players with criminal records, etc.

    There are a ton of reasons why this shouldn’t happen, and no good reason why it should.

  67. The NFL has been talking about expanding the NUMBER of teams for some time now. But I have tried most permutations on how to add just one or two and it does not work out. We cannot feasibly have a division with less than 4 teams. And there has been a lot of talk like this article refers to as “a” “London” team. Truth be told.. the most financially pragmatic solution is to have 2 NEW DIVISIONS.

    The first division would be to have 4 teams in the UK. Competition breeds business and in this way having 4 teams in the news makes football that much more of a news story. It also allows for a Division “Champion” in UK and gives each team 8 home games PLUS 3 Division games for 11 out of 16 games for each team in UK thus reducing long haul flights to a minimum.

    The second division would then be best as the Canada Division. This gives the NFL 8 new teams with revenue from 2 new countries.

    The only remaining question is what to do or how to deal with badly performing teams insofar as attendance goes in USA. Part could be a change into a new country and then the development of new franchises in USA for others. LA can support 2 teams. and it should. But there are other locations in the USA that could get transferred teams from other cities or replacement teams from teams that may go to UK or Canada.

    The reality is that the NFL has long wanted to increase the number of teams. One new division in the NFC and one for the AFC can mean 4 new teams in 2 new countries thus expanding the NFL Franchise with the greatest efficiency for the new countries and their new teams.

    Not saying this will happen.. but in my ideal world this is best for everyone and a total shake up of US teams and locations and even teams in divisions seems to be an idea whose time has come.

  68. Jerruh wants another Super Bowl at his place, but he’s not willing to give up a home game. He thinks having a team in London is a great idea, but there’s no way he’ll support any team or franchise going to San Antonio — 280 miles away — because he thinks it’s a suburb of Dallas and it’s a big fan base. He talks the talk about a 9 hour flight for a road trip, but not for a 1-hour flight. Good thinkin’ there, Jerruh.

  69. Jerry Jones you look to be the only one interested in relocating so you
    can take your team, if they would want to move to London. You cannot talk for know other teams, just talk for your Cowboys.

  70. Am I the only one who wonders why Jerrah wants a team half way around the world, when the NFL can’t even get a team in Los Angeles, the 2nd largest media market in the United States?
    I have a great idea. How about if Jerrrah moves there and starts a team, and sells the Cowboys, so they can acquire a real GM.

  71. Go ahead let London watch this rotten product that is the NFL. The league of mediocrity. There are a lot of bad teams in the NFL. Have them put the UK to sleep too. The NFL not really good football.

  72. Tell you what’s what, Jerry…

    You sell and take your act to London…

    When we’re ready we’ll call ya…

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.