Tag / NFL

by Frank Maduri

NFL To Los Angeles Update: More Twists & Turns

The ongoing quest of the NFL relocation process to Los Angeles took a few more twists and turns recently following a set of meetings between the league, the owners, and the parties from three NFL teams interested in gaining a foothold into the nation’s second largest media market.

 

Those meetings took place in the Chicago area and presentations were made by the Chargers, the Raiders, and the Rams regarding potential relocation to Los Angeles and their respective stadium proposals. I have reported on this topic for a few years now and I can attest that the situation is an evolving one, to put it diplomatically.

 

In order to provide some backdrop for readers who are not aware of the relocation scenario with the NFL and Los Angeles it essentially boils down to back room politics within one of the most profitable sports leagues in the world. The Rams, who initially played in L.A. and moved to St. Louis for a sweetheart deal on a new stadium in the mid-1990s, are now positioning themselves for a move back to Southern California. Their owner, Stan Kroenke, has made a huge land purchase in Inglewood on the site of the former Hollywood Park horseracing track (see my earlier article which focuses exclusively on this deal) with the aim to build a world class football stadium on the site.

 

The Chargers and Raiders moved quickly following Kroenke’s land move to secure land for a joint stadium project in Carson, California which has been fast tracked through the government permit and environmental review stages to be a more “shovel ready” project at this point than the Rams proposal. The Chargers have worked with San Diego (though some in San Diego municipal government claim the Chargers never worked in good faith) on a new stadium for 15 years with no progress being made in that time period.

The Raiders have worked with Oakland for a similar time frame (if not longer) to find an acceptable proposal to replace the aging Coliseum but with no success. The Raiders have positioned themselves well in the “race to L.A.” because they do not want their own stadium, they prefer to be a partner or a tenant in whatever stadium bid gets accepted by the NFL.

 

The NFL would prefer to have two teams in the market and not three, so somebody is going to be left out of this equation, and it is looking more likely that it is not going to be the Raiders. In the mainstream media press conference after the Chicago meetings regarding the L.A. relocation, an NFL Vice President was quoted as stating that the Raiders have no viable way of staying in Oakland.

 

Horse Race

 

The horse race to L.A. was viewed prior to the meetings in Chicago by NFL insiders as scenario where the Chargers/Raiders proposal in Carson being the lead proposal for acceptance by the league ownership. The rationale being that both teams are based in California and have worked diligently to remain in their current markets with no progress seen in that regard.

 

The view prior to the meetings was that Kroenke’s move with the Hollywood Park land purchase was too bold and aggressive. It also should be noted that St. Louis has put together a viable option for a new stadium on the waterfront for the Rams to remain in Missouri that has intrigued NFL owners and league executives.

 

However, according to sources in the mainstream sports media, after the meetings in Chicago it appears that the Rams proposal for the stadium at Hollywood Park in Inglewood has gained significant traction. There is also some movement by San Diego to put together a proposal for a new facility to keep the team from relocating.

It is going to be interesting to see how this plays out between now and the expected official decision on which teams will be in L.A. which is expected in January 2016. The Giants owner, John Mara, stated to the media that he expects a team to be playing in L.A. by 2016 in a temporary venue.

 

Alternate Plans

 

Once the two teams that are approved by the NFL to relocate to Los Angeles are announced, the issue becomes finding a temporary home for the teams while the construction of their long term home is being undertaken. The Rose Bowl has, according to mainstream reports, told the NFL that they are not interested in temporarily hosting a NFL franchise. The LA Coliseum apparently is willing to serve as a temporary venue for a relocated franchise to the city.

 

Then, on Monday, in a strange turn of events, San Antonio has stepped up and announced that they would be willing to host the Raiders temporarily if they get relocated to LA because their lease with Oakland ends at the end of this season. The Carson stadium will not be ready for another two years and the Inglewood stadium could take three years to construct.

 

My first thoughts when I saw this news earlier was that it was strange, but the more I thought about it, it represents a really smart move by San Antonio. The Raiders owner, Mark Davis, has already visited San Antonio and met with officials there as a potential relocation site for the franchise (see my earlier article on the Oakland stadium) though that turned out to be a maneuver to gain leverage so that Oakland would approve funds for a new facility for the team.

