CFL/XFL Exploring Alignment

[Noeller]

I don't know if his math checks out or not, but I sure appreciate where he's coming from...

 

The CFL’s business model isn’t broken, its leadership has failed

John Hodge

 

"The CFL remains in crisis mode due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but I remain unconvinced that its business model is broken.

 

According to their financial reports, the Saskatchewan Roughriders produce approximately $40 million in annual gross revenue. The Winnipeg Blue Bombers generate $35 million, while the Edmonton Football Team checks in at $25 million.

 

It’s believed that the CFL’s gross revenue in a non-pandemic year is between $200 million and $240 million. As such, we can project that the league’s six privately-owned teams average between $17 million and $23 million in annual revenue.

 

Commissioner Randy Ambrosie caused a sense of panic in May 2020 when he told the House of Commons finance committee that the CFL’s nine teams lose $10 to $20 million collectively each year. That number sounds scary on the surface, but it’s hardly overwhelming in context.

 

Annual losses of $10 to $20 million mean the league only needs to increase revenue by five to ten per cent in order to start breaking even. If teams had an equalization fund for gate receipts and Grey Cup revenue — more on that in a moment — the losses would be easy to manage across nine franchises.

 

The CFL had an average attendance figure of 22,917 in 2019, which was third-best among North American professional sports leagues. That number is better than MLS (21,310), the NBA (17,844), and NHL (17,377).

 

Fans were buying tickets to games before COVID-19 and they will again when it’s safe to do so. The league should try to become less dependent on gate revenue — ticket sales account for approximately 35 percent of revenue in Saskatchewan, Winnipeg, and Edmonton — but selling tickets to live events is still a perfectly viable stream of revenue in the entertainment industry.

 

The CFL also does relatively well on television with its TSN contract worth approximately $50 million annually. Partnering with multiple networks would be smart from a marketing and exposure perspective, but the deal is respectable.

 

The Grey Cup also remains one of the most-viewed television broadcasts in Canada every year. It often finishes in the top five to ten, particularly in non-Olympic years.

 

The game was a blowout in 2019 but still finished as the year’s No. 9 television broadcast with 3.9 million viewers. Four games of the Toronto Raptors in the NBA Finals were ahead of it (4.3 million to 7.7 million) along with the Academy Awards (5.2 million), Super Bowl LIII (4.3 million), The Big Bang Theory series finale (4.3 million), and Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals (4.2 million).

 

Virtually everything that tops the annual list for television broadcast ratings in Canada is American. The Grey Cup is the exception. The Grey Cup is ours. It’s uniquely Canadian.

 

The CFL’s business model is not broken. It’s far from perfect, but it would be perfectly viable with better leadership that can explore new sources of revenue.

 

According to Frank Cosentino’s book A Passing Game: A History of the CFL, the league’s gross revenue in 1976 was $12.9 million. This would equate to $59 million today with inflation.

 

The league’s television contract with the CBC was worth $1.5 million and player spending was approximately $750,000 per team, which is $3.4 million in today’s dollars.

 

This means CFL players got 52 per cent of league revenue in 1976. Today, they receive approximately 25 per cent. For comparison, NFL players will receive 48 per cent of league revenue in 2021, while NHL and NBA players get 50 per cent.

 

Taking inflation into account, the CFL’s annual revenue has quadrupled since 1976 and the value of its television contract has increased by 700 per cent. Meanwhile, player costs have only increased by a little over 50 per cent.

 

The CFL doesn’t have a broken business model. If its business model was ever broken, it was broken in 1976.

 

There have always been ebbs and flows for the popularity of the CFL across its various markets. Struggles in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal are hardly a new phenomenon.

 

Average attendance in Montreal fell from 23,192 to 12,022 over course of the 1960s. It was the league’s largest market at the time and declining ticket sales were of grave concern to its stakeholders.

 

The Grey Cup was hosted in Montreal in 1969 to try to boost interest in the league. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau was a strong supporter of the festivities, even performing the game’s ceremonial kickoff.

 

The Montreal initiative worked with ticket sales doubling in 1970. The average ticket price was $3.70, which is the equivalent of $25.44 today.

 

In his Grey Cup report, legendary CFL commissioner Jake Gaudaur stressed that it was important “that as many federal government representatives as possible be familiar with what Canadian football really is.”

 

Has the CFL and its leaders made a conscious effort to consistently remind our political leaders how important, special, and unique the league is? I’m not convinced they have.

