OKC Yard Dawgz joining the IFL?

[jerry101jlh]

[quote=""preeths""]That should serve as a wake-up call to the indoor leagues. They have the sandbox all to themselves for another year. Will they take advantage of the opportunity and solidify their position or fall victim to fighting amongst themselves? If af2 relaunches, my guess is that it will do so with lower costs than before and will be much more aggressive in recruiting from the indoor leagues, both to gain markets and hinder indoor league competition.[/quote]

At the restart of the AFL you had a league selling pretty strong to those arena faithful, both at the ownership level and fan level, yet now attendance is down and maybe some recognizing this isn't the old AFL.

Question is will they be able to sell a strong enough program for a second tier to hold on to existing teams that are down in attendance, way below league average and attract new ownerships and ownerships from exising leagues?

This has nothing to go with game preference, but everything to do with the business model and afford ability. The Hammerheads headed to the SIFL with once source quoting cost of business. I personally feel cost of operation down the line on the reasons they jumped, but my opinion aside all this may come down to the cost of business and the business model.

We don't know what the business model of the proposed new af2 might be, but we have to assume it will be high compared to the IFL and others if they include the players and coaches as employees of the league. I think this is a good thing, but does up the initial cost of business.

We really know little of the business model of the IFL, AIFA, CIFL and SIFL other than the AIFA model is failing fast, the CIFL's one that has meant a revolving door and the SIFL's one that has allowed in teams that face certain in season failure. The IFL model may or may not be any better than the rest, but is the highest in the operating area.

Paul poses an interesting question, but is based on the revised af2 being able to poach teams from leagues at will, which I don't see happening. I do see the new af2 as competition for markets, new and existing, especially if the current indoor leagues don't make needed changes.

[aball]

[quote=""jerry101jlh""]At the restart of the AFL you had a league selling pretty strong to those arena faithful, both at the ownership level and fan level, yet now attendance is down and maybe some recognizing this isn't the old AFL.

Question is will they be able to sell a strong enough program for a second tier to hold on to existing teams that are down in attendance, way below league average and attract new ownerships and ownerships from exising leagues?

This has nothing to go with game preference, but everything to do with the business model and afford ability. The Hammerheads headed to the SIFL with once source quoting cost of business. I personally feel cost of operation down the line on the reasons they jumped, but my opinion aside all this may come down to the cost of business and the business model.

We don't know what the business model of the proposed new af2 might be, but we have to assume it will be high compared to the IFL and others if they include the players and coaches as employees of the league. I think this is a good thing, but does up the initial cost of business.

We really know little of the business model of the IFL, AIFA, CIFL and SIFL other than the AIFA model is failing fast, the CIFL's one that has meant a revolving door and the SIFL's one that has allowed in teams that face certain in season failure. The IFL model may or may not be any better than the rest, but is the highest in the operating area.

Paul poses an interesting question, but is based on the revised af2 being able to poach teams from leagues at will, which I don't see happening. I do see the new af2 as competition for markets, new and existing, especially if the current indoor leagues don't make needed changes.[/quote]

I guess Jerry missed the 17,000 in Jacksonville or the 13,000 in Tampa last weekend. Checkout the attendance figures for the AFL upcoming playoffs. Let's see if attendance is down.

I think Paul is correct. The IFL needs to be careful as teams are looking for greener pastures, and some are and will be leaving.

[preeths]

Not just the IFL by any means, aball. The SIFL's newest member can certainly attest to the difficulties af2 was capable of causing.

[jerry101jlh]

[quote=""aball""]I guess Jerry missed the 17,000 in Jacksonville or the 13,000 in Tampa last weekend. Checkout the attendance figures for the AFL upcoming playoffs. Let's see if attendance is down.

I think Paul is correct. The IFL needs to be careful as teams are looking for greener pastures, and some are and will be leaving.[/quote]

You can't point to a couple teams or even a couple games, but have to look at the over all picture. You also have to look at those ex af2 teams and how they are doing. Most from what numbers I've seen are below league averages by quite a bit. No indoor football teams will be targeted for the upper level of the new AFL anyway.

Indoor football teams looking to jump are not looking at stability as much as lower operating costs. I'm not sure the revised af2 will be offering that.