 

The scenario in Oakland between the municipal government, county leadership, and the Raiders executives has gone downhill rapidly from bad to worse. The Coliseum is known throughout the league as the worst facility and the appetite in Oakland for spending public funds for a stadium is tepid at best. The NFL beat writer for the Raiders reported to CBS Sports that Mark Davis went to the Oakland officials with a reduced stadium plan purposing an intimate venue with 50,000 seats versus some other NFL stadiums which have close to 70,000 capacity. The smaller facility would have a reduced price tag and environmental impact, the two sides could not come to agreement on that proposal.

 

The Raiders may need a temporary home for a few years until the move to L.A. and it may need to be outside of Oakland with the state of the relationship between both parties. In the hypothetical scenario that the Rams and Raiders are both awarded L.A. relocations by the league, the Rams would most likely play at the LA Coliseum on a temporary basis. It may be difficult to schedule two teams to play at that facility, so that is where San Antonio is making their sales pitch at this point.

 

When you think about it, it makes sense for both sides. The Raiders could gain exposure to a whole new demographic of fans and due to their success earlier in their franchise history they already have a national following, they could add to that fan base by playing in Texas. The NFL let a study gain media attention a couple of weeks ago where there was a survey done of Raiders fans, and the majority said that they would support the team regardless of where they based their operation. It was an obvious placement by the NFL to soften the ground for the LA relocation of the franchise, but it could also play a role for San Antonio to appeal to both the Raiders and the league that they can be a viable temporary home.

 

It makes sense for San Antonio because they would gain tax revenues from the team operations, game days, and an increase in tourism/ hotel stays from the team playing there temporarily for two to three years. The Alamodome would be the site for the games and that facility is undergoing an over $40 million dollar renovation including wider concourses, a new scoreboard, larger locker rooms, and other amenities in preparation for the stadium to host the NCAA basketball Final Four in 2018. The Raiders would be able to play games indoors in an upgraded facility that is far nicer than Oakland Coliseum at this point. The local fans in San Antonio would get NFL football for two to three years right in their city, and the city would be able to show the NFL that they can handle an expansion or other relocated team on a permanent basis down the line.

 

Switching Places

 

On Monday night a report emerged regarding the Chargers – Raiders joint project in Carson. The NFL has reported that if that stadium initiative is accepted by the league, then the teams will no longer remain in the same division, the AFC West in this case, or the same conference. The NFL would realign the teams so that one would most likely join the NFC West.

 

In that scenario, in order to keep the conferences and the divisions evenly balanced in the four divisions with four teams in each conference, another team would have to change conferences as well. Carmen Policy, who is heading up the NFL to LA movement at this point and was heavily involved in the presentations in Chicago related in this report that several intriguing realignment options are on the table at this point.

 

I had thought about this scenario while writing an earlier article on this topic. In many ways, approving the Inglewood project is a much more streamlined process for the NFL because the Rams would relocate to Southern California and remain in the NFC West, and the Raiders would most likely be their co-tenant and remain in the AFC West with no realignment of the league being necessary.

 

However, that still leaves the Chargers in a potentially untenable situation in San Diego, which the NFL certainly internally knows much more about just how dire that situation is, certainly more than I do. That may be the impetus behind the drive for the Carson project, to resolve the Chargers stadium issue  as well as the Raiders issues all in one bold sweeping move.

 

I know that Jason LaComfora of CBS Sports first reported this several months ago, and it is an intriguing idea. He thinks that if the Rams move to LA and the Inglewood project goes ahead and the Rams leave St. Louis, then the team that is left out of the LA market could wind up moving to St. Louis and playing in the new proposed riverfront stadium. In light of recent events, with the NFL open to realignment, all options could be on the table. The Chargers could wind up moving to St. Louis and staying in the AFC West where they would have a regional rival in their division in the Kansas City Chiefs. The Chargers would also still play the Raiders and Broncos in that scenario twice per season as they currently do.

 

In my view, that would be the biggest issue with the Carson project is having to shift multiple teams and realign the league. That would eliminate the rivalry games that NFL fans look forward to from back in the old AFL days, fierce rivalries between the Broncos and Chargers or the Raiders and Chiefs.

 

The other point that I have to mention here is that the NFL does not want 3 teams playing in the Los Angeles market, and if they decide to keep the Rams out (it seems Kroenke is set to go there) how will the league prevent a billionaire from moving the operation of his team from St. Louis to the nation’s second largest media market and the entertainment capital of the world?