 

One of the ways in which the league remained healthy through its leaner years was an equalization fund. Wealthier teams would subsidize those who had struggled financially the previous year, helping ensure that all nine teams remained viable.

 

It’s hard to believe today, but two teams that received a lot of financial assistance over the years were Saskatchewan and Winnipeg. It’s tough to imagine Toronto, Montreal, and B.C. becoming CFL powerhouses in the future, but the same could have been said of the Roughriders and Blue Bombers in the not-too-distant past.

 

We also live in a world where new iterations of nostalgic properties are exploited for profit across the entertainment industry. Hawaii Five-0, Magnum P.I., and MacGyver are all among the highest-rated scripted shows on television, while films like Dolittle, Sonic the Hedgehog, and Bad Boys for Life dominate at the box office.

 

Nostalgic brands print money for Hollywood, but the CFL isn’t viable? That’s a joke.

 

I’m not an accountant or a corporate CEO. I don’t have access to the league’s exact financial figures, nor does anyone who’d be willing to disclose them on the record.

 

With that said, even I can see that the CFL generates plenty of annual revenue with lots of room for growth. It has solid attendance numbers, a strong television partner, and one of the country’s most popular television broadcasts of the year.

 

It’s disingenuous to say that the CFL doesn’t have a viable business model when revenue has increased so dramatically relative to its expenses over the decades. There’s money to be made. The league’s history proves that.

 

The CFL will never be a financial powerhouse like the NFL, but it doesn’t have to be. The CFL is an accessible product that provides high-quality entertainment and celebrates our country’s rich heritage.

 

I believe the CFL could become profitable again by 2022 or 2023 with proper leadership in place and that’s with or without the XFL."

[wbbfan]

Just now, Noeller said:

I don't know if his math checks out or not, but I sure appreciate where he's coming from...

 

The CFL’s business model isn’t broken, its leadership has failed

John Hodge

 

"The CFL remains in crisis mode due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but I remain unconvinced that its business model is broken.

 

According to their financial reports, the Saskatchewan Roughriders produce approximately $40 million in annual gross revenue. The Winnipeg Blue Bombers generate $35 million, while the Edmonton Football Team checks in at $25 million.

 

It’s believed that the CFL’s gross revenue in a non-pandemic year is between $200 million and $240 million. As such, we can project that the league’s six privately-owned teams average between $17 million and $23 million in annual revenue.

 

Commissioner Randy Ambrosie caused a sense of panic in May 2020 when he told the House of Commons finance committee that the CFL’s nine teams lose $10 to $20 million collectively each year. That number sounds scary on the surface, but it’s hardly overwhelming in context.

 

Annual losses of $10 to $20 million mean the league only needs to increase revenue by five to ten per cent in order to start breaking even. If teams had an equalization fund for gate receipts and Grey Cup revenue — more on that in a moment — the losses would be easy to manage across nine franchises.

 

The CFL had an average attendance figure of 22,917 in 2019, which was third-best among North American professional sports leagues. That number is better than MLS (21,310), the NBA (17,844), and NHL (17,377).

 

Fans were buying tickets to games before COVID-19 and they will again when it’s safe to do so. The league should try to become less dependent on gate revenue — ticket sales account for approximately 35 percent of revenue in Saskatchewan, Winnipeg, and Edmonton — but selling tickets to live events is still a perfectly viable stream of revenue in the entertainment industry.

 

The CFL also does relatively well on television with its TSN contract worth approximately $50 million annually. Partnering with multiple networks would be smart from a marketing and exposure perspective, but the deal is respectable.

 

The Grey Cup also remains one of the most-viewed television broadcasts in Canada every year. It often finishes in the top five to ten, particularly in non-Olympic years.

 

The game was a blowout in 2019 but still finished as the year’s No. 9 television broadcast with 3.9 million viewers. Four games of the Toronto Raptors in the NBA Finals were ahead of it (4.3 million to 7.7 million) along with the Academy Awards (5.2 million), Super Bowl LIII (4.3 million), The Big Bang Theory series finale (4.3 million), and Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals (4.2 million).

 

Virtually everything that tops the annual list for television broadcast ratings in Canada is American. The Grey Cup is the exception. The Grey Cup is ours. It’s uniquely Canadian.

 

The CFL’s business model is not broken. It’s far from perfect, but it would be perfectly viable with better leadership that can explore new sources of revenue.

 

According to Frank Cosentino’s book A Passing Game: A History of the CFL, the league’s gross revenue in 1976 was $12.9 million. This would equate to $59 million today with inflation.

