Clark Hunt could care less about local fans-states as much

[scho63]

WOW!!! :cuss:-I think Clark Hunt better go back to communications school and learn how to speak to the press because this paragraph is a real doozy, a blunt kick in the teeth to all the loyal fans who have spent thousands and thousands of dollars over the years while the Chiefs haven't won jack shit! If he really feels this way, why even spend another dime for this team? What a piss poor response! :shake:

So good for the Chiefs and the NFL but who cares about the local fans.....

http://espn.go.com/blog/kansas-city-chiefs/post/_/id/14426/look-for-chiefs-to-play-internationally-again-sometime-soon

Hunt said he had no regrets about taking the Lions game away from fans at Arrowhead Stadium.

“None whatsoever,’’ he said. “It’s been a great experience for the organization. I know we have fans who are disappointed that this game (was) not at Arrowhead, and I understand that, but I think it was the right thing for us to do for the Chiefs and the National Football League.

=================================

Look for Chiefs to play internationally again sometime soon

Adam Teicher, ESPN Staff Writer

LONDON -- The Kansas City Chiefs’ international experience was colored, of course, by the result of Sunday’s game against the Detroit Lions. A lot of things could have gone wrong and the trip overseas would have been a pleasure because of the Chiefs’ 45-10 victory.

Not much of significance did go wrong, though. The Chiefs, as an organization at least, embraced the experience. They threw a party at a local pub for their fans who made the trip, and by all appearances, a good time was had by all.

So the Chiefs may be making another trip to London or for an international game in Germany, Mexico or another location in the near future.

But chairman Clark Hunt said that game probably wouldn’t involve the Chiefs relinquishing a home game, as they did with the Lions game.

“I don’t foresee us playing a home game (internationally) in the near future,’’ he said. “It would be much more likely that we would play an away game before we would play another home game. Having said that, the league is going to expand the international series. Beginning in 2018, there will be four games here (in London) and the league is already looking at other markets like Mexico, Canada, Germany, Brazil, maybe one day somewhere in Asia. I think the series is going to expand, but certainly, I don’t want to give up another home game in the near future.”


The Chiefs got a lot of fan support at Wembley Stadium in London for their game against the Lions. Charlie Crowhurst/Getty Images)
Hunt said he had no regrets about taking the Lions game away from fans at Arrowhead Stadium.

“None whatsoever,’’ he said. “It’s been a great experience for the organization. I know we have fans who are disappointed that this game (was) not at Arrowhead, and I understand that, but I think it was the right thing for us to do for the Chiefs and the National Football League.

“From a fan standpoint, probably the best experience that the fans have had -- and I enjoyed it, too -- was the pub party that we hosted on Friday. We had approximately 400 fans attend it. And there were a lot that came from Kansas City, but there were also a lot that lived somewhere in Europe who are Chiefs fans and this was their chance to come to a game that wasn’t too far away. There were a lot that live here in the U.K.’’

Teams from the NFL’s bigger markets have mostly resisted giving up a home game to play internationally. The Chiefs are the first team to relinquish a home game that either wasn’t playing in an obsolete stadium or having trouble selling tickets, or both.

As the NFL expands its international footprint, it will need to remove more games from home U.S. markets. But Hunt, the chair of the NFL’s international committee, said small-market teams like Kansas City’s wouldn’t carry the entire burden of having to relinquish home games.

“I don’t see that at all,’’ Hunt said. “I think we’ll see more teams willing to give up home games. Going back to the first couple years of this series, I think there were very few that were willing to do it. But now there’s a bigger group and that’s going to grow in the future and that’s going to have to grow in the future. I don’t know what the number of international games that will be played but it could be six, it could be as many as eight one (year). And just practically, teams are going to have to give up home games. I think that there’s an acceptance that it’s good for the team, it’s not bad from a football standpoint and it gives you a chance to grow your brand.

“I think five years from now, we’re going to look back and there will be significantly more that have given up a home game. At that point is it going to be every team that has done it? I don’t know.”

[displacedinMN]

gramatically incorrect

Clark Hunt could care less about local fans-states as much--means he has room not to care.

Clark Hunt couldn't care less about local fans-states as much-means he does not care at all

Sorry, teacher mode.

[scho63]

gramitically incorrect

Clark Hunt could care less about local fans-states as much--means he has room not to care.

Clark Hunt couldn't care less about local fans-states as much-means he does not care at all

Sorry, teacher mode.

My sister is an english teacher and she would be upset with me! I just watch a video on misstated phrases and this was in there.

Ruler across the knuckles for me..... %(/

[BossChief]

Interestingt that Clark is actually the chairman of the international committee. I didn't know that.

[chiefzilla1501]

Fans waving flags isn't the same as fans cheering until a qbs ears bleed.

I can't believe cities don't speak up about the bullshit practice of replacing home games. It may not matter to Clark hunt. But it sure as hell matters to a bar or hotel owner that loses 1/8 of their nfl games.

Another example of the nfl putting money above the fans.

[Lzen]

Screw that! Make it a preseason game and I won't care. But giving up a regular season game sucks big time. Especially a game at Arrowhead.

[Red Dawg]

The problem with Clark and the Hunt family is that they are just business men. They just don't truly love football enough to go after a title at all costs like some other owners. They hire office personnel to run the brand and if they are making money then that's ok with them and the record doesn't matter. As long as tickets are sold and the fan base is not flying banners over the stadium it will not change. As long as the Chiefs are not complete bottom feeders nothing will change.

Until KC falls ass backwards into a great QB we are stuck in the same place year after year. The organization will not do what needs to be done to find one.

[raybec 4]

Fans waving flags isn't the same as fans cheering until a qbs ears bleed.