 

The issue is further complicated when consideration is given to the fact that the Rams once played in Los Angeles and they have a passionate following and supporters there that want the team to return to Southern California.

 

In that scenario, what happens to St. Louis and their plans for a new riverfront stadium? Some within NFL circles question whether St. Louis deserves another shot at a team because they lost the Cardinals previously, so if the city loses the Rams as well, are they the right market for an NFL team?

 

This situation certainly is a delicate one for the NFL and for three franchises who are vying to gain entry into a coveted and largely untapped marketplace. It will be interesting to see how the NFL, the owners, and the executives from the three teams involved handle the next steps in what has become a race to get NFL football back to Los Angeles.

 

(Some background information courtesy of CBS Sports.com)

 

by Frank Maduri

What The Cam Newton Deal Means For Eli Manning

The Carolina Panthers agreed to a contract extension with their star quarterback, Cam Newton, today which will pay him $67 million guaranteed and potentially up to $103.8 million over the life of the contract based on incentives being met. The guaranteed sum over the first three years of the deal is a NFL record, and averages out to around $22 million per season.

 

The NFL world is very much divided on this deal for Newton; some feel that Carolina overpaid and others feel it was a great move to lock in your franchise player through 2020. The debate will rage on in the next few days as well as the next few years, as the Panthers are banking that their star will continue to flourish in the years ahead.

 

The fans of that team will look at this deal three years from now, and depending on what happens in that time, will either celebrate the deal or scrutinize the front office of the team for making it. The undisputed fact here is that regardless of what happens with Newton, this deal impacts the market for quarterbacks in a profound way.

 

Since I am a New York Giants fan, first and foremost, I was interested about the way in which this deal will impact the status of Eli Manning and his next contract. The New York signal caller and two-time Super Bowl MVP is about to embark on the last year of a six year contract he signed, which at the time, made him the NFL’s highest paid player.

 

That contract, six years for $97.5 million with $15.3 million in guaranteed money, is now dwarfed by other contracts signed in the subsequent years. In the world of NFL contracts, for those fans who are unaware, the guaranteed money is the most important figure due to the language of the contracts and the metrics established for reaching the other figures in a given deal.

 

Playing It Out

 

In this case, Manning, who has stated that he feels comfortable playing out the 2015 season and then negotiating an extension, certainly looks like he has played his cards right. The situation is similar to the Joe Flacco contract extension with the Ravens back a few years ago. The Baltimore quarterback decided to play the 2012 season, his last under contract, and then negotiate a new deal in the offseason. It was a risk for both sides, if Flacco had a great season, his negotiating leverage was improved; if he got injured or played poorly, he would be in a position of weakness at the bargaining table.

 

We know now that, in hindsight, Flacco made the right choice because he had a very productive season while leading the Ravens to the Super Bowl championship. He was able to leverage that into a huge contract extension, which to some degree, has hamstrung the ability of the Ravens to add premium free agents in the years that followed.

 

This is a good segue into a similar concern I have for the New York Giants with Eli Manning’s next contract. He is coming off a season where he put up big numbers but he is 34 years old, and his next contract is going to tie up cap space as he enters a period of time where most players begin to decline. Eli has been very durable which is a double edged sword, he certainly has shown his toughness but he has played 11 years and his body could start to break down.

 

The Giants could be faced with a situation where they have a player on the decline who at the same time is tying up a lot of salary cap space. That is not an enviable position to be in. The factor that will offset some of these concerns is that fact that NFL revenues continue to increase and show no signs of reversing anytime soon. This will translate into salary cap increases in the future.

 

The Cam Newton contract puts Eli in a position to potentially leverage the Giants into a very lucrative deal. If Newton got that much guaranteed money without a Super Bowl win on his resume, we could be looking at the very real possibility that Manning could command up to $75 million in guaranteed money over his first three years of his next contract.

 

That will have a negative impact on the Giants salary cap flexibility resulting in a limited number of ways the team can improve the roster during that three year period. I am cautiously optimistic that Eli may not want to put the Giants in that type of situation because he may realize that his window to win another Super Bowl will decrease in each passing year. I also recognize that the Giants front office has a very good business sense and they are very practical and pragmatic in their approach to these contracts.

 

In the end, I hope those attributes prevail so that the Giants have the ability to compete every year for a Super Bowl championship.