 

The league’s television contract with the CBC was worth $1.5 million and player spending was approximately $750,000 per team, which is $3.4 million in today’s dollars.

 

This means CFL players got 52 per cent of league revenue in 1976. Today, they receive approximately 25 per cent. For comparison, NFL players will receive 48 per cent of league revenue in 2021, while NHL and NBA players get 50 per cent.

 

Taking inflation into account, the CFL’s annual revenue has quadrupled since 1976 and the value of its television contract has increased by 700 per cent. Meanwhile, player costs have only increased by a little over 50 per cent.

 

The CFL doesn’t have a broken business model. If its business model was ever broken, it was broken in 1976.

 

There have always been ebbs and flows for the popularity of the CFL across its various markets. Struggles in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal are hardly a new phenomenon.

 

Average attendance in Montreal fell from 23,192 to 12,022 over course of the 1960s. It was the league’s largest market at the time and declining ticket sales were of grave concern to its stakeholders.

 

The Grey Cup was hosted in Montreal in 1969 to try to boost interest in the league. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau was a strong supporter of the festivities, even performing the game’s ceremonial kickoff.

 

The Montreal initiative worked with ticket sales doubling in 1970. The average ticket price was $3.70, which is the equivalent of $25.44 today.

 

In his Grey Cup report, legendary CFL commissioner Jake Gaudaur stressed that it was important “that as many federal government representatives as possible be familiar with what Canadian football really is.”

 

Has the CFL and its leaders made a conscious effort to consistently remind our political leaders how important, special, and unique the league is? I’m not convinced they have.

 

One of the ways in which the league remained healthy through its leaner years was an equalization fund. Wealthier teams would subsidize those who had struggled financially the previous year, helping ensure that all nine teams remained viable.

 

It’s hard to believe today, but two teams that received a lot of financial assistance over the years were Saskatchewan and Winnipeg. It’s tough to imagine Toronto, Montreal, and B.C. becoming CFL powerhouses in the future, but the same could have been said of the Roughriders and Blue Bombers in the not-too-distant past.

 

We also live in a world where new iterations of nostalgic properties are exploited for profit across the entertainment industry. Hawaii Five-0, Magnum P.I., and MacGyver are all among the highest-rated scripted shows on television, while films like Dolittle, Sonic the Hedgehog, and Bad Boys for Life dominate at the box office.

 

Nostalgic brands print money for Hollywood, but the CFL isn’t viable? That’s a joke.

 

I’m not an accountant or a corporate CEO. I don’t have access to the league’s exact financial figures, nor does anyone who’d be willing to disclose them on the record.

 

With that said, even I can see that the CFL generates plenty of annual revenue with lots of room for growth. It has solid attendance numbers, a strong television partner, and one of the country’s most popular television broadcasts of the year.

 

It’s disingenuous to say that the CFL doesn’t have a viable business model when revenue has increased so dramatically relative to its expenses over the decades. There’s money to be made. The league’s history proves that.

 

The CFL will never be a financial powerhouse like the NFL, but it doesn’t have to be. The CFL is an accessible product that provides high-quality entertainment and celebrates our country’s rich heritage.

 

I believe the CFL could become profitable again by 2022 or 2023 with proper leadership in place and that’s with or without the XFL."

I think at worst the truth lies some where between hodge and henny penny. I dont think the CFL is on the verge of collapse out side of covid. It does need some improvements and growth especially amongst the youth of the nation. It cant carry a team or two each year financially. 

The biggest thing is getting new stadiums in alberta.  That might be a situation where the league and the fed might need to kick in. I dont think a new stadium in southern BC does any thing.  Maybe playing out side of the metro VC area is whats needed. From my time in bc, the interior is hard core lions country.  

[Noeller]

Edmonton's stadium is actually not that bad. Calgary's is beyond awful tho. By far the worst in the league... 

[wbbfan]

Just now, Noeller said:

Edmonton's stadium is actually not that bad. Calgary's is beyond awful tho. By far the worst in the league... 

Edmontons isnt bad, but even when it was new it wasnt a great football venue imo. It gave them a huge capacity but the stands are soo far from the field. Maybe they could get away with a thorough over haul. 

 To be honest the state of the league seems better than it was just over 10 years ago. Ottawa has a great stadium and following. Hamilton has a fantastic owner and stadium, the riders and us got new stadiums, MLSE finally owns the argos, montreal has finally turned it around and has private owners and the tv deal has grown considerably. 

