OurSports Central Independent and Minor League Sports Forums

What happens if the NFL strikes and the UFL keeps playing? Thoughts...

14 people will watch instead of the 7 who watch now.

I would think college football would be a bigger beneficiary than the UFL would.

The UFL is (and still will be) playing way, way, way off Broadway in 2011.

NFL players will not strike. If there is a lockout by the owners,
it'll be in 2012. UFL could be on more solid ground by then and
could perhaps make a dent. They need to be at least an 8 team,
non-NFL market league, by then. They should stick with their fall
schedule, whatever they do. Moving to spring would be disastrous.

Why would the spring be disastrous? How much room is there in the fall?

[quote=""mrsummitcitypigskin""]NFL players will not strike. If there is a lockout by the owners,
it'll be in 2012. [/quote]

So you've really kept up with the labor negotiations, then?

[quote=""preeths""]Why would the spring be disastrous? How much room is there in the fall?[/quote]

I'll answer your question with a question, Mr.Preeths:
How many spring outdoor football leagues have been a success?
Outdoor football is a fall sport. I think America has shown it's lack
of support for the game in the spring months.

And Sam did I miss something? The NFL owners are gonna lock
the players out after the un-capped year. And at these salaries
I'm not sure I'd blame them. I've heard more about lock-out then
strike. If your insinuation points at the calender year, you are right.
Un-capped in 2010, lock-out in 2011. My bad.

I don't think America has shown a lack of support for spring football by any stretch of the imagination. It's really only had one chance to show any support, and the USFL averaged about 25,000 per game and had decent TV ratings that beat ABC's projections. The problem was that salary demands outgrew available revenue. Burgeoning salaries shouldn't be a problem in the UFL because the league controls them. In the fall, they're battling high school, college and pro football, one of which is playing virtually every day of the week and available on television. There just isn't any room.

may happen before that uncapped year cause clubs cant pay salaries that their gate returns cant cover . in other words if this doesnt happen dont be overly stunned if some teams go dark football or not as this is an industry woe that moving a club may not solve due to the lack od open markets

[quote=""preeths""]I don't think America has shown a lack of support for spring football by any stretch of the imagination. It's really only had one chance to show any support, and the USFL[/quote]

Why leave the two-year WLAF out of this tally? True, there were only six US teams, but two or three national broadcasts per week from ABC and USA is a good shot at exposure.

Your point is well-taken, though I was looking at more of a full-blown effort. As you pointed out, WLAF had just half-a-dozen American markets and some small TV markets to boot. Still, I don't think the WLAF should be completely ignored when discussing the potential merits of the spring. The league averaged right around 20-25,000 per game in the U.S. for undisguised minor league football. I would submit again that the spring has shown that it would work better for a secondary league than the fall.