PDA

View Full Version : CFL Foreign Expansion


Shootmaster_44
06-30-2004, 03:13 AM
I finished reading Jeff Giles' book last night and he mentions how he thinks US expansion is a good idea. I was just curious of two things a) is US expansion a good idea for the CFL? b) if so where? c) Other ideas for expansion?

My two cents are as follows:
a) Yes eventually it is inevitable. The CFL will need to expand still once all the viable Canadian markets are sewn up. The CFL will have to look first to the US.
b) My list of initial markets after the final 5 Canadian regions (Quebec City, Maritimes, Okanagan Valley, Saskatoon, London, Ontario) have teams are as follows:
-Portland, Oregon
-Syracuse, New York
-Des Moines, Iowa
-Omaha, Nebraska
-Fargo, North Dakota
-Billings, Montana
-Providence, Rhode Island
-Hartford, Conneticut

I realize that some of these cities may not have CFL sized stadiums or the like. I just think they have a close enough proximity to Canada that the CFL would do alot better there than they ever did in their previous endeavours.

c)One place the CFL might want to think about except for travel costs is a team in Mexico City. American Football is played by many, many Mexicans. Their top amateur league provides NFL Europe with most of the National Players that are used over there. Azteca Stadium is large enough, as it holds 101,000 seats. As well since it is a soccer stadium its field is soccer sized, which if I remember the dimensions correctly would fit a CFL field easily with room to spare. If the CFL governors were willing to make a concession on the rules for Team Mexico City and make the non-imports Mexicans instead of Canadians, I think a team down there could work.

Another idea is create an entire Mexican division a CFL Mexico. This league could compete against the champion of CFL Canada for the Grey Cup. If the Governors of CFL Canada did not wish to lose the intent of the Grey Cup, they could always create a new trophy to compete for at the conclusion of the season. Have the championship game rotate between Mexican sites and Canadian sites. I think it would be interesting to give the Mexicans a try at the Canadian game. Screw the US, lets take the CFL global. Now that even people in the Middle East can watch 7 CFL games this season, the game itself should be exported as well, not just TV.

The cities included for CFL Mexico could include such places as:
Mexico City - Estadio Azteca - 101,000 seats
Guadalajara - Estadio Jalisco - 65,000 seats
Queretaro - La Corregidora - 40,785 seats
Puebla - Cuahuhtemoc - 42,600 seats
Monterrey - Tecnologico - 32,662 seats
Irapuato - Sergio Leon Chavez - 24,000 seats
Morelia - Jose Ma. Morelos Y Pavon - 41,552 seats
Torreron - Corrona - 20,010 seats

Pounder
06-30-2004, 12:57 PM
Of your American ideas, only Portland, Hartford (wonder if newly constructed Rentschler Field has Canadian dimensions?), and Des Moines (improvements are due to Drake Stadium) have any real merit... and you have to hope that the Portland market isn't too engrossed in the Ducks and Beavers right now.

I know the CFL dabbles in some smaller markets, but Billings and Fargo aren't even close to Regina in that aspect.

SPOKANE has Joe Albi Stadium, which has the field size and a good 28K structure, and a market bigger than Regina IIRC.

I'd call on Boise, and Bronco Stadium probably has the field and Boise the market even bigger and faster growing than Spokane, but there's no way in Hell that Boise State would allow that to happen.

What about Grand Rapids? I believe Western Michigan University is close, like that matters. What kind of stadium do they have? They're more than twice the size of market Spokane is, and bigger than Providence IIRC.

Recall that Providence is only 25 miles or so from Foxboro (Providence is slightly closer to Foxboro than Boston is), and the point is that you want to carve out your own market if at all possible.

Albany, New York? They at least have the ego for such a venture.

Rochester? Actually, I wretch at the thought of using Pae Tec Park (when it is completed) for something other than soccer or lacrosse, but I guess you have to consider Rochester.

Scranton?

Columbus, Ohio? Nah, that's Ohio State in a nutshell... never mind. Nebraska is why I don't take stock in Omaha.

Peoria? Quad Cities?

The Mexico idea? The NAFTA League? Never in the big soccer stadia... especially since you show mostly "southern" markets, while the football fans are generally "El Norte" in Mexico. Monterrey is good, maybe Torreon. Juarez / El Paso is far more likely than Puebla or Morelia. Hermosillo and Nueva Laredo, I can see, but never Guadalajara. Even then, I don't think it's a good idea for the CFL to get that far away from their base.

Shootmaster_44
06-30-2004, 03:03 PM
Ok I know very little about the American football culture in Mexico. All I did is went to the Mexican soccer federation website and looked at places that had soccer stadiums with large capacities. All I know is when the NFL had an American Bowl exhibition game in Mexico City, it sold out Estadia Azteca. I know the CFL wouldn't do that, but if football is that big of a draw, maybe 50,000 fans isn't unreasonable there. But for a team to survive in Mexico City, it needs its own division to play in as the travel costs from Canada would be too high to sustain travel to Mexico every few weeks.

As far as my American examples Portland made my list as that was once of the cities Jeff Giles mentioned in his book. So I figured he must have done his homework on it. I didn't realize the proximity of Providence to Foxboro so I guess they're out. I still think Fargo and Billings would work as they seem starved for pro sports. Correct me if I'm wrong, but they generally draw quite well for their minor hockey teams, minor baseball teams etc. Also, doesn't North Dakota State sell out their football games? They are both good enough and draw well enough to move up from Division II to I-AA this year. I threw in Omaha as a hope of drawing in the fans who support the Huskers, being football fans in general. I realize this is the same rationale they used in Memphis and Birmingham, but I think Southern fans are little more prejudiced against 3 down football. I used Syracuse as Jeff Giles mentioned them as well.

Grand Rapids crossed my mind, but I didn't know that's where Western Michigan was and couldn't be sure there was a useable stadium at all in the city.

Here's just some food for thought, how about Anchorage? Makes playing at the frozen tundra of Green Bay seem like Hawaii.

I would suggest a team in Honolulu, as it seems ideal with Aloha Stadium and everything. The huge knock against it is the travel costs from Canada imagine the time if a team was placed in Halifax flying to Honolulu. That would kill the CFL on the spot.

Magnum357
06-30-2004, 07:49 PM
Did we have this discussion on here before? Like half a dozen times!! Just out of curiosity, why is it MANDATORY for the CFL too move south again? They tried it before and it almost killed them. Now you have some interesting theories of about moving into Medium sized cities, but lots of these towns already have fairly well established Football colleges (even 1-AA is still somewhat a big Football team) and I'm not totally convinced that these cites would do that well in the CFL. I'm pretty sure that Billings would probably not draw well in the CFL, not due too the fact that their is no interest in Football in Billings, but because Billings is not THAT large of a city. Even the NIFL Outlaws are only averaging about 4000 fans a game right now. I thought you need much more then that for a CFL team? And as for North Dakota State, I still think they may be on the fence if they want too go up too 1-AA level.

Last I heard the CFL wants too pay off its debts and stabilize itself again. It has a working relationship with the NFL and even provides a few players too the NFL once in a while. The CFL wants too expand, but they are only talking 1 maybe 2 teams in the future (which might be smart) so they don't over extend themselves. What is wrong with this philosophy?

Shootmaster_44
06-30-2004, 09:43 PM
I didn't mean immediately. I was more so meaning in say 10 or 15 years just more of an idea. I thought North Dakota State had committed to moving up to I-AA for next season in anticipation for the Great West Conference starting up? Didn't South Dakota move up too? I realize that college football is big time football and that most of these cities have good college teams. My point was that these teams could coexist in many cities. The CFL would just avoid Saturday home games in these cities. As for the CFL moving South I just think the league needs some sort of money coming in from outside of Canada to make it viable. The selling of TV rights is a major step in the right direction. The CFL could conceivably become the Aussie Rules football of late night international TV. I mean what North American sports fan hasn't seen Aussie Rules? If the CFL could carve out a niche in the US like the AFL has, then it could fly. Sadly, the NFL (and to a lesser extent the Arena league) has taken away the tv niche the CFL could have. The only other way to carve that niche is through having actual teams in the US. Untapped regions near the Canada-US border such as North Dakota, Washington and New England are the places to hit in my estimation. This was my point.