For a league like the cfl to get that many new stadiums, and many really nice ones too, in a 10 year span is great. 

[Noeller]

I'll say this.... I used to be wildly opposed to profit sharing (**** the Argos and Als... Why should our support of the Bombers help them when they have zero fans??) but if it's profit sharing vs becoming the ECHL of football...? Give me profit sharing... Whatever it takes. 

[Bigblue204]

3 hours ago, wbbfan said:

I think thats the easiest solution if the least likely. 

They cant change the field size much, so maybe just bigger endzones if possible. 

The ratio? the US teams have to field and start a certain amount of Global players. Including our NI's, germans, players from the mexican league etc. 

They dont have to take all our rules, they can pick the most entertaining set of rules between the two and what they have the best access to. 

That solution won't work. It's no different from a Canadian ratio for American teams. The issue isn't not enough players (though I suppose that would be an issue too) to keep the ratio, it's that American labour laws won't allow it. The only solution I've seen that would likely work is in state/local college ratio for any American team. 

[Brandon]

5 hours ago, wbbfan said:

Legit question here, is madden still any thing close to what it was in the 2000-2010 ish era?

It varies every year but it still usually sells 5-7 million copies while back in that era it was closer to 10 million.    It's still a major franchise that generates a tonne of money.  The online competitive scene is very much present these days and definitely a thing. 

[SpeedFlex27]

3 hours ago, Noeller said:

Edmonton's stadium is actually not that bad. Calgary's is beyond awful tho. By far the worst in the league... 

Yeah, they just spent tens of millions on refurbishing Commonwealth a few years ago. It's a great place to watch a game. If anything it's too big. It should have stayed at it's original size of 42,000. McMahon is a dump. That's all I'm gonna say about that place. Unfortunately, no one wants to replace it.

[17to85]

McMahon is showing it's age very badly. Needs an upgrade in the worst way unfortunately calgary seems more focused in an arena for the fLames than ever talking about a new stadium.

[GCn20]

On 2021-03-20 at 5:31 PM, SpeedFlex27 said:

You make a good point but I think the quality of qbs now coming into the league isn't as good as it was even 10-15 years ago. We're getting a lot of D2 & D3 qbs coming up here now signing with teams. They don't have the skill set of earlier starting qbs so why not develop a Canadian kid on the roster? Look at O'Connor. He could develop into a very good player in Calgary with Dave Dickenson teaching him.

In 2015, I knew my son wouldn't get drafted & that the only chance he'd have would be as a free agent. The other qb I spoke of, well that's different. He was the best qb in U Sports for 2 years. There was an expectation he'd be taken in the later rounds from 5-7 in 2019. Never happened, though. How disappointing was that? 

Look, I was just upset with the entire process starting at the combine in Edmonton & going forward from there. That always bothered me. Then I heard Dave Naylor say these high draft picks don't care about the CFL a day or two ago. So, I was hasty when I said get rid of the ratio. I let my emotions get the best of me. 

I'm certainly not against Canadian QB development and think it something the league would do well to implement. However, under current roster restrictions and SMS I understand why they don't. IMO, NAT QBs should be exempt from the cap unless they are rostered and not count on roster limits. Then you might see CFL teams develop some NAT QBs for the 3-4 years most require to legitimately compete for meaningful reps. A QB would have to be pretty serious to stick around that long but at least there would be an avenue to pro ball for the Canadian QBs.

On 2021-03-21 at 12:43 AM, Brandon said:

 

The Goldeyes and Moose 1.0 both played with the same rule sets of the big leagues and had little to no success with younger fans.   Goldeyes is full of seniors out for a nice night out and the Moose had lots of younger families also out for a cheap night out.  You never saw 15 - 40 year old people wearing jerseys or merch or talk about them.  I saw way more people my age associating with major league teams (Leafs, Blue Jays, Habs,  NYY etc...).

It would be completely ignorant to think that the reason younger demographics gravitate towards the NFL over the CFL is because of the difference in rule set.  It has a wee bit more to do with massive mainstream popularity,  being the league with the best football players period,  being fashionable/trendy etc.... 

The only reason the CFL has survived is because of it's unique rules and field and players.  If you want a preview of how shitty the game would look then watch some AAFL or XFL games,  I did and it was sloppy as hell and very amateurish. The larger field,  3 downs,  motion, etc... helps big time on giving the Offence a better chance of making exciting plays. Certain guys who don't fit the 4 down game can excel big time in the CFL because they can gain an edge. 