(Some background and salary data courtesy of CBSSports.com)

by Frank Maduri

Rights Restricted: ESPN & The Bill Simmons Debacle

A big topic in the news today has been the suspension of sports journalist and commentator, Bill Simmons, by ESPN for his remarks regarding NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. The three week suspension of Simmons by the network has drawn criticism across the mainstream media and social media networks.

 

In order to provide some background for those who might not be aware, Simmons launched headfirst into an explosive tirade filled with expletives on an internet “podcast” show that he hosts regarding Commissioner Goodell’s handling of the Ray Rice domestic abuse incident.

 

In his three minute verbal bashing of Mr. Goodell, Mr. Simmons asserts that the Commissioner saw the tape of Rice punching his then-fiancé in an Atlantic City casino elevator. He continues by stating that Goodell would “fail a lie-detector test” if it was administered to him.

 

Mr. Goodell had initially suspended Rice for 2 games, then when the tape from the elevator emerged and the NFL looked badly, he reversed the decision and suspended Ray Rice indefinitely. Many people feel that the NFL saw the tape and were trying to cover up the incident by stating that they had not seen it during the initial investigation.

 

ESPN, which televises NFL games on Monday nights and pays billions of dollars for the rights to those broadcasts, acted swiftly by suspending Mr. Simmons for his comments about Commissioner Goodell. The response to this action by ESPN has been mostly negative for the network across the media and the social media sites, particularly Twitter. There is a Twitter “hashtag” which is trending today that notes a conversation thread of a hot topic and it is: #FreeBillSimmons.

 

In addition, Bill Simmons openly dared ESPN to suspend him for his comments, which probably was not the wisest course of action.

 

Many people feel that Simmons should not have been suspended for stating what many of us feel is the truth about the Ray Rice case. The fact that ESPN has a huge contract with the NFL makes the network look like they are pandering, and that they are restricting the freedom that the Constitution provides to those in the media to speak openly about any issue.

 

Fuel to the Fire

 

My friend pointed out to me on Facebook last night as we had some dialogue on this issue that ESPN’s suspension of Mr. Simmons is much longer than the action that the network took against another commentator, Stephen A. Smith, who was suspended for one week at the beginning of the Rice scandal a few weeks ago.

 

This wide variation in the suspension lengths was reported today by the mainstream media as well. In order to provide background for those who are not aware, Mr. Smith, also employed by ESPN indicated in statements on the air during ESPN programs that women provoke men and put men in the position to hit or physically abuse them. Those statements immediately raised a public uproar and ESPN responded by suspending Smith for one week.

 

The difference in the suspension actions taken by ESPN has added fuel to the fire and has opened network executives there to extensive public scrutiny and criticism that they punished Simmons strictly because he attacked the NFL, which is their “cash cow”.

 

However, the argument can be made that what Mr. Smith intimated in his comments has far greater long term ramifications on the central issue of domestic abuse than what Mr. Simmons said during his podcast.

 

The Other Side

 

In fairness, there are still others out there in the general public that do not view what ESPN does as pure journalism. They feel that the network is strictly a sports broadcasting medium which is greatly influenced in its coverage by the corporate sponsors and the big professional sports leagues which combine to provide them with huge advertising revenues.

 

Another faction feels that Mr. Simmons should have been suspended regardless because he represents ESPN and he used several foul words in his frustrated diatribe against the NFL and its’ commissioner, Roger Goodell. This viewpoint gains strength when considering that Mr. Simmons has a significant role on the network’s NBA basketball coverage which includes several Sunday afternoon games that children and young adults watch across the country on ABC.

 

Rights Restricted

 

The fact remains that the suspension of Mr. Simmons should have been made in-line with the suspension of Stephen A. Smith, or the network should add 3 weeks to the suspension of Smith in the near future. ESPN now has an image issue that it did not expect, and that no network wants to have to deal with.

 

The majority of the American public, which happens to be the prime customer for ESPN, believes that the network acted harshly to Simmons, muzzled his Constitutional rights as a journalist, and pandered to their corporate sponsors and the NFL.  That is a big problem for ESPN at this point which they will need to somehow address.

 

Unfortunately, I have seen this situation happen to other journalists that I know, and I can understand the sentiment that the freedom of the press is hindered by corporate interests from the big conglomerations which own the networks as well as the other forms of media. It will be a part of a much larger debate brought to light by this situation with Simmons and ESPN.

