This weekend marks the 3rd 2014 NFL International Series game held in Wembley Stadium. It also coincides with the announcement of the three games scheduled for London next year:

Buffalo Bills @ Jacksonville Jaguars

NY Jets @ Miami Dolphins

Detroit Lions @ KC Chiefs

In short, an absolute garbage lineup. Perhaps I should be more grateful, I am lucky enough to live in the city that the NFL has designated for its international expansion plans and get to watch three live games a year. The NFL offers reasonably priced season tickets for the games and it is fun every time. I was also a fan of the 1pm GMT kickoff between the Lions and the Falcons. But my goodness, I do not want to watch any of those games next year, even from the comfort of my own living room, let alone paying money to watch in a stadium.

These games are in fact, so awful, I am wondering whether this is a plan by the NFL to see if they can sell out the worst matchups that they can find. With attendance averaging 82,763 at Wembley across each game dating back to 2007, this means London has the second highest attendance figures in the whole league, behind only the Dallas Cowboys. More importantly, the TV rights are lapped up and sold onto Sky Sports and the brand is advanced across the UK and Europe. Despite the fact the 2015 lineup is awful, I expect that they will sell out all three of the games. The NFL’s mission to catch on in the UK has been a success. All signs point to a franchise being the next logical step for London and with 84,000 people showing up to watch the Raiders and the Dolphins earlier this year, who can blame them?

Well, apparently, pretty much every US fan on every message board on NFL.com, ESPN.com, PFT and MMQB can blame them:

“It’s called the NATIONAL Football League, not the INTERNATIONAL Football League!”

This is the most commonly used line of reasoning by American fans of the sport. Its only a few steps away from “America is for Americans!” and “Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer“. I’m not totally sure that English people in the 1800s were complaining about Spanish and Dutch folks playing football, although granted, they didn’t have the medium of Twitter to complain through. The spread of sports to other countries has only enriched viewing experiences and the talent pool. There’d be no Lionel Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo for one, and even in US sports, there would be no Yu Darvish, Yasiel Puig, Pau/Marc Gasol and Hakeem Olajuwon, etc. This year in the NBA, 101 players from 37 countries, a new record, will be on NBA rosters at the season’s start (2014-15). That was an increase from last year of 92 players, which at the time, was a new record. The influence of the game is spreading and having a huge impact on the dynamics of the league. That means that 22.6% of the NBA is an international player (out of 450 roster spots). That’s a huge number! Unfortunately, there’s no easy way of finding similar figures for the NFL barring a manual search through every roster. Given that there are 1,696 active players on the roster, there is no way that international players make up a figure as high as 22%. Expanding the game to other countries could sincerely help the overall development of the game.

Now, I understand that the NFL is inherently different from football, baseball, basketball and hockey, etc but these games are all different from each other and have all managed to grow abroad. I think a lot of the anger stems from the shorter season length and the fear that it will be their team that becomes relocated. Those 8 home games are so much more valuable than the 41 NBA home games or 81 MLB home games. In a playoff hunt, the difference between playing in London or playing a home game could cost you a spot in the postseason, which is generally why we don’t get the Patriots or Cowboys giving up home games to come here. It’s not necessarily fair but look at the attendance percentages for those who are giving up home games to come here:

St. Louis this year can’t sell out 90% of a stadium that is smaller than 60,000 people, which is why their owners are casting their eyes around for a bigger, more interested market. Other teams like the Falcons and Saints would never move but want to grow the brand. And why not? More revenues for the league, also means more revenues for the players.

The issues of logistics and scheduling are far more crucial to the overall success of the London franchise dream. Other writers have covered this in far more detail than I could hope to do, so I won’t touch on this too much. I still think a London team is a long way off, and will be a much more gradual thing, with 3 games ramped up to 5 over the next few years and maybe 8 after that, just to ensure they could sell them all out. Chances are, they could sell out all 8 and with the new idea of earlier starts (1pm GMT/8am EST) proving to be a success both in England and in the US, that would be a smart way of ensuring more people show up.

To be honest, I’m not fussed either way whether we get a team. In a 3-person sample conducted by WrittenByAnEnglishman (1 of which was myself), 66.6% of English fans would support their current team over a London franchise if the two were to meet in the SuperBowl. I’d go to the games and root for them but I wouldn’t support them over the Eagles. I’m stuck with Philadelphia for better or worse (mostly worse) for the rest of my life. I don’t particularly care whether we get a team but I can see that the potential benefits of doing so would be great for the league. The success of a London franchise won’t be based on whether its financially viable (it is) but whether its logistically viable (not yet). In the mean time, I’ll be booing the Cowboys at Wembley as loud as I can.