If they make the changes then the CFL will need to do some drastic changes such as slashing tickets to $10 - 15 dollars each and really make an emphasis on it being a night out of fun with the football game itself being a secondary priority.  Unlike a few other people on here...  I don't like the "We might as well settle with what we can get".   I'd rather have what I love then settle and be miserable with something I don't love.

I agree. Our rules allow athleticism to shine even in the unpolished players.

[TBURGESS]

Stadiums are way down the list in terms of CFL problems. Teams don't build stadium's anyway and governments aren't going to build them, especially in Alberta right now. No one is building a new stadium unless/until the CFL gets back on its feet.

Profit sharing? Take money away from the well run teams, make them less profitable and give it to the badly run teams to reduce/eliminate their losses. That's the opposite of being competitive with each other. Competition is what's needed, not profit sharing.

The CFL needs more fans in the stands and no, that doesn't mean cheaper tickets, especially for teams that are just barely hanging on as it is. The CFL is focusing on the wrong things. International players don't put fans in the stands. Tons of player turnover doesn't put fans in the stands. Changing the rules yearly doesn't put fans in the stands. Talking with the XFL doesn't put fans in the stands.

A better product would help putting fans in the stands. Better players can be done by reducing the ratio which would reduce costs too. (Would you rather reduce the costs and keep the Canadian game or merge with the XFL and lose it?)  Grass roots support needs to happen and to start right away, but it will take a long time and I don't know if we have a long time. Injection of capital? That's what the XFL, the ask for Government money and the ill fated US expansion from years ago are about.

Make the at game experience better? How? Mardi Gras night? Cheaper beer? (Selling more beer at a lessor price is like selling more tickets at a lessor price to try to come out ahead) Better half time entertainment? (Not much of a selling point) More hot chocolate during cold games? 

The big question is the CFL losing fans in the first place?

Partly because the CFL isn't the best players in the world playing against each other. That's the NFL. The CFL isn't even the second best players in the world playing against each other because of the ratio and the number of NFL players being paid not to play. Nothing we can do about that.

Partly because the CFL ignored young fans for 30 or more years. Can't do anything about that either, but they can increase the grass roots engagement going forward.

Partly it's that there are too few teams playing each other to many times each year. The average fan doesn't want to see the same two teams play each other 3 or sometimes 4 times in the same year, plus playoffs. Increasing the number of teams is the right answer, but it's unlikely to impossible in the current climate. That leaves reducing the number of games each season from 18 to 16.

Partly it's because the CFL play 18 games to eliminate 3 teams. Change the playoff structure so the top team gets a bye, then 2 plays 5 and 3 plays 4 to eliminate an additional team. Quite frankly, if your team can't win half their regular season games, they shouldn't be in the playoffs anyway.

Partly it's because the CFL relies on rich folks who don't mind losing money most years to run a local football team. Those folks are few and far between and a lot of them don't last for very long. For every caretaker Bob, there are a bunch of Bernie Glieberman's. Unless the find a way for CFL teams to consistently make money, this isn't going to change.

There's no one right answer. It's a bunch of things that have been festering for years and that have been brought to a head by the pandemic.

[Bigblue204]

Add player/team Long term relationships. Hard to build a loyal fan base when your favorite player (henoc/Jefferson/walker/etc) switch teams often. These 1 or even 2 year contracts just aren't making it possible for fans to connect with the players and grow up with them.

[wbbfan]

19 hours ago, Bigblue204 said:

That solution won't work. It's no different from a Canadian ratio for American teams. The issue isn't not enough players (though I suppose that would be an issue too) to keep the ratio, it's that American labour laws won't allow it. The only solution I've seen that would likely work is in state/local college ratio for any American team. 

Thats been worked around in both minor league and un affiliated ball, and in some union industry. 

It could also be worked around by instead of having a hard number of world players, they would have more salary cap room for each world player on the roster and even more for starters. If you can start all americans but have half the cap space of a team with the req number of globals for instance, every team will scrounge for those players. 

17 hours ago, Brandon said:

It varies every year but it still usually sells 5-7 million copies while back in that era it was closer to 10 million.    It's still a major franchise that generates a tonne of money.  The online competitive scene is very much present these days and definitely a thing. 

Pretty impressive to be still going that strong. I always saw a considerable disconnect between people who played madden/live etc and people who supported and went to games. As much as Id enjoy a CFL game, especially at any where near a madden level of quality I dont think that impacts the league as much.  I dont think it would bring on a ton of cash or bring in a ton of people. 

