During her SiriusXM program, Kelly delivered a sharp response that quickly summed up the argument against taking the championship game overseas.
“Playing the Super Bowl outside of America would be like celebrating July 4th in England,” she said.
It is a simple comparison, but it goes directly to the heart of the controversy.
The NFL has spent years taking regular-season games to London, Germany, Mexico and other international locations. The league has also made clear that it wants to continue expanding its global audience. But moving the Super Bowl itself would represent something entirely different.
The Super Bowl is not just another game on the schedule.
It has become one of the largest annual events in American sports and culture. Millions gather for watch parties. Cities compete for the opportunity to host it. Hotels, restaurants and local businesses prepare for years in advance.
And the economic impact can be enormous.
Recent Super Bowls have generated major economic activity for their host regions, creating jobs, filling hotels and bringing in tax revenue. Las Vegas, New Orleans and other host cities have all seen the financial benefits that come with hosting the NFL’s championship spectacle.
That is one reason Kelly questioned why those benefits should ever be transferred to another country.
“Why would we ever celebrate its biggest, most exciting, most-watched moment – and give all of the revenues that come annually to an American host city – outside of our own country?” she asked.
That question is likely to resonate with plenty of NFL fans.
Goodell did not announce that the league has officially selected an overseas Super Bowl. However, his comments suggest that the possibility is part of a broader long-term vision for the NFL’s international growth.
“There are definitely international cities that could host something like that,” Goodell said. “But we would like to see an NFL team in such a city first.”
That last point could prove especially important.
If the NFL eventually establishes a permanent franchise in London, Frankfurt or another international market, the pressure to allow that city to host major league events could grow. A team based overseas would naturally want the same opportunities available to franchises and cities inside the United States.
For critics, that creates a slippery slope.
The league has already dramatically expanded its international schedule. More regular-season games are being played outside the United States, and NFL owners have shown continued interest in increasing that number in the coming years.
Supporters say the strategy makes sense. The NFL is one of the world’s most valuable sports leagues, and international expansion offers access to new fans, sponsors and television markets.
But critics see another side to the strategy.
Every game moved overseas is a game that is no longer played in front of the American home fans who purchased tickets, supported their teams and helped build the league into a global powerhouse.
The Super Bowl, they argue, is different from a regular-season matchup.
It is the crown jewel.
Sports agent Leigh Steinberg once described the Super Bowl as “a convention of Americana,” a gathering where sports, entertainment, business and culture collide in one massive event.
That is precisely why the possibility of moving it abroad has generated such a strong reaction.
The NFL may have global ambitions, and there is little doubt that football’s international audience will continue to grow. Games in London, Munich, Mexico City and other major cities may remain a central part of that strategy.
But the Super Bowl carries a different meaning.
American football was built in American stadiums and sustained by generations of American fans. The championship game has become a national tradition, drawing audiences that extend far beyond even the most dedicated football viewers.
That does not mean international fans should be excluded from the NFL’s growth. But it does raise an obvious question about where the league should draw the line.
Goodell has opened the door to a future conversation about an international Super Bowl.
Megyn Kelly’s response made clear where she stands.
“Playing the Super Bowl outside of America would be like celebrating July 4th in England,” she said.
Whether NFL owners ever seriously pursue such a move remains to be seen. But if they do, Goodell and the league should expect a loud reaction from fans who believe the Super Bowl belongs exactly where it has always been: in the United States.
