Also, there is an international governing body of Football, and there is even a "World Cup"....but it gets absolutely NO attention here. The players come from basically the D-II or D-III level.

(but FYI the coach of the international team is/was a former coach of the KC Chiefs, Texas Longhorns, and Illinois Illini. And he comes from the town where my carcass is parked at this moment) That level of competition would not reach CFL level or even the former NFL Europa League.

I suspect that if there were a Europa League, pretty much owned and run by Europeans and played in Europe, that perhaps in the not too distant future it could reach the level of the CFL. (hell, they may want to consider playing by CFL rules even). In other words it would not be like the NFL Europa, it wouldn't even ask for the blessings or the NFL....the CFL really doesn't....though they do engage in some cooperation.

There could actually be enough decent players to staff such a league. Most could be Americans, but like the CFL, they could institute a rule that a certain percentage would have to be European citizens.

Here is the CFL rule....it looks like 50% have to be Canadian:

http://www.cfl.ca/page/non_import_player_rules

First off, let me split this in to two parts - the market, and the feasibility.

There is a huge amount of support for the NFL in the UK. The wembley games sell out every year at hugeh prices (about $150 for basic tickets) in a 90000 seat stadium. I believe if you have 8 games a season there you could average out around 85k per game, no problems. It's more of a 'middle-class' sport over here, believe it or not - probably because it's not on our equivalent of basic cable, you have to be able to afford the Sky channels on which to watch it, outside of the superbowl. But that means that the fans have the affluence to sustain a franchises merchandising purchases in the long run. You'd probably also attract other fans from Europe, if it were the only team.

However, I personally wouldn't want to see it happen here. For me, the NFL is a quintessentially american thing - as much as we do pomp and circumstance, and displays of regal elegance, and any attempt to replicate that in America just comes off terribly twee; any attempt over here to celebrate the start of a game, and any scoring etc with a huge pyrotechnic display, and have cheerleaders, tailgating etc seems just very forced. It would be something completely different (not necessarily a bad thing).

As for the feasibility, this is where it falls down - for a large number of reasons. Practically - asking players to fly back and forth for 8 games a season, from London to New York is bad enough, but to Cali and Seattle is terrible.

-Then you have the prospect of asking players to either move their family to London permanently - and all the visa issues that are involved, of course - but then, only maybe for a year, or in the case of some players only for a few weeks/months.

-Draft visits - are you expecting everyone to be able fly over to london for an evaluation? I'm sure there are plenty of players, maybe they've grown up in Alabama, went to HS in Alabama, went to college in alabama and have never left the country.

Apparently only 30% of americans have a passport - you've got to make sure that all your players you're scouting have a passport. Or maybe you have a base in America for the winter/spring season to do your evaluation. But then you risk alienating your fan base at home, who see you as just another franchise that happens to play 8 games a year in London.

-Then, you have the tax issue. Income tax for top end earner in Ohio is what, 5%? According to a few places I found, at least. Top end earners in the UK pay 45% tax - a huge penalty for a team based here. Side note - if you're looking at expanding around europe, the tax rate in France is a ridiculous 75%.

Lastly, and this is a biggy, you have the EU. In particular, its freedom of movement laws. The concept of a player basically being told where to play (his rights are held by a team whether he signs with them or not after drafting) is going to be laughed at by any human rights lawyer in europe. The CBA might come under scrutiny, but probably that would just about be ok.

I would be much, much happier seeing a European league. Unfortunately I missed the developmental league we had here, but that basically would feel like a 'minor league' system. If you want to get people truly interested, you'd have to have at least some semblence of parity. Maybe make it like the CFL, just a separate entity. Then you have the possibility of it some day being better than the NFL - eventually, if it became as popular as soccer for example, or even just cricket or rugby (much more realistic), and people were playing it as children, there's no reason why Americans would be inherently better, just because of nationality, it's more a cultural thing.

Does the NFL want to spread the game, or just make more money for itself? Is there a world-wide gridiron football governing body that has any kind of jurisdiction over the NFL? Probably not.

@douche-nozzle said:

I don't think greedy owners see anything but dollar signs in their eyes. They will do just about anything for extra cash.

Though Art Modell may have been the worst of the bunch but they all would probably sell their grandmothers for a farthing.

@hoorta said:

my friend turned to me last week and said something about a player in the world cup asking "you know, the greatest player in the world who played for blah blah?" and i only knew one name and said renaldo. he then scolded me and said "no! c'mon, you should know this!"

i turned to him and said "shut the fuck up."

end of conversation.

@the-gipper said:

Gip- $30 million to subsidize NFL Europe? Hello- that's pocket change to the NFL. about $1 million per owner- damn cheapskates. With multi billion TV revenue coming in? The concussion settlement is ultimately going to ring up about a billion or so I'd bet.

@mld-woody said:

A team in London opens up a whole new market. TV markets would be a huge money get. That's why the B1G added Rutgers and Maryland for that reason.

We already have the MLS. Why would the EPL put a team here?

NFL Europe was its own league, right? This team would be part of the NFL. Much different.

For the same reason Goodell seems hellbent on putting an NFL team in EPL territory?

And I'll put it to you on (as most Americans) are soccer novistas terms. Apples to apples. Sure, I enjoyed the World Cup. When guys start commenting that so-and-sos midfielder had a shitty game, I said to myself WTF? I'm not that much into it to notice the difference. It would be the same if we put an NFL team in Europe. They'd be like a bunch of preppie Panthers fans- going to the game to be "cool" but not really knowing what's going on. US Parallel- people that show up at Super Bowl Parties to watch the commercials and halftime show. Yup Roger- their money (in whatever currency) is still as green, I suppose.

