Bcarlson1 had said:
Just wondering what the consensus is out there about the Arena Football 1 League vs. the IFL. Obviously this site was started to discuss the IFL but with the original Arena League taking 2009 off and now a new Arena Football 1 offshoot league getting out of bankruptcy I was just curious to hear the opinions that you all may have out there. It is great to see 26 teams in this league and much less than that confirmed in the new Arena League. Also how do you think the talent level will fare between leagues along with the number of games on the schedules for each league? I look forward to a great 2010 IFL season and would love to see it really take the #1 position as far as Indoor Football is concerned.
mrsummitcitypigskin had replied:
AF1 will apparently be the top tier Arena league.
IFL we be a top tier Indoor league (no nets etc.)
AIFA, CIFL & SIFL will be support leagues to both.
Each of the 3 support leagues has their own regional
footprint that they want to stick with.
The af1 is coming very close to fulfilling its goal of being a leaner and more economical version of the old AFL. We'll just have to see how the first season plays out.
On the other side of the coin ... The IFL has essentially replaced the old AF2. Which is one of the reasons why af1 was not able to get anywhere with the idea of a two tier league. they were originally hoping to retain at least 8 to 10 of the af2 smaller markets and attract another 4 to 6 from other leagues. But a lot of teams did the math on this one and here is what they saw.
" Pay 3X to play af2 level competition in the IFL or pay 5X to do a similar thing in the lower tier of the af1?"
The thing that the IFL has going for it is that it isn't owned by another league. The af1 can't hold it down like the AFL did with the af2. It is growing and improving in an organic fashion without taking on a lot of debt along the way. It even returned several thousand dollars back to its teams after the end of the 2009 season.
So af1 generally has the larger markets and the higher salaries but IFL has the most teams, the better travel footprint and has not started off with 6 million of debt.
After this 2010 season has been played ... We're going to see some very interesting decisions being made by markets that have been sitting out for a season or two.
It could be very interesting.
Georgia replaced an af2 team with an SIFL team.
San Jose replaced the dormant Saber Cats with The AIFA Wolves
Rapid City Michigan invited the IFL Thunder to come over and replace the AFL Rampage.
They really needed to get something reasonably solid up and running as quickly as possible.
Maybe, but just barely. If the IFL could be considered AA, then the AF1 would be considered AA1/2 at best.
Both leagues share about the same ratio of small, medium and large markets. The IFL is simply bigger overall at this point.
And I can tell you this for a fact. About half of the owners in the AF1 have no business being in that league and will lose their asses in the first year. Mark my words.
And I'm sorry, but paying a player a $100 or so more a game hardly gives the AF1 more exposure. You're only fooling yourself if you believe that.
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1152
- Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 9:51 pm
- Location: Cedar Hills, UT/Daytona Beach, FL
Mrs. Brown's 4th Grade Class, Faulkner Elementary
New Smyrna Beach, Florida, 1974-75
"I Have More Important Things To Occupy My Time That What's Being Said On Message Boards -- OSC Founder Paul Reeths"
"There's a sucker born every minute" -- PT Barnum