Magnum357
07-01-2004, 08:57 PM
An interesting theory, but why is it mandatory for the CFL too tap into the U.S. TV market? The cities you suggest are not exactly Neilson friendly for the TV market. Billings and Fargo may like Football, but are not exactly powerhouses if you want big TV rating numbers. For general expansion, your ideas do sound possible, but your whole point is to get into places for TV exposure. Like I said above, the CFL tried it before and nearly got killed tring to do it. I think the CFL is more then happy establishing its niche in Canada where they can dictate terms on their own behalf. Ya, the AFL is doing better then they did before, but it wouldn't have happened without NBC at the helm. And as much as I do like to watch Arean Football, if given the choice I would much rather watch NFL, CFL or Indoor Football over Arena ball any day.

And as for North Dakota State, last I heard was that they where on the fence on the issue of moving up. Now that was a few months ago and my info is old.

Shootmaster_44
07-02-2004, 04:28 AM
oops to clarify one thing when I said AFL I meant the Australian Football League. I now realize that the AFL most people think of is the Arena Football League. One question what is the difference between arena football and indoor football?

Jamie
07-02-2004, 10:49 AM
The games are essentially the same, both played on a 50 yard field except that Arena football uses nets in the endzone, and most players go "both ways"; play offense and defense.

To get more questions answered about Arena vs. Indoor football, you should probably go to the Indoor Football section of this message board.

sportman
07-10-2004, 01:35 AM
Do you think the cfl will buy the nafl?

patmc16
07-10-2004, 10:58 AM
I just think they have a close enough proximity to Canada that the CFL would do alot better there than they ever did in their previous endeavours.

Now I know its been awhile since my 10th grade geography class, but I've never heard anyone call Iowa, Nebraska, Rhode Island, or Conneticut "close proximity to Canada". Still, they are closer than many of the original CFL-USA teams.

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Detroit. Detroit is the largest US-Canada border town, with Windsor, ON as the neighbor immediatly to the South (yes South). I'm not sure if it is common knowledge, but Tiger Stadium is still standing and is still fully maintained despite the fact that the Tigers left several years ago. It would be perfect for the CFL. Even if there is no US TV contract, Detroit is served by the CBC network out of Windsor (Hockey Night in Canada is a regular in my house). Detroit could have full coverage of their team even without the US contract. The Lions played at Tiger Stadium before the Silverdome was built and I understand there was a visit from the XFL looking at it as an expansion site for the league before it folded. Detroit is a much larger market than any of those mentioned, US or Canadian. If they are a winning team, the fans will go nuts. The Detroit Drive were a major draw when they were winning one Arena Bowl after another. They only left town because the owner bought the Tigers and sold them to someone out of state who would move them. They outdrew the Tigers at the time and he didn't want the competition.

Shootmaster_44
07-12-2004, 04:35 AM
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Detroit. Detroit is the largest US-Canada border town, with Windsor, ON as the neighbor immediatly to the South (yes South). I'm not sure if it is common knowledge, but Tiger Stadium is still standing and is still fully maintained despite the fact that the Tigers left several years ago. It would be perfect for the CFL. Even if there is no US TV contract, Detroit is served by the CBC network out of Windsor (Hockey Night in Canada is a regular in my house). Detroit could have full coverage of their team even without the US contract. The Lions played at Tiger Stadium before the Silverdome was built and I understand there was a visit from the XFL looking at it as an expansion site for the league before it folded. Detroit is a much larger market than any of those mentioned, US or Canadian. If they are a winning team, the fans will go nuts. The Detroit Drive were a major draw when they were winning one Arena Bowl after another. They only left town because the owner bought the Tigers and sold them to someone out of state who would move them. They outdrew the Tigers at the time and he didn't want the competition.

In the 1960's the CFL had a potential owner who did have a tentative lease for Tiger Stadium. He was going to call his team something to the effect of Windsor via Detroit or something to that effect. At that time, the CFL was huge there was also interest from a group who wanted a team for either Ebbets Field, the Polo Grounds or maybe it was Shea Stadium in New York City. The CFL governors voted down US expansion at that time, deciding to focus on keeping the CFL a Canadian game. Now I think Detroit is too large of a city to both with a CFL club. They have the Lions which would compete with the CFL during the September, October and November months. Plus the Greater Detroit area has two Big 10 NCAA football powerhouses in its midst, Michigan and Michigan State. During September through November, the CFL plays most of its games on the weekends which would mean going head-to-head with either major NCAA football or the "big boys," the NFL on Sundays. It wouldn't work. Besides Detroit already has a pro team in a smaller football league the Detroit Fury in the Arena Football League. That puts four major football clubs in Greater Detroit, not to mention other Division II and III NCAA schools around Detroit and the University of Windsor.

The Silverdome believe it or not, is the future home of the World Hockey Association's Detroit franchise. If the WHA takes off, the stadium would be converted to a hockey rink, which I think would make it hard to convert to a football stadium that quickly. Also, does the Silverdome have a large enough carpet to accomodate a CFL-sized field?

I think if a team is to be placed in the Detroit area, it would be better suited to be placed in Windsor. Detroit football fans could come to Windsor to see games if they so chose. I know there isn't a CFL sized stadium in Windsor, but U of Windsor's current football stadium could be renovated to suit a CFL team right?

firewolff
07-12-2004, 11:33 AM
Being a big CFL fan, and living fairly close to Portland, Oregon, I would love to see a team here.

However, everything that I have read from Commissioner Wright is that they have no interest in heading South. Heck, it looks like it could be years before they get to Halifax (then Quebec City and London).

It's a nice dream, though.

PapaJoe
07-20-2004, 05:34 PM
It is true that we have discussed this many times, but the answer remains the same. The only US cities that are viable are those with some ties with Canada. These cities are New York, Buffalo, Detroit, Minniapolis, Cleveland and Seattle. I truly doubt that such franchises would be very profitable, but they would allow for a US TV package that would bring in some much needed money. Papa Joe

patmc16
07-20-2004, 06:11 PM
Now I think Detroit is too large of a city

What an absurd notion! Where would the Arena League be if they believed this. I doubt that any owner of any professioanl franchise in any league would ever feel that there are too many people in their area to draw their fan base from.

That puts four major football clubs in Greater Detroit, not to mention other Division II and III NCAA schools around Detroit and the University of Windsor.

If they are a winning franchise, it doesn't matter how many other teams are in the area (i.e. the Drive), assuming they schedule very carefully. If a professional league can't compete with Div 2 / 3 programs, they better close up shop asap.

The Silverdome believe it or not, is the future home of the World Hockey Association's Detroit franchise. If the WHA takes off, the stadium would be converted to a hockey rink, which I think would make it hard to convert to a football stadium that quickly. Also, does the Silverdome have a large enough carpet to accomodate a CFL-sized field?

It's not that unbelievable. They will use the same set-up that the Pistons did for 15 years or so from the mid 70's through the 80's. They will be pulling the big blue curtain out of the moth-balls. The ice rink will be permanetly embedded in the concrete floor at the Silverdome. The football field, or whatever they need to put down will go over the rink fairly easily. Doesn't matter though, as an NFL field just fits. A CFL one wouldn't fit without removing many of the lower level end zone seats. That's why I suggested Tiger Stadium and not the Silverdome. The Silverdome will almost certainly be demolished at some point anyway. The property it sits on in "Automotion Alley" is worth more without the 'Dome.

patmc16
07-20-2004, 06:16 PM
Now I think Detroit is too large of a city

What an absurd notion! Where would the Arena League be if they believed this. I doubt that any owner of any professioanl franchise in any league would ever feel that there are too many people in their area to draw their fan base from.

That puts four major football clubs in Greater Detroit, not to mention other Division II and III NCAA schools around Detroit and the University of Windsor.

If they are a winning franchise, it doesn't matter how many other teams are in the area (i.e. the Drive), assuming they schedule very carefully. If a professional league can't compete with Div 2 / 3 programs, they better close up shop asap.

The Silverdome believe it or not, is the future home of the World Hockey Association's Detroit franchise. If the WHA takes off, the stadium would be converted to a hockey rink, which I think would make it hard to convert to a football stadium that quickly. Also, does the Silverdome have a large enough carpet to accomodate a CFL-sized field?