I can't believe cities don't speak up about the bullshit practice of replacing home games. It may not matter to Clark hunt. But it sure as hell matters to a bar or hotel owner that loses 1/8 of their nfl games.

Another example of the nfl putting money above the fans.

The cities should be pissed, especially considering the amount of tax dollars they pour into these clubs. Every home game is a windfall for Jackson County and they got screwed out of their revenue.

[TEX]

Like so many in charge, he's out of touch.

The NFL is changing. This is what the league wants. IMO, it's out of touch as well.

[Donger]

grammatically incorrect

Clark Hunt could care less about local fans-states as much--means he has room not to care.

Clark Hunt couldn't care less about local fans-states as much-means he does not care at all

Sorry, teacher mode.

FYP

[Reaper16]

Fans waving flags isn't the same as fans cheering until a qbs ears bleed.

I can't believe cities don't speak up about the bullshit practice of replacing home games. It may not matter to Clark hunt. But it sure as hell matters to a bar or hotel owner that loses 1/8 of their nfl games.

Another example of the nfl putting money above the fans.

The cities should be pissed, especially considering the amount of tax dollars they pour into these clubs. Every home game is a windfall for Jackson County and they got screwed out of their revenue.

It's tantamount to theft, IMO. Every lost home game is money out of the pockets of working class folk in the service industry & food out of the mouths of their children. If a pro sports organization is partly publicly funded in any significant capacity then they have an obligation, in my opinion, to play as many home games as they are allowed. Entire economies spring up around that public funding, and its the lower rungs on the ladder that get hit hardest when a home game is lost.

[Mr. Derek]

The "international ****fest series" is such a great success, next year Cowboys, Steelers and Patriots will host a game in London.

[Baby Lee]

gramitically incorrect

Clark Hunt could care less about local fans-states as much--means he has room not to care.

Clark Hunt couldn't care less about local fans-states as much-means he does not care at all

Sorry, teacher mode.

grammatically

[King_Chief_Fan]

are we surprised....No.

His attempt to field a competitive team with a competent coach has failed many times....I don't think he gives two rats pa-toots about anything the fans say.

The fools in all of this are the fans....Fans keep buying their merchandise and keep their butts in the seats and keep paying $32 to cook their BBQ 8 times a year.

[BlackHelicopters]

Clark has nice hair

[rabblerouser]

The problem with Clark and the Hunt family is that they are just business men. They just don't truly love football enough to go after a title at all costs like some other owners. They hire office personnel to run the brand and if they are making money then that's ok with them and the record doesn't matter. As long as tickets are sold and the fan base is not flying banners over the stadium it will not change. As long as the Chiefs are not complete bottom feeders nothing will change.

Until KC falls ass backwards into a great QB we are stuck in the same place year after year. The organization will not do what needs to be done to find one.

<a href="http://s193.photobucket.com/user/telepicker97/media/Mobile%20Uploads/agreebyrd_zpsy4kw6hqd.gif.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z164/telepicker97/Mobile%20Uploads/agreebyrd_zpsy4kw6hqd.gif" border="0" alt=" photo agreebyrd_zpsy4kw6hqd.gif"/></a>

[BigMeatballDave]

Wow. If I were a season ticket holder, he just made the decision for me to never buy them again.

[rabblerouser]

Wow. If I were a season ticket holder, he just made the decision for me to never buy them again.

It just gets easier and easier to not give Clark Hunt another fucking dollar.

Fuck that smarmy prick.

[milkman]

are we surprised....No.

His attempt to field a competitive team with a competent coach has failed many times....I don't think he gives two rats pa-toots about anything the fans say.

The fools in all of this are the fans....Fans keep buying their merchandise and keep their butts in the seats and keep paying $32 to cook their BBQ 7 times a year.

FYP

[ChiliConCarnage]

I'm not sure what part of that paragraph would upset you. It's just stating the obvious

[KCUnited]

Just 1 game back of the 6th seed.

If you start me up...

[Prison Bitch]

It's a busness, don't take it personally. And when he asks you for your $, remind him it's a business. He will understand.

[rabblerouser]

Just 1 game back of the 6th seed.

If you start me up...

Fuck you, CHunt.

[Hydrae]

Interesting which paragraphs you highlighted with no mention of this one:

“I don’t foresee us playing a home game (internationally) in the near future,’’ he said. “It would be much more likely that we would play an away game before we would play another home game. Having said that, the league is going to expand the international series. Beginning in 2018, there will be four games here (in London) and the league is already looking at other markets like Mexico, Canada, Germany, Brazil, maybe one day somewhere in Asia. I think the series is going to expand, but certainly, I don’t want to give up another home game in the near future.”

The international games will be happening, nothing the fans can do to stop that but bitch. But Clark, as head of the International Committee (which was interesting news), set an example this year with this game. This does not mean he expects to give up a game a year like Jacksonville. But this will allow the committee to put more pressure on other top tier teams to give up home games down the road.

[srvy]

Guess that statement isn't surprising to me at all. The Hunts have always been NFL first over locality.

I won't get to butt hurt over this. The NFL knew exactly what teams to go to to surrender the home game. The Hunts have always been the biggest supporters of the NFL did we expect them to say no?

[mrbiggz]

The stadium wasn't even full. I saw on the broadcast that several rows of the seats had a chiefs covering over them. I would probably be correct to assume that Detroit's side had the same thing. London and/or the UK must be paying a lot of money to get the NFL in Europe.

[joeman335td]

And this is why we haven't won a playoff game in 20 years, nor a Super Bowl in 45. Thanks, Clark. We appreciate you, too.