 

In the end, the NFL is a multi-billion dollar industry with tremendous resources and enormous power. Their story that they did not receive the tape during their investigation into Mr. Rice seems highly unlikely. Mr. Simmons was saying what many of us already knew or thought to be true. The fact that he got suspended for being upset about the NFL’s poor handling of a horrible incident involving the abuse of a defenseless woman while Mr. Smith got a far less rigorous suspension for actually defending Ray Rice is the root problem here.

 

That decision by the executives of the network is not only what is wrong with the whole situation involving freedom of the press, it is an indictment on our society. The fact that so many people found it as troubling as I did, gives me hope that maybe our future will be better than the issues of the past several weeks.

by Frank Maduri

NFL & Recycling: Detroit Lions “Turn It Green” Campaign

The National Football League is busily preparing for another season in about a month from today, currently the players are getting ready at training camps across the country. The Detroit Lions will be wearing new practice jerseys at camp on August 6th that are bright green in color and made from recycled materials.

 

The new uniforms mark the start of the team’s recycling campaign which is called “Turn It Green” and will have a social media hashtag of the same name to be used across Twitter, Facebook, InstaGram, and the other platforms.

 

The uniforms are made by Unifi and are part of their Repreve line of sports equipment made from recycled materials. Each jersey is made from 21 recycled bottles and the Lions will be giving away towels to fans who attend their practice session which are made from 3 recycled bottles each.

 

The campaign will also have a promotional contest where fans can enter to win a chance to throw the ball on the practice field with the Detroit Lions quarterbacks. The “Turn It Green” program will highlight the benefits of recycling and the team is adding several in-stadium recycling receptacles at Ford Field for the upcoming 2014 football season.

 

Raising Awareness

 

The announcement of this program featured some statistics on recycling including the fact that only 30% of the plastic bottles used in the U.S. are recycled. In fact, 75% of our overall garbage is recyclable in the U.S. but only 30% of that overall total is recycled.

Americans generate 21.5 million tons of food waste each year, which if it was composted, would be the equivalent reduction of greenhouse gases in the environment as if 2 million cars were taken off the roadways.

 

This campaign will raise awareness to the many benefits of recycling for our communities and the NFL and the Detroit Lions deserve credit for putting this program in motion. The NFL has more fans than any other sport in the U.S. and if this program reaches even a portion of them and changes their perception of the importance of recycling it will be a positive step in the right direction.

 

The use of social media and the contest are great ways to interact with their fans which is so important in marketing any type of campaign today. The program was certainly well thought out, and I will be interested to see if other NFL teams follow suit with similar initiatives in their community affairs and stadium operations.

 

I know the sight of the Lions taking the practice field in bright green uniforms will be a big change from their usual appearance, but it is for a very important reason, to raise awareness of the importance of recycling to protect our environment and conserve our natural resources.

 

(Background courtesy of CBS Sports.com, statistics courtesy of www.dosomething.org and EPA.gov)

by Frank Maduri

TV Markets and the Expansion of Sports – Part 3

The role of TV markets in the potential expansion of professional sports has been well documented in the first two parts of this series. The first part dealt with the potential expansion of the NBA, the second part dealt with the potential expansion of Major League Baseball, and this third part of the series will deal with the potential expansion of the National Football League (NFL).

 

The focus on the NFL is timely, since the expansion discussion was again central to the media coverage of the league recently. The NFL began playing regular season games in London calling them the “International Series” beginning in 2007 (www.nfl.com). The most recent game in London was played on October 27, with the San Francisco 49ers taking on the Jacksonville Jaguars.

 

In the media events leading up to this game in London, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell spoke openly about the determination for the NFL to place a team in London and Los Angeles. He added that he did not care which city went through the process first, but that they are both targeted areas for the NFL to have a presence within in the future (www.cbssports.com).

 

The initial expansion talk for the NFL began around the Super Bowl in 2012 when the Commissioner discussed the league expanding from 32 to 34 teams. In recent months, the NFL owners committee has stated that they like the league at 32 teams and that any changes would most likely come by relocation of struggling franchises.

 

 

Current Situation

The NFL is currently made up of 32 teams split into two conferences of 16 teams each. In each conference the teams are split into four divisions of four teams each, so the schedule is perfectly balanced. The alignment makes sense and they have an excellent system for rotating the schedule for inter-conference and inter-divisional games.

