Otherwise, can't say I'm the least bit surprised to hear about the situation, and honestly I AM surprised it never happened sooner.
The IFL needs to keep this in mind. I get the feeling the CIFL won't have that problem any more. [/quote]
And what makes you think the the IFL doesn't have that in mind? The IFL isn't trying to over-expand by any means. The truth is, there are only about 3 to 4 true expansion teams for 2009. The rest are teams from other leagues who are interested in defecting. And the IFL is being very selective about who they let make that jump. If they weren't then you can bet that they would have already been making announcements. It's really kind of comical reading some of these assumptions being made by people who are on the outside and have no clue what they're talking about.
If you don't want opinions from the "outside", don't post here. I've found that in most cases, people who rail about "outside" opinions tend to be offended that they're accurate. But I could be wrong.
That said... I refer you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoor_Football_League. Now I know Wikipedia isn't terribly reliable, but if the page is accurate, and the IFL gets every "rumored" team and adds every expansion city, it will start 2009 with over 30 teams spread from the Carolinas to Alaska.
History has shown that this is not a stable approach. The CIFL has proven that rapid expansion just adds more teams, not better organizations.
It would have been better for the long-term future of the IFL to play one season with just the teams from the two founding leagues, and then undertake expansion.
However, I understand that indoor football (as a whole) doesn't do long-term planning. So if the IFL wants to start 2009 with over 30 teams, that's fine. It's my considered opinion that they won't finish 2009 with over 30 teams.