Sources: Vikings get game in London

**NodakPaul** · 10-16-2012, 09:51 AM

Originally Posted by Minniman

Missing a home game hurts the team. This is especially valid if the other team is an east coast team with deep pocket fans.

Going to London hurts the team. It could harm their record; it could hurt their playoff chances, and the travel and jet lag harms the players' health for a few games.

The Vikings may make a few extra bucks, but it is not great news for Vikings fans.

Every game could harm a team's record, playoff chances, and health. There is no evidence that playing a game in London changes this.

In fact, teams have done pretty well after a London trip. The NFL instituted a BYE week after a London game for all teams since 2009, and those teams have gone a collective 5-1 in the following game. The lone loss was to Tampa Bay, who only went 4-12 that year anyway. The Bears even pulled off three wins in a row after a London game, and we have seen four playoff teams (including one super bowl champion) play a London game since it started in 2007.

**jmcdon00** · 10-16-2012, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by NodakPaul

Every game could harm a team's record, playoff chances, and health. There is no evidence that playing a game in London changes this.

In fact, teams have done pretty well after a London trip. The NFL instituted a BYE week after a London game for all teams since 2009, and those teams have gone a collective 5-1 in the following game. The lone loss was to Tampa Bay, who only went 4-12 that year anyway. The Bears even pulled off three wins in a row after a London game, and we have seen four playoff teams (including one super bowl champion) play a London game since it started in 2007.

There is evidence that the Vikings play better at home than on the road. In 2013 we have 9 road games and 7 home games. Sure the Vikings could win in London, but I like their chances better in the Metrodome with 60,000 Vikings fans.

**NodakPaul** · 10-16-2012, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by jmcdon00

There is evidence that the Vikings play better at home than on the road. In 2013 we have 9 road games and 7 home games. Sure the Vikings could win in London, but I like their chances better in the Metrodome with 60,000 Vikings fans.

OK, I can concede that.

Although you might want to change that to 57,000 Vikings fans, since that is what we are averaging right now.

Week 1 vs Jags - 56,607
Week 3 vs 49ers - 57,288
Week 5 vs Titans - 57,652

On the bright side... attendance is going up.

**jmcdon00** · 10-16-2012, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by NodakPaul

OK, I can concede that.

Although you might want to change that to 57,000 Vikings fans, since that is what we are averaging right now.

Week 1 vs Jags - 56,607
Week 3 vs 49ers - 57,288
Week 5 vs Titans - 57,652

On the bright side... attendance is going up.

Something about a 3-13 season has a negative impact on attendance. Strange. Doesn't change the fact that the fans(the 57,000 dedicated fans) and the local economy are negatively effected.
If I were a fair weather fan from ND it probably wouldn't bother me either.

**NodakPaul** · 10-16-2012, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by jmcdon00

Something about a 3-13 season has a negative impact on attendance. Strange. Doesn't change the fact that the fans(the 57,000 dedicated fans) and the local economy are negatively effected.
If I were a fair weather fan from ND it probably wouldn't bother me either.

lol. So the fair weather fans in MN get a pass?

I still have my season tickets - my lack of attendance this year has more to do with me launching a new company and Mrs Nodak going back to school to get her doctorate than the venue or last season's record.

But the fact remains that the dome isn't selling out. And of those 57,000 "loyal" fans, how many of them actually make every home game. Even among season ticket holders that number is surprisingly low. You have season tickets, right? Can you honestly tell me that you make every game every year?

You can complain about it being a FU to the fans, but keep in mind that if the Vikings hadn't opted to take advantage of the new attendance rules none of the home games this year would have been aired on local tv. THAT would have been a big FU to fans and the state, especially after the new stadium was pushed through. Call me crazy, but I am OK with the Vikings recouping some of their loss by hosting an international game.

And you argued for years that the gameday impact on the local economy was negligible and fungible. It was one of your main arguments against public subsidy for a stadium. Now all of a sudden missing one game has a negative economic impact? I don't buy it.

**jmcdon00** · 10-16-2012, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by NodakPaul

lol. So the fair weather fans in MN get a pass?

I still have my season tickets - my lack of attendance this year has more to do with me launching a new company and Mrs Nodak going back to school to get her doctorate than the venue or last season's record.

But the fact remains that the dome isn't selling out. And of those 57,000 "loyal" fans, how many of them actually make every home game. Even among season ticket holders that number is surprisingly low. You have season tickets, right? Can you honestly tell me that you make every game every year?

You can complain about it being a FU to the fans, but keep in mind that if the Vikings hadn't opted to take advantage of the new attendance rules none of the home games this year would have been aired on local tv. THAT would have been a big FU to fans and the state, especially after the new stadium was pushed through. Call me crazy, but I am OK with the Vikings recouping some of their loss by hosting an international game.

And you argued for years that the gameday impact on the local economy was negligible and fungible. It was one of your main arguments against public subsidy for a stadium. Now all of a sudden missing one game has a negative economic impact? I don't buy it.

Just giving you a little ribbing, I know you have good reasons not to attend all the games(living in ND is a good enough reason on it's own).
I have been to every home game the last 4 years or so(other than the one in detroit), honestly.

Now I just have to convince the fiance that London would be a great place to go for our honeymoon. (tough sell as she's a Bears fan).

**AngloVike** · 10-16-2012, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by singersp

The Vikings have played overseas before also. Someone will have to refresh my memory, but I believe it may have been in Spain & we played the Bears & won some type of World Cup.

You're probably thinking of '83 when the Vikes played in London for the Global Cup against St Louis Cardinals with a 28-10 victory.
They did play the Bears in Gothenburg in '88 as well - winning 28-21, add in two American Bowl games in the 90's as well all which were won. So one good thing is that the Vikes are undefeated playing outside of the US.

**NodakPaul** · 10-16-2012, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by jmcdon00

I have been to every home game the last 4 years or so(other than the one in detroit), honestly.

I am both impressed and jealous.

Originally Posted by jmcdon00

Now I just have to convince the fiance that London would be a great place to go for our honeymoon. (tough sell as she's a Bears fan).

I tried with my wife. She didn't even give me a Hell No, she just walked out of the room...

I took that to mean yes, so I am going to book airline tickets... ;D

**AngloVike** · 10-16-2012, 04:45 PM

And has been confirmed that we will be hosting the Steelers for that game...now to try and get tickets!

**i_bleed_purple** · 10-16-2012, 04:48 PM

Why is it that until now, all the games were terrible matchups involving such crap teams as the 49ers and buccaneers. The Steelers game was one I was planning on coming down for even a couple years ago, now that's not an option.