[alnorth]

I don't understand why people are outraged at the quoted paragraph or the story as a whole. Its pretty much completely accurate. The international series has been very successful, and it is important to the NFL. If giving up a home game this year puts pressure on successful franchises to do the same in the future, then that makes a lot of sense as well.

[KCTitus]

And this is why we haven't won a playoff game in 20 years, nor a Super Bowl in 45. Thanks, Clark. We appreciate you, too.

You're putting all that on Clark? You realize Clark has been the actual 'owner' for less than a decade, yes?

I will agree, however, that Lamar got his championship and didnt seem all that interested in one after that.

Still, it's the football guys that put the product on the field, the owner just pays the bills.

[alnorth]

The stadium wasn't even full. I saw on the broadcast that several rows of the seats had a chiefs covering over them. I would probably be correct to assume that Detroit's side had the same thing. London and/or the UK must be paying a lot of money to get the NFL in Europe.

Wembley stadium seats 86,000 for American Football. Attendance was 83,624 (97.2% full)

[Bugeater]

It's tantamount to theft, IMO. Every lost home game is money out of the pockets of working class folk in the service industry & food out of the mouths of their children. If a pro sports organization is partly publicly funded in any significant capacity then they have an obligation, in my opinion, to play as many home games as they are allowed. Entire economies spring up around that public funding, and its the lower rungs on the ladder that get hit hardest when a home game is lost.

I'm waiting for one of these cities to file a lawsuit over this bullshit. I don't understand why it hasn't happened yet.

[Brock]

Every owner in the nfl will say exactly the same thing

[rabblerouser]

I'm waiting for one of these cities to file a lawsuit over this bullshit. I don't understand why it hasn't happened yet.

Probably because the people who would need to bring forth the suit are too broke to hire legal representation??

[alnorth]

I'm waiting for one of these cities to file a lawsuit over this bullshit. I don't understand why it hasn't happened yet.

It hasn't happened yet because that would be a very absurd lawsuit. The city is not even guaranteed to keep their team past the end of their current lease, much less 8 regular season home games every year.

[King_Chief_Fan]

You're putting all that on Clark? You realize Clark has been the actual 'owner' for less than a decade, yes?

I will agree, however, that Lamar got his championship and didnt seem all that interested in one after that.

Still, it's the football guys that put the product on the field, the owner just pays the bills.

If you were paying the bills, would you be satisfied with what is happening with the Chiefs? Owners generally hold people accountable for poor results.

[wazu]

Wow. What an absurd overreaction this thread is. I guess I gotta say, if not watching the 2-5 Chiefs take on a terrible Lions team in person upsets you, then you are a bigger fan than me.

[rabblerouser]

If you were paying the bills, would you be satisfied with what is happening with the Chiefs? Owners generally hold people accountable for poor results.

The Colts were in the AFC Championship Game last year and just fired their OC.

Todd Haley was fired less than a year after going 10-6 and winning the division.

Andy Reid has not done a fucking thing since going 9-0 against backups and 3rd string QBs in early 2013.

These are just facts.

[Mile High Mania]

If it's great business and good for teams... then send over the top teams. If you want to generate interest, you have to do better than Bills/Jags.

Don't send the spare teams that are looking for exposure - send the best of the best, really try to do it right.

And, not sure what I'm missing, but why couldn't both teams playing in Europe be playing 'road games'?

Grabbed this from Wikipedia about next season -
"2016[edit]
On October 7, 2015 the league announced that a resolution had been passed to schedule international games at additional locations to Tottenham until 2025. This means games will still take place at Wembley in 2016 but it is also possible games will take place outside of Wembley. Mexico City is thought likely to join the slate for 2016.[42] On October 22, 2015 it was confirmed that at least two games per year will remain at Wembley until at least 2020 and that the Jacksonville Jaguars will continue to play a home game there annually throughout the agreement.[43] Subsequent to this, on November 3, 2015 the NFL announced that it had reached an agreement with the Rugby Football Union to host regular season games at Twickenham Stadium from 2016 onwards, with a minimum of three, and as many as five games to be held over the initial agreement period of three years.[44]

Jacksonville will face either the Denver Broncos, Oakland Raiders, Minnesota Vikings, Green Bay Packers, an AFC North team, or one of their divisional rivals at Wembley and it is rumored that the Washington Redskins are considering playing a home game there too. Green Bay have confirmed they would be interested in traveling to London as an away team.[45][46]

Both the Houston Texans and Pittsburgh Steelers have expressed interest in playing a game at Estadio Azteca (or possibly Estadio Olímpico Universitario) in Mexico City for 2016 although Houston would not be prepared to give up a home fixture.[47][48] (The two teams are not currently slated to face each other in 2016, unless they finish in the same position in their respective divisions in the 2015 season standings.)"

[Brock]

If you were paying the bills, would you be satisfied with what is happening with the Chiefs? Owners generally hold people accountable for poor results.

He's been through 3 gms and 4 hcs so far

[The Franchise]

Clark Hunt is trying to make money for his business? Holy shit....I'm shocked.

[Bugeater]

It hasn't happened yet because that would be a very absurd lawsuit. The city is not even guaranteed to keep their team past the end of their current lease, much less 8 regular season home games every year.
So it's just another example of cities being held hostage by the team. Didn't the lease just get renewed with the renovations?

[FloridaMan88]

Clark gave up a home game for the London game and gave up an available weekend at Arrowhead for the American Royal.

Clark is in the entertainment business, owners such as Robert Kraft are in the business of winning.

[FloridaMan88]

Clark Hunt is trying to make money for his business? Holy shit....I'm shocked.

Robert Kraft is in the business of making money as well... do you seem him readily giving up a home game to play in London?

[KCTitus]

If you were paying the bills, would you be satisfied with what is happening with the Chiefs? Owners generally hold people accountable for poor results.

