Getty ImagesOn Friday morning, seemingly out of the blue, the NFL announced that the Rams will play a home game in each of the next three seasons in London.
It wasn?t a surprise only for the fans in St. Louis.? In an appearance on The Dan Patrick Show coming less than an hour after word of the three-year deal broke, new coach Jeff Fisher said he found out about the potential move the prior day.
?I had discussions with [COO] Kevin Demoff late yesterday,? Fisher said, in response to the question of when he first learned about the arrangement.? ?[Demoff] said it might be a possibility.? I guess they firmed things up in the last 24 hours.?
The development has ruffled feathers in St. Louis, for multiple reasons.? First, the team has given up what would have been one of the more compelling contests on the 2012 slate of home games.? Second, the city will lose one of the 10 annual occasions (preseason and regular season) on which revenue spikes for hotels, restaurants, bars, and related game-day/game-weekend services.? Third, and perhaps most importantly, the three-year deal coincides with the three remaining years before the team can abandon its current lease, if the Edward Jones Dome isn?t among the top 25 percent of all NFL stadiums.
To his credit, Kevin Demoff applied a thick layer of skin and absorbed the slings and arrows from the St. Louis fan base in a chat that was conducted Friday afternoon by the team?s official website.? And Demoff wasn?t bashful about responding to aggressive fans.? Here?s the verbatim content of one of the first questions posted, even though it was more of a statement:? ?Tired of the constant F-you?s by your organization. You guys have successfully alienated your entire fanbase over and over again. You guys are the laughingstock of the league, congrats.?
Conceding in his first response that the Rams knew the announcement would trigger a ?mixed bag? of responses, Demoff subsequently summarized the benefits of the move:? ?1. The league is placing its faith in the St. Louis Rams and now has a vested interest in our success. That means potentially a better schedule, a possible primetime game, things like that. 2. This is a unique opportunity to showcase St. Louis globally and especially in the UK. For multinational businesses like AB, Monsanto, Enterprise, Emerson, Purina, etc, this provides a platform that combines their local roots with international reach. 3. The bigger we can make our brand nationally and globally, the bigger it makes our ?effective market size?.? If you look at Buffalo playing yearly in Toronto, they are applying the same concept to grow their fan base while still being a regional and local team.?
The second point makes plenty of sense.? The third point becomes relevant only if folks from St. Louis will be traveling to the London games, and vice-versa.? As to the first point, the notion that the Rams would get a ?better schedule? has, in our view, no link to the willingness to play a home game each year in London.? The league doesn?t select prime-time games based on the potential ratings boost in other countries; the games are picked based on how the league believes those games will perform in the U.S.? For American viewers, the fact that the Rams will play seven games domestically and one internationally in each of the next three years simply doesn?t matter.? Moreover, the actual slate of games is based on a formula tied to whether the team finishes in first, second, third, or fourth place in its division; where those gave have been or will be played simply doesn?t matter when determining the opponents.
Demoff provided a somewhat more persuasive answer as to the possible on-field edge to be derived from three years of playing in London:? ?We actually hope that we can gain a competitive advantage by playing abroad and knowing exactly how to adapt to the conditions versus a team traveling to the UK for the first time.? Additionally, with Arsenal?s facilities, we should have the opportunity to have a normal practice schedule in the UK should we want it.? Finally this will allow us to have a bye in early November for the next few years which is highly important to the overall health of our team down the stretch.? And let?s face it, we haven?t played any better at home the past few years than on the road.?
That said, there are a few flaws in the logic.? The Patriots played a London game in 2009; thus, the organization and plenty of players will have an edge over the Rams in the 2012 game.? The fact that Stan Kroenke owns Arsenal would make it far cheaper to have a ?normal practice schedule? in London; any NFL team that goes to London could have a ?normal practice schedule? if it so chooses, as the Bucs did in 2011.? Also, any potential free agents with relatively equal offers from the Rams and another team may choose the other team in order to avoid having to go to London during the season for each of the next three years.? This could make it more expensive to sign free agents.
Demoff provided some insights into the manner in which the deal came together, which could make Fisher wonder why he wasn?t told about the possibility of playing games in London before Thursday.? ?[T]he league approved an initiative in October allowing teams to apply to play for up to five years,? Demoff said.? ?The majority of teams applied for three years because that was enough time for the league to consider the request but also not committing for the long term.? There is some connection to the lease timing, but that wasn?t the driving force in the years.? The driving force was our desire to partner with the league in putting on these games and knowing we had to show a commitment to the league.? On the flipside, people want to say that once the games expire we can leave, but what if we also look at it as once the improvements take place we want to return back to a refurbished building for good??
That?s a potent paragraph.? Demoff admits ?some connection? to an arrangement to play in London through 2014 and a St. Louis lease that can be escaped after 2014.? The last sentence strongly implies dissatisfaction with the current building in St. Louis, along with an expression of hope that, after 2014, the stadium would be properly ?refurbished.?
Thus, it?s fair to characterize this move by the Rams as a deliberate, calculated, and shrewd business decision.? Though Demoff?s contention that playing three games in London creates a ?chance to become the next Dallas Cowboys or Pittsburgh Steelers? represents the kind of stretch that could shatter a rubber band, the decision to take away one home game per year forces the powers-that-be in St. Louis to make the commitment sooner rather than later to properly upgrade the stadium ? or confront the possibility that the team will leave.
Making the tactic even more brilliant from a business perspective is the fact that the Rams, and in turn the NFL, will now be able to pit Los Angeles against London in the hopes of getting the best possible deal for the relocation of the Rams, if it comes to that.
Still, our friends in St. Louis shouldn?t abandon hope, yet.? The team?s tactic will bring the situation to a head.? And if the outcome becomes that the Rams will be moving out in three years, the folks in the Show Me State can hope that the Jaguars will be able to show three straight years of financial losses in Jacksonville, which would allow new owner Shad Khan to break the lease at Everbank Field and move the team to St. Louis.
all my children moneyball moneyball nasa satellite nasa satellite v for vendetta kate walsh
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.