 

The NFL is the most watched sport in the United States, and has a huge level of interest that dwarfs the other members of “The Big Four” major sports leagues. The number of people to support and watch additional NFL teams is there, so the debate will always rage on about potential expansion of this tremendously successful league.

 

The NFL frequently has seven or eight of the Top 10 most watched television events every year. The Super Bowl, of course, is the most watched television event on the calendar in the United States. It has set records in recent years for TV viewership, which some reports have speculated is driven by the recession in the U.S. and more people staying home to watch it in smaller groups.

 

Sunday Night Football on NBC is the most watched network primetime show every year. The importance of the medium of television to the NFL is very crucial for an expansion market, more so than with other sports.

 

Potential Expansion Markets

 

The potential for expansion in the NFL is a much shorter list than for the other leagues because the league has publicly stated that it does not want to expand much beyond the 32 franchises they have currently. This is also due to the fact that the owners do not want to split the revenue sharing “pie” too much further.

 

Here are the most likely candidates for an NFL expansion franchise:

(TV markets data courtesy of www.stationindex.com , Metro population data courtesy of www.census.gov and the Fortune 500 data courtesy of www.money.cnn.com )

  • Los Angeles, CA – The largest city and the largest TV market without an NFL team. It has been on the NFL expansion radar screen for a long time. At one point the city had two NFL teams that both left, which is why support for a replacement franchise lagged for many years.

TV Market Rank: 2nd

Metro Population Rank: 2nd

Fortune 500 Company HQ: 10 (in general area)

 

Synopsis/Outlook: The Los Angeles bid is a very likely expansion or relocation destination for an NFL franchise or two. The population density, the huge TV and media market, and the corporate sponsorship capabilities are definitely sufficient to support 2 teams. The plan at this point would be that those two teams would share a stadium similar to the Giants and Jets currently. The downtown stadium plan supported by AEG has lost support politically and will not happen. The City of Industry plan is still on the table and is the most likely site for a future state of the art NFL stadium. The temporary stadium would most likely be the Rose Bowl in Pasadena until the new stadium construction is completed. The most likely relocation candidates would be the Oakland Raiders (who have a major stadium issue with the Coliseum and no public dollars to fix it in Oakland), St. Louis Rams (who have an “out clause” in their lease after next season and are fighting with the city of St. Louis over a renovation plan for their current stadium), and the San Diego Chargers (they are just a couple of hours down the road and they have been working on a new stadium deal for over 15 years now). The NFL and the owners have all made statements indicating that they will be in L.A. sooner rather than later. One final note, MSG Network interviewed former basketball legend and current L.A. Dodgers part-owner, Earvin “Magic” Johnson during halftime of the NY Knicks game recently, and he publicly stated that he wanted to help bring an NFL team to Los Angeles. When high profile men with money and connections start talking about their desire to do it, we have all seen that it is only a matter of time before it gets done.

 

  • San Antonio, TX – The second largest city in the country by population without an NFL team. The city has a diverse group of potential fans, and the area is known for being very loyal to their other professional team, the Spurs of the NBA.

TV Markets Rank: 36th

Metro Population Rank: 25th

Fortune 500 Company HQ: 5

 

Synopsis/Outlook: Many reports I have read throughout the media reference sources from within the NFL that believe that San Antonio and Toronto are the only other markets outside of L.A. which could successfully support an NFL team. The issues with San Antonio and a potential bid for expansion are still numerous: the city is in the territorial rights zone for the Dallas Cowboys, the metro population is good but the suburbs are non-existent, the TV market is good but not great (though the NFL has current franchises in much smaller TV markets), and the stadium is problematic as well. In order for a bid to be successful, Cowboys owner Jerry Jones would have to approve the move into his territory (he has made statements of support in the past). The right ownership group would have to emerge with enough capital to compete against the Cowboys (who are immensely popular in the entire state) and the Houston Texans (who play about a 2 hour drive away). The final piece is the stadium, they have the Alamo Dome currently, but it was built several years ago. It would need by some estimates between $100 million to $500 million in renovations to be an NFL level facility. Most people believe that for a San Antonio bid to be accepted, the Alamo Dome would be used as a temporary home while a brand new stadium would be built for the NFL team. The government willpower and support is there to undertake that project, they have a growing economy, and the corporate sponsorship for such a venture is there as well. If the right pieces fall into place, this is also a very likely future expansion location for the NFL.