It's not that unbelievable. They will use the same set-up that the Pistons did for 15 years or so from the mid 70's through the 80's. They will be pulling the big blue curtain out of the moth-balls. The ice rink will be permanetly embedded in the concrete floor at the Silverdome. The football field, or whatever they need to put down will go over the rink fairly easily. Doesn't matter though, as an NFL field just fits. A CFL one wouldn't fit without removing many of the lower level end zone seats. That's why I suggested Tiger Stadium and not the Silverdome. The Silverdome will almost certainly be demolished at some point anyway. The property it sits on in "Automotion Alley" is worth more without the 'Dome.

Shootmaster_44
07-22-2004, 03:33 AM
[quote]Now I think Detroit is too large of a city

What an absurd notion! Where would the Arena League be if they believed this. I doubt that any owner of any professioanl franchise in any league would ever feel that there are too many people in their area to draw their fan base from.

That's true, but what I meant is that the fans in Detroit may feel the CFL is too "small-potatoes" for their liking. Plus, the CFL may run into the same problems they did in Memphis and Birmingham, that the average American football fan finds the CFL as a bastardization of "the great American game." I fear the CFL may find themselves only drawing the crowds that the AFL's Fury now gets. Lastly, the more I think about it, the question that finally popped into my head is this: How can the CFL keep the Import Ratio, so as not to give the Detroit franchise a competitve edge? If the CFL were to try and tap into the Detroit market, place the team in Windsor and then they would be able to avoid the US immigration rule against Canadian players working for American clubs.

That puts four major football clubs in Greater Detroit, not to mention other Division II and III NCAA schools around Detroit and the University of Windsor.

If they are a winning franchise, it doesn't matter how many other teams are in the area (i.e. the Drive), assuming they schedule very carefully. If a professional league can't compete with Div 2 / 3 programs, they better close up shop asap.

Presented with the option of seeing a "traditional American" football game or going to a "bastardized Canadian" football game may cause the CFL to lose fans to the NCAA teams. My point by throwing those teams in, is simply that the CFL would have alot of scheduling to work around in Detroit, so as not to directly compete with any existing clubs. July and most of August would be alright for the CFL. But the Detroit franchise would have to buck the CFL tradition of weekend play in September, October and November. The NCAA traditionally plays on Saturday and even without factoring in Division II and III schools, the CFL would still have to compete with Michigan and Michigan State for fans. Sunday would be out as the CFL would not be stupid enough to go head-to-head with the Lions. I'm not sure how big Detroit High School football is, but based on the news coverage of it, I'm banking that it might be high enough to draw enough fans to put Friday out too.

The Silverdome believe it or not, is the future home of the World Hockey Association's Detroit franchise. If the WHA takes off, the stadium would be converted to a hockey rink, which I think would make it hard to convert to a football stadium that quickly. Also, does the Silverdome have a large enough carpet to accomodate a CFL-sized field?

It's not that unbelievable. They will use the same set-up that the Pistons did for 15 years or so from the mid 70's through the 80's. They will be pulling the big blue curtain out of the moth-balls. The ice rink will be permanetly embedded in the concrete floor at the Silverdome. The football field, or whatever they need to put down will go over the rink fairly easily. Doesn't matter though, as an NFL field just fits. A CFL one wouldn't fit without removing many of the lower level end zone seats. That's why I suggested Tiger Stadium and not the Silverdome. The Silverdome will almost certainly be demolished at some point anyway. The property it sits on in "Automotion Alley" is worth more without the 'Dome.

I suppose this would just be like the Palace when they used to change from Vipers games to Drive games, just on a grander scale. From what I gathered from baseball and football history books, didn't the Lions play at Tiger Stadium before? Wasn't there a problem of a football field barely fitting and the players could end up hitting a brick wall if they went out the end of the end zone? I might be thinking of Yankee Stadium though when the AAFC's NY Yankees played there. All the same, is Tiger stadium large enough to fit a proper CFL field? It would be nice to have a stadium with some sort of nostalgia in the league. If Detroit were to get a team, I would say that they should have at least one Grey Cup at Michigan Stadium, providing both the U of M would rent it to them and it would fit a CFL field. Would a Grey Cup draw enough fans to make it look good if they used it though?

Shootmaster_44
07-22-2004, 03:46 AM
It is true that we have discussed this many times, but the answer remains the same. The only US cities that are viable are those with some ties with Canada. These cities are New York, Buffalo, Detroit, Minniapolis, Cleveland and Seattle. I truly doubt that such franchises would be very profitable, but they would allow for a US TV package that would bring in some much needed money. Papa Joe

The CFL does need a better US TV presence. What network might be interested in them that would be better? I would say approach Spike TV, they used to run Arena Football games and weren't half bad at it. Their ChampCar coverage is pretty good, except for missing green flag racing to do a profile of a driver's house instead. The CFL should look at getting them on board with a deal similar to NBC's deal with the AFL and the NHL. They share the production costs of the games and I believe the league gets something like 75% of the advertising they bring in. Aside from certain spots the network inserts themselves.

The only reason I could see Spike TV declining the CFL's overtures is that it could piss off Vince McMahon. His WWE currently runs a plethora of programming on Spike TV and is very lucrative for the network. If Spike pisses Vince off and he moves his shows back to the USA Network, UPN etc., Spike TV loses its highest rated show WWE Raw and all the advertising it brings in. So it might present a small problem for the CFL.

If it falls through, there is always other networks too that could be interested. NBC does the AFL and NHL on their main network, but they own several other cable networks that the CFL might be able to get on. The best possibility for the CFL is to get on a network that is already carried in Canada. This would help by getting Canadian fans tuning into the games as well. In short, it would help sell advertising. The only two NBC owned cable networks that Canada gets are MSNBC and CNBC. CNBC would be a good alternative for the CFL as it does show weekend sports programming to suppliment its weekday business coverage. As well, it shows other programming after the business day to suppliment its business coverage. What this could mean is that the CFL simulcasts TSN's Friday Night Football, until after Labour Day. After which CNBC could show its own broadcasts picking up where CBC left off with their "Football Night In Canada" on Saturday nights.

Bill
07-22-2004, 10:05 AM
Either that...

Or get US cable companies to broadcast the CBC...
I'm not sure how far fetched that idea is..

I do know since I went from the "big dish" years ago to just cable..
I sure miss "Hockey Night In Canada" and listening to Don Cherry...

Or even a cable football network.. Or one that will show CFL football and not some frigging xtreme sport like nose picking or something..

It must just be the production costs for a football game are substantially higher than some of these so called sports..

Either way..
More football is good..

maddawg1967
10-27-2004, 09:56 PM
Broadcasting the CFL in the USA? What a concept. The only places you can get the CFL nowadays are the digital channels on cable or satellite that you have to pay a whole lot extra for.

Second brainstorm: Broadcasting Hockey Night in Canada in the US, that is when or if the NHL ever gets started up again. We here in the US dont have the privilege of seeing or hearing grapes rant on and give his two cents worth. Love the guy. I mean we get BBC America, why not CBC America?

Also, what about Los Angeles? They are starved for football. They have no outdoor football team of anykind, unless you consider the LA Galaxy, "football". The LA Memorial coliseum has the field space for it, unlike second rate markets like Shreveport, Omaha and a few other places.

patmc16
10-28-2004, 09:42 PM
Broadcasting the CFL in the USA? What a concept. The only places you can get the CFL nowadays are the digital channels on cable or satellite that you have to pay a whole lot extra for.

Second brainstorm: Broadcasting Hockey Night in Canada in the US, that is when or if the NHL ever gets started up again. We here in the US dont have the privilege of seeing or hearing grapes rant on and give his two cents worth. Love the guy. I mean we get BBC America, why not CBC America?

Due to our close proximity to Canada, we get to see Grapes here in Metro Detroit from the Windsor, Ontario CBC station. We also get to see some CFL, including the Grey Cup. The rest of the US is missing out. The only problem is that pretty much all of the hockey games involve at least one of the six Canadian teams, so most US vs. US games never get shown, other than in the playoffs. The early game almost always includes the Leafs, Habs, or Sens. The late game almost always includes the Oilers, Flames, or Canucks. Also, I couldn't see a "CBC America" working unless it is mostly different programming from the regular CBC. Getting a feed from CBC on a US network for HNiC and/or CFL games would be a better idea. CBC is essentially PBS in Canada, but even more liberal. It is run by the Canadian government. That's why the network was pretty PO'd when Grapes spoke out about the Canadian's lack of support of the US in Iraq. Who will put a PBS type channel in a cable line-up? No offense to our friends south of the border but, outside of the sports, it's a pretty dull network. The National isn't going to pull in many US viewers.

patmc16
10-28-2004, 09:45 PM
Broadcasting the CFL in the USA? What a concept. The only places you can get the CFL nowadays are the digital channels on cable or satellite that you have to pay a whole lot extra for.

