NFL Europe Having Trouble (how to make it more popular?)

ESPN.com ^

[GulliverSwift]

In a vote that was closer than many had anticipated, and which reflected some strong sentiment against continuing an experiment of mixed results, owners decided Wednesday during a half-day meeting in Washington, D.C., to continue the NFL Europe league.

The vote, however, could not have been any closer and one more owner opposed to the matter would have killed off the springtime league.

On most key issues, like NFL Europe, a three-quarters vote of the league membership, or 24 of 32 votes, is required for endorsement. The NFL owners voted precisely 24-8 to continue NFL Europe for two more seasons. The league has been championed for years by commissioner Paul Tagliabue and sources told ESPN.com on Wednesday night that he had to be persuasive to retain the developmental league.

"We want to keep looking at it," said Pittsburgh owner Dan Rooney. "We feel that there is still potential there on which we can build."

The membership will be asked to decide next year, entering the final season under the new business plan for NFL Europe, to extend it through 2013. There are some owners who still contend that the league, founded in 1991, can realize a profit.

But other owners remain concerned about continuing financial losses, and diminished returns in terms of player development, and told ESPN.com they question the wisdom of continuing to subsidize NFL Europe.

In another matter the owners voted, as anticipated, to award Super Bowl XLI, in 2007, to Miami. It will mark the ninth time the city will have hosted the championship game.

Support for again resuscitating NFL Europe appeared mixed when ESPN.com surveyed several owners the past few weeks. And the Wednesday vote certainly reflected that. The vote next year, on endorsing the league through 2013, could be rather contentious. There is little doubt Tagliabue and NFL Players Association executive director Gene Upshaw, who is in favor of NFL Europe, must buttress support in the coming year.

Said one opponent: "I'm just not convinced of the long-term (viability). The proponents keep telling me I'm short-sighted. Well, my vision is plenty good enough for me to see us throwing good money after something that's had 12 years to work, and hasn't."

With the NFL's three-year business plan for NFL Europe having expired, league owners recently received a memorandum detailing the benefits of overseas play, and the positives of continuing the experiment to globalize American-style football.

Some owners have become weary of investing in a product perceived as stagnant, and which has not created much ripple effect, in their minds. But the proponents of keeping NFL Europe still view as essential the potential for marketing opportunities, and at a time when there are few new revenue streams, along with expanding the NFL's scope as a true entertainment entity.

One stance that likely will not sell, at least with more pragmatic owners, is the contention that the investment in Europe might eventually produce some NFL players. In the recent memo, NFL officials pointed out that other American professional leagues have tapped into foreign-bred talent, and suggested the NFL might someday do likewise.

Countered one NFC personnel chief: "The logic there is totally skewed. Baseball, the NBA, hockey, they draw foreign players because those sports are played in a lot of other countries. But, hey, no one else plays football but us. Other countries are developing the players for those other sports. Us, we're sending players to other countries, hoping they will develop. But we could do the same thing with a springtime schedule played here."

Certainly development of high-profile players, like St. Louis quarterback Kurt Warner, has slowed. There were 257 former NFL Europe players on NFL rosters in 2002, and the number is probably similar this season, but the spring league hasn't produced as many visible stars recently as it did 3-5 years ago.

A few other owners noted the security risks involved in sending American players to Europe, but there were no reported incidents in 2002, and NFL officials feel the threat is not a particularly strong one.

Len Pasquarelli is a senior writer for ESPN.com.

[GulliverSwift]

Here is a Scottish Claymore, from a Scottish website.

I think one problem with NFL Europe is that most of the players are pretty bad. That's a pretty bad way to get introduced to the game, by seeing mediocre players who have trouble with basic manuevers.

If the NFL really wanted to promote the game over there, they should have the two Super Bowl contestants from the previous season play two preseason games in Europe.

Maybe to make it more interesting, could possibly tell the defense to lay off and allow great pass plays. Each team could have the opportunity to get to face a soft defense for one of the two games. (unless it's the Raiders, who'll be soft regardless) Doing this will provide a demonstration of what an ideal game is about. Of course, that sounds artificial, and probably just having the two teams go at it in earnest would be better. They've made it all the way to the Big Game, so they probably have a good handle on play making (unlike NFL Europe scrubs)

Most people in Europe still don't even know what's going on. It just looks like a bunch of guys with costumes who run into each other.

Europe deserves better than soccer. Soccer is an old, old game, 400 years old, right after Columbus sailed the ocean blue. There have been many, many improvements on it since then. It's like settling for a candle instead of a lightbulb.

I enjoyed it in elementary school at recess, but tackle football (when Mrs. Teacher wan't looking) was always funner.

