Quote:So you're predicting the packers won't be playing us in London?
I'm predicting there is a 75% chance we don't play the packers in London.
Quote:LOL! You are joking right?
It's ok, you can just admit that you're talking out your backside. The Cowboys have a legit claim as the most popular team in America. The Steelers are a great rival, but the Cowboys a bigger draw.
I understand peoples' frustration, but personally, I don't care which game is played in London.
It sucks to be honest. Losing a marquee opponent basically every year.
A great part of having an NFL team is being able to see superstar players. I am glad that I got to see the Jaguars take on guys like Dan Marino, Barry Sanders and Brett Favre. If the Packers game is moved, it is probably the last chance that fans in this town would get to see Aaron Rodgers. Also losing the chance to see a potential Super Bowl team.
I get that losing a game is part of the London deal. And the London deal is supposed to help the team get stronger in Jacksonville. But I completely understand why fans don't like losing a marquee game.
I sure hope it's not true about the Packers game next year, but kind of feel there might be something there.
I agree they do seem to be moving one of the season's best home games overseas each year, with the Bills being an exception this upcoming season.
I ask you all 3 questions and would like just a one team answer:
Which home game would you have rather the Jags played in London in 2013?
Which home game would you have rather the Jags played in London in 2014?
Which home game would you have rather the Jags played in London in 2015?
See below for a quick refresher on the Jags 2013, 2014 and 2015 schedule.
http://www.nfl.com/schedules/2013/REG/JAGUARS
Quote:From Ryan O
Bummer. Three out of four years that the best home game of the year is heading overseas.
http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/...ris-polian
Yeah, I don't really understand the point of it, either. If the idea is to make the Jaguars the team that gets rooted for in England, then it seems to be that moving winnable games against the dregs of the league would make the most sense, while keeping as much home field advantage as possible against the difficult teams. Playing against the marquee teams in England is a lose/lose/lose. The team loses the advantage it needs in the game, the fans here lose the best game on the schedule, and the team loses out on looking good in front of the English fans. The Jaguars have been repeatedly stomped in the England games, all of them were over before halftime.
Quote:If the Packers game is moved, it is probably the last chance that fans in this town would get to see Aaron Rodgers. Also losing the chance to see a potential Super Bowl team.
A home playoff game against the Packers would fix both of those issues.
Personally I'd like to see the *worst* opponent on the schedule play the Wembley game for once. Would be nice to see the Jags running up the score for a change.
The reality, of course, is that the opponent is largely determined by which of the non-divisional home games features an opponent that's willing to play in England.
Quote:I sure hope it's not true about the Packers game next year, but kind of feel there might be something there.
I agree they do seem to be moving one of the season's best home games overseas each year, with the Bills being an exception this upcoming season.
I ask you all 3 questions and would like just a one team answer:
Which home game would you have rather the Jags played in London in 2013?
Which home game would you have rather the Jags played in London in 2014?
Which home game would you have rather the Jags played in London in 2015?
See below for a quick refresher on the Jags 2013, 2014 and 2015 schedule.
http://www.nfl.com/schedules/2013/REG/JAGUARS
2013 should have been the Cardinals, 2014 should have been the Browns, and 2015 is fine, but I would have liked to see it be the Chargers. I like the idea of forcing a west coast team to go across 8 timezones for the game.
Quote:A home playoff game against the Packers would fix both of those issues.
Personally I'd like to see the *worst* opponent on the schedule play the Wembley game for once. Would be nice to see the Jags running up the score for a change.
The reality, of course, is that the opponent is largely determined by which of the non-divisional home games features an opponent that's willing to play in England.
The Jaguars will never host a playoff game against the Packers, I think that's a pretty safe never to declare.
Moving the marquee games ruins my chance to recoup a majority of my season ticket money via one game. A Packers game for me would pay for my tickets for the year.
Personally, I'd prefer to see games played in the UK which we stand a chance of winning.
So far, all the International series games have sold out (although they're still trying to sell the final tickets for this seasons Jaguars-Bills game) so the opposition might not matter. And watching the Jaguars get thumped by teams like the 49ers, Cowboys and Packers might not be the best way of winning over new Jaguars fans in the UK.