Well, I'm a fan and so I would want the team to succeed on the field...that's a completely different perspective than an owner of a franchise who has to take into consideration the overall success of the league. Should I hope that Clark has the same desire to win a SB as I do, sure. Does he? No clue.

It seems to me, at least, that Clark has acted much quicker than his father in regard to holding people accountable. He can hire/fire the GM and HC. Naturally, those changes will necessitate changes at lower levels. I dont expect the owner to be involved in the hiring decisions that are the responsibility of the HC and GM.

[Rain Man]

Robert Kraft is in the business of making money as well... do you seem him readily giving up a home game to play in London?

The NFL is testing the market for moving an NFL team there, not starting one up. That's why it's the Rams and Jaguars playing there consistently. Teams that won't move probably won't have "home games" in London.

[Just Passin' By]

It hasn't happened yet because that would be a very absurd lawsuit. The city is not even guaranteed to keep their team past the end of their current lease, much less 8 regular season home games every year.

There are teams with leases that require them to play their home games at the specific stadium, so a lawsuit wouldn't be absurd at all. In fact, when the Bengals signed their new lease, it specifically allowed for them to play two 'home' games elsewhere in any 5 year period, in order to avoid any problems.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000342199/article/bengals-new-lease-permits-international-home-games

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/04/17/new-stadium-deal-gives-bengals-the-green-light-to-host-games-in-london/

[The Franchise]

Robert Kraft is in the business of making money as well... do you seem him readily giving up a home game to play in London?

You mean like back in 2012?

[Dayze]

You mean like back in 2012?

LMAO

[Just Passin' By]

You mean like back in 2012?

The Patriots were the visiting team for that game. The Rams were the home team.

[The Franchise]

Robert Kraft is in the business of making money as well... do you seem him readily giving up a home game to play in London?

You mean like back in 2012?

Oh....and don't forget 2009 as well.

[FloridaMan88]

You mean like back in 2012?

St. Louis was the "home" team in London and gave up a home game in 2012, not the Patriots.

In 2009 when the Patriots played in London, Tampa was the home team and gave up a home game.

The Patriots have never given up a home game to play in London.

[The Franchise]

The Patriots were the visiting team for that game. The Rams were the home team.

Shit....nevermind. 2009 was an away game as well.

[Gonzo]

Meh, whatever money the city lost on the game was made up for with the Royals.

[ChiefsCountry]

810 played the entire interview they had with Hunt on Sunday. It was actually pretty informative. Another reason they pushed for the game this year was the success of the Royals and the booking of the Sports Complex. They tried to bring in more concerts to offset losing a Chiefs game day.

[Otter]

Were season ticket prices at least 15% (3% for inconvenience) lower than the previous year? If not, I'd be figuring out a way to give the Hunts a big old middle finger.

[DaneMcCloud]

But chairman Clark Hunt said that game probably wouldn’t involve the Chiefs relinquishing a home game, as they did with the Lions game.

"I don’t foresee us playing a home game (internationally) in the near future" he said. “It would be much more likely that we would play an away game before we would play another home game. But certainly, I don’t want to give up another home game in the near future.”

Is the reading comprehension around here approaching zero?

[Bugeater]

There are teams with leases that require them to play their home games at the specific stadium, so a lawsuit wouldn't be absurd at all. In fact, when the Bengals signed their new lease, it specifically allowed for them to play two 'home' games elsewhere in any 5 year period, in order to avoid any problems.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000342199/article/bengals-new-lease-permits-international-home-games

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/04/17/new-stadium-deal-gives-bengals-the-green-light-to-host-games-in-london/
Interesting. Probably means Clark gave some sort of concession to the county the last time the lease was renewed in order to be able to do this.

[Bugeater]

Is the reading comprehension around here approaching zero?
We just want to be outraged.

[rabblerouser]

Is the reading comprehension around here approaching zero?

Approaching?? No...I'd say the level has been statically there for a while now.

[Eleazar]

Trying to decide if this false thread title is worth sending the OP an infraction over. Eh, maybe just a neg rep.

[rabblerouser]

Trying to decide if this false thread title is worth sending the OP an infraction over. Eh, maybe just a neg rep.

Well, CHunt said that he didn't want to lose another home game, so maybe really could care less and be like, "fuck em all, I don't care I'm counting my money."??

So yeah...neg rep for vagueness in wording.

[Eleazar]

Well, CHunt said that he didn't want to lose another home game, so maybe really could care less and be like, "fuck em all, I don't care I'm counting my money."??

So yeah...neg rep for vagueness in wording.

The title is completely false. Clark didn't say that or anything like that. He made some throwaway statement that he thought the London games were a good idea and he's glad they participated.

In fact, the Teicher piece specifically says they are NOT likely to play a home game there again anytime soon.

But for some reason there are a few yokels who are unhinged that the Chiefs might suck their way through 7 dates at Arrowhead instead of 8 every couple of years. Why, who can guess? But some people are ready to launch a rebellion over the team playing 1 London game in what, 4-5 years of the international series.

[FloridaMan88]

The title is completely false. Clark didn't say that or anything like that. He made some throwaway statement that he thought the London games were a good idea and he's glad they participated.

In fact, the Teicher piece specifically says they are NOT likely to play a home game there again anytime soon.

But for some reason there are a few yokels who are unhinged that the Chiefs might suck their way through 7 dates at Arrowhead instead of 8 every couple of years. Why, who can guess? But some people are ready to launch a rebellion over the team playing 1 London game in what, 4-5 years of the international series.

I think the point is why does Clark have to be so eager to do something that puts the Chiefs at a competitive disadvantage... i.e. give up a home game at Arrowhead?

