The only problem with having the Pro Bowl in London is it isn't warm, sunny, and relaxing. You'll have even less players who want to go.
Super Bowl in London?
- Thread starter DaleC76
- Start date
It would be about as smart as holding the champion's league finale here. Nobody would really give a crap over there. What should have been an exclusive ticket would end up with empty seats. They'd also have to start it in the middle of the night to be on prime time in the U.S.
I don't know. Even the best team in Europe would make the Lions look like the '85 Bears.
That's not completely true. American Football has gained in popularity in Europe in recent years and London is a very easy place for people in mainland Europe to get to. They'd fill Wembley.
A big problem I can forsee is that American Football will ruin the pitch again. It is being relaid again after three of the four teams who played in the FA Cup Semi-Finals a couple of weeks ago complained about it. Wembley has hosted a number of non-Football events that have had a damaging effect on the pitch.
The time difference will also be a big problem. The only thing close to this I can think of is the 1992 WWF Summerslam which was held at the old Wembley. Although it is the second highest attended WWF/WWE event ever (93,173), it did not do very well as a pay-per-view as it was taped due to the time difference.
^ Really? So after NFL Europe collapsed miserably our football actually gained popularity in continental Europe?!
I'm not saying there's support there for a whole league, but one off games would sell tickets. People in Europe would still pay to see the two best teams play.
Another small issue, a number of the seats at Wembley are designated "Club Wembley" seats. This means you buy a seat for a year and you or anyone you choose can occupy it for any event held at the stadium. This occasionally causes problems with a lot of seats that are bought and paid for but unoccupied, which doesn't look good on TV.
trying to tape delay the super bowl would be a huge mistake..
i can just see people boycotting it.
nah it would have to be broadast live in america or lose a big chunk of the audience.
can you imagine one of the sb's that are not that competetive??
that's pretty much what i have seen happen, maybe its something to do with more quality and better marketing of it, also i doubt a super bowl will ever happen over here in London due to time differences even if they did the tape delay then the result would be all over the internet and pointless for fans in the US
^Yes, as I said earlier there's a psychological aspect to it not being live. Even before the Internet was in common use, WWF Summerslam in 1992 lost a lot of PPV buys because it wasn't live.
These days, the result would leak easily if they tried to keep it a secret. I suppose they could air it live and whatever time in the morning and then air it again as if it was live later at whatever time it would normally start but even that would be unpopular, I imagine.
These days, the result would leak easily if they tried to keep it a secret. I suppose they could air it live and whatever time in the morning and then air it again as if it was live later at whatever time it would normally start but even that would be unpopular, I imagine.
I don't think that's a big problem. The Super Bowl normally starts at 11pm GMT. That's probably too late if the game is played in London, but you'd just have to move it ahead by three hours - that would be 3pm Eastern or noon Western time, which would still be acceptable, or not?
In my opinion it would be a smart move by the NFL. The Super Bowl already is a pretty big deal in European media, and doing that would certainly generate even more excitement about American Football.
And regarding "There are plenty of fine American cities that have never hosted the Superbowl." - well, yeah, but what's the chance of a fan of one of the teams that get to the final to actually get tickets? The Super Bowl is mostly tv-event anyway, so does it really matter that much where it takes place physically?
Yes, for sure. Any second rate US college team would destroy such an "EU team".
There are ambitious amateur American football teams in Europe, but the level it's played at is simply not comparable to the US.
I'm not sure how long an average American Football game lasts but that would cause significant transportation problems if they sold out the stadium as the Tube would most likely be closed by the time the game ended.
They could extend the Tube's opening hours for one night, but transportation from the stadium would still be a problem.
The Super Bowl takes at least four hours. Does the London Underground only run until midnight or what? I can't imagine that getting 80.000 people or whatever to and from Wembley would be an unsolvable problem for a city like London.
At 11pm getting there would not be a problem.
At 3am, getting home would be. The last train from Wembley is around 12:30am. Yes, this could be changed but they'd have to do it for the entire network as the Jubilee Line will only take you so far.
Plus there are certain issues regarding the amount of noise such an event would cause at that time of night.
No, I meant the game should start at 8pm if it's played in London. 11pm would be too late for many reasons. 
No, I meant the game should start at 8pm if it's played in London. 11pm would be too late for many reasons.
8pm would be better, but not perfect if it's going to last for four hours.
I doubt they could kill football off. It's way too ingrained in American culture at the moment.
Similar threads
