NFL Commissioner Considering London Superbowl

[tayb]

Here is the actual article.

"SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. -- A future Super Bowl champion may someday be crowned overseas in a game witnessed predominantly by a foreign audience, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said.

"There's a great deal of interest in holding a Super Bowl in London," Goodell told reporters Monday. "So we'll be looking at that."

The commissioner said London's new Wembley Stadium would make a great candidate for pro football's biggest matchup, given the enthusiasm overseas for the game.

The NFL has been expanding its overseas presence for years by televising games around the world. It's held preseason games in numerous countries in Europe, Asia, Mexico and Canada, and in 2005, the Arizona Cardinals and San Francisco 49ers played the first regular-season match outside the United States.

The game at Azteca Stadium in Mexico City drew the league's largest crowd to date, 103,467.

On Oct. 28, Wembley will host the first regular-season NFL game outside North America. It took just 90 minutes to sell the first 40,000 tickets for the game between the Miami Dolphins and New York Giants. Goodell said event organizers have sold 95,000 tickets in all.

Goodell spoke about the possibility of a British Super Bowl after a luncheon Monday in Scottsdale sponsored by the host committee for the 2008 Super Bowl in Arizona."(http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3065254)



I can't believe they would actually take the super bowl, the biggest sporting event in America over seas. I would honestly boycott watching that crap if they played it in London, and I guarantee you I wouldn't be alone. (That is unless Da 'Boys are playing.)

I am beginning to dislike Roger Goodell more and more after everything he does.

Comments on this?

[jtk1519]

I like the idea. The Superbowl is a TV thing anyway. The average fan can't dream off attending the actual game or even most of the parties. It's a showcase for a few hundred thousand celebrities and heads of buisness. Seeing the Superbowl at the New Wembley would be awesome.

[HebronHawk]

Here is the actual article.

"SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. -- A future Super Bowl champion may someday be crowned overseas in a game witnessed predominantly by a foreign audience, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said.

"There's a great deal of interest in holding a Super Bowl in London," Goodell told reporters Monday. "So we'll be looking at that."

The commissioner said London's new Wembley Stadium would make a great candidate for pro football's biggest matchup, given the enthusiasm overseas for the game.

The NFL has been expanding its overseas presence for years by televising games around the world. It's held preseason games in numerous countries in Europe, Asia, Mexico and Canada, and in 2005, the Arizona Cardinals and San Francisco 49ers played the first regular-season match outside the United States.

The game at Azteca Stadium in Mexico City drew the league's largest crowd to date, 103,467.

On Oct. 28, Wembley will host the first regular-season NFL game outside North America. It took just 90 minutes to sell the first 40,000 tickets for the game between the Miami Dolphins and New York Giants. Goodell said event organizers have sold 95,000 tickets in all.

Goodell spoke about the possibility of a British Super Bowl after a luncheon Monday in Scottsdale sponsored by the host committee for the 2008 Super Bowl in Arizona."(http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3065254)



I can't believe they would actually take the super bowl, the biggest sporting event in America over seas. I would honestly boycott watching that crap if they played it in London, and I guarantee you I wouldn't be alone. (That is unless Da 'Boys are playing.)

I am beginning to dislike Roger Goodell more and more after everything he does.

Comments on this?

Avg. ticket price 5000 Euros.

[KT2000]

I don't really like the idea. The teams would be negatively affected by playing overseas in a venue most have never heard of before. It's one of those ideas that sounds a lot better than it would actually be IMO. The Super Bowl is a uniquely American event and should be kept as such. I doubt the UEFA Champions League would consider moving their games to big American venues any time soon even though they would easily sell out.

[Favpack]

The idea is beyond idiotic. Who runs the Super Bowl? SPONSORS - and sponsors don't want something American happening in London. Plus, when is kickoff? A 5:20 cst kickoff is after midnight in London.

Unbelievably stupid idea.

[jrock210]

I think you go for a Mexico Super Bowl. They pack the house for a regular game imagine the Super Bowl!

[tayb]

I think a strict American past time should be kept exactly that, an American past time.

I don't see any big European events planning to move their "super bowls" to America where they would undoubtedly sell out as well. If this move actually goes down there will be a LARGE amount of angry, angry fans.

[Owl, Been there Done that]

this guy has been making football boring, and now he wants to take it to Europe, WELCOME TO THE NO FUN LEAGUE.

[LPMOM]

i read that today and thought it just sounded kind of unatureal.
did'nt like the sound of it at all!

[HebronHawk]

The Euro is worth more than the US Dollar. Heck the Canadian Dollar is worth more than the US Dollar is.

More money for the NFL if the tickets are sold in Euros or English Pounds than Dollars.

The corporate types will still fly across the pond and have a great time in London.

Also will be more tax deductable in Europe than the US. Different rules.

[Dawg Fan]

Oh yea thats a great idea? The one uniquely American sport in the world and they want to have the championship overseas where the terrorists have a better than average shot at mayhem and death against one of our favorite pastimes. Not to mention that this is the NFL and not the WFL. The man has gone off the reservation. Unbelievably stupid idea!!!!!:Censor:

[jtk1519]

Oh yea thats a great idea? The one uniquely American sport in the world and they want to have the championship overseas where the terrorists have a better than average shot at mayhem and death against one of our favorite pastimes. Not to mention that this is the NFL and not the WFL. The man has gone off the reservation. Unbelievably stupid idea!!!!!:Censor:

Neo-con racist.

[78 Spartan]

It's an interesting idea in theory. Moving it overseas does not insult the red-blooded American football lover in me. Why not? Everything else is global nowadays.

