IFL losing teams; AZ Coach Frustrated

The Indoor Football League (IFL) forum
4th&long
Site Admin
Posts: 1167
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 6:56 pm

IFL losing teams; AZ Coach Frustrated

Post by 4th&long » Fri Jul 14, 2017 12:47 pm

http://arizonasports.com/story/1174467/ ... stability/

>>The Rattlers jumped to the Indoor Football League, an outfit that began in 2009. Arizona wrapped up their first season in the IFL with a 50-41 win over the Sioux Falls Storm in the United Bowl last Saturday.

But much like the AFL, the IFL is facing challenges with membership. The Spokane Empire ceased operations Wednesday, while the Colorado Crush, Salt Lake Screaming Eagles and Cedar Rapids Titans have all also been mentioned as candidates for a shutdown. Meanwhile, the Wichita Falls Nighthawks, Green Bay Blizzard and Nebraska Danger all plan to relocate to Champions Indoor Football League for geographic and travel reasons.

Kevin Guy, the head coach, who just won his fourth championship with the Rattlers, is frustrated by the lack of stability.<<

4th&long

LordBy2014
Site Admin
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:54 pm
Location: Denver, CO

IFL Done?

Post by LordBy2014 » Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:23 pm

just from the outside looking in, the IFL in one season went from appearing to be the most stable of the Indoor/Arena Leagues to League most likely to disappear come 2018 . . .

Might be time for some of these leagues to merge and/or consolidate into one or two stable organizations going forward . . .

just spitballing . . .

suge night
Site Admin
Posts: 649
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:09 pm
Location: USA

Post by suge night » Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:57 am

What has been the case for some time now, its not simply about having revenue but what if any profitability is obtainable.

A merger is going to have to happen, and also conversation about working relationships that are long over due will need to take place.

This is a market shake up,that will realign the sport unlike years past.
The sport must finally face the material facts of its marketplace and make some decision on what the market cap is, though the market cap has already clearly been established.
When teams play in large arena's and can only or barely seat 1000 for an audience that market is established,the question then becomes based upon the league does that team fit in that league, and what if anything does that league really offer that team, because the breakdown of the team also drags that league down.

Renandpat
Site Admin
Posts: 340
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:56 pm

Post by Renandpat » Sat Jul 15, 2017 4:10 am

The Market wins as it doesn't really want or need this $hit.

4th&long
Site Admin
Posts: 1167
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 6:56 pm

Post by 4th&long » Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:20 pm

[quote=""suge night""]What has been the case for some time now, its not simply about having revenue but what if any profitability is obtainable.

A merger is going to have to happen, and also conversation about working relationships that are long over due will need to take place.

This is a market shake up,that will realign the sport unlike years past.
The sport must finally face the material facts of its marketplace and make some decision on what the market cap is, though the market cap has already clearly been established.
When teams play in large arena's and can only or barely seat 1000 for an audience that market is established,the question then becomes based upon the league does that team fit in that league, and what if anything does that league really offer that team, because the breakdown of the team also drags that league down.[/quote]

I agree, AFL eating costs for failed franchises has dragged them down. But their new model may not attract new owners quickly. At least it appears they stopped the bleeding. And losing solid well attended cities like AZ, JAX who went to other leagues and SJ Orlando who just gave up due to covering failed franchises- that's the trouble of the single entity model - debts are everyones.

4th

User avatar
Pounder
Site Admin
Posts: 2733
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:01 pm
Location: Portland freaking Oregon!

Post by Pounder » Sun Jul 16, 2017 6:33 am

Being a fan of a team in a single entity league, I'm going to disagree with this statement- at least as a standalone.

When you have a source of shareable income, that can get spread around. The irony here... MLS is DESIGNED to lose money. However, SUM (the marketing arm essentially owned by MLS owners) makes the real money, partly because it manages all soccer TV rights in the United States, especially the national team. So we're talking about an innovative revenue stream accessible to a single entity structure.