[GulliverSwift]

The game seems to be popular in Finland

[John H K]

Europe deserves better than soccer. Soccer is an old, old game, 400 years old, right after Columbus sailed the ocean blue. There have been many, many improvements on it since then. It's like settling for a candle instead of a lightbulb.

Well, they already have Rugby, which is pretty popular.

Frankly, I'm not sure why soccer exists given the existence of Rugby.

[JohnGalt]

NFL Europe has sent something like 25 players to the Pro Bowl and has proven itself to be a capable developmental league.

The problem is that NFL style football with average players is really boring compared to the college game, and that problem is not easily overcome since the purpose of the league, of course is to develop NFL talent.

[hobbes1]

What the NFL should do, is take a Lesson from the NBA, and FORCE ESPN to broadcst every single game, just like the NBA does with the Godforsaken WNBA....

[Dane]

Why would the NFL think that the games would be competitive in Europe, especially when the teams in France would surrender the game before the kick off.

[GulliverSwift]

Yeah, I agree. There are so many college teams but the talent only goes to the really prominent schools. Steve Spurrier used to really on merely the talent of the players he got. Now in Washington, it's much harder when there's more parity and more talent on all teams (however hard that is to believe). Defense especially is tougher in the NFL, which gives him troubles and keeps him from scoring 50 points like he did.

But I prefer NFL. The sloppy play in college is unimpressive. The slow tackles that are too high and to slow are one example. But that's okay, they're still teenagers, and they have homework to worry about. (some of them) I still watch on Saturday, despite the poorer play, because I support the local team.

[LenS]

Soccer exists because most Europeans and Latin Americans are afraid of hitting (those that aren't, have already emigrated to the US, Canada or Australia). Soccer allows them to run around looking pretty. *eg*

[GulliverSwift]

One stance that likely will not sell, at least with more pragmatic owners, is the contention that the investment in Europe might eventually produce some NFL players. In the recent memo, NFL officials pointed out that other American professional leagues have tapped into foreign-bred talent, and suggested the NFL might someday do likewise.

Of course it provides players. It's just like the minor leagues in the US. There's the NBDL for the NBA and minor leaues for baseball. They've just done a poor job of promoting it.

[John H K]

Eh, even the French are fairly decent at Rugby at the world level (but wildly inconsistent, they can find a way to lose to anybody.)

It's more fun to watch. Doesn't require any more equipment than soccer, really. Teams actually score. A total variety of body types from huge goons to skinny fast guys can play it effectively.

[mhking]

If they pulled it from Europe and put the money into the CFL (along with a domestic television contract), they'd do much better. The NFL already has a developmental agreement with the CFL; they would do better to go ahead and take the next step.

[hobbes1]

Which was my point exactly. Make ESPN carry it, like they do the excrementitious WNBA...then a few viewers and the ad revenue will help.

[GulliverSwift]

Well, I'd prefer that to "Outside the Lines," which sticks stuffy liberalism into sports. Then there's "Playmakers" the TV show... they have no shame. They'd probably, of course, also prefer gymnastics and ice skating. I don't know what's happened to that network, but they're getting distracted.

[hobbes1]

You know, While I agree about the ESPN programming, at least it is just that, ESPN programming.


The WNBA OTOH, is a failed product attempt by the NBA that is now literally forced down our throats, including the sportsticker, and sports pages, even though they draw about 5 people a game.

[GulliverSwift]

I clicked on your profile to see if you were Canadian, but instead I found this. That's great.

[GulliverSwift]

No, no, no, I hope you don't think I said I prefered WNBA to "Outside the Lines" or "Playmakers." I said I'd prefer NFL Europe to watching the shows.

The WNBA--- Need I say more? A lot of teams have folded becuse the owner doesn't want to keep the dead horse on life support any longer. Others asked someone else to buy the team and it was moved.

[hobbes1]

Oh, No I got your point....I just dislike the WNBA, even more than the ESPN programming.

[JohnGalt]

The college game allows for truly different offenses and styles of play based on the talent at hand. Football fans prefer the college game because there is more to study and watch, where as the pro-game is so complex its hard to make sense of it with Ron Jaworski breaking down the film.

When you ask average talent to play complex schemes that their athletic ability does not call for, you are going to get boring play.

[GulliverSwift]

When you ask average talent to play complex schemes that their athletic ability does not call for, you are going to get boring play.

What's "average" in the NFL is far better than college players. Although I love when the team runs up the score board, I still know that the game's sloppy and probably absurdly overmatched. Every guy and his brother has a college football team, and there's not enough talent to go around to them all.

[Dead Dog]

What is needed is for someone like Madden to do a Football for Dummies kind of interactive DVD, it could be sold cheap world wide, have cool rock music, and be offered in a variety of languages. They could market it during NFL exibition games and NFLE games. Football isn't fun until you get an idea of exactly what is going on. It is Sun Tzu with cleats.