However, three things tell me it's impractical:

1) the terror threat would be just too inviting;

2) the largest TV market is still the USA, and it's got to play in prime time in the US, so that would mean an 11:30pm local time kick off at the earliest. Not sure how that would work.

3) does Wembley have a retractable roof now? because, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the weather just totally suck in late January over there?

[jtk1519]

It's an interesting idea in theory. Moving it overseas does not insult the red-blooded American football lover in me. Why not? Everything else is global nowadays.

However, three things tell me it's impractical:

1) the terror threat would be just too inviting;

2) the largest TV market is still the USA, and it's got to play in prime time in the US, so that would mean an 11:30pm local time kick off at the earliest. Not sure how that would work.

3) does Wembley have a retractable roof now? because, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the weather just totally suck in late January over there?

I don't think the weather will be that big a deal. There is no time a year when London is not awesome. The NFL has their weather rules for the comfort of the fans, but Wembley has a very large roof that would more than protect the spectators...

http://www.ichauffeur.co.uk/a/i/wembley-stadium.jpg
http://www.pedja-licina.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/_42723441_wembley416.jpg

[BDB]

none of us have a chance ay going so might as well send it to a new venue.

terrorist threat? you people are paranoid as hell.

[Bootsdaddy]

Not going to bother me when I'm sitting in my living room.

[Humblefied]

If he's trying to get some interest around the globe about the NFL than move the first game of the season over there or something small like that, but the super bowl is the super bowl. It belongs in america.

[jtk1519]

Superbowl XL in 2006 drew an estimated 1 billion viewers worldwide. Of that 1 billion, a little over 90 million (or less than 10%) were Americans. The Superbowl is the most watched single-day sporting event in the world. The World Series is an American thing. The NBA Finals are an American thing. The Superbowl grew way too big to be just an American thing many, many years ago. It's as global as a single championship game can be.

[Firebird]

I like the idea. This is the perfect way to grow our sport. I don't think it will ever overtake soccer on a global level, but we have a great game.

How great would it be if the NFL could viably maintain teams in other countries, or spin off leagues around the world. Picture a World Cup, of football where the champions from each league square off in a playoff. That's gold, Jerry.

The SuperBowl is a made for TV event that rotates all over this country. You aren't ever going to get tickets. The folks actually at that game, they'll go if its held in Ulaanbatoor.

The fact that the NFL sold 40,000 tickets in 90 minutes for the Giants-Dolphins game proves that there is an interest in the NFL overseas. Of course, we will never get a real fan base over there until we start setting up youth leagues, etc., but this would just be a great start.

Globalization is the way of the future. The NFL needs to get on board now.

[lonny23]

Here is the actual article.

"SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. -- A future Super Bowl champion may someday be crowned overseas in a game witnessed predominantly by a foreign audience, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said.

"There's a great deal of interest in holding a Super Bowl in London," Goodell told reporters Monday. "So we'll be looking at that."

The commissioner said London's new Wembley Stadium would make a great candidate for pro football's biggest matchup, given the enthusiasm overseas for the game.

The NFL has been expanding its overseas presence for years by televising games around the world. It's held preseason games in numerous countries in Europe, Asia, Mexico and Canada, and in 2005, the Arizona Cardinals and San Francisco 49ers played the first regular-season match outside the United States.

The game at Azteca Stadium in Mexico City drew the league's largest crowd to date, 103,467.

On Oct. 28, Wembley will host the first regular-season NFL game outside North America. It took just 90 minutes to sell the first 40,000 tickets for the game between the Miami Dolphins and New York Giants. Goodell said event organizers have sold 95,000 tickets in all.

Goodell spoke about the possibility of a British Super Bowl after a luncheon Monday in Scottsdale sponsored by the host committee for the 2008 Super Bowl in Arizona."(http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3065254)



I can't believe they would actually take the super bowl, the biggest sporting event in America over seas. I would honestly boycott watching that crap if they played it in London, and I guarantee you I wouldn't be alone. (That is unless Da 'Boys are playing.)

I am beginning to dislike Roger Goodell more and more after everything he does.

Comments on this?I'll just make sure I'm stationed in England if they move it!:D

[lonny23]

I like the idea. The Superbowl is a TV thing anyway. The average fan can't dream off attending the actual game or even most of the parties. It's a showcase for a few hundred thousand celebrities and heads of buisness. Seeing the Superbowl at the New Wembley would be awesome.
You should ask for a show of hands of people on this board who have been to the Super Bowl. They didn't even go in 2004 in Houston.

[lonny23]

none of us have a chance ay going so might as well send it to a new venue.

terrorist threat? you people are paranoid as hell.
I'll find a way to go to the Super Bowl in the next few years (2011 in Arlington and/or when the Cowboys make it).

You're right that it's not affecting our attendance or our normal schedule.

[Owl, Been there Done that]

Oh yea thats a great idea? The one uniquely American sport in the world and they want to have the championship overseas where the terrorists have a better than average shot at mayhem and death against one of our favorite pastimes. Not to mention that this is the NFL and not the WFL. The man has gone off the reservation. Unbelievably stupid idea!!!!!:Censor:

Man you are one paranoid son of a gun.

[Dawg Fan]

Man you are one paranoid son of a gun.

make that realistic or at least prove to me I am wrong

[jtk1519]

make that realistic or at least prove to me I am wrong

London is FAR better prepared to deal with terrorism than any US city outside of maybe D.C. London is a borderline police state. There is more audio and video surveillance in London than any other city in the world and since the tube bombings, London has gone all out in preparing themselves. Much, much more so than any American city. A Superbowl in metro NYC or metro D.C. (which has and are being considered as possible host cities) would be much bigger and easier targets than London.

