With this year’s NFL International Series game now gone, there has been plenty of speculation, fuelled by fairly vague comments from administrators, that the UK will in time, see either an increased number of regular season games played here; or that London might host a Super Bowl; or even a franchise. As NFLUK journalist Keith Webster notes, the league must have a roadmap of where it is going with these games, as otherwise the venture risks petering out with little long-term legacy, as previous efforts did in the past.
A second annual game is widely expected, and seems realistic, especially given the high levels of interest in the games so far. Any of the other proposals however, would be much more drastic. Loaning the outside world one game a year is one thing, but a Super Bowl is America’s biggest sporting event, whilst a London team would mean weekly transatlantic trips and would need a guaranteed week-in, week-out fanbase.
With that in mind then, a Super Bowl seems more likely than a franchise, but still not likely. The NFL has a strong preference for warm weather or indoor locations, and London in February will have neither. Most important is the likelihood of rain, which can have a marked effect on the quality of entertainment, as we saw with the first game at Wembley in 2007, when the Giants v Dolphins clash was turned into a mudbath. On the plus side, it would avoid the league taking away a home game from either of the teams involved, and it is a game that fans are used to travelling for. However those same fans would be outraged at the showpiece event for “America’s game” being taken overseas, especially given the huge boost that the game brings to the local economy of the host city.
As for a London-based franchise, there are three key issues. The first is that of logistics. Could teams reasonably travel across the Atlantic every week, and would players be willing to relocate to another country? The second question relates to the fans. Although Wembley has been sold out three years in a row thanks to a combination of hardcore supporters and curious sports fans looking for something different and a spectacle, would they attend eight games a year, and support a London franchise? Casual observers might be good for a game or two per season, and whilst the hardcore would attend more regularly, financial would come into play, as would the fact that many who have attended the London games have come from around the UK and Europe. They presumably would not do so every week. Meanwhile most UK fans already support NFL teams, and would be reluctant to change their allegiance to a side whose American players would have as much in common with Britain as those in Denver, Houston or Chicago.
Finally, it would require a big change in culture. Farming out individual games, even the biggest game of all, to another country is simply promoting an American product abroad. Handing entry to the NFL to a foreign team would mean that this is no longer America’s game. It would, if successful (admittedly a big if), mean giving the outside world a say in the running of the sport. Britain gave up ownership of sports like football, cricket and rugby many years ago, but retained its own leagues and identity, and despite the increase in foreign players and cross border competitions, that integrity remains. This would be a long way from the defunct NFL Europa. Up until now, Americans who disagree with international expansion have been largely able to ignore such efforts, which have had little impact on them, and barely registered on their consciousness.
Despite the hopes of Webster and Alistair Kirkwood, Managing Director of NFLUK, veteran journalist Mike Carlson probably identified the most realistic plan on Five last Sunday night. He has observed that the most likely outcome is the addition of a 17th regular season game to the league schedule (which has already been discussed), and for each team to play their extra game at a neutral venue, whether abroad, or at locations in the United States that do not currently host NFL games, such as Los Angeles. This seems more pragmatic and could lead to London and other British and European locations hosting multiple games annually. League expansion would only follow if this move succeeded.
Ultimately, as a fan who has attended all three Wembley games, and hopes to attend more in the future, I hope that the league does not add a London team. A 17th game which allows further matches in the UK would be great, but not a Super Bowl or franchise. Part of the NFL’s charm, amongst many other things, is its American-ness. It has a different culture and character to European and Commonwealth sports, and conjures up scenes from an array of locations across the length and breadth of the United States. As Paul Hayward recently observed in The Guardian, sporting events have a sense of belonging to a place. To buy into a sport is to buy into its surroundings and history. Sporting events are a part of the fabric of their location, and their location is a part of their fabric.
There is still room for international expansion in sport, taking the PGA or LTA tours, or the Formula 1 circuit to new countries is a logical reflection of those sports’ growing appeal. The Premier League’s derided game 39 plan misjudged this balance, but there may be other ways of bringing English football to overseas fans.
As for the NFL, in the cold light of day, a London franchise or a Super Bowl seem unlikely, whatever league Commissioner Roger Goodell says. Men like Goodell and Kirkwood, with vested interests in keeping fans as interested as possible are never going to rule anything out, and the intrigue keeps people talking, so putting too much faith in their statements is unwise. Instead, British fans should make the most of whatever games come our way, and revel in the excitement of something that is truly American, in the best possible way.
No comments:
Post a Comment