Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Recommended Posts

No! (Sorry, you have every right to your opinion)

I'd like to see a poll of American NFL fans just to gauge their opinion on the whole European expansion subject.

I've yet to talk to anyone who is for it. It's the same response, we're killing the golden goose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its hard to believe the NFL owners are willing to give London a team and cut another slice out their pie. I understand England has a lot of NFL fans with TV coverage just like we do, but the logistics of traveling teams back and forth along with fatigue the players must get from long flights seems too much. I don't mind if the colts play over there as long as we are the away team. COLTSNATION needs and want all of our home games to be at home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im American but have lived in England for the last 12 years... the NFL has grown substantially over here and I honestly think London could support an NFL team. Whether or not pushing for one is or isnt the best thing for the sport is an entirely different matter, but everyone in America should know that it is a growing sport over here and it's starting to be much more appreciated here too.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm english and love nfl. But understand and respect your views guys. its getting bigger in uk believe me though.

Happy to know that the Colts have fans worldwide.  I would think a team based in England would put one division, one conference at a competitive disadvantage with the extra travel.  Wouldn't it?

 

Anyway... How about a mid-season showcase weekend with several teams over there?  The NFL would need to rethink the off-weekends and put something together that would get 4-6 teams in London for a 2-3 game showcase of NFL football.

 

That would make the greedy owners some money right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Europe wants to see football, let them get their own league.  The Colts going to London would likely mean the loss of a home game.....no thanks.

 

As an international pilot for...well, you can tell by my avatar, I can tell you first hand that crossing time zones can really screw up a body.  Any team that travels to Europe is paying the price in jet lag and fatigue, I don't care how early you go, the effects linger.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, MAYBE if it's in place of a road game. I would be furious if they lost a home game because of a London game.

Also, having divisional opponents play in London is a ridiculously unfair advantage. A team losing a divisional home game? Come on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With all due respect to the UK fans, this is INSANE. Making teams travel to London for a game takes away somebody's home game, puts ridiculous travel time on both teams, and there is simply no good reason for it. Putting a team in London is the WORST idea the NFL has had in a long time (and they've had a lot of stupid ideas). The travel time is just. too. much. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy to know that the Colts have fans worldwide.  I would think a team based in England would put one division, one conference at a competitive disadvantage with the extra travel.  Wouldn't it?

 

Anyway... How about a mid-season showcase weekend with several teams over there?  The NFL would need to rethink the off-weekends and put something together that would get 4-6 teams in London for a 2-3 game showcase of NFL football.

 

That would make the greedy owners some money right?

You know they already do 3 games in London every year as it stands right? It's not all on the same weekend but they still do 3 games a year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Ballard didn't say it was definite.   He didn't rule it out.   He just said as of this minute.    I think he's hoping to find out in April and May.      He still might end up deciding Eason is OK as the back-up.   I was only trying to impress upon those in the "Throw Jacob Eason in and see what we have" crowd that Ballard has crushed that dream for 2021.    But I wouldn't rule out 2022....  at least not yet.  
    • TY - 2Y/22M - he can still play but he’s not Tyreek Hill taking the top of defenses anymore, and with his disappearing act at the beginning of the year I’m afraid to sign him any longer or with too much guaranteed. Partly for sentimental reasons I want him to stay, but I do think he’s still got some juice.    Mack - 1Y/1M - Likable player but due to his position and injury, no way can I justify giving him much more than vet minimum.    Houston - 1Y/8M - Fell off a lot this year compared to his first year. Still our best edge player, basically by default and I’d be hoping we can get a more 2019 performance out of him at arguably our weakest position on the team.    Autry - Walk. He will price himself out with an inflated sense of value because he’s gotten decent sack numbers, but he is the definition of JAG and I’d only keep him if he agreed to a minimum contract.    Rhodes - 1Y/6M - He was a stud this year. If we could guarantee that he won’t revert back to his last two years in Minnesota I would be willing to go longer and higher. With how much he fell off after getting paid the first time, I’m not giving him a long term deal.    Walker - 1Y/2M - He was playing a very small percentage of downs at the end of the year so I’m keeping him less based on ability and more based on leadership and football savvy.    Hooker - Walk. Both sides need to just move on. I’d keep him at minimum too but I think both sides want a fresh start. Also a little miscast in the current defense so no reason to force a square peg into a round hole.    Brissett - 1Y/5M - Too big of a fan of Brissett as a man to want to see him leave. I don’t want him starting but he’s a very solid backup and compared to the 20M we gave him last year, I can live with his salary being at 1/4 of that this year.    Pascal and MAC both tendered at 2.24M. I want to bring in Kenny Golladay or Allen Robinson and Pascal is JAG so he’s not falling into my future plans much. I’m a big fan of MAC and I wouldn’t mind seeing him play the Jack Doyle role. He’s a better blocker, has better hands, and is more explosive.    I may be lowballing some guys but I’d hate to fall into the trap of overvaluing our guys and keeping them just because you want to keep your own. Unfortunately, I think the five most important positions on the team also coincide with our five weakest positions on the team; QB, WR, CB, DE, and LT. Fortunately we’ve got a good cap situation and this is the perfect year to be needing a QB. 
    • If we let Walker Walk, (and I think it’s likely) it’s not because we want an upgrade.   It’s because we simply don’t play him enough.   I think East Street has the numbers in snaps, but I think Walker is roughly playing 25-30 percent of the snaps.   That’s it.    We can't pay him enough for that.   Some other team will PLAY him more so they will PAY him more.    When Walker is off the field, we are either playing a 4-2-5 or a 4-1-6.   Leonard plays basically 100 percent of the snaps and I think Oke is about 55-60 percent.     There is a method to our madness.  
    • I'm surprised some folks want to resign Walker. Imo we definitely need an upgrade.... I'd let him walk.
    • Colts have won one playoff game in 6 seasons. Some more losing seasons and this team is no longer even in the top half of NFL franchises. They would be mostly irrelevant. I can’t imagine Irsay going for that.   Ballard is definitely safe...but this is year 5 and I am assuming there is a bit more urgency than just waiting for the perfect opportunity to come along.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...