[tayb]

Did you guys forget about the time difference? London is some 6 hours ahead of us. We would be watching the super bowl right about now if they moved it to London. That really undermines the whole "super bowl sunday" where you throw/attend a party, bbq, hang out for hours and debate who will win and then sit down sunday evening and watch. I mean I would go to church, come back, eat lunch, and the game would be on. The whole "super bowl sunday" would be completely gone and that is ridiculous.

This coupled with Roger Goodells(sp) strange and contradictory way of punishing people is starting to get on my nerves. It already chaps my a** when someone gets fined for excessive celebration after a touchdown. The fans are going insane and the commish expects the players to cordially walk off the field, give me a break.

NFL = No Fun League.

[jtk1519]

Did you guys forget about the time difference? London is some 6 hours ahead of us. We would be watching the super bowl right about now if they moved it to London. That really undermines the whole "super bowl sunday" where you throw/attend a party, bbq, hang out for hours and debate who will win and then sit down sunday evening and watch. I mean I would go to church, come back, eat lunch, and the game would be on. The whole "super bowl sunday" would be completely gone and that is ridiculous.

That's ridiculous. The game could be shown live on TV here around 4 pm which would mean a London kickoff around 10 pm. No big deal. The NFL would still get in their 16 hours of pregame coverage and the game would kickoff close to the same time of day it always has. No big deal.

[tayb]

That's ridiculous. The game could be shown live on TV here around 4 pm which would mean a London kickoff around 10 pm. No big deal. The NFL would still get in their 16 hours of pregame coverage and the game would kickoff close to the same time of day it always has. No big deal.

10 pm kickoff in London in January? Yeah right. The game won't be over until well after 1 am and it will be freezing cold for everyone who is their watching. I would bet on a 7 pm - 8 pm kick off which would make it around 1 pm - 2 pm here.

[HebronHawk]

This coupled with Roger Goodells(sp) strange and contradictory way of punishing people is starting to get on my nerves. It already chaps my a** when someone gets fined for excessive celebration after a touchdown. The fans are going insane and the commish expects the players to cordially walk off the field, give me a break.

NFL = No Fun League.

He would. But he's no playa either.

[Dawg Fan]

London is FAR better prepared to deal with terrorism than any US city outside of maybe D.C. London is a borderline police state. There is more audio and video surveillance in London than any other city in the world and since the tube bombings, London has gone all out in preparing themselves. Much, much more so than any American city. A Superbowl in metro NYC or metro D.C. (which has and are being considered as possible host cities) would be much bigger and easier targets than London.

sure helped them stop those bus attacks:rolleyes: sorry, not buying

[dada]

I hope it's tape delayed....then I can get someone in London to text me the score then I would bet the house.....kinda like I did when I watched the 95 Super Bowl in Korea.........lol

[jtk1519]

sure helped them stop those bus attacks:rolleyes: sorry, not buying

London lost a couple of buses and part of a subway. We lost 220 stories worth of skyscrapers (that the same people had already tried to bring down once before) and a decent sized chunk of the world's largest office building. London > US

[jtk1519]

10 pm kickoff in London in January? Yeah right. The game won't be over until well after 1 am and it will be freezing cold for everyone who is their watching. I would bet on a 7 pm - 8 pm kick off which would make it around 1 pm - 2 pm here.

The average temp. range in London in February (when the Superbowl is held) is 33-44 F. The NFL has had no problem considering NYC and D.C. Both of whom have completely open-air stadiums unlike Wembley which is mostly covered. The average temp range in NYC in Feb. is 29-42 and in D.C. it is 26-47.

[tayb]

The average temp. range in London in February (when the Superbowl is held) is 33-44 F. The NFL has had no problem considering NYC and D.C. Both of whom have completely open-air stadiums unlike Wembley which is mostly covered. The average temp range in NYC in Feb. is 29-42 and in D.C. it is 26-47.

Yeah they have no problem doing it in NYC or DC because they can do it at a reasonable hour. 1 am is where it will be in the 30's and that really isn't an enjoyable atmosphere for anyone to watch or play in.

[tayb]

London lost a couple of buses and part of a subway. We lost 220 stories worth of skyscrapers (that the same people had already tried to bring down once before) and a decent sized chunk of the world's largest office building. London > US

So London isn't targeted as much, what is your point. Everyone knows America is one of, if not the most, hated countries in the world. What better way to demoralize an American iconic sport than by blowing it up during its biggest hour.

[jtk1519]

Yeah they have no problem doing it in NYC or DC because they can do it at a reasonable hour. 1 am is where it will be in the 30's and that really isn't an enjoyable atmosphere for anyone to watch or play in.

Superbowl XL that was played in Detroit let out close to 1 am local time in a city known for dangerous snow, ice, etc. that time of year (same for The Meadowlands in metro NYC). Things London simply does not see. The weather in London can be cruddy, but it's better than Detroit, DC, NYC, etc.

[jtk1519]

So London isn't targeted as much, what is your point. Everyone knows America is one of, if not the most, hated countries in the world. What better way to demoralize an American iconic sport than by blowing it up during its biggest hour.

So, then the game is in just as much danger in Dallas, San Diego, Miami, Phoenix, Tampa Bay, etc. And, ummmmm... if London "isn't targeted as much", wouldn't that make London a safer host city than many of the others the NFL is considering? That sound you hear is that really weak "London terrorism" argument shooting right out the window. Thanks for your help. ;)

[tayb]

Superbowl XL that was played in Detroit let out close to 1 am local time in a city known for dangerous snow, ice, etc. that time of year (same for The Meadowlands in metro NYC). Things London simply does not see. The weather in London can be cruddy, but it's better than Detroit, DC, NYC, etc.

The superbowl consistently starts between 6:25 and 6:40 eastern time which is 5:30 central time. No superbowl has ever lasted 7 hours or ended anywhere near midnight or 1 am.

And we are getting farther and farther away from the time difference. If they started the game for the locals when they usually start it, 6:30 ish, it would be noon here.

[tayb]

So, then the game is in just as much danger in Dallas, San Diego, Miami, Phoenix, Tampa Bay, etc. And, ummmmm... if London "isn't targeted as much", wouldn't that make London a safer host city than many of the others the NFL is considering? That sound you hear is that really weak "London terrorism" argument shooting right out the window. Thanks for your help. ;)

No you completely missed the entire point. London hasn't experienced terrorism nearly as much as we are because they are not a target. If the superbowl goes over there they ARE a target because it is an American event, plus the fact that they are overseas and much closer to countries known for housing terrorists.

Your argument that London hasn't experienced as much terrorism because they are "better equipped" is complete bull. They are never a target for terrorist activities and the one time they were, they were completely blown to hell. If anything America is better equipped to deal with terrorist activity because we have so much more experience with it.

[slorch]

things that are the equivilent of having the Super Bowl in London:

staging a surfing competition in Lubbock

having a National Defense seminar in France.

wearing underwear on the outside of your pants

slipping grandma some tongue when kissing her goodbye

putting an automatic transmission in any sports/ or muscle car

telling Congress they will now be held accountable for spending

walking up to a craps table and "throwing in some dice you brought from home..."

wearing nothing but UT/ OU/ A&M/ or Tech stuff to the Michigan/ OSU game...

i'll think of more later...

bottom line- this idea sucks!

[HebronHawk]

So, then the game is in just as much danger in Dallas, San Diego, Miami, Phoenix, Tampa Bay, etc. And, ummmmm... if London "isn't targeted as much", wouldn't that make London a safer host city than many of the others the NFL is considering? That sound you hear is that really weak "London terrorism" argument shooting right out the window. Thanks for your help. ;)

Maybe we should play the Superbowl in Green Bay, WI.. Muslims would stick out like a "sour thumb" there. Especially if weather doesn't matter.

It's right in the Central time zone too. :p

[slorch]

things that are the equivilent of having the Super Bowl in London:

staging a surfing competition in Lubbock

having a National Defense seminar in France.

wearing underwear on the outside of your pants

slipping grandma some tongue when kissing her goodbye

putting an automatic transmission in any sports/ or muscle car

telling Congress they will now be held accountable for spending

walking up to a craps table and "throwing in some dice you brought from home..."

wearing nothing but UT/ OU/ A&M/ or Tech stuff to the Michigan/ OSU game...

i'll think of more later...

bottom line- this idea sucks!

watching national news and expecting an objective analysis

[Dawg Fan]

London lost a couple of buses and part of a subway. We lost 220 stories worth of skyscrapers (that the same people had already tried to bring down once before) and a decent sized chunk of the world's largest office building. London > US

sorry but the London attack happened after 9/11 so the Brits had time to beef up their security.....next

[Dawg Fan]

So, then the game is in just as much danger in Dallas, San Diego, Miami, Phoenix, Tampa Bay, etc. And, ummmmm... if London "isn't targeted as much", wouldn't that make London a safer host city than many of the others the NFL is considering? That sound you hear is that really weak "London terrorism" argument shooting right out the window. Thanks for your help. ;)


your dreaming:rolleyes:

[slorch]

the only bad thing about a bombing of the fereign SuperBowl is that Jerry jones and Daniel Snyder wouldn't be there together...

[jtk1519]

sorry but the London attack happened after 9/11 so the Brits had time to beef up their security.....next

Sorry, but the WTC fell years after terrorists tried to bring it down in a successful bombing. We had even more time and actually had a target and still failed. Next.

[jtk1519]

No you completely missed the entire point. London hasn't experienced terrorism nearly as much as we are because they are not a target. If the superbowl goes over there they ARE a target because it is an American event, plus the fact that they are overseas and much closer to countries known for housing terrorists.

Your argument that London hasn't experienced as much terrorism because they are "better equipped" is complete bull. They are never a target for terrorist activities and the one time they were, they were completely blown to hell. If anything America is better equipped to deal with terrorist activity because we have so much more experience with it.

Wow. London hasn't been targeted? Wow... just wow. Be sure and let us know when you decide to join us all here is the real world.

[Firebird]

No you completely missed the entire point. London hasn't experienced terrorism nearly as much as we are because they are not a target. If the superbowl goes over there they ARE a target because it is an American event, plus the fact that they are overseas and much closer to countries known for housing terrorists.

Your argument that London hasn't experienced as much terrorism because they are "better equipped" is complete bull. They are never a target for terrorist activities and the one time they were, they were completely blown to hell. If anything America is better equipped to deal with terrorist activity because we have so much more experience with it.


What planet have you been on? The Irish Republican Army wants to know.

London's one of the world's prime targets. Take a look at who they burn in effigy out on the streets...Blair was just a hair behind Bush. They're also much more accustomed to this sort of thing. A lot of people forget that Europe has been dealing with bombs let off in public places for decades. They haven't had as big of a blockbuster as we did, but London is well acquainted with terrorists. JTK is right-- your every move is shadowed in London.

The SB would be no more, no less of a target in London than here in the States.