The AFL lacks similar income sources. That's the real problem.
Mean Spirited Blogger #107

suge night
Site Admin
Posts: 649
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:09 pm
Location: USA

Post by suge night » Sun Jul 16, 2017 3:18 pm

Good point Pounder, in looking over the research conducted by outside sources on the AFL league and certain teams analysis of the marketplace, they have continued to fail at understanding how to read the information then follow what it suggest.

Revenue,Growth, and Scale is the heart beat to any business but in the startup plan must be understood, there is a way to make this viable as you stated but everything we see today from the arena and indoor bunch is based upon a complete misunderstanding of the unique business that can be held within sports, and by simply staying with the traditional strategies they will continue to fail.

Already established is a limited audience base, now can that grow even though it hasn't, I would suggest yes there is a continuing misunderstanding of how the owners from the major sports leagues have made it, its not because they are so much smarter than everyone else, no billionaire wants to under write his team simply because he knows its unsustainable without some in flux of outside cash exchanges.

In closing today to enter a league (indoor) they ask for the $5,000 application fee, but the question is what are you the buyer really buying, the league is the worst example of why you should invest in a losing entity the league as a franchisor is worthless and has nothing outside the buyer's
ego to play on as a real selling point, I'll stop here but great point Pounder.

suge night
Site Admin
Posts: 649
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:09 pm
Location: USA

Post by suge night » Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:29 pm

Recent, developments within the IFL still places the league in doom mode.

There will be some type of merger coming after 2018, with Arizona now clearly in charge of the direction. The move to gain old AFL markets as a way to help close ranks will make way with the NAL who is also stumbling alone as well, both are announcing possibly area's of growth, but the real determination of that will be fan base.

The NAL official list of teams will be known sometime in August according to them based upon the arena, suspect is that Firebird team which showed little this season, the IFL has 5 teams with everything else being possibly.

Long gone are the day's of the team setting up shop and choosing fan support, today the fans determine whether or not a team can be sustained in a market, so understanding that component is a must.

The league can announce all it want,question will be is any one listening.
Last edited by suge night on Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

nksports
Site Admin
Posts: 3669
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Newton, KS (the land of Oz)

Post by nksports » Tue Aug 01, 2017 4:25 am

AFL players have taken numerous pay cuts in the last few years and the teams are still struggling. IFL teams pay about $250 a game and they are struggling. There are CIF teams that struggled to meet their $75 a game payroll.
I think the indoor football game is going the way of the indoor soccer game. It was a fad whose time has come and gone. (I remember when some MISL teams would draw 9,000 to 10,000 a game and would still lose money).
There are some medium sized (50,000 to 100,000) towns that are doing better than others. When Sioux Falls is the last market standing, they win, but who would they play next?
(And if these teams can't make it, what makes people think the next minor-league outdoor league will make oodles of money? Oh, I forgot, it's the tape. The magic tape that the NFL craves.)

suge night
Site Admin
Posts: 649
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:09 pm
Location: USA

Post by suge night » Tue Aug 01, 2017 2:54 pm

Great observation NK Sports ,the CIF TX Revolution has had this payroll problem each season,it is well known within player circles that while the team may win on the field. Cash your check before Monday you're right the best opportunity the sport had to develop and build a market for itself has past, it doesn't matter what alphabet letters you place in front of the league.

Its all the same today the game is still being sold to potential owners as a golden era sport simply look at the selling strategy of the league's some are attempting to go back to old markets or markets that recently closed shop.

Simply because the sport had once been there,today those markets offer even less of a potential fan base than when they were in the golden era lol

Question today is there really any market for the sport, I think on a small scale it has a viable market,but the problem is the current force is to muscle the big arena game while being shown that model is dead, CenTX Wichita even TX Rev are good examples of empty arena teams, and of the teams who can draw 5,000 the league's aren't up to the test, fans who watched Arizona and Jacksonville this season noted that the difference in talent level are noticeable.

In closing I've been in conversation with team brass who felt they have a roster of prospect professional talent, but the guys have been on that team for more than four years and not moved beyond that team so do they have professional talent or career minor league players who are good just not good enough for next level.

Oh and the film game is simply an outdated statement, we all know this.
Last edited by suge night on Tue Aug 01, 2017 3:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Post Reply

Return to “IFL”