@taco918 said:

I think most of us understand the basic business concept. Some of that might even be true IF they were putting a new team there rather than relocating one. The increase will be nominal in terms of the overall current NFL revenue

yap. yap. yap.

@mld-woody said:

We already have the MLS. Why would the EPL put a team here?

NFL Europe was its own league, right? This team would be part of the NFL. Much different.

@jrb12711 said:

Don't you know that older member on this forum know everything about life and the younger guys can't possibly understand how the world works?

smart man, you must be like 81

@douche-nozzle said:

It is a joke that King Roger is still in power. His reign has been blatant disregard for the fans. His only goal is money....money....money

Umm, the owners hired him to make them more money. That's his job.

@jrb12711 said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't NFL Europe essentially the D-League for the NFL before it dissolved? If that's true it seems foolish to compare an actual franchise opprtunity to that. Look, I personally would dislike to see a team in London. But it's clear when NFL teams play there, people show up. Say what you will about Roger Goddell, but it's pretty well documented he's a savvy business leader who's increased the NFL as a brand significantly since he's arrived. I'd listen to and respect the argument of the brand being big enough already, but I'd argue that's not how the world works. It's 2014 and globalization is the key to success. I'm sure the NFL has incredible amounts of info we don't have on the viability of a team in London.

From a how it would work traveling perspective, I think you could create a system where teams mostly play London before a bye or on Thursdays (or another day possibly). Not ideal, but definitely plausible. It's definitely weird to think about but I call it like I see it, and at this point I'd bet that a London team experiment will happen.

I think the whole franchise vs d-league is the most likely view the NFL is taking on this.

@the-gipper said:

@taco918 said:

I remember NFL Europe. I can't give you the answers you're looking for as I'm not privy to the NFL's information on the subject

Well, I just recited those facts. They were losing 30 million per year on the venture per reports. And the only team in England folded, leaving it primarily a German League.

. However I believe the common belief was that the lack of talent in the league and the view of it as a minor league of sorts resulted in its downfall. If they put a team there that competes with the big boys it might drum up more interest. I'm sure Europeans would love an opportunity to beat Americans at their own game as well.

Except it would not be Europeans beating Americans. At least for the foreseeable future any team in London is going to pretty much have all American players and all American coaches and front office. They may get some guy over there to become owner, but he would just be a money man.

As for the EPL putting a team here, I'm not sure, although every country has their own league. I'm not sure if it's just a remnant of that or they didn't like the prospects of going up against football, basketball, baseball and hockey. Plus the MLS is already pretty established.

Is Leeds United no longer around? I know they've been regulated a few times but I hadn't heard they completely folded.

In checking I didn't see any team in the 20 Premier League teams in Leeds. Maybe I missed something.

If a Leeds team was relegated that would be like making the Philadelphia Phillies or the Houston Astros a AAA team. (Oh, wait, the Astros essentially ARE a AAA team)

gft and Howie must be "on holiday" since neither of them have chimed in with their opinions on this subject. It would be good to know their thoughts.

Yeah Leeds United is still around. They're in what is basically the second division. I actually kind of dig the promotion/regulation concept. It would probably work best in basketball to prevent the whole tanking issue. It would be a shit storm in football.

It would be good to get the Brits take on the subject.

@the-gipper said:

I hope you're right, but I'm just not sure how that will shake down. At the very least there will be a formal proposal for a team in London, I'd bet my car on it.

@miktoxic said:

what 'league' was HEHATEME in?

was that the XFL?

hey, i watched it. better than baseball or golf or soccer.

hottest trampiest cheerleaders ever.

I loved the XFL. The best rule in that whole league was fair catches were illegal. It failed because instead of letting it grow organically Vince McMahan threw all his money in at once and naturally lost it when it wasn't an instant success.

was that the XFL?

hey, i watched it. better than baseball or golf or soccer.

hottest trampiest cheerleaders ever.

i thought for sure one of those beotches woulda dropped her drawers for an xtra $20.

@douche-nozzle said:

Still being a whiner from the James Harrison deal?

@diehardbrownsfan said:

And here is why it won't happen:

This isn't like baseball players playing in Toronto, or Montreal. The cost of living in London is vastly higher even than in like NYC. And, of course, they are paid in an entirely different currency.

The NFLPA will demand a "bonus salary", not countable against the salary cap, for any player that would play for a London team.

And that bonus would have to be significant to not only account for the increase in the cost of living, but also to compensate those player for being so far away from home and family.

Maybe the owners think they can get more cash from London....but they will learn that the Players Union will demand a huge portion of that pound of flesh.

And, as a result, they will figure out that players will 10 times prefer to play in LA or SA than in Europe.

To them, London would be a nice place to visit in the off season.....or maybe once a decade play there.....but not as a permanent home.

From a how it would work traveling perspective, I think you could create a system where teams mostly play London before a bye or on Thursdays (or another day possibly). Not ideal, but definitely plausible. It's definitely weird to think about but I call it like I see it, and at this point I'd bet that a London team experiment will happen.

@miktoxic said:

That could be done....but what about this London team? It would have to make the pond jump at least 8 times a year. That is a bigger issue.

(Plus, don't you think making the London Lords play every game against a team that is coming in off a bye is a bit unfair, competitively?)

....and yes, they would have to be the London Lords......as that was the name of the teams where my kid went to college.

@taco918 said: