NFL Expansion: The Case Against the Far Side of the World

With the New England Patriots and Tampa Bay Buccaneers playing to a sold-out crowd in London last night, one of the hot topics of discussion has been the idea of putting an NFL franchise somewhere in England.

I'll get to my review of the game later in the week (The cliff's notes: penalties are becoming a big problem for every unit, special teams continues to be hit-or-miss, and the running game seemed incapable of building on a solid week against Tennessee. It's going to be a big bye week for the Patriots), but for now, let's just chew on the fat from the game: the idea of expansion.

Now, I'm a big fan of history. There's a reason George Washington once cautioned us against entangling alliances with foreign nations and—I'm a little hazy on the exact details—I'm pretty sure it was because he knew being stuck on an airplane for six-plus hours was a chore.

Don't get me wrong, I am consistently impressed with British citizens and their understanding of American football. It's more than a curiosity; for some, it's a bit of a passion.

I compare it to many Americans, myself included, and their enduring love of the Premier League.

For instance, I've been a loyal supporter of Arsenal FC since I was laid-up one summer as a kid and caught some ancient replay of one of their games on television. I know my Arsenal and Premier League history as well as anybody, but I don't expect an EPL team to be playing all their home games in the states anytime soon.

The Premier League would be in an even better position to generate an audience overseas than the NFL. It's an international game that is a known quantity and appeals to a wider demographic than any other, would instantly give Americans a team to rally around that plays at the highest level, and it would generate more copy than a Megan Fox sex tape. 

The downside, though, is obvious—for either league. The travel would instantly create a huge competitive disadvantage for whichever team was away, the quality of the product would slip, and without a guarantee of success, it's a huge financial risk to anybody brought on board.

Furthermore, the NFL, at least in the current climate, has expanded enough as it is.

I don't mean that there aren't enough good NFL teams because, despite what many pundits have said about the bottom four or five teams in the league, the middle has greatly improved itself.

I made this argument earlier this season, but I actually think there are more quality football teams this season than there have been in the last few years.

I don't think the Saints, Vikings, Colts, or Giants are any worse than teams in past years who steamrolled the league, I just believe they are facing more competent teams this year who can give them a game.

But the league should be concerned less about the quality of the product on the field than the quantity of fans in the stands.

The NFL instituted the local blackout policy as a way to ensure that games were always going to be sold out and ratings would remain high. But with so few regular season games compared to sports like basketball, baseball, and even hockey, there's a desperate need to make the most of them.

And yet, nearly one-third of the league's teams live under the constant threat of possible blackouts with such an unsettled economic situation.

While many teams have been able to avoid blackouts with extensions provided by the league, one has to wonder if—in a country where the league is not a priority—such blackouts could be avoided.

Still, travel is always getting faster and more comfortable. The Patriots were able to fly nearly painlessly, according to player interviews from several media organizations, by flying with seats that extended to become beds.

With the ability to comfortably sleep through travel, a six-hour flight doesn't seem so bad. Unfortunately, though, a 12-hour flight would drag on anybody's system, asleep or not. 

Even the economic situation will, eventually, find itself a solution. And I do believe that in a more certain economic climate, with money to burn, it makes sense to try and establish the sport in new places.

But the biggest flaw the argument for expansion has is the simple fact that the NFL has yet to exhaust its potential in North America.

Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Toronto, San Antonio, Virginia, and Portland could all support an NFL franchise, and that's just the areas that have seen substantial population growth in the last eight years.

L.A. certainly could use an NFL team, the Vegas metro area has a population growing far faster than cities like Detroit or Jacksonville, as does San Antonio and Virginia in counties not named Alexandria and Arlington (Redskin territory).

It just makes no sense to overlook the huge potential of American cities that currently go without to pursue expansion.

Especially compared to sports like soccer and baseball, the NFL has to seriously grow its global brand. England is as good a place as any to do it, but there are far less risky, far more deserving, and far more sensible places to put an NFL franchise than London.