The counter argument is that as long as the stadium sells out, it makes little difference whether it's filled with newly converted Jaguars fans, or glory hunting Packers, Patriots and Seahawks fans. It's just about making money. So the most important thing (for the Jaguars and the NFL) is to ensure the game sells out. And the best way to do that is to send us a "top" team to play against.
This seasons Bills game will test that. If it sells out and draws in enough advertising, then they might not feel the need to send over the bigger teams in future...
Quote:The Jaguars will never host a playoff game against the Packers, I think that's a pretty safe never to declare.
All it takes is a minor rearrangement of conferences at the next expansion or a rules change for how the playoffs are organised (which could well happen). Or another Superbowl in Jacksonville. Never say never.
If you're going to have a team no one cares about (US) play over seas, you have to pull a marquee team to play them against.
SF was a good team
Dallas is a universal symbol of football.
GB has Arod.
I'm not a J-Ville native.... but if people from J-Ville and the surrounding areas supported the team fully... the London thing would probably be less of an issue.
Can't hate on a man for making sure he gets paid (while doing a solid try at keeping the franchise in J-Ville)
Quote:I understand peoples' frustration, but personally, I don't care which game is played in London.
I agree. I go to see the Jags.
Quote:I agree. I go to see the Jags.
I am pretty sure we all do. But it is nice to see a star player in what is likely our last opportunity.
The reason there are London games involving Jaguars is because even though our ticket prices are some of NFL's least expensive we are in bottom 25% generally. That fact is after we have lowered bowl size to about average NFL size. All NFL team business models for ticket sales is to have the smallest amount of churn turnover year after year and ticket prices that accommodate the smallest amount of churn turnover. Right now our ticket prices reflect this business model with the help of the London games. Of course after we start winning there will be obvious significant interest like in the early years. Winning will allow ticket price increases because of increased demand. The London games will go away if we can increase revenue so the team isn't constantly spending money marketing and improving game day experience that teams in top half of revenue do not have to spend every year. If not then London games will continue. It is only logical that a 2nd London game in back to back games lowers cost and increases Jaguars exposure therefore increase possible revenue. Again solve the revenue problem in Jacksonville and London games go away.
Quote:It's ok, you can just admit that you're talking out your backside. The Cowboys have a legit claim as the most popular team in America. The Steelers are a great rival, but the Cowboys a bigger draw.
The Broncos have actually come out on top as America's team over the past couple years.
Quote:It sucks to be honest. Losing a marquee opponent basically every year.
A great part of having an NFL team is being able to see superstar players. I am glad that I got to see the Jaguars take on guys like Dan Marino, Barry Sanders and Brett Favre. If the Packers game is moved, it is probably the last chance that fans in this town would get to see Aaron Rodgers. Also losing the chance to see a potential Super Bowl team.
I get that losing a game is part of the London deal. And the London deal is supposed to help the team get stronger in Jacksonville. But I completely understand why fans don't like losing a marquee game.
Wouldn't you rather see a Jaguars win at home over a game where there's virtually no chance for victory?
As long as the Jaguars are considered the "second billing" and not the "main attraction," this is going to continue to happen for our London games.
A top tier team will be necessary to send to London, and we're not currently there. You want to send teams that represent your best.
Not an easy pill to swallow for STH, but completely logical from a business standpoint.
Quote:I sure hope it's not true about the Packers game next year, but kind of feel there might be something there.
I agree they do seem to be moving one of the season's best home games overseas each year, with the Bills being an exception this upcoming season.
I ask you all 3 questions and would like just a one team answer:
Which home game would you have rather the Jags played in London in 2013?
Which home game would you have rather the Jags played in London in 2014?
Which home game would you have rather the Jags played in London in 2015?
See below for a quick refresher on the Jags 2013, 2014 and 2015 schedule.
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.nfl.com/schedules/2013/REG/JAGUARS'>http://www.nfl.com/schedules/2013/REG/JAGUARS</a>
That's easy. Give London a Titans or Texans (or even colts) game.
2013 Titans
2014 Texans
2015 Colts