FootBiz newsletter #105: What's the point of playing league games overseas?

“Right, but what’s the actual point of all this?”

In a discussion about all things football in the past week, and in this instance discussing league games being taken abroad, that very pointed question hung in the air like a peak age Cristiano Ronaldo hovering at the back post to head in a cross.

What is the point of this all? Of taking Barcelona and Villarreal across the Atlantic or Milan vs Como to Western Australia of all places.

As it happens, this is a question that is increasingly being asked in the USA of the NFL’s global ambitions, which your run-of-the-mill fans in America have become rather tired of. As talk of a London Super Bowl increases (though the brash declarations of Peter Mandelson can now disappear with Mandelson himself as the disgraced Epstein chum left his post this week) there are murmurs of discontent increasing in parallel with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell’s appetite for growth.

When Goodell eventually leaves his office atop the most lucrative sports league in the world, the signature achievement of his reign will have been the global expansion of a sport that had previously been so closely guarded within American borders. And he’s not in the mood to stop now.

"The ownership's approved eight games already," Goodell said before the NFL's game in Brazil last week. "I hope to get that to 16 at some point in the future. Let's see how that goes."

To do that, Goodell will almost certainly increase teams’ seasons from the current 17 games each (increased from 16 games in 2021) to 18 games each despite serious reservations from the players’ union. That said, the NFLPA has a history of being easily bought and not particularly standing up for its constituents, and you can expect to see that happen again (albeit under new leadership after a recent scandal) when the proposal gets formalised. As in the football we know best, player safety amid an expanding schedule is something that governing bodies talk about but don’t prioritise.

But what is the actual point of Milan vs Como in Perth, Australia? Given the time difference, is there any world where Australia ever becomes a major overseas market for Italy’s top flight? Could it increase Serie A’s broadcast revenue in Australia from ~$20m to $30m? Would that even make it worthwhile?

It’s hard to deny that La Liga sending two Champions League clubs to Miami for a match makes sense as a marketing exercise at least. On one hand, you have a mega-brand trying to solidify and grow its US business to rectify its financial issues, on the other, a smaller club limited by its geography looking to gain an international foothold based off on-field success and a recognisable visual hook — that is to say: a bright yellow kit.

In a bygone era, these sorts of events would have been so impactful because of the difficulty of watching these leagues and the rare opportunity to see such stars in the flesh. When the NFL first played a game in London, less than 12% of the population had Sky Sports to even watch the league on a weekly basis. The NFL dropping into town felt like an alien spaceship landing.

As it is now, Barca played games in the USA in 2022, 2023 and 2024. It’s not as if a game in December 2025 wouldn’t sell out, but there’s no scarcity anymore in these things. This isn’t special. The fact it’s worth three points in the league won’t make it so.

Meanwhile the development of streaming means you can watch every Barcelona game on your smart TV in the US, just as Australians can with AC Milan. So yeah, this still has value as a treat for fans of football in those cities (and the wider state/country) but what is the objective? Still not abundantly clear beyond the obvious an$w€r.

One justification that actually does make sense to me is one that the NFL stumbled on — I believe — almost by accident.

In hosting games in London, the NFL was very clear about trying to crack a lucrative, English-speaking market. What they also created was a blanket television experience.

Spend time in the US during (American) football season and it becomes clear how dominant the NFL is, and how it owns Sundays. From lunchtime until bedtime it is wall-to-wall football, but by adding a game in Europe the NFL suddenly had broadcast inventory at breakfast time as well. Given the league is legally prohibited from hosting games on Fridays (because of high school football) and Saturdays (college) this takeover of Sunday mornings comes with a lot of value in providing expansion when it had seemed impossible to expand.

Perhaps that is what the Australian market could bring European soccer? If Serie A tried to institute 10am kick-offs in Naples there would be protests but if that start time was necessary because it was being held in Dubai or Riyadh? A lot easier, and you create a new slot for broadcasters.

With such a high percentage of teams’ revenues still coming from broadcast rights, league bodies are sweating the worrying trend seen in Europe’s recent negotiations of flattening or declining rights deals. Finding an extra broadcast slot may be the difference between the next deal you announce being up or down.

But is it worth it? Is it worth tearing up the fabric of these leagues for this?

That’s a much longer answer.

Table of Contents

• UEFA punt overseas games decision

• Championship playoffs to expand?

• Chelsea confident of escaping points deduction

• Nou Camp questions persist

• Frank wants timeouts and handball reform

• FIFA publishes legal database

• World Cup qualifiers update

Plenty of news below the wall.

If you’ve not subscribed yet, do consider unlocking all the content (and supporting our work along the way)

Subscribe to Community level to read the rest.