Goodell, what do you think?

[LooGie]

No, they moved because of the cost of living/building in L.A. Owners can get partial stadium funding from the city/state virtually anywhere else. But tax increase proposals in L.A./Orange County consistently get voted down. Why would an owner spend $2 billion to build a new stadium in Anaheim when it costs half as much to build it in Nashville or Houston and the city/state will pick up half of the tab?

so that's Goodell's fault? you blamed, (or judged anyway) Goodell for not trying to get a team back to LA. So, he should add more teams and dilute the talent pool so LA can get a team, or force a current owner to move there? What's your point, and how does it compare to expanding overseas?

I think we both know the answer here.

 

 

Expanding the league outside of the US has always been Goodell's biggest plan. He's came out and stated that much. This is an American game that the world doesn't understand, nor do they want to. This isn't an international game like Baseball or basketball, nor will it ever be. By sending a game to London one home team, it's fanbase and the city lose out on a game and money employee's of the stadium would have made... If you want to build up a game internationally, fine, just don't do it at American fans who make the game work's expense. It's not right.

Goodell's penalizing the Patriots of a first round draft pick was a bad idea as well, but that's another topic all together... Then destroying the spygate tapes, what a genius move there as well. Tags was great because he was out of the spotlight. Goodell is attention hungry and jumps in front of the camera every chance he gets, which I don't think the commish should do. I for one can't stand the guy.

 

 

So you have no problem with fans who have been supporting their team for years and years being robbed out of a game so soccer fans can watch a game in a mud bowl?

 

I think you guys are missing the point. Since expanding overseas (if it can be done, which is yet to be seen, i think it can, however, i dont want it to) is the next on hit list of priorities (and rightfully so) there's only one way to do it. Real NFL stars, playing in a real NFL game that REALLY means something. Goodell is doing exactly what he should do. Sending over half-wits, or druggies, or has-beens, to play in pre-season games is not going to work. We all know it. If you just relax for a minute, and take a deep breath, you'll be able to accept that.

So, logically, there is no other way to do this, and Goodell has made a decision to do it right. He has to go overseas. There is no other way to grow. And to do that, he has to do it THIS EXACT way. Sure, it sucks, but maybe it woudln't suck so bad (for the players) if it was a reward game.

 

Maybe if it's whoever scored the first and second most points from the year before. Then players would be going because they did A GOOD thing last year. A reward type of setting, where they even get $5k for making it to the "china bowl" or whatever. That might ease the pain. But that's a whole other subject and a pointless one, because we all know it wont happen.

 

But to get overseas, you gotta send pure-bred, American, grade-A, beefy NFL stars who are playing for their playoff spots.

[Bill Swerski]

so that's Goodell's fault? you blamed, (or judged anyway) Goodell for not trying to get a team back to LA. So, he should add more teams and dilute the talent pool so LA can get a team, or force a current owner to move there? What's your point, and how does it compare to expanding overseas?

 

There are a lot of owners who would LOVE to exploit the LA/Orange County markets. The problem, as I said before, is with stadium funding in over-priced and over-taxed SoCal. The Colts probably would've moved there if they didn't get funding from the Indiana legislature. The Jags are struggling in Jacksonville and they're candidates to move as well. I find it odd that Goodell and the owners so much about expanding into new markets overseas, but doesn't seem to give a crap about exploiting the second-largest market in their own country.

 

I think you guys are missing the point. Since expanding overseas (if it can be done, which is yet to be seen, i think it can, however, i dont want it to) is the next on hit list of priorities (and rightfully so) there's only one way to do it.

 

There's no way to expand franchises across the Atlantic with the current schedule. And given that players on the West Coast constantly complain about having to travel back and forth across the country, they'd like flying across the Atlantic a lot less.

 

Real NFL stars, playing in a real NFL game that REALLY means something. Goodell is doing exactly what he should do. Sending over half-wits, or druggies, or has-beens, to play in pre-season games is not going to work.

 

So, how do you explain the popularity of poorly-played college football in America? Or the Arena League? The players in "Europa" were better than the vast majority of the crud that we see on Saturdays.

 

The reality is that Europe rejected pro football because they don't care about football in general. It had nothing to do with the quality of play (which wasn't really that bad). Sure, playing a regular-season game at Wembley sells tickets, but it's not going to sustain interest. The Europeans are going to have to start a league of their own to get seriously into it. It needs to be ingrained into the culture. And given the failure of NFL Europa, I don't see that happening any time soon.

 

Do you honestly think that Americans would care if Manchester United played Chelsea in a regular-season game at Giants Stadium? I'm sure that some of the few hardcore soccer fans on the East Coast would show up and some others might out of curiosity/boredom as well. But the reality is that Americans don't care about soccer. And even elite players like Pele and David Beckham playing in America have failed miserably to change that.