Second brainstorm: Broadcasting Hockey Night in Canada in the US, that is when or if the NHL ever gets started up again. We here in the US dont have the privilege of seeing or hearing grapes rant on and give his two cents worth. Love the guy. I mean we get BBC America, why not CBC America?

Due to our close proximity to Canada, we get to see Grapes here in Metro Detroit from the Windsor, Ontario CBC station. We also get to see some CFL, including the Grey Cup. The rest of the US is missing out. The only problem is that pretty much all of the hockey games involve at least one of the six Canadian teams, so most US vs. US games never get shown, other than in the playoffs. The early game almost always includes the Leafs, Habs, or Sens. The late game almost always includes the Oilers, Flames, or Canucks. Also, I couldn't see a "CBC America" working unless it is mostly different programming from the regular CBC. Getting a feed from CBC on a US network for HNiC and/or CFL games would be a better idea. CBC is essentially PBS in Canada, but even more liberal. It is run by the Canadian government. That's why the network was pretty PO'd when Grapes spoke out about the Canadian's lack of support of the US in Iraq. Who will put a PBS type channel in a cable line-up? No offense to our friends south of the border but, outside of the sports, it's a pretty dull network. The National isn't going to pull in many US viewers.

Shootmaster_44
10-29-2004, 04:56 AM
The only problem is that pretty much all of the hockey games involve at least one of the six Canadian teams, so most US vs. US games never get shown, other than in the playoffs. The early game almost always includes the Leafs, Habs, or Sens. The late game almost always includes the Oilers, Flames, or Canucks.

Not to turn this into a hockey thread or anything, but the CBC shows only games involving a Canadian club because that's their target audience.....Canadians. In Canada the best rated games are Canadian games. While the NHL would love to see possibly an LA-Rangers or Islanders Cup Final as it would bring exposure to the US, in Canada it would score low ratings. It would be the same as a Expos/Jays World Series in the US. It wouldn't sell in the US on TV. Besides in Canada, TSN and to a lesser extent Rogers Sportsnet show enough games from elsewhere to cover that need. Plus, there's always ABC's coverage which is shown in Canada as well. The only bone of contention with that is I'm an LA Kings fan and my cable company carries ABC from Detroit. That means I never see the West Coast games on ABC and therefore rarely see my Kings on TV. In all last season I think I saw 4 or 5 Kings games on TV and 2 were on RDS in French!

To bring this post back towards its original intent. I would like to see the CFL on TV in the US. The easiest way for them to do this is to have US cable companies carry TSN, Sportsnet and CBC. The other idea is look at what the Australian Football League did with their coverage and copy that. For those who don't know, the AFL doesn't sell the rights persey, they sell subscriptions to "AFL International." Fox Sports World subscribes to this and in a sense gives the AFL a infomercial for their coverage.

My other idea is this, why doesn't the CFL approach one of the NFL broadcasters (ABC, CBS, FOX or ESPN) and offer their games as low cost late night or daytime programming. I'm sure ESPN would love to put the CFL on at Noon Eastern weekdays instead of 2 episodes of the 2004 Women's Trick Shot Masters (Pool), 2004 National SWAT Championships and PRCA Extreme Bulls. Sure the games might not be carried live, but it will be on US TV. I'm sure a Riders-Lions game would get better ratings than pool, darts or the other garbage on during the day.

The last option I have is simply putting a weekly 1 hour highlights show on US TV. ESPN or Fox Sports Net I'm sure would carry that in the very least. If response to this was good, then branching out into full-length games would be good. The 1 hour show could be modeled on NFL Primetime and if the NFL wants to get involved, possibly use whatever network's main NFL analysts for it. The bottom line is the CFL must use their pact with the NFL for their benefit as well, not just for the NFL's.

Now that I think of it, doesn't the NFL have their own network in the US? Why can't it show live CFL broadcasts? It could simply rebroadcast TSN, CBC or Sportsnet's coverage of the games. Much like the Aussie Rules broadcasts, whenever something occurs that doesn't occur in the US game, stop and explain it. That way fans of the NFL, could learn to enjoy Canada's great game.

American Dragon
01-26-2005, 09:04 PM
I finished reading Jeff Giles' book last night and he mentions how he thinks US expansion is a good idea. I was just curious of two things a) is US expansion a good idea for the CFL? b) if so where? c) Other ideas for expansion?

My two cents are as follows:
a) Yes eventually it is inevitable. The CFL will need to expand still once all the viable Canadian markets are sewn up. The CFL will have to look first to the US.

Meh, the last time the CFL tried the US expansion bit, it blew up in their faces. Other than Baltimore, the rest of the markets were widely forgettable and folded up shop rather quickly.

Geoff
01-31-2005, 09:43 PM
Same could happen to any sports leage. Ownership apears find but is unstable, poor advertising, little to no PR. It's not the CFL's fault.

Pounder
02-01-2005, 10:49 AM
Not to turn this into a hockey thread or anything, but the CBC shows only games involving a Canadian club because that's their target audience.....Canadians. In Canada the best rated games are Canadian games...

...To bring this post back towards its original intent. I would like to see the CFL on TV in the US. The easiest way for them to do this is to have US cable companies carry TSN, Sportsnet and CBC.

I hope you understand that I found this kind of funny, kind of goose-and-gander. Just reverse the countries, change the sport, and you can say the same thing about American audiences, tenfold.

US networks, frankly, would like to find a surer way of getting the male 18-35 to watch TV, then they'd ditch sports (outside the NFL, MAYBE) altogether. They make a lot more money on soaps, folks.

Will ESPN adjust programming now that their college channel is a month from startup? Will we know any better until the NHL is playing again? I'm thinking they're making too much money off of poker right now to get back into the world sports business.

jeffconn
02-04-2005, 09:16 PM
Pounder said:
Will ESPN adjust programming now that their college channel is a month from startup? Will we know any better until the NHL is playing again? I'm thinking they're making too much money off of poker right now to get back into the world sports business.
That's VERY true. What we see as non-sports, such as poker and strong man competitions, are PAID to run on ESPN, usually by sponsors with deep pockets who want the ESPN exposure and sense of legitimacy. In fact, there is a backlog of sports and sportslike events (the national geography bee?) just waiting for the opportunity to buy ESPN time. If the CFL wants to be on ESPN, they'll need to open up the wallet and let the Canadian dollars fly out.

By the way, the CFL WAS aired south of the border in 2004, on the cable and low power America One Television Network. Since the network isn't owned by a major media conglomerate, it isn't seen in most of the USA.
http://www.americaonesports.com/
http://www.americaone.com/

Pounder
02-07-2005, 12:07 PM
What we see as non-sports, such as poker and strong man competitions, are PAID to run on ESPN, usually by sponsors with deep pockets who want the ESPN exposure and sense of legitimacy.

Sponsors? Oh, heck yes. Legitimacy? To heck with that, the sponsors are selling gaming in Vegas and muscle supplements and snowboards and "doing something about overbearing parents trying to push the target kids into traditional sports." That's blatantly obvious... and it's working, folks. I can start to see where ESPN may chuck or relegate the "normal" sports programming someday in the manner that MTV hardly ever shows music videos anymore.

By the way, the CFL WAS aired south of the border in 2004, on the cable and low power America One Television Network. Since the network isn't owned by a major media conglomerate, it isn't seen in most of the USA.
http://www.americaonesports.com/
http://www.americaone.com/

The America One deal is basically a joke in the ABA discussion, so I've been in denial ever since the ECHL announced a similar deal, not that I can find the programming in Boise. Therefore, it doesn't exist... trust me.