[rabblerouser]

The title is completely false. Clark didn't say that or anything like that. He made some throwaway statement that he thought the London games were a good idea and he's glad they participated.

In fact, the Teicher piece specifically says they are NOT likely to play a home game there again anytime soon.

But for some reason there are a few yokels who are unhinged that the Chiefs might suck their way through 7 dates at Arrowhead instead of 8 every couple of years. Why, who can guess? But some people are ready to launch a rebellion over the team playing 1 London game in what, 4-5 years of the international series.

Amen.

I think the point is why does Clark have to be so eager to do something that puts the Chiefs at a competitive disadvantage... i.e. give up a home game at Arrowhead?

What, you think they woulda curbstomped the Detoilet Lions 55-3 inside Arrowhead??

Maybe. But how much of an edge do you need to obliterate the Lions??

If anything, it seemingly made the team sharper, knowing that they didn't have that Arrowhead energy to draw from...

[HonestChieffan]

Clark is right.

Op should be ashamed. Clark did not dis the fans.

[Bowser]

Meanwhile....Great Seats Still Available!

[Rain Man]

Is the reading comprehension around here approaching zero?

Amphibians. Why do you ask?

[Bowser]

Is the reading comprehension around here approaching zero?

WE WILL BE OUTRAGED AND YOU WILL LIKE IT

[alnorth]

So it's just another example of cities being held hostage by the team. Didn't the lease just get renewed with the renovations?

Well yes, but when a city builds a stadium, they are doing it only with the guarantee that the team remains in the city for X years. There is no guarantee of 8 games a year played in that stadium.

If you don't like it, fine. Don't build/renovate your stadium, and lose your team to a city that will.

[alnorth]

The NFL is testing the market for moving an NFL team there, not starting one up. That's why it's the Rams and Jaguars playing there consistently. Teams that won't move probably won't have "home games" in London.

Even if they have no intention of placing a team there anytime soon, it still makes a lot of sense to fill whatever demand there is overseas for live meaningful NFL games. If they can build fans overseas, then they can sell their games to local TV, sell online subscriptions and apparel, making more money, etc.

[rabblerouser]

Meanwhile....Great Seats Still Available!

Lots of division games coming up!!

Get your tickets for the Chiefs playoff run TODAY!!

ROFL

[Baby Lee]

Amphibians. Why do you ask?

Garlics make feets stank.

[displacedinMN]

grammatically

Good at grammar, bad at typing. Getting worse all the time

[Mile High Mania]

Lots of division games coming up!!

Get your tickets for the Chiefs playoff run TODAY!!

ROFL

Hey, think of the marketing campaign.. they could really make a show of it, with events onsite, shirts -- "Every game is a playoff game, be a part of the action now."

[Valiant]

People just need start putting their wallet where their mouth is and quit spending money.

actually all the fans of each club needs to.

quit going to games and buying gear. Cities also need to tell them to get bent when they want new stadiums.

especially when you have franchises like the chiefs. An owner who likes money over championships.


personally i would love to see a new league take them on. Start out with 8 to 10 teams and a minor league system.

[alnorth]

And, not sure what I'm missing, but why couldn't both teams playing in Europe be playing 'road games'?

It is not mathematically possible to avoid taking a home game away from someone when a game is played overseas.

[alnorth]

People just need start putting their wallet where their mouth is and quit spending money.

actually all the fans of each club needs to.

quit going to games and buying gear. Cities also need to tell them to get bent when they want new stadiums.

especially when you have franchises like the chiefs. An owner who likes money over championships.


personally i would love to see a new league take them on. Start out with 8 to 10 teams and a minor league system.

What is the weather like in fantasyland? Is it near the ocean?

[KCTitus]

People just need start putting their wallet where their mouth is and quit spending money.

actually all the fans of each club needs to.

quit going to games and buying gear. Cities also need to tell them to get bent when they want new stadiums.

especially when you have franchises like the chiefs. An owner who likes money over championships.


personally i would love to see a new league take them on. Start out with 8 to 10 teams and a minor league system.

You're missing one big piece of the revenue puzzle...the TV contracts. If you want to try to 'boycott' every NFL sponsor, good luck.

[ChiliConCarnage]

The Patriots have never given up a home game to play in London.

and it wouldn't make much sense for it to happen. Clark and every other owner gets more $ from Patriots tickets sold than from tickets sold at some small market that's charging half as much per non-premium ticket.

[Mile High Mania]

It is not mathematically possible to avoid taking a home game away from someone when a game is played overseas.

That's that part where I get lost...

I realize that divisional games wouldn't go over, then you have the games vs the set division based on order of finish, those shouldn't go over and you have what 2 games per team that are really just there, right.

So, with those 2 games per team, there's got to be something that can be done to make what we send over more interesting.

Maybe that's a way to drive "sell outs or ticket sales". If you're the Jags or a club like that and your not selling out home games, guess what - we ship 1 off every other year.

There's no way one of the big teams would just say yes to shipping a home game and why would they do it?

[Mr. Flopnuts]

This has been mentioned before, and maybe even in this very thread, but it is worth repeating infinitely. At some point, cities are going to push back against this. When you lobby, and demand public tax dollars to fund stadiums for a tax exempt league all in the name of job creation, and stimulating local economies, you better be careful how many of those limited events you take away from the very people who fund your stadium, then turn around and pay for parking, tickets, concessions, and merchandise. I'd like to see cities take a hard line stand and demand x amount of dollars back from those funded stadiums for every game lost to this gigantic expansion effort. Fucking douchebags...