[jtk1519]

What planet have you been on? The Irish Republican Army wants to know.

London's one of the world's prime targets. Take a look at who they burn in effigy out on the streets...Blair was just a hair behind Bush. They're also much more accustomed to this sort of thing. A lot of people forget that Europe has been dealing with bombs let off in public places for decades. They haven't had as big of a blockbuster as we did, but London is well acquainted with terrorists. JTK is right-- your every move is shadowed in London.

The SB would be no more, no less of a target in London than here in the States.

I hate to sound like a condescending jerk, but I'm convinced Americans are generally clueless when it pertains to anything outside the lower 48. They just have no clue. That's simply the only way to explain some of the ignorant notions advanced in this thread.

[Dawg Fan]

Sorry, but the WTC fell years after terrorists tried to bring it down in a successful bombing. We had even more time and actually had a target and still failed. Next.

You are equating using 4 commercial jets to a van with explosives that was unsuccessful? Good try but no. next

[Dawg Fan]

What planet have you been on? The Irish Republican Army wants to know.

London's one of the world's prime targets. Take a look at who they burn in effigy out on the streets...Blair was just a hair behind Bush. They're also much more accustomed to this sort of thing. A lot of people forget that Europe has been dealing with bombs let off in public places for decades. They haven't had as big of a blockbuster as we did, but London is well acquainted with terrorists. JTK is right-- your every move is shadowed in London.

The SB would be no more, no less of a target in London than here in the States.

sorry but I think you have a false sense of security. The muslim population in England is very large and they have a large militant base. Haven't you seen the news where the leaders of their church call for the destruction of America? I think you young ones are a bit naive. I don't trust England's security more than ours one bit. Having the Superbowl in England is the dumbest idea yet. Have more preseason games over there and encourage them to get together a successful league. Then you can have a true world championship and have it overseas. Right now the championship game belongs here in the US.:mad:

[jtk1519]

sorry but I think you have a false sense of security. The muslim population in England is very large and they have a large militant base. Haven't you seen the news where the leaders of their church call for the destruction of America? I think you young ones are a bit naive. I don't trust England's security more than ours one bit. Having the Superbowl in England is the dumbest idea yet. Have more preseason games over there and encourage them to get together a successful league. Then you can have a true world championship and have it overseas. Right now the championship game belongs here in the US.:mad:

You do of course realize that the US has a significantly larger Muslim population than the UK, don't you? Upwards of 8 million in the US compared to under 2 million in the UK. Even in terms of percentages, we are still talking about a religion that makes up less than 3% of either country's total population.

And haven't you see Muslims in the US calling for the destruction of the US? Spend some time in Michigan (which just recently hosted a Superbowl BTW) or read their papers. Radical Muslims have been preaching anti-American rhetoric there for years. Hell, Muslims in Dearborn, MI took to the streets rejoicing on September 11, 2001. As much as the typical American superiority attitude might like to claim, we are not special. We didn't get all the nice Muslims while all the crazy one's went to the UK. Be realistic folks.

Don't perpetuate the ignorance, Dawg. You're too smart for that. London and the UK have been fighting the same battles as us and enduring the same things as us for years. The only difference is that their response and way of dealing with the problem has been far more extreme than ours. London is literally being called a police state by many because of just how much they have beefed up police forces and security measures in that city. If you're honestly worried about somebody attacking the Superbowl, the worry about it in Dallas or Phoenix or San Diego where those cities security measures don't even begin to compare to London's.

[Firebird]

London does have a significantly larger base of unintegrated militant Islamists that almost any city in the U.S. That's true.

But London is really and truly one of the best-equipped cities in the world to handle the threat. This is a city that hosts giant, international events on a yearly basis, and yet you don't hear about catastrophes. Scotland Yard and MI6 are among the very best in the world at what they do, and that is not an exaggeration. The city is preparing for the Olympics in 2012, and has already beefed up security far beyond any we have here in the states, save possibly for Pennsylvania Avenue itself. You don't take a step in London without getting watched.

New York, Washington, London...they're all at a very high risk for terror any time, not just during sporting events. Either you suck it up and refuse to let these folks intimidate you, or you go play your SuperBowl in Monahans or something.

[HebronHawk]

You do of course realize that the US has a significantly larger Muslim population than the UK, don't you? Upwards of 8 million in the US compared to under 2 million in the UK. Even in terms of percentages, we are still talking about a religion that makes up less than 3% of either country's total population.

And haven't you see Muslims in the US calling for the destruction of the US? Spend some time in Michigan (which just recently hosted a Superbowl BTW) or read their papers. Radical Muslims have been preaching anti-American rhetoric there for years. Hell, Muslims in Dearborn, MI took to the streets rejoicing on September 11, 2001. As much as the typical American superiority attitude might like to claim, we are not special. We didn't get all the nice Muslims while all the crazy one's went to the UK. Be realistic folks.

Don't perpetuate the ignorance, Dawg. You're too smart for that. London and the UK have been fighting the same battles as us and enduring the same things as us for years. The only difference is that their response and way of dealing with the problem has been far more extreme than ours. London is literally being called a police state by many because of just how much they have beefed up police forces and security measures in that city. If you're honestly worried about somebody attacking the Superbowl, the worry about it in Dallas or Phoenix or San Diego where those cities security measures don't even begin to compare to London's.

Hamtramack, MI has many of their street signs printed in Arabic since the city council went 100% muslim several years ago.

[Dawg Fan]

You do of course realize that the US has a significantly larger Muslim population than the UK, don't you? Upwards of 8 million in the US compared to under 2 million in the UK. Even in terms of percentages, we are still talking about a religion that makes up less than 3% of either country's total population.