BCRantzilla
02-19-2005, 02:09 AM
One city we have forgotten in all of this is Baltimore. By many accounts out in Maryland, a CFL team would still draw in the 20,000 per range there even though the NFL is there. In fact a large contingant of fans of the defunct Stallions, (moved to Montreal when the Ravens arrived,) make the trip to the Grey Cup every year. Fans like that do deserve a CFL team. (Perhaps in Landover if Memorial Stadium isn't around anymore?)

Portland is probably the biggest no-brainer out there with the only exception of Quebec City. (In terms of CFL expansion in general.) I wouldn't put a team in Fargo because they may be way too close to Winnipeg to draw for anyone but the Bombers, (who would probably sellout with the combined attendance,) but I wouldn't rule them out for the odd exhibition .)

Boise wouldn't be too bad of a choice either.

Aside from that, I would avoid the Northeastern US completely because of the glut of CFL and NFL teams already there. (Hamilton, Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal all very close to the boarder as it is and none of the big cities in the US would draw.)

LA could care less about football as their failed NFL and AFL teams have shown. In fact unless the team is an institution like the Lakers or the Dodgers, LA isn't a sports town outside of the college campuses. There is no stadium for football, (the colosseum is a dump that hasn't been maintained at all since the Raiders left town,) and no initiative to build one. (I heard a very funny story out there that a stadium was going to be built in COMPTON! :lol: Yeah, that will get 'em to come out...)

Pounder
02-19-2005, 04:52 PM
You really think Baltimore would bring 20,000 out for CFL now? I just don't see that. I know there will always be the "f*** NFL" contingent that feel very strongly to want to sell this, but that is far less than 20,000. Now that Peter Angelos has to get off his a** to sell the Orioles again, that market has a chance- at least- of seeing a lot of effort going into actually selling tickets.

I don't know what to think about Portland right now. There's a couple of interesting "preliminary discussions" out there. (1) Alberto Salazar wants to build a track & field stadium on an industrial plot in the eastern reaches of the metro area... think Prefontaine. (2) There's an MLS to PDX group that's pretty much in the nascent stage. I'll know more in early March when they appear at a Timbers Army gathering. Thing is, Mexican club Pachuca seems to be behind this. Possibilities include buying up PGE Park and sending baseball out or building a stadium (not a good idea) on the site pending abandonment by the local dog track, not too far from the Salazar proposal. The city and the Pacific Coast League have been teasing forever about a purchase being imminent for the PCL Beavers and USL Timbers, but there's still no closure (and we're right about at the target date). The Winterhawks are having a better season than last year, but are losing fans. CFL in Portland- at one time I'd have thought so, especially when the big push into America was in full swing. Now, I don't see it.

I have not heard Compton mentioned. I've heard Carson, next door. BC, have you been there? The parts of the town nearer the 91 and 605 are basically industrial, the Home Depot Center (LA Galaxy and Chivas USA) is located on the Cal State campus nearby, and you just don't run into bad neighborhoods from the traffic sources to where the stadium site(s) are located. Put your rap records down and take a look!

minnfan
06-21-2005, 06:24 PM
Again with the "this city, that city, and maybe those two also"?

Look, one of the main reasons the US CFL teams failed was because the Canadian based teams could not break through the import ratio problem. They tried, tried hard, but failed.

For those who don't know, the CFL teams are required to carry a number of Canadians on their rosters. This usually means kickers, linemen and the occasional skill position star. The US based teams could not be forced to follow those rules due to US laws regarding employment and quotas.

That's why in two years Baltimore was in two Grey Cups, Larry Smith had been connected with the CFL for decades and knew how to stockpile his team with US only players. Fred Anderson (Sacramento and San Antonio) did the same and nearly won a Grey Cup himself as the Texans were probably the second best team in the league behind Baltimore. Memphis and Birmingham both had contenders if not actual challengers and they only played a single season.

I've got video and newspaper clippings from 93, 94 and 95 that show clearly the fears the owners and head coaches (not to mention the Canadian fans) had about having their championships dominated by US based teams for the rest of time. That's why the US teams were placed in their own division in 1995 after playing in mixed US/Canadian divisions in 1994. In guaranteed a Canadian based team in every Grey Cup.

Additionally, US players on Canadian teams had to get a higher salary than their US counterparts because the Canadian dollar is so undervalued against the US dollar. Plus the fact that taxes in Canada, payroll taxes, are gigantic compared to US taxes. Most US players made every effort to play on the US based teams to avoid that.

Those two problems, the CFL "import" limits and the difference between the two dollars, still exists. It means, no matter what, that there will be no further US expansion until they are dealt with.

Portland was tried, back before Sacramento and San Antonio were selected as the first two US teams, their interest after a pre-season game played at whatever stadium they used drew some 12,000 unimpressed spectators.

Detroit/Windsor territory is owned by the new owners of the Ottawa franchise. Nobody else can own a team in that area.

Good idea, no way it'll happen.

SATexansCFLForever
08-10-2005, 09:04 PM
The only reasons why US Expansion failed is because of those fans still interested in the NFL and College Football and some other boring things............

Alabama and Auburn football decreased Birmingham's interested in the Barracudas

Cowboys, Oilers and Texas high Schools and colleges did the same to the Texans

Tourist industry destroyed the Posse

minnfan
08-23-2005, 11:29 AM
The only reasons why US Expansion failed is because of those fans still interested in the NFL and College Football and some other boring things............

Alabama and Auburn football decreased Birmingham's interested in the Barracudas

Cowboys, Oilers and Texas high Schools and colleges did the same to the Texans

Tourist industry destroyed the Posse

That's not the only reason, or reasons, but by themselves they're enough. CFL fans insist that three down football is more exciting than four and in general that's probably true, I know I enjoy Canadian rules more than US rules. However, you simply can't overestimate how difficult it is to impress football fans who have grown up with four down games in high school, college and the pros.

They simply don't have time to adjust to the Canadian style and the fact that there are hundreds of teams right in the US that play successfully year after year doesn't leave much room to take in another league.

The AFL is finding it difficult to carve out a niche for themselves and they play a four down game.

You also can't overlook the fact that the requirement that Canadian based teams carry a number of Canadian players while US teams don't have to do that is a serious problem, serious enough to kill any US expansion plans all by itself. Until a way around that is found there will be no US teams in the CFL. And since the US laws regarding quotas are unlikely to change the CFL itself would have to drop the Canadian players clause. That's very unlikely to happen, it's one of the things that keeps the Canadian government on the side of the league.

I've wondered though. The British Isles have abandoned the NFLe, (good for them, it's an embarrassing attempt at European football) would it be possible for those few gridiron football fans in GB to support a couple CFL teams?

Pounder
08-23-2005, 02:53 PM
Took my father to one game in Vancouver many years ago.

"Too much punting."

You'll never get the American fans to change their minds.

Andy J
08-24-2005, 01:26 AM
Hello , I have been away from this board for a number years; actually not too long after the demise of the XFL. I just wanted to express my opinion on the the CFL and a proposed new league.
I am from San Antonio and have been a fan of the Wings, Gunslingers, Riders and the Texans. I think that San Antonio in only second to Birmingham in having teams in failed leagues.
While I really enjoyed the WFL, USFL, and the WLAF. I most enjoyed the CFL. I disagree with my local compatriot on why the Texans failed.
I saw it as a combination of poor marketing and the lack of a real plan for US expansion. For example the Texans announced their move from Sacramento in March and then you didn't hear anything until mid- May ;when they signed a lease agreement with the Alamodome. The season started in mid- June. One month to promote a new team in a league that no one and I mean no one new anything about. Then by August when NFL camps open and the Dallas Cowboys were just up the road in Austin the media got on that bandwagon and ignored the Texans.
I also thought that the organization brought too many of the staff people from California who were completely ignorant about the city. They did add a local marketing person; but that wasn't until October.
In spite of that ,the team did average over 15,000 and drew decent crowds to several games including over 18,000 the last regular season game.
What you saw was a good brand of football but without any fan knowledge of the league, its teams or it's players. Some people actually told me that they thought Canadian football was something like Rugby. The CFL on TV at that time was only limited to ESPN 2; with one game a week. In San Antonio only 10% of cable homes got ESPN 2.The Texans did pay for some CBC games to be shown locally but with little publicity.

