NFL considering having a game at BDS

https://247sports.com/Article/Alabama-Notre-Dame-could-play-host-to-NFL-games-138877643/

https://thespun.com/sec/alabama-cri...-discussed-playing-game-at-alabama-notre-dame

The NFL has also talked internally about playing games in other cities in the U.S. which do not have pro teams, with some buzz about playing a game at Notre Dame or Alabama, as well as Hawaii and cities in Canada. It is viewed as a unique and profound way to grow the game globally and extend the reach of sales, merchandising and broadcast rights around the globe, with there only so much more room for growth within America.​

Click to expand...

Interesting idea, but I think it would almost have to be a Falcons-Titans game, Falcons vs Saints game, or a Falcons/Titans vs a big team (Cowboys, Steelers, Packers, Patriots, or niners).

bamacon said:

I think it’s funny how they keep saying how great pro football is and yet they are having to try and grasp at gimmicks to get butts into seats. Some of the games I’ve watched recently might have half full stadiums. The Chargers cannot even fill a 15,000 capacity soccer facility. It’s pretty sad but A-day has a far bigger crowd than half of the NFL’s teams BIGGEST games of their season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

NFL teams are just like college teams, some sell out, but most dont. Teams like the Packers, Steelers, and Patriots pack the stadium despite the record, but teams like the Jags cant. But using the Chargers as an example is kinda like using Arkansas this year as an example of college sports for the same argument. Arkansas's largest attendance this year was against Portland St. All others were below 55k with the lowest being 40k.

As far as the LA Chargers. LA has always been the city of bandwagoners, you never see full stadiums pro or college. Its why the move from San Diego to LA has never made any logical sense other than the owner wanting to use public funding for the next Taj Mahal of stadiums. But also consider that the Chargers are technically a new team, and they haven't had time to develop a strong connection to LA.

Cruloc said:

Aren't the Chargers moving after this year? Maybe their fan base has checked out knowing the team won't be there anymore.

Click to expand...

They moved 2 years ago from San Diego. Their specific issue is that it was about their owner trying to hold the city of San Diego hostage, and the fighting Burgandys basically told him to kick rocks. So he decided to move them to LA with no fan base, and to a place that doesn't support teams not named the Lakers.

Point is they aren't a nostalgic team like the Raiders in which they are more about the name and not the city. San Diego was probably the best place for them.

CrimsonNagus said:

This makes more sense to me than putting a team in London.




They already moved and are playing in a soccer stadium until their new stadium is ready next year.

Click to expand...

Honestly I dont understand why places like San Antonio and St Louis dont have a team when they are built to host one with a strong pro fan base. But Good ole Roger is hell bent on putting a team in London or Mexico City.

CrimsonNagus said:

And the Rams had just moved back to LA the year before in 2016 so, now, a city that doesn't support football has 2 NFL teams.

Click to expand...

LA wanted one, got 2, and nearly had 3 had it not been for Las Vegas. But the move for LA was to build that stadium, and bring the Super Bowl back to LA. It wasnt for the people of LA to get behind a team.

Cruloc said:

London? Wasn't NFL Europe a failure? Why move one franchise to London? Makes no sense....but then again I'm not a wealthy NFL franchise owner that can hold a city hostage for a new stadium.

Click to expand...

Both the NFL and now the MLB are doing games in London. I think what people like Roger, don't understand is that just because its a sell out, it doesn't mean it always is. Imagine if the Bayern Munich played Real Madrid in at BDS.... BDS would be packed, but does that mean the UEFA should explore the idea of having a US member from Alabama? No it just means the interest in a major sports game from a different country peaked the interest for one weekend.




The Raiders had the opposite problem than the Rams and the Chargers, and probably the only team that should've moved. Oakland has done the A's and Raiders no favors by being stingy about the stadium issue. Oakland Coliseum is constantly voted the worst or 2nd worst stadium in MLB and NFL every year. The Raiders have begged for a new stadium for years, and LV said that they would build one. So the rest is history

CajunCrimson said:

There are bigger cities that just may not have enough people who make a big enough salary to support.....

San Antonio may be one of those cities. Their per capita is in the upper $40K, while Houston is in the lower $60K range.

Other big cities are similar - Memphis for one....

And what about Columbus OH? It's a bigger city than Cleveland OR Cinci.

San Jose metro has nearly 2 million people....

Click to expand...

Yes there are probably better options than SA and STL. I still say if the NFL was to expand internationally then Canada would be a better expansion than London or Mexico City. Atleast pro football has been proven popular there on a consistent basis. But I think there are many more deserving US cities than international ones imo.