And haven't you see Muslims in the US calling for the destruction of the US? Spend some time in Michigan (which just recently hosted a Superbowl BTW) or read their papers. Radical Muslims have been preaching anti-American rhetoric there for years. Hell, Muslims in Dearborn, MI took to the streets rejoicing on September 11, 2001. As much as the typical American superiority attitude might like to claim, we are not special. We didn't get all the nice Muslims while all the crazy one's went to the UK. Be realistic folks.

Don't perpetuate the ignorance, Dawg. You're too smart for that. London and the UK have been fighting the same battles as us and enduring the same things as us for years. The only difference is that their response and way of dealing with the problem has been far more extreme than ours. London is literally being called a police state by many because of just how much they have beefed up police forces and security measures in that city. If you're honestly worried about somebody attacking the Superbowl, the worry about it in Dallas or Phoenix or San Diego where those cities security measures don't even begin to compare to London's.

look, just because I don't agree with you doesn't perpetuate ignorance in the slightest. The superbowl belongs in the US, plain and simple. Anyone watch "I Robot"? Anyone remember the line by Will Smith " Somehow, I told you so doesn't really help (paraphrasing). Thats the way I feel about holding the superbowl overseas. If it turns into a catastrophe all the I told you so's wont mean a thing. If the superbowl gets attacked here in the states I will be distraught but I know the best security possible was in place. Just having people on a forum tell me that England is better suited to handle the event doesn't sway me one bit. No sale here......EVER

[jtk1519]

look, just because I don't agree with you doesn't perpetuate ignorance in the slightest. The superbowl belongs in the US, plain and simple. Anyone watch "I Robot"? Anyone remember the line by Will Smith " Somehow, I told you so doesn't really help (paraphrasing). Thats the way I feel about holding the superbowl overseas. If it turns into a catastrophe all the I told you so's wont mean a thing. If the superbowl gets attacked here in the states I will be distraught but I know the best security possible was in place. Just having people on a forum tell me that England is better suited to handle the event doesn't sway me one bit. No sale here......EVER

You shouldn't need people on a forum to sway you towards reality. You're in some kind of close-minded fantasy world if you actually for one second believe some of the stuff you said in this thread. That is the perpetuation of ignorance I spoke of... to have one's words completely defy reality and advance ideas or notions that are quickly disproven by opening one's eyes. The fact that some people honestly do not know or believe what bird and I have been saying is equally frightening and disheartening.

[Dawg Fan]

You shouldn't need people on a forum to sway you towards reality. You're in some kind of close-minded fantasy world if you actually for one second believe some of the stuff you said in this thread. That is the perpetuation of ignorance I spoke of... to have one's words completely defy reality and advance ideas or notions that are quickly disproven by opening one's eyes. The fact that some people honestly do not know or believe what bird and I have been saying is equally frightening and disheartening.

only to you two and that should be the scary thing. You have your own version of reality. I know you are a confident person yet still naive. How many attacks have there been here since 9/11? How many super bowls have we had since 9/11? The foolish notion that our #1 sport that we cherish would somehow be more safe being played overseas defies reality. My eyes are open and have been for longer than you have been on this planet. Actually this whole notion is beyond stupid and I don't see it happening. If I don't agree with you and firebird you say I am close minded and that is pure horse hockey. I think you two are in the minority by a big margin.

[slorch]

politics aside, or geopolitical terrorism aside,there is no reason to export the Super Bowl, ever! Why would we give those nonappreciative ******** one of our best American entities. This is the American guilt syndrome gone bad, combined with misplaced capitalism, it is a recipe for disaster. Why Europe? At least in China, our players will be safe. They'd have armed guards/ tanks that shoot anyone that gets within shouting distance of the stadium.

moronic ideas such as these will take something that is the best sports league in America back to the pack. Greed will end the NFL as we know it, unless real leaders present themselves soon. The europansies have no business hosting a SuperBowl.

[jtk1519]

only to you two and that should be the scary thing. You have your own version of reality. I know you are a confident person yet still naive. How many attacks have there been here since 9/11? How many super bowls have we had since 9/11? The foolish notion that our #1 sport that we cherish would somehow be more safe being played overseas defies reality. My eyes are open and have been for longer than you have been on this planet. Actually this whole notion is beyond stupid and I don't see it happening. If I don't agree with you and firebird you say I am close minded and that is pure horse hockey. I think you two are in the minority by a big margin.

Dawg, you and I normally agrre, but there are not multiple versions of reality, man. There is only one and it is the one supported by fact. Fact is all I have brought to this thread full of ignorance. I never said the Superbowl would be safer there. I said the Superbowl is a target no matter where it goes and Firebird and I correctly pointed out that London hosts more events on par with the size of the Superbowl than any American city and that London has taken many, many more steps and a much more aggressive approach to defending itself against terrorist attacks than any American city. That is not a matter of opinion and that is not one man's view of reality... that is fact. Plain and simple. It is fact because it is supported by all the evidence and I find that some people here don't know that to be rather sad.

[HebronHawk]

politics aside, or geopolitical terrorism aside,there is no reason to export the Super Bowl, ever! Why would we give those nonappreciative ******** one of our best American entities. This is the American guilt syndrome gone bad, combined with misplaced capitalism, it is a recipe for disaster. Why Europe? At least in China, our players will be safe. They'd have armed guards/ tanks that shoot anyone that gets within shouting distance of the stadium.

moronic ideas such as these will take something that is the best sports league in America back to the pack. Greed will end the NFL as we know it, unless real leaders present themselves soon. The europansies have no business hosting a SuperBowl.