[aball]

[quote=""jerry101jlh""]You can't point to a couple teams or even a couple games, but have to look at the over all picture. You also have to look at those ex af2 teams and how they are doing. Most from what numbers I've seen are below league averages by quite a bit. No indoor football teams will be targeted for the upper level of the new AFL anyway.

Indoor football teams looking to jump are not looking at stability as much as lower operating costs. I'm not sure the revised af2 will be offering that.[/quote]

So what's the overall picture? Here's a link for last weeks AFL attendance numbers http://www.arenafan.com/

All but two AFL teams have had great attendance numbers this year, and those locations may be moved to New Orleans and Georgia next season. Keep the focus on the indoor leagues, unless you know what your talking about.

The AFL is alive and well.

[arenafan]

I agree. The AFL is doing well this year. As long as they keep the payroll at $400 dollars a game per player, then the owners will make money and the league will thrive. Especially when you have 13K fans at your game. AF2 will not make a comeback like everyone thinks. The model they used doesn't work and I don't care what Kurtz says, they aren't going to be able to change much on the business model. Does anyone know how many teams the AF2 has gone through? I will tell you 41. Thats right 41 failed franchises. There is a reason for that. If teams can't afford the IFL franchise fees and league dues (which are the highest amoung current leagues), then how are they gonna afford a new AF2? No way they land enough teams close enough so they dont have to fly. Also no way new teams get out of the franchise fee from Kurtz. He is gonna get his money first!

Baton Rouge Blaze Baton Rouge, LA Riverside Centroplex 2000 2001 2001
Lafayette Roughnecks Lafayette, LA CajunDome 2000 2001 2001
Lincoln Lightning Lincoln, NE Pershing Municipal Auditorium 1998 2001 2001
Augusta Stallions Augusta, GA James Brown Arena 1999 2000 2002
Carolina Rhinos Greenville, SC Bi-Lo Center 1999 2000 2002
Jacksonville Tomcats Jacksonville, FL Jacksonville Memorial Coliseum 1999 2000 2002
Pensacola Barracudas Pensacola, FL Pensacola Civic Center 1999 2000 2002
Roanoke Steam Roanoke, VA Roanoke Civic Center 1999 2000 2002
Tallahassee Thunder Tallahassee, FL Tallahassee-Leon County Civic Center 1999 2000 2002
Fresno Frenzy Fresno, CA Selland Arena 2001 2002 2002
Mobile Wizards Mobile, AL Mobile Civic Center 2001 2002 2002
New Haven Ninjas New Haven, CT New Haven Coliseum 2001 2002 2002
Charleston Swamp Foxes North Charleston, SC North Charleston Coliseum 1999 2000 2003
Greensboro Prowlers Greensboro, NC Greensboro Coliseum 1999 2000 2003
Norfolk Nighthawks Norfolk, VA Norfolk Scope 1999 2000 2003
Richmond Speed Richmond, VA Richmond Coliseum 1999 2000 2003
Rochester Brigade Rochester, NY Blue Cross Arena 2000 2001 2003
Cincinnati Swarm Cincinnati, OH U.S. Bank Arena 2002 2003 2003
Columbus Wardogs Columbus, GA Columbus Civic Center 2000 2001 2004
Wichita Stealth Wichita, KS Kansas Coliseum 1999 2001 2004
Hawaiian Islanders Honolulu, HI Neal S. Blaisdell Center 2001 2002 2004
Laredo Law Laredo, TX Laredo Entertainment Center 2003 2004 2004
San Diego Riptide San Diego, CA San Diego Sports Arena 2001 2002 2005
Macon Knights Macon, GA Macon Coliseum 2000 2001 2006
Memphis Xplorers Southaven, MS DeSoto Civic Center 2000 2001 2006
Alabama Steeldogs Birmingham, AL Birmingham Jefferson Convention Center 1999 2000 2007
Bakersfield Blitz Bakersfield, CA Rabobank Arena 2003 2004 2007
Everett Hawks Everett, WA Everett Events Center 2001 2006 2007
Cincinnati Jungle Kats Cincinnati, OH U.S. Bank Arena 2006 2007 2007
Fort Wayne Fusion Fort Wayne, IN Allen County War Memorial Coliseum 2006 2007 2007
Laredo Lobos Laredo, TX Laredo Entertainment Center 2005 2007 2007
Louisville Fire Louisville, KY Freedom Hall 2000 2001 2008
Lubbock Renegades Lubbock, TX City Bank Coliseum 2006 2007 2008
Texas Copperheads Cypress, TX Richard E. Berry Educational Support Center 2005 2007 2008
Austin Wranglers Austin, TX Frank Erwin Center 2003 2008 2008
Daytona Beach ThunderBirds Daytona Beach, FL Ocean Center 2005 2008 2008
Mahoning Valley Thunder Youngstown, OH Covelli Centre 2007 2007 2009
Arkansas Twisters North Little Rock, Arkansas Verizon Arena 1999 2000 2009
Central Valley Coyotes Fresno, California Selland Arena 2001 2002 2009
Kentucky Horsemen Lexington, Kentucky Rupp Arena 2002 2008 2009
Tri-Cities Fever Kennewick, Washington Toyota Center 2004 2007 2009