Edited February 27, 2008 by Bill Swerski

[LooGie]

There are a lot of owners who would LOVE to exploit the LA/Orange County markets. The problem, as I said before, is with stadium funding in over-priced and over-taxed SoCal. The Colts probably would've moved there if they didn't get funding from the Indiana legislature. The Jags are struggling in Jacksonville and they're candidates to move as well. I find it odd that Goodell and the owners so much about expanding into new markets overseas, but doesn't seem to give a crap about exploiting the second-largest market in their own country.

SD, SF and OAK are enough Cali teams if you ask me. That's doesn't mean an LA team wouldn't do well, but personally, I dont think so. And if it did, then it would just detract from one of those other 3 markets. I get your point on LA, but I dont see what Goodell could do, much less, why he should do it.

 

 

There's no way to expand franchises across the Atlantic with the current schedule. And given that players on the West Coast constantly complain about having to travel back and forth across the country, they'd like flying across the Atlantic a lot less.

Oh well, that's THEIR JOB now. Get on a plane, fly to ___ and whine the whole way, then get out and play a ball game. Be it SEA, GB or Zimbabwe. They can whine all they want. It doesn't change the fact that it's still the best way to expand.

 

 

So, how do you explain the popularity of poorly-played college football in America? Or the Arena League? The players in "Europa" were better than the vast majority of the crud that we see on Saturdays.

 

The reality is that Europe rejected pro football because they don't care about football in general. It had nothing to do with the quality of play (which wasn't really that bad). Sure, playing a regular-season game at Wembley sells tickets, but it's not going to sustain interest. The Europeans are going to have to start a league of their own to get seriously into it. It needs to be ingrained into the culture. And given the failure of NFL Europa, I don't see that happening any time soon.

I explain all that, in the same way, as "how do you explain the popularity of poorly-played soccer in England?" It's their sport. It's our sport, American's love it. Soccer does pretty well over here.

Are we so ignorant and daft as to think that Europeans won't know the difference between a pre-season game, and a regular season game with A-list stars? I mean, if England sent a minor-league b-class soccer team over here, i'd think we'd catch on... Well, someone else would. I dont know anything about soccer, but you get my point. (You made a great point below that actually already battles this point, but I wont erase my statement. I enjoy good debates)

 

 

Do you honestly think that Americans would care if Manchester United played Chelsea in a regular-season game at Giants Stadium? I'm sure that some of the few hardcore soccer fans on the East Coast would show up and some others might out of curiosity/boredom as well. But the reality is that Americans don't care about soccer. And even elite players like Pele and David Beckham playing in America have failed miserably to change that.

 

This statement sorta disproves my previous point, about the b-class soccer team, but there's still a point to be heard. American's are lazy, selfish and downright judgmental of others. From other countries sports, to their politics and laws and even religions. If it aint white (and red and blue) it ain't right. I can tell you right now, I think soccer is stupid. One of the most popular sports on earth, and I think everyone who watches it, is retarded. I'd rather watch...well...nothing. That's my daft, American ego. And 99% of Americans have bit of that too.

However, there's a better chance of the a-list soccer players coming over here and igniting a passion for soccer, than b-class nobodies trying to make it back into the European soccer mainstream starlight.

 

And that's the point you keep glancing over - that there is no other way to do this. If it's gonna be done, as sucky as it is, it HAS to be done this way. There's no other way it will succeed. If it doesn't succeed this way, it wont succeed any other way. And going back tothe point of this thread, Goodell, is doing exactly what he should be doing.

 

You seem to want to debate whether we should do it or not. Whether it's fair to fans here, or whether other countries will care. I'll debate those points too, because I think it will succeed, and yes, I hate it. I dont want it to succeed. And if it has to succeed, I'd much rather have Mexico and Canada games. Hell, give those countries their own damn teams, and add 2 more teams to the states and have 36. Or even put 2 other teams in South America. But, as far as Goodell, he's doing what he's got to

[Bill Swerski]

Are we so ignorant and daft as to think that Europeans won't know the difference between a pre-season game, and a regular season game with A-list stars? I mean, if England sent a minor-league b-class soccer team over here, i'd think we'd catch on... Well, someone else would. I dont know anything about soccer, but you get my point. (You made a great point below that actually already battles this point, but I wont erase my statement. I enjoy good debates)

 

I has nothing to do with Europeans being ignorant. They're not. They just don't care about pro football because it's not part of their culture. And I don't see how sending teams over there to play regular-season games is going to change that. All that seems to do is piss off season-ticket holders in America who wanted to go to the game... oh, and pad the NFL's coffers as well.