At least China defends their borders. I wonder why the Mexicans don't go there.

[Firebird]

politics aside, or geopolitical terrorism aside,there is no reason to export the Super Bowl, ever! Why would we give those nonappreciative ******** one of our best American entities. This is the American guilt syndrome gone bad, combined with misplaced capitalism, it is a recipe for disaster. Why Europe? At least in China, our players will be safe. They'd have armed guards/ tanks that shoot anyone that gets within shouting distance of the stadium.

moronic ideas such as these will take something that is the best sports league in America back to the pack. Greed will end the NFL as we know it, unless real leaders present themselves soon. The europansies have no business hosting a SuperBowl.

I'll make sure to tell the British, who have participated in every single American venture (at the cost of making themselves an even bigger target) in the war on terror, that they are unappreciative.

[slorch]

I'll make sure to tell the British, who have participated in every single American venture (at the cost of making themselves an even bigger target) in the war on terror, that they are unappreciative.

I don't mean it towards the British. I was wrong on that.

I was targeting the seemingly teeming masses of anti American folks( if you watch/ read our media) that seem to exist throughout Europe.


You are correct on the British, and I would not want to misstate their commitment to the US.

Bottom line, keep the Super Bowl in the US. We already have international flavor when we've had them in San Diego, Miami, and Detroit!

[slorch]

At least China defends their borders. I wonder why the Mexicans don't go there.

can't swim that far.

[jtk1519]

I was targeting the seemingly teeming masses of anti American folks( if you watch/ read our media) that seem to exist throughout Europe.

And therein lies your (most American's) problem.

[slorch]

And therein lies your (most American's) problem.

plug in your sarcasmometer. (low battery)


I was making light of how25 people will show up to a protest, and they make it sound like 1000's were there. You should know by now, I believe everything the media says...:rolleyes:

[Firebird]

At least China defends their borders. I wonder why the Mexicans don't go there.

China's a net exporter of illegal immigrants. Seems like some of y'all are under the impression that this is an America-only phenom.

[jtk1519]

plug in your sarcasmometer. (low battery)


I was making light of how25 people will show up to a protest, and they make it sound like 1000's were there. You should know by now, I believe everything the media says...:rolleyes:

I know. Perhaps I should have included a smiley.

[Dawg Fan]

Dawg, you and I normally agrre, but there are not multiple versions of reality, man. There is only one and it is the one supported by fact. Fact is all I have brought to this thread full of ignorance. I never said the Superbowl would be safer there. I said the Superbowl is a target no matter where it goes and Firebird and I correctly pointed out that London hosts more events on par with the size of the Superbowl than any American city and that London has taken many, many more steps and a much more aggressive approach to defending itself against terrorist attacks than any American city. That is not a matter of opinion and that is not one man's view of reality... that is fact. Plain and simple. It is fact because it is supported by all the evidence and I find that some people here don't know that to be rather sad.

Ok, last post by me on this. Who is the bigger and most valued target by terrorists? Is it Europe or the US? Simple question really. Do you believe that the effort by terrorists to cause mayhem would be the same to a soccer or tennis championship as it would to America's #1 fan supported sport? We have had several superbowls here since 9/11 and they have all been safe and that my friend is a fact. Plain and simple as you put it. IMO if you play the game over there you invite more problems than you can count.

[jtk1519]

Ok, last post by me on this. Who is the bigger and most valued target by terrorists? Is it Europe or the US? Simple question really.

Your kidding, right? I guess you don't read the news much so I would encourage you to google "London 7/7" and "Madrid 11-M". I know this may come as a surprise, but terrorists are not just attacking America. They don't envy our toilet paper. They have attacked every area of the world over the last decade. Americans are not special targets. Americans are one of many targets and it has less to do with our drive-thrus and cell phones and more to do with the little guy we depicting hanging on a cross.

Do you believe that the effort by terrorists to cause mayhem would be the same to a soccer or tennis championship as it would to America's #1 fan supported sport? We have had several superbowls here since 9/11 and they have all been safe and that my friend is a fact. Plain and simple as you put it. IMO if you play the game over there you invite more problems than you can count.

Dawg, London is hosting the 2012 Olympics and even though the last UEFA Champions League in the UK was in Manchester, that game presents a much, MUCH bigger target than the Superbowl. Respectfully, you're operating under some very misguided ideas.

[slorch]

Your kidding, right? I guess you don't read the news much so I would encourage you to google "London 7/7" and "Madrid 11-M". I know this may come as a surprise, but terrorists are not just attacking America. They don't envy our toilet paper. They have attacked every area of the world over the last decade. Americans are not special targets. Americans are one of many targets and it has less to do with our drive-thrus and cell phones and more to do with the little guy we depicting hanging on a cross.



Dawg, London is hosting the 2012 Olympics and even though the last UEFA Champions League in the UK was in Manchester, that game presents a much, MUCH bigger target than the Superbowl. Respectfully, you're operating under some very misguided ideas.

you're a smart dude, but I think you missed his point.

I thought he was acknowledging the attacks in Europe, while we have had none since 9-11. he was also describing the "High value" of a target that would be the ultimate in Americana, the SuperBowl( sorry, baseball fans, it's the truth)

[Firebird]

Almost all western targets are high value. The people doing them have a different world view than you and I do. They don't view the world in terms of states and boundaries, they are operating under a clash of civilization mentality. They view the USA as an important leader of a block of Westerners who are intent on subjugating the Islamic world. Europe and the USA are both huge targets. If anything, Europe might be slightly higher, because there are more active Muslims there that (in the opinion of these guys) deserve to live in the Dar-al-Islam. Europe is the "House of War" par excellence, in part because they view it as a realistic possibility that Europe could actually become part of the "House of Peace".

