Amidst the mundane news cycle that is the NFL preseason, league commissioner Roger Goodell finds himself in the headlines, due to hinted desires to host a Super Bowl internationally, presumably London, and the once preposterous idea has more traction then ever. Based off revenue generated by the international regular season games the NFL has hosted abroad it feels that such a decision is inevitable. The league could easily check off all the necessary boxes for hosting a Super Bowl in a location like London England. The true question would be, is this a disrespect to the vast majority of NFL fans located in the United States?
Time and time again the National Football League has proven as an organization generating revenue is never an issue. While an international Super Bowl could wildly be a success, is there a moral obligation to fan bases to keep the game state-side? Under the guidance of Roger Goodell the league has been more profit driven than ever before. There is no concern of a Super Bowl that was hosted domestically failing to generate profit and revenue.
The notion of moving the Super Bowl, even for one year, shows a clear ignorance for the fan culture that exist far beyond attending the game, the entire week leading up to the Super Bowl has become an experience in itself, and for many fans it’s as close as they get to being at the Super Bowl. Host cities are flocked by people looking to partake in the plethora of events and entertainment that spawn from the presence of the Super Bowl. Most of the fans that visit the host will do so with no intentions of being inside the stadium for the game, and often depart the city before the game is even played.
The decision to host a Super Bowl internationally would boil down to matter of, do we make money, or more money? The economics for how well the league would benefit financially from such a game may outweigh any hopes of loyalty to the fans that have help build this league. Imagine if the Champions League Final was held in Los Angeles, California or El Clásico between Real Madrid and Barcelona to New York City. It’s not only a spit in the face of fans of the teams involved but fans of the sport itself. While you can argue these examples have a stronger international foothold, you would still say it to be foolish to host these matches in those locations. The idea of hosting a Super Bowl internationally without having a single team located outside the United States feel a bit like putting the cart before the horse. Fans should not have to suffer for the NFL’s greed and desire to grow the brand internationally.
It is no coincidence that commissioner Goodell would try to use the Super Bowl in such a fashion. NFL owners have been resistant to international games and anything that would remove games from their team’s home stadium. This means beyond regular seasons games it would be near impossible to host playoff games given the current playoff model for the NFL. The higher seed host the game in their home stadium. That means added revenue for that owner, and no owner is turning down free money. The Super Bowl however has traditionally been held at a host city throughout the United States. This where the concern truly enters as the concept of a host city could be expanded to include somewhere like London, England or other locations. For the most part the idea has been met with disgust by most fans, but fan satisfaction may carry little weight in this argument.
Unlike many of the matters we hear about involving off-field issues it usually involves the NFLPA to some degree. That is not the case with the subject of deciding the host cities for future Super Bowls. That power falls on the NFL owners and could further spell disaster for the future on where the Super Bowl is held in the coming years. If the choices are making money, and anything else. It’s not hard to figure out which way the owners will go. Take a peek at the recent collusion stories about the NFL owners and its not a difficult assertion to make. In a day an age where every phrase and word of an interview is analyzed it is not a mistake Commissioner Goodell chose the words he did. This is not the first time this idea has been floated; casually appearing in the media cycles over the past couple years. Goodell has made it clear host intentions and desires for the NFL to become an international league. Regular season games held in an international setting has been an annoyance to fans, but could be the opening to Pandora’s box.
In 2023, Goodell received a three-year extension that will keep him in place as commissioner through the 2027 season. Outside of retirement, which most would see as a surprise move, it’s fair to imagine Goodell’s contract will be renewed, or extended in some fashion in the near future. This could lead to Goodell being around long enough for something like a Super Bowl in London to become more than a hypothetical scenario. Growth of the sport is never a bad thing, but if the league front office wishes to see a Super Bowl held internationally greater steps must be taken. It’s nothing to host a game overseas, even a series of games, then why haven’t we heard of any talks of expansion with teams in overseas markets. Hosting a Super Bowl internationally is a money grab pure and simple. Sadly, it is also the type of move fans have come to expect from he league front office and commissioner Goodell.