I believe i also heard recently that ncaa football was making a return. 

[SpeedFlex27]

5 hours ago, Bigblue204 said:

Add player/team Long term relationships. Hard to build a loyal fan base when your favorite player (henoc/Jefferson/walker/etc) switch teams often. These 1 or even 2 year contracts just aren't making it possible for fans to connect with the players and grow up with them.

The CFL & CFLPA don't care & the 1 year deals & UFA never changes. The CFL & the Players are deaf. Just care about themselves. I've said time & time again neither respect the fans. And the fans have spoken. They stay away. I've never seen a league so stupid that it just keeps doing the same things that don't work. They know fans hate all the player movement but Duh????? It's as plain as the nose on their faces & it is just ignored. Think the 1 year deals & UFA will be addressed in the next CBA? There'll be so much whining & bitching from the players so don't count on it. 

[wbbfan]

2 weeks into the nothing burger of merger and I feel like things will start to settle back down now. 

 

 Has XFL 3.0 folded yet? And now my watch begins. 

[TBURGESS]

https://3downnation.com/2021/03/25/cfl-xfl-merger-media-rights-could-be-worth-100-million-usd-annually-report/

Quote

Daniel Cohen, a senior vice-president of global media rights consulting for New York-based media consulting firm Octagon, dropped that number!

If it's true, $100 Mil a year is a huge number for the CFL.

[wbbfan]

2 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

https://3downnation.com/2021/03/25/cfl-xfl-merger-media-rights-could-be-worth-100-million-usd-annually-report/

If it's true, $100 Mil a year is a huge number for the CFL.

I have trouble buying that when the CFL has little US tv draw and the XFLs previous deal was worth 0 dollars. At this point I need to see some proof of concept from the XFL before believing much of any thing. 

[Noeller]

37 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

I have trouble buying that when the CFL has little US tv draw and the XFLs previous deal was worth 0 dollars. At this point I need to see some proof of concept from the XFL before believing much of any thing. 

My thought as well... I don't know how this guy arrives at this number. 

[wbbfan]

8 minutes ago, Noeller said:

My thought as well... I don't know how this guy arrives at this number. 

MLS pulls in less than his estimate, with 27 teams while being the top soccer league in north america and the most popular kids sport in north america. 

I dont see any chance of the CFL game beating mls in terms of us TV draw. 

[Jpan85]

3 hours ago, Noeller said:

My thought as well... I don't know how this guy arrives at this number. 

Quote

Essentially they (XFL) purchase airtime from ESPN or FOX and then sell advertisements against their purchased air time and whatever profit the league makes they keep.

This is how

[Brandon]

1 hour ago, Jpan85 said:

This is how

Sounds very risky to me

[wbbfan]

2 hours ago, Jpan85 said:

This is how

All the risk, and requires a very high amount of up front cash. 

[MOBomberFan]

What are you guys saying the league should do about 1 years contracts? Mandatory 2 minimum length contracts? Banning 1 year contracts? What about 1 year extensions? Risky....

We won't be able to attract the players that are willing to come 'test the waters' on 1 year contracts or try to show off their talents for an NFL shot. Pretending the league has all this leverage is silly. We need the players, and the players want the option to sign 1 year deals. You know what happens when the CFL starts to dictate minimum length contracts and maximum earning potential? Players won't even bother. TJ Jones, anyone?

[Noeller]

12 hours ago, Jpan85 said:

This is how

right but this makes the assumption that they can sell advertising for this product (XFL/CFL)  in the States and it also assumes a certain price per ad. Those are MASSIVE guesses on his part....

[wbbfan]

7 hours ago, MOBomberFan said:

What are you guys saying the league should do about 1 years contracts? Mandatory 2 minimum length contracts? Banning 1 year contracts? What about 1 year extensions? Risky....

We won't be able to attract the players that are willing to come 'test the waters' on 1 year contracts or try to show off their talents for an NFL shot. Pretending the league has all this leverage is silly. We need the players, and the players want the option to sign 1 year deals. You know what happens when the CFL starts to dictate minimum length contracts and maximum earning potential? Players won't even bother. TJ Jones, anyone?

Cap signing bonuses and increase the amount for each added year signed. 

But really I dont think any thing happens any time soon to 1 year deals, and i dont think the PA would or should agree to any changes soon if they give up the 20%.