[Mile High Mania]

This has been mentioned before, and maybe even in this very thread, but it is worth repeating infinitely. At some point, cities are going to push back against this. When you lobby, and demand public tax dollars to fund stadiums for a tax exempt league all in the name of job creation, and stimulating local economies, you better be careful how many of those limited events you take away from the very people who fund your stadium, then turn around and pay for parking, tickets, concessions, and merchandise. I'd like to see cities take a hard line stand and demand x amount of dollars back from those funded stadiums for every game lost to this gigantic expansion effort. ****ing douchebags...

That's why I'm thinking this needs to be positioned as an incentive for fans to buy tickets... not sure how you would do it without making it look clumsy or come off as a "buy tickets or else", but seriously... they have to figure out a way to make the games worth a damn if they're going to do this more.

I just don't know what the end game is, having a team in London? Why? I don't get the point.

What have the ticket sales been like game over game the last few years? Are they buying tickets because it's a rarity or is there actually a burning desire to see more games?

[RealSNR]

I don't have a problem giving up away games to go to London. Do it all you want

[wazu]

This has been mentioned before, and maybe even in this very thread, but it is worth repeating infinitely. At some point, cities are going to push back against this. When you lobby, and demand public tax dollars to fund stadiums for a tax exempt league all in the name of job creation, and stimulating local economies, you better be careful how many of those limited events you take away from the very people who fund your stadium, then turn around and pay for parking, tickets, concessions, and merchandise. I'd like to see cities take a hard line stand and demand x amount of dollars back from those funded stadiums for every game lost to this gigantic expansion effort. Fucking douchebags...

I would argue there is a huge benefit to having your city name promoted internationally. Giving up a home game every other year or so is no big deal.

[Toby Waller]

the wealthy person did what the wealthy person wanted to do.
Tough tooty on you

[TLO]

As long as the Royals don't have to give up any games, I don't give a shit.

[alnorth]

This has been mentioned before, and maybe even in this very thread, but it is worth repeating infinitely. At some point, cities are going to push back against this. When you lobby, and demand public tax dollars to fund stadiums for a tax exempt league all in the name of job creation, and stimulating local economies, you better be careful how many of those limited events you take away from the very people who fund your stadium, then turn around and pay for parking, tickets, concessions, and merchandise. I'd like to see cities take a hard line stand and demand x amount of dollars back from those funded stadiums for every game lost to this gigantic expansion effort. Fucking douchebags...

I strongly disagree with this. The cities are not going to do a damned thing, stadiums will continue to be built and renovated, and even if we get to the point where EVERY team plays a game overseas and EVERY team loses a home game once every two years, fans will adjust and get used to it.

[alnorth]

That's that part where I get lost...

I realize that divisional games wouldn't go over, then you have the games vs the set division based on order of finish, those shouldn't go over and you have what 2 games per team that are really just there, right.

So, with those 2 games per team, there's got to be something that can be done to make what we send over more interesting.

Maybe that's a way to drive "sell outs or ticket sales". If you're the Jags or a club like that and your not selling out home games, guess what - we ship 1 off every other year.

There's no way one of the big teams would just say yes to shipping a home game and why would they do it?

Not sure, I was just answering your question on why we couldn't just have it be a road game for both teams. That is not possible.

[alnorth]

What have the ticket sales been like game over game the last few years? Are they buying tickets because it's a rarity or is there actually a burning desire to see more games?

Tickets sales have been terrific for every game, even when its between two shitty teams. I do not believe London can support a local team, but I do think there's interest in the NFL as an occasional novelty a few times a year with many different teams barnstorming through. The international series is being expanded because its been very successful.

[007]

Were season ticket prices at least 15% (3% for inconvenience) lower than the previous year? If not, I'd be figuring out a way to give the Hunts a big old middle finger.They charged STH for 9 home games but raised the prices enough that you still paid more than last year.

[HemiEd]

Wow. If I were a season ticket holder, he just made the decision for me to never buy them again.

Teams from the NFL’s bigger markets have mostly resisted giving up a home game to play internationally. The Chiefs are the first team to relinquish a home game that either wasn’t playing in an obsolete stadium or having trouble selling tickets, or both.


Translation: Our fans have kept buying the same old QB approach and the hope of getting a wild card bid every year, so I know I can get by with this shit.

[Bugeater]

Well yes, but when a city builds a stadium, they are doing it only with the guarantee that the team remains in the city for X years. There is no guarantee of 8 games a year played in that stadium.

Well they're pretty stupid for not writing that into the lease, and apparently the Bengals old lease was written that way.

If you don't like it, fine. Don't build/renovate your stadium, and lose your team to a city that will.
And that's what I meant when I said "held hostage". Then again, I don't think the list of cities that are ready to poach a team is really all that long.

[scho63]

Is the reading comprehension around here approaching zero?

My reading comprehension is just fine. You obviously need help to understand a very soft and weak answer that you normally hear from politicians.

I love the bullshit political answer he gave. Why didn't he just come out and say "I don't want to give away another home game for a minimum of "x" years because it's unfair to our fans."

But chairman Clark Hunt said that game probably wouldn’t involve the Chiefs relinquishing a home game, as they did with the Lions game.

"I don’t foresee us playing a home game (internationally) in the near future" he said. “It would be much more likely that we would play an away game before we would play another home game. But certainly, I don’t want to give up another home game in the near future.”

[Bugeater]

What I took from it was that he doesn't regret fucking over the fans and the city, but it will be a while until he fucks them over again.

[Eleazar]

That's why I'm thinking this needs to be positioned as an incentive for fans to buy tickets... not sure how you would do it without making it look clumsy or come off as a "buy tickets or else", but seriously... they have to figure out a way to make the games worth a damn if they're going to do this more.

I just don't know what the end game is, having a team in London? Why? I don't get the point.

What have the ticket sales been like game over game the last few years? Are they buying tickets because it's a rarity or is there actually a burning desire to see more games?