However it is a fact that the Texans were the last US based CFL team left.
The Baltimore Stallions moved to Montreal; The Shreveport Pirates attempted to move to Norfolk; without a stadium lease. There were buyers for the Birmingham Barracudas and they tried move the team to Shreveport and become the Bayou Barracudas. The CFL rejected that.The Memphis team just folded.
The Texans owner proposed that the Texans could continue to play as the sole US team but the CFL would have to help pay for the increased travel costs and for the broadcast of Texan games played in Canada.
The CFL said NO!
So it made no practical sense for the Texans to continue. Just as the CFL expanded to the US in haphazard way. They quickly did an about face and began do their "RadicallyCanadian" and "Our Balls are Bigger Than Yours" promotions in Canada.

But afterwards I did come to the idea that Canadian Style football could work in the US. Because I think the fast paced game is exciting to watch; I think that Americans like scoring and it could be argued that a second-tier league needs rules that encourage scoring. But when you call it Canadian ;people automaticly think it's some kind of foreign football that doesn't belong to us. I think a US league that parallels the CFL season ; but that is only limited to 6-8 non- NFL cities that have a sizeable population;an adequate stadium and also don't have a lot of identification with college football;ala Birmingham.
Right off hand the basketball cities come to mind Orlando,Salt Lake City,San Antonio, Portland maybe even Memphis again. I say basketball cities because a football team would be a complement to sports in those cities. In San Antonio the Spurs start in late October and finish in June.
The CFL starts in June and is winding down in late October.
I think this new league would have to make agreements with the NFL and even encourage cross ownership or part ownership with the NFL teams. It must also work our agreements with the CFL I think it would give it more dimension if it played a limited inter-locking schedule with CFL teams maybe 2 games a season and maybe a Championship game between both leagues. In late November or Early December. After the Grey Cup.(Remember that the NFL tried to have a game between the NFLE champion and CFL champ a while back]
Television? The idea would have to be sold to regional cable networks .Some show the CFL now.
But don't call it Canadian. Call it fast action , wide open, high scoring ;three down football. Name it the USFL or the CFL[Continental Football League] or convice the NFL to call it NFL2.

minnfan
08-24-2005, 01:04 PM
Hello , I have been away from this board for a number years; actually not too long after the demise of the XFL. I just wanted to express my opinion on the the CFL and a proposed new league.
I am from San Antonio and have been a fan of the Wings, Gunslingers, Riders and the Texans. I think that San Antonio in only second to Birmingham in having teams in failed leagues.
While I really enjoyed the WFL, USFL, and the WLAF. I most enjoyed the CFL. I disagree with my local compatriot on why the Texans failed.
I saw it as a combination of poor marketing and the lack of a real plan for US expansion. For example the Texans announced their move from Sacramento in March and then you didn't hear anything until mid- May ;when they signed a lease agreement with the Alamodome. The season started in mid- June. One month to promote a new team in a league that no one and I mean no one new anything about. Then by August when NFL camps open and the Dallas Cowboys were just up the road in Austin the media got on that bandwagon and ignored the Texans.
I also thought that the organization brought too many of the staff people from California who were completely ignorant about the city. They did add a local marketing person; but that wasn't until October.
In spite of that ,the team did average over 15,000 and drew decent crowds to several games including over 18,000 the last regular season game.
What you saw was a good brand of football but without any fan knowledge of the league, its teams or it's players. Some people actually told me that they thought Canadian football was something like Rugby. The CFL on TV at that time was only limited to ESPN 2; with one game a week. In San Antonio only 10% of cable homes got ESPN 2.The Texans did pay for some CBC games to be shown locally but with little publicity.

However it is a fact that the Texans were the last US based CFL team left.
The Baltimore Stallions moved to Montreal; The Shreveport Pirates attempted to move to Norfolk; without a stadium lease. There were buyers for the Birmingham Barracudas and they tried move the team to Shreveport and become the Bayou Barracudas. The CFL rejected that.The Memphis team just folded.
The Texans owner proposed that the Texans could continue to play as the sole US team but the CFL would have to help pay for the increased travel costs and for the broadcast of Texan games played in Canada.
The CFL said NO!
So it made no practical sense for the Texans to continue. Just as the CFL expanded to the US in haphazard way. They quickly did an about face and began do their "RadicallyCanadian" and "Our Balls are Bigger Than Yours" promotions in Canada.

But afterwards I did come to the idea that Canadian Style football could work in the US. Because I think the fast paced game is exciting to watch; I think that Americans like scoring and it could be argued that a second-tier league needs rules that encourage scoring. But when you call it Canadian ;people automaticly think it's some kind of foreign football that doesn't belong to us. I think a US league that parallels the CFL season ; but that is only limited to 6-8 non- NFL cities that have a sizeable population;an adequate stadium and also don't have a lot of identification with college football;ala Birmingham.
Right off hand the basketball cities come to mind Orlando,Salt Lake City,San Antonio, Portland maybe even Memphis again. I say basketball cities because a football team would be a complement to sports in those cities. In San Antonio the Spurs start in late October and finish in June.
The CFL starts in June and is winding down in late October.
I think this new league would have to make agreements with the NFL and even encourage cross ownership or part ownership with the NFL teams. It must also work our agreements with the CFL I think it would give it more dimension if it played a limited inter-locking schedule with CFL teams maybe 2 games a season and maybe a Championship game between both leagues. In late November or Early December. After the Grey Cup.(Remember that the NFL tried to have a game between the NFLE champion and CFL champ a while back]
Television? The idea would have to be sold to regional cable networks .Some show the CFL now.
But don't call it Canadian. Call it fast action , wide open, high scoring ;three down football. Name it the USFL or the CFL[Continental Football League] or convice the NFL to call it NFL2.


Good post. I agree with most of what you said up to the last. When you talk about combining your league idea in any way with the CFL you lose me. I agree with you that most US fans have little understanding for or appreciation of the Canadian brand of football. Which makes any connection very difficult. You're two league - one championship idea is seriously flawed because the CFL gets nothing out of it. There's no point to the CFL playing for a post-championship championship, all it does is dilute their own Grey Cup game without putting any serious money on the table in return. That's the specific reason why the CFL turned thumbs down on the CFL-WLAF championship game some years ago. They risked a loss of pride and position and gained nothing in return.

I believe there is no room for, or prospect of, a new league in the US for the forseeable future. What peoples perceptions of the USFL were (even though they were wrong) was confirmed by the XFL. It will be years and years before another spring or summer league gets even a nod of notice in this country. Unless the NFL decides to do it themselves, and that seems really unlikely.

I love the idea of a spring league, but don't think I'll ever see another one.

superscoutken
08-24-2005, 05:28 PM
Hello , I have been away from this board for a number years; actually not too long after the demise of the XFL. I just wanted to express my opinion on the the CFL and a proposed new league.
I am from San Antonio and have been a fan of the Wings, Gunslingers, Riders and the Texans. I think that San Antonio in only second to Birmingham in having teams in failed leagues.
While I really enjoyed the WFL, USFL, and the WLAF. I most enjoyed the CFL. I disagree with my local compatriot on why the Texans failed.
I saw it as a combination of poor marketing and the lack of a real plan for US expansion. For example the Texans announced their move from Sacramento in March and then you didn't hear anything until mid- May ;when they signed a lease agreement with the Alamodome. The season started in mid- June. One month to promote a new team in a league that no one and I mean no one new anything about. Then by August when NFL camps open and the Dallas Cowboys were just up the road in Austin the media got on that bandwagon and ignored the Texans.
I also thought that the organization brought too many of the staff people from California who were completely ignorant about the city. They did add a local marketing person; but that wasn't until October.
In spite of that ,the team did average over 15,000 and drew decent crowds to several games including over 18,000 the last regular season game.
What you saw was a good brand of football but without any fan knowledge of the league, its teams or it's players. Some people actually told me that they thought Canadian football was something like Rugby. The CFL on TV at that time was only limited to ESPN 2; with one game a week. In San Antonio only 10% of cable homes got ESPN 2.The Texans did pay for some CBC games to be shown locally but with little publicity.

However it is a fact that the Texans were the last US based CFL team left.
The Baltimore Stallions moved to Montreal; The Shreveport Pirates attempted to move to Norfolk; without a stadium lease. There were buyers for the Birmingham Barracudas and they tried move the team to Shreveport and become the Bayou Barracudas. The CFL rejected that.The Memphis team just folded.
The Texans owner proposed that the Texans could continue to play as the sole US team but the CFL would have to help pay for the increased travel costs and for the broadcast of Texan games played in Canada.
The CFL said NO!
So it made no practical sense for the Texans to continue. Just as the CFL expanded to the US in haphazard way. They quickly did an about face and began do their "RadicallyCanadian" and "Our Balls are Bigger Than Yours" promotions in Canada.

