Over a Cup of Coffee

by Jerry Hewitt
October 7, 2010 - Southern Indoor Football League (SIFL)

Are championships won or bought? It's long been known that some teams step outside of the rules to get a top player or two.

About ten years ago I had the girlfriend of a top player in the NIFL tell me the extra perks her was getting to play for a certain team. They included money over and above that allowed by the league. I had an owner tell me before starting his team his franchise would never break any rules while owning a team, yet the team went on to pay certain key players more than was allowed.

I recently saw an article relating to now ex-Billings quarterback Chris Dixon. In the article his agent was quoted as saying Chris was looking to go where he could negotiate the best deal. Since each league has written rules as to what players are paid and what other perks are allowed in the way of housing, meals, etc., I have to wonder what there is to negotiate? I'm not accusing Dixon of any wrong doing and certainly not saying he is wrong to get the best deal he can.

This isn't a player problem. I can't fault players for wanting to get as much for their services as they can. This is an owner problem. It's owners who break the rules when they pay players more than allowed or find ways outside of the regulations to put a better team on the field. Is this fair or just wrong?

It's fair from the stand point that participating in this practice is open to all teams since its an area league offices generally do not have the resources to monitor. It is further complicated by the fact that since the teams make most decisions, little is done to stop this practice. It stands to reason that nothing or little is done when it's likely those who have the power to end additional payments may be among those guilty of the practice.

Since this option to build a team is open to all, it is fair, but fair doesn't make it right. I have no good ideas on how to put an end to these additional perks. League officials can only monitor so much and don't have the resources to follow up on every rumor. My question isn't so much how to stop it, but if we should just accept it as the normal way to do business and make it part of the rules.

I have long advocated a different type of pay structure, something similar to what the new AFL uses. I'm not going to get into whether the $200 per game or so most leagues allow is too little or not, but that there ought to be a sliding scale of sorts. I don't believe that there are more than a couple players on teams that are paid outside of the normal allowance, so my idea makes sense.

I say that leagues should adopt what I call a franchise player rule. I propose that leagues allow their teams to designate up to two players as "franchise players" and be allowed to pay these two say, $1,000.00 per game. I also propose that these "franchise players" have to be on the team that designates them for at least one season before they qualify. The one season on the team would prevent other teams from luring them away with the "franchise player" rule.

I realize some may say that not all teams could afford this pay structure and true or not it would be up to each team to decide if they exercised the plan. Neither my idea nor any other would ever stop the cheating practice of not following rules, but would give those teams who do play by the rules the opportunity to better compete with teams who do not follow the rules.

There is also the way of going with a player salary cap much like the NFL. Set a top dollar amount for the 20 man active roster of say $6000.00 and allow teams to decide how much each player is paid. Again this would not stop some from cheating, but would allow more flexibility for those who want to stay within the rules, yet want the opportunity to compete for the top players at this level.

In sports and in general, there will always be those who break the rules to get an edge on their competition. This is nothing new nor is it something that will ever end. The idea of fair play, leveling the playing field, or expecting something like ethics to be a part of things is maybe better left to idealists and those who are just naive. I am neither.

Last this morning a couple of notes on press releases from yesterday. The IFL announced the Prescott-based Arizona Adrenaline who in their release said the team will be 95% local. Although I think fielding local talent is always a great idea I wonder how long before they scrap that idea when they figure out fans would rather watch a winner rather than yesteryear's local high school stars.

The AIFA Richmond Raiders appear to be signing the majority of the 13-1 IFL Richmond Revolution team which has me wondering what might be wrong with the Revolution club.

Southern Indoor Football League Stories from October 7, 2010

• Over a Cup of Coffee - OSC Original by Jerry Hewitt

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer(s), and do not necessarily reflect the thoughts or opinions of OurSports Central or its staff.