The tickets sell like hotcackes over there so far.

I actually don't think Goodell wants a team over there. I think even he can see that it's not workable.

I think the league makes plenty of money off these games, and eventually he hopes to have a TV deal in the UK that's worth some money. That's what Roger bleeds... green.

[philfree]

The tickets sell like hotcackes over there so far.

I actually don't think Goodell wants a team over there. I think even he can see that it's not workable.

I think the league makes plenty of money off these games, and eventually he hopes to have a TV deal in the UK that's worth some money. That's what Roger bleeds... green.

I bet they are making more money playing a game overseas then they do here at this point or they wouldn't be doing it.

[chiefzilla1501]

The tickets sell like hotcackes over there so far.

I actually don't think Goodell wants a team over there. I think even he can see that it's not workable.

I think the league makes plenty of money off these games, and eventually he hopes to have a TV deal in the UK that's worth some money. That's what Roger bleeds... green.

Roger doesn't give a shit about "workable." He's been ruining the game for years at the expense of money. If he finds a franchise in Europe that's more lucrative than a domestic market, he'll do it. And this is why everybody hates him.

[baitism]

Just move the effing Chiefs to London so we can get a new franchise with ownership that wants to win.

[WeathermanKumke]

Wow more bitching even thou we curb stomped the lions 45-10. Clark says it's going to be atleast another 4-5 years before another home game. I didn't see people bitch in the 90s when the NFL was doing the exact same thing (I guess people forget Cowboys vs Chiefs in Mexico or Packers vs Chiefs in Tokyo) and say how Playing international preseason games make the players hurt more often and how Lamar was a greedy bitch for choosing money over giving International fans a way to see the sport and tapping into w new economical market to strengthen the league.

[chiefzilla1501]

Wow more bitching even thou we curb stomped the lions 45-10. Clark says it's going to be atleast another 4-5 years before another home game. I didn't see people bitch in the 90s when the NFL was doing the exact same thing (I guess people forget Cowboys vs Chiefs in Mexico or Packers vs Chiefs in Tokyo) and say how Playing international preseason games make the players hurt more often and how Lamar was a greedy bitch for choosing money over giving International fans a way to see the sport and tapping into w new economical market to strengthen the league.

There are only 16 games a season. In a league where homefield advantage is critically important. You're forcing 2 teams to prep for a game with serious jet lag. And given how much the NFL bullies cities and taxpayers to give in to their ridiculous demands, the NFL should have no business fucking over cities that are heavily publicly financed.

Fuck any idea that puts money over the integrity of the game. Fuck any idea that fucks over the general public that is filling the pockets of NFL owners.

Fuck international games. Find different ways to do this. Spend offseasons, training camps, and preseasons abroad -- nobody in the US cares about those games.

[alnorth]

Fuck international games. Find different ways to do this. Spend offseasons, training camps, and preseasons abroad -- nobody in the US cares about those games.

There is no other way. Its either this or nothing. NFL fans overseas aren't stupid, they know preseason games don't count.

If the NFL can slowly build it up so that a decade from now they can send 16 games a year overseas (so that each team plays exactly one game a year outside the US) to build fans around the world, that would be very profitable, good for the sport, and they'd be dumb to not at least explore it.

[J Diddy]

Harumph!!!

I am teh outrage!

[chiefzilla1501]

There is no other way. Its either this or nothing. NFL fans overseas aren't stupid, they know preseason games don't count.

If the NFL can slowly build it up so that a decade from now they can send 16 games a year overseas (so that each team plays exactly one game a year outside the US) to build fans around the world, that would be very profitable, good for the sport, and they'd be dumb to not at least explore it.

I fail to see how an initiative that detracts from the actual game itself, but makes the NFL much more money that they don't even need, is considered "good for the sport."

[Chromatic]

This has been mentioned before, and maybe even in this very thread, but it is worth repeating infinitely. At some point, cities are going to push back against this. When you lobby, and demand public tax dollars to fund stadiums for a tax exempt league all in the name of job creation, and stimulating local economies, you better be careful how many of those limited events you take away from the very people who fund your stadium, then turn around and pay for parking, tickets, concessions, and merchandise. I'd like to see cities take a hard line stand and demand x amount of dollars back from those funded stadiums for every game lost to this gigantic expansion effort. Fucking douchebags...

Oliver tackles this issue pretty well, imo. It's pretty far out there on what these guys get away with and how things are run.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xcwJt4bcnXs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[chiefzilla1501]

And for the love of God get rid of Thursday night football as well. Same category of -- hurts the game, makes NFL more money. No fucking thank you.

[alnorth]

I fail to see how an initiative that detracts from the actual game itself, but makes the NFL much more money that they don't even need, is considered "good for the sport."

If a ton of people outside the USA cares about the NFL that otherwise would not have cared without the international series, that is obviously good for the sport.

[chiefzilla1501]

If a ton of people outside the USA cares about the NFL that otherwise would not have cared without the international series, that is obviously good for the sport.

Advantages:
Makes NFL and rich owners more money

Disadvantages:
-Takes away a home game. Very important in a very short 16 game season
-Forces teams to prep through a short week dealing with major jet lag
-Despite the NFL fleecing cities for massive public financing of stadiums, it dicks over home markets, particularly entertainment districts. Big time.

So again. How does making more money in a league that is already dripping with money do a damn thing good for the sport? It's sad when we think that making money is "good for the sport" vs. protecting the integrity of a game

[Hydrae]

There are only 16 games a season. In a league where homefield advantage is critically important. You're forcing 2 teams to prep for a game with serious jet lag. And given how much the NFL bullies cities and taxpayers to give in to their ridiculous demands, the NFL should have no business ****ing over cities that are heavily publicly financed.

