Giants-Packers game finally gives London a matchup of two teams with winning records

Minnesota Vikings v New Orleans Saints
Getty Images

Sunday’s Giants-Packers game will be the NFL’s 32nd regular-season game in London. And the first to match up two teams with winning records.

With the Giants and Packers both at 3-1, the league has finally ended a long streak of sending mediocre or worse games to London, where the NFL is eager to build a large fan base.

Ten London games have matched up two teams with losing records, while the other 21 London games have had one team with a winning record or a .500 record, but not until Giants-Packers on Sunday have both teams had a winning record.

The NFL sometimes sends bad teams to London because those teams struggle to fill their home stadiums and don’t mind giving up a home game to play overseas: That’s why the Packers have never played in London before, as their fan base buys tickets both at Lambeau Field and on the road. But sometimes the London games are just the victims of bad luck, with the games looking good on paper when they’re scheduled, only to have the teams playing in London struggle early in the season.

Here are the 32 London games so far, with the teams’ records heading into the game:

2007: Giants (5-2) vs. Dolphins (0-7)
2008: Chargers (3-4) vs. Saints (3-4)
2009: Patriots (4-2) vs. Buccaneers (0-6)
2010: Broncos (2-5) vs. 49ers (1-6)
2011: Bears (3-3) vs. Buccaneers (4-2)
2012: Patriots (4-3) vs. Rams (3-4)
2013: Steelers (0-3) vs. Vikings (0-3)
2013: 49ers (5-2) vs. Jaguars (0-7)
2014: Dolphins (1-2) vs. Raiders (0-3)
2014: Lions (5-2) vs. Falcons (2-5)
2014: Cowboys (6-3) vs. Jaguars (1-8)
2015: Jets (2-1) vs. Dolphins (1-2)
2015: Bills (3-3) vs. Jaguars (1-5)
2015: Lions (1-6) vs. Chiefs (2-5)
2016: Colts (1-2) vs. Jaguars (0-3)
2016: Giants (3-3) vs. Rams (3-3)
2016: Washington (4-3) vs. Bengals (3-4)
2017: Jaguars (1-1) vs. Ravens (2-0)
2017: Saints (1-2) vs. Dolphins (1-1)
2017: Cardinals (3-3) vs. Rams (4-2)
2017: Vikings (5-2) vs. Browns (0-7)
2018: Seahawks (2-3) vs. Raiders (1-4)
2018: Titans (3-3) vs. Chargers (4-2)
2018: Jaguars (3-4) vs. Eagles (3-4)
2019: Raiders (2-2) vs. Bears (3-1)
2019: Buccaneers (2-3) vs. Panthers (3-2)
2019: Bengals (0-7) vs. Rams (4-3)
2019: Texans (5-3) vs. Jaguars (4-4)
2021: Jets (1-3) vs. Falcons (1-3)
2021: Dolphins (1-4) vs. Jaguars (0-5)
2022: Vikings (2-1) vs. Saints (1-2)
2022: Giants (3-1) vs. Packers (3-1)

18 responses to “Giants-Packers game finally gives London a matchup of two teams with winning records

  1. The London games are really tough on the “home team”, who have to travel thousands of miles just to be acclaimed as the “home team” instead of playing the game in their home stadium; and are even tougher on West Coast teams, who need to fly 5,400 miles EACH WAY. My team, the Rams, were both: the home team for all four of the games they have played in London (2012, 2016, 2017, and 2019), and flying 5400 miles each way, just to be the “home team”. (Granted, in 2012 they were based in St. Louis, “only” 4200 miles each way.)

  2. Yeah, but only one of those teams has a healthy QB. Winning records standing alone won’t ensure a competitive game.

  3. It’s funny that some fans are still complaining about their teams’ travelling distances.

    Seriously, this isn’t the old days. All teams now travel by chartered or private planes and they DON’T line up waiting hours through security like us peons. Playing in London is literally just another couple of hours of flight time.

  4. BuckyBadger says:
    October 3, 2022 at 11:35 am
    The Giants won’t be a winning team when the dusts settles.

    Wow, buck-tooth!

    The dust has barely settled on your team barely beating a team’s 3rd-string QB at home with multiple possessions in overtime yesterday!

  5. They said the Giants would be 0-4 by this point of the season….wrong on that one too Bucky….

  6. The Packers struggled to beat Bailey Zappe in overtime yesterday and the Giants played probably the worst team in the NFL, so those winning records are not an indication of quality teams. Will the Packers be playing another third-string QB again next week?

  7. Packers the luckiest team.
    Played the Bucs who were missing Evans Jones and Godwin
    Played the Patriots who were down to there 3rd string QB
    Playing the Giants who are missing their starting QB.

  8. It’s funny, almost every post was from a vikings troll bashing the Packers or pretending they are a Packers fan to try and get people to dislike Pack fans. Someone needs a new hobby.

  9. The onus is on Rodgers. He needs to be a game-changer as he was against the Patriots, every week if necessary. That’s what he’s being paid for. Rodgers elected not to work out with the young receivers. That doesn’t change expectations. Win a SuperBowl this year with this team, or find a place more to his liking elsewhere, preferably with more mirrors than Lambeau. This year, right now, or take a hike.

  10. Win a SuperBowl this year with this team, or find a place more to his liking elsewhere, preferably with more mirrors than Lambeau. This year, right now, or take a hike.

    It would cost $99,778,568 for the Packers to move on from Rodgers next year. Thats no less than 40% of their cap.

    He will end his career in Green Bay.

    Sell your stock if you don’t like it.

  11. Unless the Packers D can carry the team we’ll be another none and done we should have traded that QB when he was worth something.

  12. “we should have traded that QB” – can’t even say his name “Rogers”. smh

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.