The NFL and London: Is it a Good Permanent Match?

The NFL and London are adding more games next season, and there are even whispers of placing a franchise there, but could it be sustained?

The NFL is no stranger to Europe, or to London, England.

The World League of American Football (or NFL Europe as it was later called) operated from 1991-2007 (with a two-year hiatus from 1993-94), having some limited success, but ultimately not being able to even stay afloat as a developmental league.

The London Monarchs actually won the inaugural World Bowl in 1991, but their search for a home — moving from Wembley Stadium, to White Hart Lane and finally to Stamford Bridge — as well as waning attendance led to their eventual change from the London Monarchs to the England Monarchs, playing home games in London, Birmingham and Bristol, and then finally disbanding after the 1998 season.

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has always stated his desire to see the league’s market expand back into Europe, and has tried several different methods, including the preseason American Bowl games, and then starting in 2007, the International Series during the regular season.

The International series — consisting of two games per season — has been held at London’s Wembley Stadium, and is slated to continue through 2016. The series moved to three games in 2014, and there are now discussions in place to expand the series to five games in future seasons. Goodell has also mentioned the possibility of London eventually hosting a Super Bowl.

The series has been a relative hit in England, with tickets selling out within days of being released, nine months in advance. According to the NFL’s statistics, only 3 percent of those attending are Americans or American expatriates, while 22 percent are from London and the remaining 60 percent from elsewhere in the U.K.

So the NFL market is there in London, but is it just the novelty of a couple of games a season that make it so popular, or could there actually be a niche for a team to be based in London, and to be part of the NFL mothership?

As an Atlantan, it reminds me of the continued failed attempts to bring a successful professional soccer team to the city of Atlanta. Exhibition and one-off games from larger European leagues do have success, but in the end, when Atlanta becomes home to a soccer franchise, the luster of the new team wears off in a hurry and attendance always fails (which is of course, why Atlanta is getting an MLS franchise in 2017).

The idea of expanding the International Series to five games may be the best litmus test there is, but even that wouldn’t guarantee the success of a permanent team in London.

One of the biggest problems a London franchise would have is the same hurdle that the NFL Europe’s Monarchs encountered – and that’s where do they call home?

Oct 26, 2014; London, UNITED KINGDOM; Fans arrive from the Wembley Park underground station for the NFL International Series game between the Detroit Lions and the Atlanta Falcons at Wembley Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports /

Wembley Stadium is terribly expensive to use, and availability can be limited due to the other events constantly scheduled at England’s premier venue. Several of the soccer stadiums (such as White Hart Lane) contain fields that are not large enough to house a 100-yard NFL field, and 10-yard end zones. Stadiums that do have large enough fields may not be in ideal locations.

Would the NFL dare attempt to fleece the British fans for a publicly funded stadium built strictly to house their franchise?

Travel time would also have to be taken into consideration for a permanent team in London. Travel visas, inoculations, and all the other wonderful pitfalls that come with international travel would become a concern for every player in the league. Trying to schedule games overseas allotting for ample travel and rest time could become nightmarish for the league.

And then there’s that whole England time zone issue. Most of the International Series games have been played at a 1:00 pm EDT kickoff time, translating to 6:00 pm in England. But it wouldn’t be likely that all the games would be able to be played at that London start time, and you’d end up with what he had this past weekend when the Atlanta Falcons and Detroit Lions met – a game beginning at 9:30 am in the Eastern part of the United States and 6:30 am on the West Coast.

Probably not the best thing for television ratings and revenues.

But the biggest problem facing a team permanently placed in England would be attendance.

By the time the London/England Monarchs folded up their tents in 1998, attendance had dipped down below 10,000 per game, playing in stadiums that held over 40,000. The NFL would probably end up having to float the cost of a team in England, pulling from the resources that are shared league-wide with the North American franchises.

Playing games in London isn’t necessarily a bad thing. The English crowds are very generally engaged in the game (even more than some American crowds), and obviously enjoy the break from European futbol for a brief time to see a game live that they normally are only able to view on the tele. But that doesn’t mean they are ready to invest in jerseys, caps and an allegiance to their own team.

American Futbol in London is best viewed like the McRib sandwich at McDonald’s. People get really excited when it’s back, but it will never become a permanent menu item at the golden arches, because the McDonald’s marketing gurus know that much of the buzz is created by the sandwich’s absence for a time.

A few games a year in England is just enough to cause a little commotion and excitement, but having a full 16-game NFL slate would eventually wear thin on fans who really just see the NFL as a little wrinkle in their lives as sports fans.

More from FanSided

Home/NFL