  • Toronto – Intriguing potential expansion opportunity for the NFL to fully integrate into Canada.

Synopsis/Overview: The TV market and other demographic data are not applicable for this Canadian city. The potential bid does have some very strong attributes. Toronto has a very diverse population base which appeals to the NFL and their strategic interest in growing the sport internationally. The city currently hosts one regular season game each year under an agreement with the Buffalo Bills. The game in Toronto regularly plays to a sold out crowd, so the demand is there for the NFL product in Canada. The other potential avenue outside of expansion is the potential for the Buffalo Bills to relocate to Toronto. However, the City of Buffalo just committed a huge amount of money and resources to the renovation of Ralph Wilson Stadium and the Bills signed a new lease in Buffalo as well, making that relocation rather unlikely. The stadium in the short term would be the Rogers Centre (formerly the SkyDome) and then a new stadium would be built for the expansion NFL franchise. Corporate support would not be an issue, nor would the right ownership group. A solid potential bid.

  • London, United Kingdom – The London bid is gaining tremendous momentum at this point. It would bring the NFL into the global stage faster than the other major U.S. sports leagues.

Synopsis/Outlook: The situation in London is similar to Toronto, the TV markets and other demographics do not apply. The NFL has an “International Committee” which has been studying the potential for international growth of American football for years now. Some sources inside the NFL in the reports throughout the media say the committee should be named “the London Committee”. London is really the only viable option for international expansion. The corporate support, with London being a major financial and commercial hub in Europe, would be excellent for a future NFL franchise. There are fans who question why the NFL would want to put a team in London and believe that it is a bad idea. If you take away all the other positive attributes about the city, the only statistic needed for the rationale behind why the NFL wants to have a full time presence in London is: population. Some estimates have the population of London within city limits at 9.7 million, the greater metro area estimates are 13 million to 21 million people (courtesy of the Greater London Authority). The NFL is not currently in LA, so after the New York/New Jersey metro area, the next largest metro area the NFL has a franchise in is Chicago at approximately 9.5 million people (www.census.gov). The potential expansion to London would add another market with the population base of New York or Los Angeles. That offers the NFL a very unique way to expand the league into a very large marketplace. The bid would be solid as the team would have several potential ownership groups and they could play at Wembley Stadium at least initially. In fact, Fox Sports, reported over the weekend that the London based professional soccer club, Tottenham Hotspur, is proposing to build a brand new 65,000 seat stadium that could be shared with a future NFL franchise. When that sort of project is being proposed it validates that the NFL and the city of London have had several behind the scenes meetings about the expansion possibilities there. The relocation route could be another potential avenue into London, with the Jacksonville Jaguars being the most likely franchise for relocation there, according to several media reports. The owner of the Jaguars, Mr. Khan, has ties to London and the Jaguars have the lowest merchandise sales in the NFL. They also currently play in the league’s smallest market, Jacksonville, and they have committed to playing 3 games in London over the next 3 years.

 

Final observations

 

 

The NFL is the most popular professional league in the United States, and it is poised to expand into a few of the remaining markets left that they have not tapped. In my opinion, I think the NFL needs to be in Los Angeles, the game translates so well to the medium of television and it makes no sense to not have a franchise in the second largest TV market in the country.

 

Furthermore, I think the league would do very well with a team in San Antonio, but I do not think it will happen for a long time. The Toronto move is less likely now that the Bills are staying in Western New York, and the London move is complicated. On the surface, I understand why they want to make the move over to London, but logistically that would be a major headache for the NFL.

 

Every U.S. based team that played over there would have to have a bye week the following week, and the London based team would have to fly over here and spend three to four weeks straight on the road in various regions of the U.S. (Northeast, Midwest, etc.).

 

An additional consideration is the conversion rate of the currency, if the contracts for the players are in U.S. dollars, and they are living during the season in London and using the Euro, that is going to be a problem. London is also one of the most expensive cities to live in, so most of the players would opt to leave their families back in the U.S., which I think will definitely impact how the team in London would be able to attract top players to sign to play over there.

 

So each expansion possibility has unique issues here, even the L.A. bid, it will be interesting to see what the future holds for the NFL. The next part of this series will focus on the National Hockey League (NHL) and the potential for that league to expand, which is very realistic in the near future.