RealGM

I know most of you are going to bitch about this, but I'm pretty excited. I think I'm going to try to make it. Also, Lambeau won't be losing a home game, the Jaguars will be the "Home" team.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25241204/report-packers-to-play-in-london-in-2016

PkrsBcksGphsMqt wrote:I know most of you are going to bitch about this, but I'm pretty excited. I think I'm going to try to make it. Also, Lambeau won't be losing a home game, the Jaguars will be the "Home" team.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25241204/report-packers-to-play-in-london-in-2016

Hell ya I'll go.

Ugh, Tottenham's new stadium won't be done by then to host the London games. I'd be 100% in if that was the case.

This link just showed up on my facebook feed and I started reading the comments. It made my head hurt.


People asking why the Packers are moving to London. Asking why the Packers are losing a home game from Lambeau. People making idiotic comments. Saying Godell should be fired for "The London Packers." Have people always been this stupid and the internet has now given them an outlet to showcase their stupidity to the rest of the world or is this generation just a bad dumpster fire leading to idiocracy?

The Pack have been very clear with the NFL that they will not give up a home game. Many expected us to to be playing Oakland over there this year.

Saw on twiiter, and its a good point, that the Jaguars may not be in favor of losing the Pack as a home game as its probably a guaranteed sellout or big crowd --- especially if its late in the year where GB fans want to go to warm weather. Should be interesting.

Thunder Muscle wrote:Saw on twiiter, and its a good point, that the Jaguars may not be in favor of losing the Pack as a home game as its probably a guaranteed sellout or big crowd --- especially if its late in the year where GB fans want to go to warm weather. Should be interesting.

It's not interesting. It's a Jaguars home game in London. Simple as that

RRyder823 wrote:

Thunder Muscle wrote:Saw on twiiter, and its a good point, that the Jaguars may not be in favor of losing the Pack as a home game as its probably a guaranteed sellout or big crowd --- especially if its late in the year where GB fans want to go to warm weather. Should be interesting.

It's not interesting. It's a Jaguars home game in London. Simple as that

Do the Jaguars collect all revenue (including concessions, parking, etc) or does the London venue/opposing team get a cut? And Jacksonville business owners will lose in travel, hotel, restaurants that the Packer fans would bring in since they do travel so well, especially to Florida. I'm sure if the Jaguars organization and area businesses have a say, Green Bay would not be the game they want to go over there.

Jaguars have a 4 year contract to play 1 game in London, so it would be them losing the home game. The point above is if the Geen Bay game will be a big seller in Jax, why not try to lobby to get a different one in London which will likely sell good regardless of opponent.

Thunder Muscle wrote:

RRyder823 wrote:

Thunder Muscle wrote:Saw on twiiter, and its a good point, that the Jaguars may not be in favor of losing the Pack as a home game as its probably a guaranteed sellout or big crowd --- especially if its late in the year where GB fans want to go to warm weather. Should be interesting.

It's not interesting. It's a Jaguars home game in London. Simple as that

Do the Jaguars collect all revenue (including concessions, parking, etc) or does the London venue/opposing team get a cut? And Jacksonville business owners will lose in travel, hotel, restaurants that the Packer fans would bring in since they do travel so well, especially to Florida. I'm sure if the Jaguars organization and area businesses have a say, Green Bay would not be the game they want to go over there.

I'm not clear on the details but the league does incentives teams that don't sell out their stadiums to give up a home game for London. Not sure what that all entails but it's been stated repeatedly that they do. And why they never even ask teams that always sell out to host the game. Just point to a time that a team that sells out regualry hosted the game. Its always teams like Oakland, Atlanta or Jacksonville. It's simple economics. If your guaranteed to sell out your game. There's no point in accepting the game. If odds are good you won't sell out though then it makes sense you do it.

There are consensions the NFL makes to teams that agree to host. I'm just not privy to the details. The one that pops into my head though is that the game has 100% chance of not being blacked out in Jacksonville.

Wembley made 3M pounds off of each NFL game last year, not sure what that entails though.

Pretty sure the NFL has enough cash to sling to whomever is the home team. The problem is, the local economy of said team takes a big hit.

as long as we don't lose a home game I don't care

JayMKE wrote:as long as we don't lose a home game I don't care

NFL would never do that, nor would the Packers Management allow it.


Stadiums like Jax need it, and I've been there when the Packers played and they have a big draw, but it's still not full. They declare a sellout because they put tarp over a bunch of the upper deck. It's too damn big a stadium and not enough interest to fill it.

I think it's cool the Packers get to go to London and it is a good idea for them to have an away game there. If you are trying to sell the sport overseas or at least draw interest, better to have a marque team there, and the Packers are one of the big teams with an international presence.

I'm waiting for the official date of this. My wife and I are going to Germany for Oktoberfest next year and if this game falls one one of those 3 weekends I'm likely going to either start or end our trip in London to go to this game.