But afterwards I did come to the idea that Canadian Style football could work in the US. Because I think the fast paced game is exciting to watch; I think that Americans like scoring and it could be argued that a second-tier league needs rules that encourage scoring. But when you call it Canadian ;people automaticly think it's some kind of foreign football that doesn't belong to us. I think a US league that parallels the CFL season ; but that is only limited to 6-8 non- NFL cities that have a sizeable population;an adequate stadium and also don't have a lot of identification with college football;ala Birmingham.
Right off hand the basketball cities come to mind Orlando,Salt Lake City,San Antonio, Portland maybe even Memphis again. I say basketball cities because a football team would be a complement to sports in those cities. In San Antonio the Spurs start in late October and finish in June.
The CFL starts in June and is winding down in late October.
I think this new league would have to make agreements with the NFL and even encourage cross ownership or part ownership with the NFL teams. It must also work our agreements with the CFL I think it would give it more dimension if it played a limited inter-locking schedule with CFL teams maybe 2 games a season and maybe a Championship game between both leagues. In late November or Early December. After the Grey Cup.(Remember that the NFL tried to have a game between the NFLE champion and CFL champ a while back]
Television? The idea would have to be sold to regional cable networks .Some show the CFL now.
But don't call it Canadian. Call it fast action , wide open, high scoring ;three down football. Name it the USFL or the CFL[Continental Football League] or convice the NFL to call it NFL2.


Good post. I agree with most of what you said up to the last. When you talk about combining your league idea in any way with the CFL you lose me. I agree with you that most US fans have little understanding for or appreciation of the Canadian brand of football. Which makes any connection very difficult. You're two league - one championship idea is seriously flawed because the CFL gets nothing out of it. There's no point to the CFL playing for a post-championship championship, all it does is dilute their own Grey Cup game without putting any serious money on the table in return. That's the specific reason why the CFL turned thumbs down on the CFL-WLAF championship game some years ago. They risked a loss of pride and position and gained nothing in return.

I believe there is no room for, or prospect of, a new league in the US for the forseeable future. What peoples perceptions of the USFL were (even though they were wrong) was confirmed by the XFL. It will be years and years before another spring or summer league gets even a nod of notice in this country. Unless the NFL decides to do it themselves, and that seems really unlikely.

I love the idea of a spring league, but don't think I'll ever see another one.

dont listen to minnfan....he still thinks the XFL really tried to make it work........It could be done with the right Financiers.........It couldnt be all CFL rules football though.Minnfan is correct on that...........but the 110 yd field is something I am going to be proposing to the investors so we can be more appealing to the CFL league ...........Plus he has NO IDEA how much damage a Group of MultiBillionaires could do to the NFL if they were determined to compete for players and drive salaries up further........or at least come in and give an NFL salary cap casualty what he was worth rather than what the team can afford under it's salary cap.

Andy J
08-24-2005, 09:43 PM
There must be an agreement between both leagues and yes some

serious money on the table. I like CFL Rules ; but I never understood

the rouge. Get rid of it and probably a few other things.

superscoutken
08-24-2005, 10:07 PM
There must be an agreement between both leagues and yes some

serious money on the table. I like CFL Rules ; but I never understood

the rouge. Get rid of it and probably a few other things.

The rouge would have to go........Eventually a formal agreement would be great but dont think that would happen at this point. It would have to be developed over time. The CFL is happy with the way things are going with the NFL................we are contemplating using the forward motion since it's already been a part of the indoor game but have not voted on this at this point..............other than that I like the CFL rules but I have to think about what is going to be easily adaptable for the fans so they dont lose interest too soon...........and that would be to have mostly NFL rules so fans can concentrate on the caliber of play on the field...........the 110 yd field is a must...........there are alot of speedy ,scat back, return types out there who will make this outdoor game very exciting for fans to watch.........the USFL name is going to be reinstated and we will have a TRUE UNITED STATES .............FOOTBALL LEAGUE.....It's a good time too for this to keep our patriotic routes in check...........We will pick up where the USFL left off with a Liberty & Independence Conference too

spider
08-24-2005, 10:19 PM
I've seen your proposed list but I don't see anything in there about Arkansas. Arkansas would be primo for something like this.

Little Rock has the ideal stadium. They play a few Arkansas games there and a semi pro team plays there during the summer.

I know that a one time the old Spring Football League (SPFL) was going to play there but the league went belly up.

Pounder
08-25-2005, 12:06 PM
110-yard fields? In a lot of college towns where the stadia are already not just situated for 100 + 20 (counting the endzones), but tight enough that you have to negotiate with schools to knock out seats that they don't want to take out?

Nice dream.

I could start quibbling about sites picked. I could quibble about a lot of things in the acres of text our superscout writes, but I haven't the time.

The National Football League is popular. College Football is popular. If just any old football were popular, the NAFL would have some serious wings already. If this were a hot property, you'd already have the money for it.

superscoutken
08-25-2005, 02:24 PM
110-yard fields? In a lot of college towns where the stadia are already not just situated for 100 + 20 (counting the endzones), but tight enough that you have to negotiate with schools to knock out seats that they don't want to take out?

Nice dream.

I could start quibbling about sites picked. I could quibble about a lot of things in the acres of text our superscout writes, but I haven't the time.

The National Football League is popular. College Football is popular. If just any old football were popular, the NAFL would have some serious wings already. If this were a hot property, you'd already have the money for it.

Yeah you could quibble........but in reality who really cares what you have to say?..........the 110 yd field could be a problem at some stadiums and we already realize this..............as far as money....there is a ton of it..........I'm just the personnel guy.............we're just getting some insight to finalize the plan

minnfan
08-25-2005, 03:51 PM
110-yard fields? In a lot of college towns where the stadia are already not just situated for 100 + 20 (counting the endzones), but tight enough that you have to negotiate with schools to knock out seats that they don't want to take out?

Nice dream.

I could start quibbling about sites picked. I could quibble about a lot of things in the acres of text our superscout writes, but I haven't the time.

The National Football League is popular. College Football is popular. If just any old football were popular, the NAFL would have some serious wings already. If this were a hot property, you'd already have the money for it.


These people talk and talk and talk......they don't address the problems that prior failed leagues ran into, and the same problems are awaiting them today. What, exactly do you do about the CFL import ratio? What do you do about getting on television when minor indoor league who've got a few years under their belts can't do it?

Certainly there are players available, lots of them, and good ones too. There might be guys with money to invest, big money too. But history says very loudly that there are not enough fans willing to spend the bucks to support these minor leagues, and nobody ready to televise them.

Any talk at all about working in conjunction with the CFL is nonsense, they learned their lession with the XFL, had they agreed to join Vince as a part of his league they would be out of business right now. Not a single chance in a million they would be tempted to try with still another new league.

As for superclown........... he's good for a laugh, but if he were what he says he is he wouldn't be spending his time on this kind of a board, he'd be doing the job he claims he's supposed to be doing.

Besides, anybody who claims the XFL was an NFL project is living in another world. A really strange one.

Any new US league that has to lean on the CFL to get off the ground is a league already in desperate shape.

superscoutken
08-25-2005, 03:58 PM
[quote=Pounder]110-yard fields? In a lot of college towns where the stadia are already not just situated for 100 + 20 (counting the endzones), but tight enough that you have to negotiate with schools to knock out seats that they don't want to take out?

Nice dream.

I could start quibbling about sites picked. I could quibble about a lot of things in the acres of text our superscout writes, but I haven't the time.

The National Football League is popular. College Football is popular. If just any old football were popular, the NAFL would have some serious wings already. If this were a hot property, you'd already have the money for it.




These people talk and talk and talk......they don't address the problems that prior failed leagues ran into, and the same problems are awaiting them today. What, exactly do you do about the CFL import ratio? What do you do about getting on television when minor indoor league who've got a few years under their belts can't do it?

Certainly there are players available, lots of them, and good ones too. There might be guys with money to invest, big money too. But history says very loudly that there are not enough fans willing to spend the bucks to support these minor leagues, and nobody ready to televise them.