[aball]

How long is the failed indoor franchise list?

[super390]

I think both the AFL and IFL have been good at a certain thing. The AFL has found ways to get 10,000+ people to come to games in some major markets, which would have seemed pretty incredible back in the '80s. The IFL has formed a promising coalition of regional small-market rivalries. The AFL's problem is controlling the costs while it builds up that support in major markets, something slow to develop and quick to dissipate. The IFL's problem is turning its coalition into a really national league and extracting advantages from that.

They may both fail, but since their models point at different sizes of market, and the AFL is clearing out of its smallest markets, why should they compete against each other? It doesn't sound as though a new AF2 can offer anything better than the IFL, and it doesn't sound as though the IFL will ever have teams routinely average more than 6000 fans per game. So it's all up to owners. If they think they are too small for the AFL, they should join the IFL and use their votes to reduce the travel costs. Logically if there aren't enough markets in the IFL to solve the travel-cost problem, then there won't be in the AF2 either, while combining all these teams in one lineup is the single most powerful way to solve it.

Otherwise we devolve back into regional leagues and the IFL has failed, in which case the game needs some kind of authority to stabilize the regions. A new AF2 doesn't solve any problems in the sport, and neither does the SIFL splitting the Texas teams.

[IndoorExpert]

[quote=""super390""]I think both the AFL and IFL have been good at a certain thing. The AFL has found ways to get 10,000+ people to come to games in some major markets, which would have seemed pretty incredible back in the '80s. The IFL has formed a promising coalition of regional small-market rivalries. The AFL's problem is controlling the costs while it builds up that support in major markets, something slow to develop and quick to dissipate. The IFL's problem is turning its coalition into a really national league and extracting advantages from that.

They may both fail, but since their models point at different sizes of market, and the AFL is clearing out of its smallest markets, why should they compete against each other? It doesn't sound as though a new AF2 can offer anything better than the IFL, and it doesn't sound as though the IFL will ever have teams routinely average more than 6000 fans per game. So it's all up to owners. If they think they are too small for the AFL, they should join the IFL and use their votes to reduce the travel costs. Logically if there aren't enough markets in the IFL to solve the travel-cost problem, then there won't be in the AF2 either, while combining all these teams in one lineup is the single most powerful way to solve it.

Otherwise we devolve back into regional leagues and the IFL has failed, in which case the game needs some kind of authority to stabilize the regions. A new AF2 doesn't solve any problems in the sport, and neither does the SIFL splitting the Texas teams.[/quote]

Nice post. I like where you are going with your thoughts. I get way too tired of hearing the AFL and IFL fans compare this apple to oranges debate. One should stay major markets and the other should stay small markets. Its really that simple.

[Pounder]

It's cynical time!

All it takes is one somewhat bigger market accepted to the IFL, ostensibly to take advantage of regional rivalries. If that team catches fire, eyes light up in the boardroom.

Remember that the af2 model was really rather successful. The old AFL boardroom was likely to make more money from semi-instability than from the type of stability that is possible for them to reach. There were enough teams in af2 that drew well to make people want to gamble on it.

Ideally, you want them to work together. Could that be construed as collusion?

Realistically, because greed has yet to cease to be a human constant, both leagues are a threat to each other.