Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

The Bills playing a couple of games in Toronto has little to nothing to do with Goodell pushing for international expansion.

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

[quote=mlmdub130;662171]he didn't start it but he is moving forward with it, [B]the bills are playing a bunch of their home gmes in canada over the next few years[/B], and he is pushing forward with trying to have atleast two games played outside the us each year, imo that is bs[/quote]

i thought the bills owner wanted this, he can actually sell tickets and make money in toronto. i thought the bills owner was doing this to get a feel for the bills move to toronto.

as for games outside the US, theres pros and cons imo.

pros are that oversee fans in england and europe get to go to a game. this creates and expands NFL's marketing power and allows them to dip into a new market base. also redskin fans in england to get to see a game.

con is how the travel time and less than nfl-caliber fields effect the conditioning and health of players. while i would prefer the skins to never play a game in europe, it seems every team will have to take their turn flying across the pond.

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

[quote=mlmdub130;662171]he didn't start it but he is moving forward with it, the bills are playing a bunch of their home gmes in canada over the next few years, and he is pushing forward with trying to have atleast two games played outside the us each year, imo that is bs[/quote]

Still... seems odd to be holding this against him since he's just continuing on with what was started years and years ago, but to each his own I guess.

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

[quote=Mattyk;662148]Honestly I don't get the haters when it comes to Goodell. He's made a pretty smooth transition over from Tagliabue and done some good things in his short time as commish. I like that he's taken a firm stance with a lot of issues including player conduct.[/quote]
Wanting to take more games overseas, maybe a team, the SUPER FREAKING BOWL, etc.. too much for me. The fines for criticizing officiating, etc

Tag was more about the players and the game itself than the image to the outsiders

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

[quote=Mattyk;661959]C'mon folks, you don't think there's any serious head trauma going on along the lines during games? Guys crash into each other full force on the snap, helmets collide, guys are falling to the ground getting kicked, kneed, and elbowed.

[B]As I said earlier, research is coming out that says all the small collisions during games add up and are perhaps more damaging over time than the big ones.[/B] At least with the big ones guys are held out to heal. With the smaller collisions guys don't even know they could be hurt and keep playing.[/quote]

to me it's insane to even thihnk about having this discussion with my loved ones, but it's very couragous imo

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/10/don-hasselbeck-pledges-his-brain-for-concussion-research/]Don Hasselbeck pledges his brain for concussion research | ProFootballTalk.com[/url]

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

[quote=over the mountain;662177]i thought the bills owner wanted this, he can actually sell tickets and make money in toronto. [B]i thought the bills owner was doing this to get a feel for the bills move to toronto[/B].

as for games outside the US, theres pros and cons imo.

pros are that oversee fans in england and europe get to go to a game. this creates and expands NFL's marketing power and allows them to dip into a new market base. also redskin fans in england to get to see a game.

con is how the travel time and less than nfl-caliber fields effect the conditioning and health of players. while i would prefer the skins to never play a game in europe, it seems every team will have to take their turn flying across the pond.[/quote]

the owner might want to move there but ask all the die hard bills season ticket holders how they feel about it

as a season ticket holder and a die hard fan the last thing i wanna see is one of my 8 home games be played some where else, i'm just not a fan of the nfl expanding anything overseas. if a fan in germany wants to see a skins game welll thats fine planes fly both ways

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

Sense a bit of xenophobia here.

International expansion was huge for Tags. He pushed for games in Mexico during the regular season, kept NFL Europe going even though it was losing money, pushed for games in China and Japan (which I can't recall if that happened)

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;662357]Sense a bit of xenophobia here.

International expansion was huge for Tags. He pushed for games in Mexico during the regular season, kept NFL Europe going even though it was losing money,[B] pushed for games in China and Japan[/B] (which I can't recall if that happened)[/quote]

You don't remember the Spurrier regime going to Japan and decimating the 49ers in the preseason? Man that was awesome. Then came the regular season....

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;662357]Sense a bit of xenophobia here.

International expansion was huge for Tags. He pushed for games in Mexico during the regular season, kept NFL Europe going even though it was losing money, pushed for games in China and Japan (which I can't recall if that happened)[/quote]

[YT]tQlzaujE5Ys[/YT]

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

[quote=GMScud;662363]You don't remember the Spurrier regime going to Japan and decimating the 49ers in the preseason? Man that was awesome. Then came the regular season....[/quote]

LOL. Yeah...though I was thinking more about regular season

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

I understand the money aspect but why should a home team lose their home game? Are season tickets going to be less? You want a game in China, Japan, etc? Pro Bowl would be perfect. They get to see the best players all at once as well as having a week's worth or so of introduction to American Football via the exhibits, clinics, etc that go on Pro Bowl week, perfect exposure imo

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

[quote=tryfuhl;662416]I understand the money aspect but why should a home team lose their home game? Are season tickets going to be less? You want a game in China, Japan, etc? Pro Bowl would be perfect. They get to see the best players all at once as well as having a week's worth or so of introduction to American Football via the exhibits, clinics, etc that go on Pro Bowl week, perfect exposure imo[/quote]

The long term plan isnt to have teams play a few games in China, England, wherever, its to put franchises there. Ultimately I think the Super Bowl would be between the North American Conference and the International Conference.

IMO, the NFL has pretty muched tapped out the US market for making $ but there's an awful lot of $ to be made in the rest of the world.

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

[quote=irish;662514]The long term plan isnt to have teams play a few games in China, England, wherever, its to put franchises there. Ultimately I think the Super Bowl would be between the North American Conference and the International Conference.

IMO, the NFL has pretty muched tapped out the US market for making $ but there's an awful lot of $ to be made in the rest of the world.[/quote]
Yeah I mentioned overseas expansion as well, that's freaking crazy. NAC vs IC would be the stupidest freaking thing ever. You'd basically be exporting US players to these other countries, lower the level of talent needed because of diluting the league with even more teams, etc. Can you imagine the nightmare of Team England going to Team China to play.. or vice versa?

Shipping US guys over to play in an asian league would be one thing, kind of like in hockey, some guys stay in Russia, some come over, blah blah.. but they still play within a central league. If the NFL wants NFL Europe v.2 then by all means, try it somewhere else, but don't mix it in with what we already have.

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

[quote=tryfuhl;662516]Yeah I mentioned overseas expansion as well, that's freaking crazy. NAC vs IC would be the stupidest freaking thing ever. You'd basically be exporting US players to these other countries, lower the level of talent needed because of diluting the league with even more teams, etc. Can you imagine the nightmare of Team England going to Team China to play.. or vice versa?

Shipping US guys over to play in an asian league would be one thing, kind of like in hockey, some guys stay in Russia, some come over, blah blah.. but they still play within a central league. If the NFL wants NFL Europe v.2 then by all means, try it somewhere else, but don't mix it in with what we already have.[/quote]

I dont think the idea is stupid but I do think logistically it would be difficult. Expansion has nothing to do with the quality of the game, it has to do with making $. The only reason the NFL ever expands is to make more $. The NFL is pretty much out of ways to squeeze $ out of its American fans so by expanding overseas it can tap a whole new set of wallets. The overseas fans will never really fullembrace the game until they have a team of their own to follow. Once they have that team they will start buying the hats shirts and other junk the NFL sells. In addition to the TV contract and expansion fees. Its a lot of $ that cant be ignored.

Re: The end of the three point stance?
 

Why is the end of a three point stance post talkin about nfl's expansion n location?