 

IMO, NFL Europa was a better model to garner their interest. Those were THEIR teams. THEY had a stake in it. But they chose to not support them. Europeans and Americans will not develop any significant interest in pro football and soccer, respectively, until it becomes a major part of their cultures. And you can't change a nation's culture by simply bringing better players to their stage. Pele and Beckham have shown that raiding country's highly-marketable superstars doesn't work. (Bringing Gretzky to LA helped the NHL in America somewhat, but the league was a major sport here for decades prior to that.)

 

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point.

[LooGie]

I has nothing to do with Europeans being ignorant. They're not. They just don't care about pro football because it's not part of their culture. And I don't see how sending teams over there to play regular-season games is going to change that. All that seems to do is piss off season-ticket holders in America who wanted to go to the game... oh, and pad the NFL's coffers as well.

 

IMO, NFL Europa was a better model to garner their interest. Those were THEIR teams. THEY had a stake in it. But they chose to not support them. Europeans and Americans will not develop any significant interest in pro football and soccer, respectively, until it becomes a major part of their cultures. And you can't change a nation's culture by simply bringing better players to their stage. Pele and Beckham have shown that raiding country's highly-marketable superstars doesn't work. (Bringing Gretzky to LA helped the NHL in America somewhat, but the league was a major sport here for decades prior to that.)

 

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point.

actually, this post is brilliant. I didn't think of Europa as "their teams" before. I thought of it as what it was to us. Has-beens, never was's and the like. You made a brilliant point about their teams, and not being able to change their culture. While I still feel this could succeed, i think you might be 100% right in that a better verion of Europa might be the better way to go.

Look at that Swerski....you and I, actually talking through something? Awesome!

 

So, lemme ask you this, besides the overseas stuff, base your opinion 100% on his disciplinary actions. What do you say about him?

[Bill Swerski]

actually, this post is brilliant. I didn't think of Europa as "their teams" before. I thought of it as what it was to us. Has-beens, never was's and the like. You made a brilliant point about their teams, and not being able to change their culture. While I still feel this could succeed, i think you might be 100% right in that a better verion of Europa might be the better way to go.

Look at that Swerski....you and I, actually talking through something? Awesome!

 

I'm shocked!

 

Thanks for the kind words.

 

So, lemme ask you this, besides the overseas stuff, base your opinion 100% on his disciplinary actions. What do you say about him?

 

I'm a big fan of his disciplinary action on players. I also liked the fines levied against the Pats and Belichick, but am disappointed that he destroyed BB's tapes (:cough: cover-up :cough:). But overall, I like the way that he's disciplined the league. That's an area where Tags came up short.

[LooGie]

I'm shocked!

 

Thanks for the kind words.

 

 

 

I'm a big fan of his disciplinary action on players. I also liked the fines levied against the Pats and Belichick, but am disappointed that he destroyed BB's tapes (:cough: cover-up :cough:). But overall, I like the way that he's disciplined the league. That's an area where Tags came up short.

totally agree on the Tags thing.

 

I'm still amazed about this tape destroying. You think it was a cover up, but for what reason?

Only thing i can think of is having proof of cheating for games where superbowls were actually won, is alot of trash to sift through, alot of paperwork, and probably not worth the hassle. Let them keep their Lambardi for that year and just move past it?

[Bill Swerski]

I'm still amazed about this tape destroying. You think it was a cover up, but for what reason?

Only thing i can think of is having proof of cheating for games where superbowls were actually won, is alot of trash to sift through, alot of paperwork, and probably not worth the hassle. Let them keep their Lambardi for that year and just move past it?

 

I would guess that he destroyed them so that the only proof of the Pats' cheating was the Jets game this past season and the Packers game the previous year. I'm not sure if there's any damning evidence of them cheating in the SBs. If there were, he'd have ample reason to destroy the evidence. But even if there wasn't, there's most likely more incidents of illegal taping that the media would latch on to. Goodell doesn't want any more bad press for his league and destroying everything gives him the ability to simultaneously stonewall investigators and shut the media up.

[Sturphy]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8030603654.html

 

Goodell wants to crackdown on cheating.

[LooGie]

 

the lowering of the proof needed for him to punish seems a little odd. I dont know what is needed now, but I would assume it's nothing more than proof of cheating, which is what we would expect.

[piratesownninjas]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8030603654.html

 

Goodell wants to crackdown on cheating.

He also wants to lessen the burden of proof, so he can hand out penalties easier...

God complex in full effect.

[piratesownninjas]

the lowering of the proof needed for him to punish seems a little odd. I dont know what is needed now, but I would assume it's nothing more than proof of cheating, which is what we would expect.

Get ready for it, because Goodell has a good chance at screwing this game up big time. He is slowly marching to have his power unchecked.

[Bronco Billy]

Get ready for it, because Goodell has a good chance at screwing this game up big time. He is slowly marching to have his power unchecked.

 

The extent of his powers reach to whatever extent the owners decide to allow him. His powers will increase or decrease at the behest of the owners.