I also find questionable your logic that these guys would naturally view a sporting event as their best, primary target. All available evidence indicates that they want to strike a real blow at integral parts of our society-- transport, finance, military and political centers, etc. Blowing up a stadium might kill a lot of people, but in the long run would not be as disruptive as an attack on air travel, mass transit, or government installations.

[Miss Kitty]

I think it is crap!!! Let the world have it's soccer and let's keep the NFL (National Football League), not the World Football League, in our nation.

This is where we as common folk have a chance to make a difference. But it would take a united stance to make it happen. Starting with sponsors....do you think a company would spend that kind of money for ad space if the masses would stop purchasing from them if they did indeed sponsor the Super Bowl overseas? I know it seems like a small thing and only one voice, but many voices add up quickly. And our country is great about boycots so we could so easily boycot, not only the superbowl but those who make so much money on it and rely on the common joes buying from them etc. It is a snowball effect.

But if people keep quiet, then there is no problem.

If not just looking at it, from a US pride point of view.....lets look at the economical point of view. They go on and on about how great is is for the economy of whatever city gets the Super Bowl. And what about all of the jobs that AMERICANS would be losing. Yes it is only one game, but people put in lots of time in preparation and of course working the event itself. From parking attendants to hotel folks.

Yes, I have many reasons I would not want to see our precious Super Bowl played anywhere but America. But mainly because, I am damn tired of the big guys taking things away from Americans and giving it to other countries, like my so called American company did with my job and the jobs of many, many, others. It has to stop somewhere.

[slorch]

Almost all western targets are high value. The people doing them have a different world view than you and I do. They don't view the world in terms of states and boundaries, they are operating under a clash of civilization mentality. They view the USA as an important leader of a block of Westerners who are intent on subjugating the Islamic world. Europe and the USA are both huge targets. If anything, Europe might be slightly higher, because there are more active Muslims there that (in the opinion of these guys) deserve to live in the Dar-al-Islam. Europe is the "House of War" par excellence, in part because they view it as a realistic possibility that Europe could actually become part of the "House of Peace".

I also find questionable your logic that these guys would naturally view a sporting event as their best, primary target. All available evidence indicates that they want to strike a real blow at integral parts of our society-- transport, finance, military and political centers, etc. Blowing up a stadium might kill a lot of people, but in the long run would not be as disruptive as an attack on air travel, mass transit, or government installations.

I didn't say that. I said a high value target, as in symbolic, just as the WTC was.

[jtk1519]

I didn't say that. I said a high value target, as in symbolic, just as the WTC was.

I don't buy that notion at all and that has been my point all along. It simply doesn't make any sense. Sure, it's an American game played by Americans, but a Superbowl held in London would be attended by mostly citizens of the UK. It would be in a UK stadium on UK soil. An attack on such an event would be an attack on the UK... not America.

My point all along has been that if terrorists want to take out a Superbowl, they will do so when it is played in American city, because to attack it in London proves nothing to America. The terrorists wouldn't prove that they can get in and operate in America as the 9/11 hijackers did. They wouldn't prove that they could get in the Superbowl city and attack the game while going undetected. All they would be proving is that they can hit London... nothing more. The Superbowl doesn't elevate London as a target because London, New York and D.C. are already the biggest targets on any terrorists Christmas list. It wouldn't be symbolic at all.

[jtk1519]

I thought he was acknowledging the attacks in Europe, while we have had none since 9-11. he was also describing the "High value" of a target that would be the ultimate in Americana, the SuperBowl( sorry, baseball fans, it's the truth)

And my response to that was that prior to 9/11, the World Trade Center had already been successfully attacked (though the terrorists' objective was clearly not obtained). We not only knew that they wanted to attack us, but we knew the city and the very buildings they wanted to attack... and we still failed to protect them. Forgive me for allowing that knowledge to serve as a sobering reminder anytime somebody gloats over the lack of attacks since 9/11.

[Firebird]

I don't buy that notion at all and that has been my point all along. It simply doesn't make any sense. Sure, it's an American game played by Americans, but a Superbowl held in London would be attended by mostly citizens of the UK. It would be in a UK stadium on UK soil. An attack on such an event would be an attack on the UK... not America.

My point all along has been that if terrorists want to take out a Superbowl, they will do so when it is played in American city, because to attack it in London proves nothing to America. The terrorists wouldn't prove that they can get in and operate in America as the 9/11 hijackers did. They wouldn't prove that they could get in the Superbowl city and attack the game while going undetected. All they would be proving is that they can hit London... nothing more. The Superbowl doesn't elevate London as a target because London, New York and D.C. are already the biggest targets on any terrorists Christmas list. It wouldn't be symbolic at all.


I'm tired of arguing this one. Slorch and Dawg simply don't want to see the Super Bowl played on foreign soil, and they're looking for excuses to justify what is at heart an emotional response. The terrorist feint is just that-- a distraction from the fact that they just don't want to see on of our biggest events go overseas, even for a year.

MissKitty's response is far more up-front in that regard, and I admire that. I may not agree with her sentiments, but she's being honest in why she thinks the idea sucks.

[HebronHawk]

can't swim that far.

Most can't swim at all. :D

[HebronHawk]

China's a net exporter of illegal immigrants. Seems like some of y'all are under the impression that this is an America-only phenom.

You are correct. Many end up coming ashore on the West Coast in cargo ship containers through the port of Long Beach.