To keep the competitive balance I would propose that they work up to 16 games overseas, all on Thursday nights. The team involved would each have a bye week the week before so that they will have been off for 10-11 days (depending on a Monday game) and can leave early to avoid any jet lag issues. Coming back they will again be off for another 10-11 days to get back home and adjust to the local time.

Every team gives up one home game every two years. The games can be held wherever they want in the world with this much time between games and the games should be more competitive than the Thursday night crap we get now.

[Discuss Thrower]

To keep the competitive balance I would propose that they work up to 16 games overseas, all on Thursday nights. The team involved would each have a bye week the week before so that they will have been off for 10-11 days (depending on a Monday game) and can leave early to avoid any jet lag issues. Coming back they will again be off for another 10-11 days to get back home and adjust to the local time.

Every team gives up one home game every two years. The games can be held wherever they want in the world with this much time between games and the games should be more competitive than the Thursday night crap we get now.

Denver and probably a few other teams are legally precluded from giving up a home game, so that won't work unless (in Denver's case) you increase the schedule by one game thereby the Broncos play "10" games at Pile High.

[alnorth]

Advantages:
Makes NFL and rich owners more money

Disadvantages:
-Takes away a home game. Very important in a very short 16 game season
-Forces teams to prep through a short week dealing with major jet lag
-Despite the NFL fleecing cities for massive public financing of stadiums, it dicks over home markets, particularly entertainment districts. Big time.

So again. How does making more money in a league that is already dripping with money do a damn thing good for the sport? It's sad when we think that making money is "good for the sport" vs. protecting the integrity of a game

You are just obviously dead-ass wrong here. All of the other major sports get a ton of international talent every year. If American Football is popular outside the USA, then amateur football might develop, leading to a larger talent pool for college football, and then the pros, etc. Yes, its also profitable for the NFL, but if you can't or won't recognize the fact that having American Football be more than just a weird local sport that only Americans care about is good for the game, then I don't know what to tell you.

Also, you are getting amazingly bent out of shape over one damned home game every few years.

[chiefzilla1501]

To keep the competitive balance I would propose that they work up to 16 games overseas, all on Thursday nights. The team involved would each have a bye week the week before so that they will have been off for 10-11 days (depending on a Monday game) and can leave early to avoid any jet lag issues. Coming back they will again be off for another 10-11 days to get back home and adjust to the local time.

Every team gives up one home game every two years. The games can be held wherever they want in the world with this much time between games and the games should be more competitive than the Thursday night crap we get now.

All that does is create more competitive balance. It doesn't fix the competitive imbalance.

They would still have to play the next week recovering from reverse jet lag playing a team that has 10 un-lagged days to prep. And when it comes to playoff bubbles, you'll have teams with 8 home games making the playoffs over teams who only had 7. It's a pure money grab.

[chiefzilla1501]

You are just obviously dead-ass wrong here. All of the other major sports get a ton of international talent every year. If American Football is popular outside the USA, then amateur football might develop, leading to a larger talent pool for college football, and then the pros, etc. Yes, its also profitable for the NFL, but if you can't or won't recognize the fact that having American Football be more than just a weird local sport that only Americans care about is good for the game, then I don't know what to tell you.

Also, you are getting amazingly bent out of shape over one damned home game every few years.

I'm bent out of shape about it? It's 6% of an entire season. Tell me another league that would marginalize that. No one game is more critical in pro sports than an NFL game because of how few games they play.

Okay, I agree that there is some small positive benefit to what you say above. But it is not worth creating competitive balance to do that. And there's a major limit to how much you can grow the sport beyond how fast it's growing now. Because football only works if you have a great deal of structure. It's not like basketball or soccer where you can learn to play well by casual pickup games.

There are ways to grow intrigue. Silly to believe you have to go all-in or bust unless you're going for a money grab. Start by shipping over as many meaningless games and events to Europe as possible.

[Bugeater]

Denver and probably a few other teams are legally precluded from giving up a home game, so that won't work unless (in Denver's case) you increase the schedule by one game thereby the Broncos play "10" games at Pile High.
How is Denver "legally precluded" from giving up a home game?

[Discuss Thrower]

How is Denver "legally precluded" from giving up a home game?

Contract between the team and the municipal body which owns the stadium. Broncos must play 10 games a year to maintain the lease.

[Bugeater]

Contract between the team and the municipal body which owns the stadium. Broncos must play 10 games a year to maintain the lease.
Weird, Alnorth said that leases don't cover the amount of games played each year.

[Discuss Thrower]

http://espn.go.com/blog/denver-broncos/post/_/id/9766/why-the-manning-broncos-havent-played-in-london

Saurce.

[chiefzilla1501]

Here are a few other ideas:
-Ship more preseason games and training camp time over to Europe
-Ship over the pro bowl and all their competitions
-Play LOTS of friendlies. Including in the postseason. An awesome experience -- Chiefs' fans can watch Aaron Murray play a full game. UK can root for their home team to beat he Chiefs' backups
-Create a European combine
-Hell, if owners are going to fight to expand playoffs, then consider competitive exhibitions in the postseason

All of these things significantly grow interest and TV revenue internationally as well as domestically. NONE of them **** with regular season games. Does very little to dick over NFL markets that heavily rely on home games.

[Bugeater]

http://espn.go.com/blog/denver-broncos/post/_/id/9766/why-the-manning-broncos-havent-played-in-london

Saurce.
Nice. Just another example of how the Broncos are about winning and the Chiefs are about revenue.

[Mile High Mania]

http://espn.go.com/blog/denver-broncos/post/_/id/9766/why-the-manning-broncos-havent-played-in-london

Saurce.

Sweet