Chiefs Interview with Clark about recent changes - Page 3

**DaFace** · 07-03-2013, 11:29 AM

Some interesting tidbits in here. Lots of acknowledging of SOC in the setup from Forbes, and a lot of talk about why he went with Andy Reid and John Dorsey.

Dayze · 07-03-2013, 02:54 PM

get a league going where it's paid by how many games you win lol. or $ per game.

**DaFace** · 07-03-2013, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowser

Zach is going to unleash a furious anger in your direction with comments like that.

I doubt it. It's pretty much factual that, with a handful of exceptions, the best players in the world don't play in the MLS. They can make far more money elsewhere.

chiefzilla1501 · 07-03-2013, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdcox

That team is going to be continously jet-lagged. There was one study I saw that indicated that home field advantage was proportional to distance travelled. I really hate the idea.

It is a ridiculously stupid idea with the only intention of making money instead of protecting the integrity of the game.

Which is why moron Goodell is probably going to do it.

Putting preseason games there isn't a bad idea. But keep that shit out of the regular season. No player is going to want to play there because they're going to have a terrible road record every single year.

ChiefsCountry · 07-03-2013, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dayze

I personally liked watching NFLE ball.

I wish it were still around.

Agreed. Same concept but put it here in the states in medium sized cities and the diehards like on here would go apeshit over it.
Posted via Mobile Device

**chefsos** · 07-03-2013, 04:42 PM

I don't think there is any way in hell that you can, fairly, have one NFL team in a faraway outpost such as London or Tokyo or wherever. You'd have to get more than one team relatively nearby, probably by moving (or creating) an entire division.

**chefsos** · 07-03-2013, 04:57 PM

Also, and I'm likely in the minority with this, I really don't see an eventual overseas Super Bowl as a travesty. It's never been a home game for anyone anyway, and it hasn't been about the diehard fans of either participant for some time now.

BigBeauford · 07-03-2013, 05:40 PM

They could play half the season at home and half away, with every team that just played them a bye week.

jd1020 · 07-03-2013, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

I doubt it. It's pretty much factual that, with a handful of exceptions, the best players in the world don't play in the MLS. They can make far more money elsewhere.

Yup. The US teams goalie plays on Everton in Europe and has been over there since 2003. The US soccer scene blows dick compared to virtually anywhere else in the world. Whats our national team ranked at? Barely in the top 30? Pfffft.

Sannyasi · 07-03-2013, 07:14 PM

The NFL would be fine in England. Its not even really Europe. Its like Diet Europe.

DTLB58 · 07-03-2013, 09:34 PM

This crap about a team in London and a SB overseas is just stupid.

DTLB58 · 07-03-2013, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crossbow

What do you guys think of the NFL wanting to put a team in England?

Focking stupid. The American Football Conference.

I think they are fooling themselves with the popularity of the NFL in England.

DTLB58 · 07-03-2013, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chefsos

Also, and I'm likely in the minority with this, I really don't see an eventual overseas Super Bowl as a travesty. It's never been a home game for anyone anyway, and it hasn't been about the diehard fans of either participant for some time now.

Just try it once and see the uproar. #Egypt

If this years SB isn't a blizzard in NY and more and more of these Northern Owners that have been in the league forever want and get a SB (Bears, Chiefs, Broncos, ect) kicked booted from a SB because of London?

Yea, I'd love to watch the most important game of the year from another country with fans in the stands, maybe not even sold out, who don't even fully understand the game, let alone the history of it. Cheering for the wrong reasons at the wrong time

I've waited 40 years to see the Chiefs in the SB and the NFL wants to tell me it's a good idea to promote the 'brand' to ship my ass on a plane to London to watch them in person for the championship instead of possibly hundreds of miles and a few short hours away? Are you serious?

And yes, you are the minority.

**Anyong Bluth** · 07-03-2013, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdcox

That team is going to be continously jet-lagged. There was one study I saw that indicated that home field advantage was proportional to distance travelled. I really hate the idea.

Yep, saw a stat last season about the abysmal winning percentage of West coast teams playing on the East coast in the early game slot (noon central time).

Can only be even nuttier when you add an additional 6 hours to your time change unless the London team would strictly play all their home games at night. Probably would have them do a stretch of 2 games at home and then 2 statesside to cut down on travel back & forth? Would definitely be an odd situation logisticswise... .

**cdcox** · 07-03-2013, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theelusiveeightrop

I'd like to read that study. Link?

It was several years ago. You can find lots of studies if you google:

home field advantage distance traveled

GordonGekko · 07-03-2013, 10:03 PM

Very interesting if London got a team. I can definitely see how the FA thing might get tricky, but really it is another team meaning 53+ more opportunities for guys to make a team and make bank. London is a huge city and even if 1/3 the populace supported the team, that's like 4 million people more than enough to support an NFL franchise.

NFL's first real problem though, is LA not having a team, to me that would bug the shit out of me if I were an owner or commissioner.

07-03-2013, 11:29 AM
DaFace Kind of a mod Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Donkey Land Casino cash: $-1943101	Interview with Clark about recent changes Some interesting tidbits in here. Lots of acknowledging of SOC in the setup from Forbes, and a lot of talk about why he went with Andy Reid and John Dorsey.
Posts: 53,155

07-03-2013, 02:54 PM	#31
Dayze Resident Glue Sniffer Join Date: Nov 2003 Casino cash: $1679358	get a league going where it's paid by how many games you win lol. or $ per game. __________________ Life is 99% inspiration, 1% Perspiration, and 1% Attention to Detial. RIP & Godspeed: Saccoppo Lonewolf Ed Fire Me Boy
Posts: 37,463

07-03-2013, 04:42 PM	#35
chefsos Fifty eight sixty two... Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Felton, DE Casino cash: $8247676	I don't think there is any way in hell that you can, fairly, have one NFL team in a faraway outpost such as London or Tokyo or wherever. You'd have to get more than one team relatively nearby, probably by moving (or creating) an entire division.
Posts: 9,451

07-03-2013, 04:57 PM	#36
chefsos Fifty eight sixty two... Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Felton, DE Casino cash: $8247676	Also, and I'm likely in the minority with this, I really don't see an eventual overseas Super Bowl as a travesty. It's never been a home game for anyone anyway, and it hasn't been about the diehard fans of either participant for some time now.
Posts: 9,451

07-03-2013, 05:40 PM	#37
BigBeauford MVP Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Lenexa, KS Casino cash: $1386717	They could play half the season at home and half away, with every team that just played them a bye week.
Posts: 14,412

07-03-2013, 07:14 PM	#39
Sannyasi Veteran Join Date: Jan 2010 Casino cash: $9963714	The NFL would be fine in England. Its not even really Europe. Its like Diet Europe.
Posts: 2,616

07-03-2013, 09:34 PM	#40
DTLB58 DT CARD COLLECTOR Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: ManCave Casino cash: $10005837	This crap about a team in London and a SB overseas is just stupid. __________________ 667 Different DT cards and counting
Posts: 7,574

07-03-2013, 10:03 PM	#45
GordonGekko On the inside Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Ft. Worth, TX Casino cash: $9448880	Very interesting if London got a team. I can definitely see how the FA thing might get tricky, but really it is another team meaning 53+ more opportunities for guys to make a team and make bank. London is a huge city and even if 1/3 the populace supported the team, that's like 4 million people more than enough to support an NFL franchise. NFL's first real problem though, is LA not having a team, to me that would bug the shit out of me if I were an owner or commissioner.
Posts: 3,563