Any talk at all about working in conjunction with the CFL is nonsense, they learned their lession with the XFL, had they agreed to join Vince as a part of his league they would be out of business right now. Not a single chance in a million they would be tempted to try with still another new league.





Bro......MinnFan is a COMPLETE JOKE...........I'm on this computer so much because I'm in personnel and I do a ton of research on players, scouting reports, contact info, etc, etc......info on failed leagues is alot of the research we are examining so we know what we are doing........there is NO DOUBT that the XFL was designed to fail on purpose to discourage any further development of a competing outdoor football league..........if you knew the football people and media people we do you would know this to be fact........you are a FOOL...........it's not about whether a league could compete against the NFL for ratings or for fans or anything like that................it's about cost control and keeping salaries where they are........and discouraging multibillionaire investors from competing for top players.........that's what the NFL wants to do..................


The NFL's average salary in 1983 was $152,800. A year later, after the USFL began paying fat salaries and creating a bidding war with the NFL, the average salary was $225,600, an increase of 47.6 percent -- the largest jump in the league's history.....................


United States Football League VS. National Football League
The trial: USFL v. NFL
The judge: Peter K. Leisure, Southern District of New York
The jury: Patricia McCabe (foreperson), Steven Ziegler, Margaret Lilienfeld (replaced Wendell James), Bernez Stephens, Patricia Sibilia, Miriam Sanchez



The antitrust lawsuit

By Greg Garber
ESPN.com

Wednesday, March 5
Updated: March 6, 11:11 AM ET


Harvey Myerson, the USFL's flamboyant attorney, claimed to have three "smoking guns" that proved the NFL had conspired to monopolize pro football:

1) A March 2, 1973 memorandum to NFL broadcasting director Robert Cochran from NFL counsel Jay Moyer suggesting that an "open network" might be an "invitation to formation of a new league."

2) An Aug. 4, 1983 memo from Jack Donlan, the NFL Management Council executive director, to his staff insisting that NFL teams should push USFL teams to "increase the salaries of existing players or run the risk of losing them."

3) A plan to "conquer" the USFL presented in February, 1984 to NFL management by Harvard Business School professor Michael Porter.


The judge: Peter K. Leisure, Southern District of New York


The jury: Patricia McCabe (foreperson), Steven Ziegler, Margaret Lilienfeld (replaced Wendell James), Bernez Stephens, Patricia Sibilia, Miriam Sanchez

Following the USFL's second season, its owners decided to file a lawsuit against the National Football League for violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Also named as a defendant was Pete Rozelle, commissioner of the NFL, while Al Davis and his Los Angeles Raiders were excluded from the suit in exchange for Davis's testimony for the USFL. The league sought actual damages of $567 million dollars which, when trebled, would amount to more than $1.7 billion.

Chief among the USFL's arguments was that the NFL, which had contracts with ABC, NBC and CBS, had pressured the networks to not televise the USFL in the fall. The league also claimed that the NFL had followed the practices outlined in the Porter Presentation, a package compiled by a Harvard professor to show the NFL how to conquer its new competitor. In particular, the USFL maintained that the NFL had conspired to harm the Oakland Invaders and New Jersey Generals.

"I've found in my numerous investigations that the National Football League has a way of covering up evidence," said Coniglio. "I hope the NFL office doesn't have all the copies."

The trial, which lasted 48 days, produced more than 7100 pages of transcripts and thousands of pages of exhibits. Among those testifying were Rozelle, USFL commissioner Harry Usher, Howard Cosell, Davis, Donald Trump and a litany of television executives. Additionally, team owners from both leagues, including the late owner of the Tampa Bay Bandits, John Bassett, via videotape, were called to testify.

On July 29, 1986, the United States Football League won the battle but lost its war against the National Football League. After five days of deliberation, the jury that heard the USFL's case against the NFL found the older league guilty of monopolizing professional football and of using predatory tactics .

While the jury found that the NFL had willfully acquired and maintained a monopolization of professional football, it ruled against the rest of the USFL's claims. It did not find that the NFL controlled or attempted to control the television market. The vital claims were those based on television revenues, and those were the ones that the jury did not accept.

The case went to trial, and while the USFL won the battle—the court held that the NFL was a "duly adjudicated illegal monopoly"—it lost the war.However, several jurors later said that they wanted to grant a substantial judgment to the USFL (one juror was willing to award $100 million before tripling), but the entire jury could not agree on an amount. They finally settled on $1 because they felt the court was allowed to override the jury on the question of damages and impose its own damage award, but the court had no such authority.



The jury felt that the USFL had abandoned its original plan to patiently build fan support while containing costs and had instead pursued a merger strategy. Moreover, the announced move to the fall also caused the abandonment of major markets and led to further fan skepticism. In essence, the jury ruled that although the USFL was harmed by the NFL's monopolization of pro football, most of the upstart league's problems were the result of its own mismanagement. Statements reflecting jury confusion were subsequently ignored.



The NFL argued that the USFL was its own worst enemy and had only itself to blame for its financial woes.

Even the testimony of Howard Cosell and Al Davis -- the Raiders owner was excluded from the lawsuit in exchange for his testimony -- failed to save the USFL. On July 29, a jury of six found the NFL guilty of acting as a monopoly, but agreed with the NFL's argument that the USFL had done itself more damage.


Let the War Begin

By Joe Stein

The war actually began last August when the Chicago Blitz under George Allen signed tight end Tim Wrightman, a third-round pick of the Chicago Bears who had not agreed to a contract with the NFL team. After the Blitz signed linebacker Jim Fahnhorst, a fourth-round pick of the Minnesota Vikings, there was a calm as the USFL began signing hundreds of NFL rejects. But it proved to be just a calm before the storm
The clouds erupted in January, after the new league had held its first draft, as top picks began signing with the USFL. First, it was Tim Spencer of the Blitz on January 7and proceeded through February 26 when the Michigan Panthers signed Anthony Carter. Before that was the signing of underclassman Herschel Walker by the New Jersey Generals, a move that prompted as much debate as a presidential election. It was clear the new league was playing hardball, a game perhaps the NFL had not expected.

Said New York Jets personnel director Mike Hickey (before the signing of Walker). “Let them eat cake.” Responded Jim Gould, president of the USFL’s Washington Federals. “There are two types of war: One where you go out and beat the NFL and another type, a psychological war, where you get them to start beating themselves. I’m not at war with the Redskins. I’m at war with the mentality that we’re so big and almighty nobody can compete with us. That’s the “Let them eat cake” routine. That’s the arrogance we’re at war with.”

What bothered many personnel directors, especially the Redskins’ Bobby Beathard, was that the USFL was able to corral many of the top players without a whimper from the NFL. The established league was still 109 days away from its draft when Spencer signed in early January. Said Beathard, “What I hate is not having a shot. It’s that helpless feeling. It’s very frustrating.”

But it wasn’t very frustrating to the players who signed. They walked away with huge contracts and also set the stage for those who decided to wait for the NFL draft. The absence of numerous top players will catapult other players higher in the draft, meaning more money. And players who turned down big USFL offers will still have bargaining leverage with the NFL team that drafts them, even though the USFL will be nearing its third month when the April 26-27 draft is held.

Said player agent Leigh Steinberg. “Who cares if a player misses eight games if he can play for you 10-15 years?” Steinberg predicted that after the NFL draft, what will develop would be “the wild, wild west of contract negotiations.”

Perry Deering, the agent who negotiated a reported $2 million, four-year contract for Kelvin Bryant with the Philadelphia Stars, agrees “I except salaries to increase 25 percent this year for the incoming class,” he said pointing out that the normal increase is about 10-15 percent. Said agent Tony Agnone, “The rookie this year will be the highest paid group as a whole, in history.”

Added Deering, “I’m happy to see it come. The NFL has been able to take advantage of its monopolistic position for too ling. It’s healthy. The owners aren’t going to like it. It’s going to cut their profit margin down. But it’s the best thing that’s ever happened to a players.”





The Appeal

USFL denied request for NFL retrial

Judge Ralph K. Winter wrote in the 91-page opinion on the USFL's appeal: ``There was ample evidence that the USFL failed because it did not make the painstaking investment and patient efforts that bring credibility, stability and public recognition to a sports league.''