Partly In The USA?

A question being asked in the media at the moment is whether the Premier League would be missing out if it doesn’t take a game, or games, overseas.

A ‘39th game’ has long been mooted, then usually kicked into the long grass after a bad reaction. But with protocols around ‘international’ games having changed at FIFA, is it just a matter of time now before one of the other 38 goes that way?

Last season, games from La Liga and Serie A were scrapped at the last minute when some of those involved got cold feet about staging domestic league games in Miami and Perth respectively; decision that spilled some bad blood on all sides. It’s often the sticking point in these matters; it’s incredibly difficult to make it work in a way that suits everyone, and almost impossible to do so in a way that fans will be happy with.

But the relaxing of the protocols at FIFA do make things a touch easier. Although they limit the number of games, they do allow leagues to take one top-division game abroad, and a host country to stage up to five games from other leagues, per season. The main stipulation is that all stakeholders are in agreement, and that FIFA can veto the plans if they want to.

No major surprises there, given FIFA would sell their granny for the right price, but it still remains to see if there are any serious takers. Serie A said it was doing so to save the league, while the Bundesliga has indicated it won’t happen immediately, but hasn’t ruled it out. With them – and Ligue 1 - struggling to find broadcast deals that are anywhere near EPL levels, the temptation to grow their brand externally must be strong.

But as the Premier League has no such financial issues, are there any benefits to going outside of England that outweigh the inevitable backlash that will come with it?

The original ideas for an overseas game – an extra game so no clubs had to give up a lucrative home match – had the Far East as the likely destination, but now the United States looks are more viable option. In  2025/26, Barcelona were on board with the Miami match, although their opponents, and the ‘home’ team, Villareal, were a little less enthusiastic. Other stakeholders were equally split. Fans, as usual, were not really considered; or at least not the homegrown ones.

Shady and Shiny

But following the World Cup this summer, clubs won’t have missed the clear signals that it’s the country where real money can be made, and that there is a relatively young audience there who loved seeing the world’s stars perform Stateside in the summer and who want more.

Which will undoubtably reopen the debate at some stage within the league, and its clubs.

The World Cup – shady politics and water breaks aside – was a great show on the field, but what are the actual tangible advantages to moving a game from Manchester to Miami, or Sunderland to Seattle? Growing the club’s overseas fanbase even more is one, but beyond that there aren’t a lot of obvious pros. Fans in the UK – most of them anyway – wouldn’t be able to just drop a trip of three to six thousand miles into their week. And even if they could, what’s to be gained from it besides an expensive city break?

The Premier League is already broadcast around the world, so extra exposure is hardly needed. A few extra quid, for clubs raking in tens of millions each month already, isn’t going to alter their financial landscape much either. And aren’t we already at breaking point when it comes to player workloads?

It would be a new, shiny bit of bling to show off for a few weeks, rather than something that adds substantial long-term value to the club at the moment.  

But do we need shiny and new things? What next? An influencer dog as a pundit?

The wider question might be whether Americanisation of one of England’s biggest and best imports is a good thing. The NFL has done the reverse by bringing league games to the UK, as well as other parts of the world, for a while and it doesn’t seem to have done it any harm. But that is a complex sport with complex rules played predominantly in one country, so the NFL are – in effect – sharing it with an audience who don’t get to see it up close very often, yet the Premier League, and soccer more generally, are already huge in the USA.

It’s the Premier League’s ultra-competitiveness that set it apart. Seeing any team have to go to the home of Bournemouth, or Brentford,  and scrap from the first whistle, is part of the broader appeal. That simply cannot be replicated if the action was relocated to, say, Boston.

And even if they kept league games sacred, but moved a cup game instead, the same kind of issues remain. Certainly for fans of the clubs concerned. I heard someone on TalkSport say that the Carabou Cup Final could be the one to go without upsetting anyone, but try telling Newcastle United fans that.

Appeal

The main beneficiaries of any moves would, therefore, be the fans in the US. But do they really want to see the Premier League clubs in their states and stadiums? Isn’t the current appeal there because it’s Arsenal going to Brighton, rather than Brighton and Arsenal coming to America?

It all feels a little too much like a gimmick – albeit a financially appealing one – right now.

And maybe, even if the fans do travel, they might be a little disappointed anyway. As good as the World Cup looked on TV, the fans at the stadiums still groaned of long travel delays, inflated ticket and transport prices and other issues with the infrastructure and organisation.

Until now, I’ve always thought of the USA as the world leader in customer service and I always hold up Disney as an exemplar when it comes to best practice in that field.

But in a recent vacation that took in Los Angeles, I went to their rivals, Universal Studios, for the day (primarily to go on the world-famous studio tour that can only be found there). And it was a bit of a let-down to be honest.

The park’s opening times were 10-6. But when we arrived shortly after 10am, the queues for the car park ($40 dollars btw) were long, then after parking up, the queues into the grounds were even longer. Of the dozen-plus security gates, only two were open and several staff stood doing nothing while the growing line of customers (paying about $120 per person) waited in the by-now-midday sun. From driving up the car park ramp to getting inside the park, well over ninety minutes was lost.

Inside, they waited until the studio tour bus was about to disembark before – as they put it - ‘pulling the band aid off real quick’ by announcing that the Jaws ride (the main reason I’d wanted to go on it) was undergoing its annual clean up so was closed, and the drive down Wisteria Lane where the Desperate Housewives used to live (and my wife’s main reason for wanting to go on it) was not happening either as they were shooting scenes for a new show that day. In all, it represented very poor value for money.

So, a bit like the theme park, there needs to be a much more compelling reason for clubs -and their fans - to make that long journey mid-season.

Of course, money talks. And change happens. So any overseas game talk can only be a matter of when, not if.

And I’m just now sure we are there yet.