How Would Moving the CFL Season Earlier Affect the Argos?

[paulwoods13]

It's probable that the next US TV deal will be worth more than the current Canadian TV deal.

Wow, $40M Cdn per year from US TV? I'll take that bet.

[rdavies]

I have yet to see evidence that either will materialize. I really, really doubt that NFL Network or ESPN are just dying to have more Cdn football in the summer to the tune of millions of dollars. And I'll repeat what I've written before -- IMO attendance would be adversely affected in Toronto and other eastern markets, where cottages and weekend getaways are a big part of summer culture. I think any gain from earlier playoff games on the Prairies would be offset by losses out here.

While I do think NFLN is desperate for live content, and I would love to see it, I don't think the big bucks will materialize. I can't see ESPN ponying up big money to suddenly get something they were previously basically given and already know what it can offer.

But Ambrosie has been down there and meeting with both so I would wonder why he is pushing this agenda or just pushing to move the schedule up a few weeks just to see what happens. Even if he gets a decent offer from NFLN does that offset the lesser exposure than they would get on ESPN. Or is having most games on ESPN3 getting exposure? Then again ESPN3 is widely available via the internet so the potential of larger audiences is there but that could be like the error (that they never recovered from) that the NHL made choosing SportsChannel America over ESPN.

Commercial ad rates will be less the farther they get from the Christmas season, there will be more competition from other sports, so there are some cons to this whole idea.

[AngeloV]

It's probable that the next US TV deal will be worth more than the current Canadian TV deal.

I have serious doubts about that. I think the money is not even at the 10M amount I used as an example. My guess is Ambrosie is taking a gamble that NFLN will be happy with the viewership and perhaps offer bigger bucks down the road. A gamble which IMO is not worth the risk.

And for the record, I get why you are defending this so hard. I know that you were the most vocal about not liking the move to BMO because you had no desire to sit outdoors in November to watch games. So you're looking at it from a personal point of view. I will be at the games no matter when they are played. I just think it's best to limit the competition around the most important times of the season.

[Argofan_1000]

Wow, $40M Cdn per year from US TV? I'll take that bet.

NFL networks have 70+ million subscribers @ $200 US per season each. $40M Canadian is approx 5 cents per subscriber per month. They can afford it and the CFL has earned it. Also NFL needs to keep CFL strong as the CFL works well with the NFL. Any other US league (XFL) it will be difficult to get a foot hold in the US if the CFL pays players more than they do. This is insurance for the NFL in the US.

[paulwoods13]

NFL networks have 70+ million subscribers @ $200 US per season each. $40M Canadian is approx 5 cents per subscriber per month. They can afford it and the CFL has earned it. Also NFL needs to keep CFL strong as the CFL works well with the NFL. Any other US league (XFL) it will be difficult to get a foot hold in the US if the CFL pays players more than they do. This is insurance for the NFL in the US.

As I said, I'll take the bet. What the CFL "has earned" is whatever someone is willing to pay them. I simply can't believe NFLN will pay $40M Cdn/season for CFL rights. Would love to lose the bet, but I don't think I will. As for what will keep the XFL at bay, I suggest it has far more to do with the Big 4 networks all being under contract to the NFL than it does with the CFL paying its players more.

[AngeloV]

NFL networks have 70+ million subscribers @ $200 US per season each. $40M Canadian is approx 5 cents per subscriber per month. They can afford it and the CFL has earned it. Also NFL needs to keep CFL strong as the CFL works well with the NFL. Any other US league (XFL) it will be difficult to get a foot hold in the US if the CFL pays players more than they do. This is insurance for the NFL in the US.

I think you are confusing the NFL network price for the NFL ticket price. They are not related. NFL network is actually a free part of digital cable subscriptions in the US, and really has not been a big money maker for the league, which is why they stopped producing Thursday night games themselves and contracted CBS and NBC to start doing it.

And regarding any other league, do you really think the NFL worries about that? Vince McMahon has put aside 100M to possibly start up the XFL again. Players in that league will not be making anywhere near the minimum NFL salary, and since he will own the league entirely as he did the first time, there will be no real allegiance among fans. It would fail again, just as everything he has ever done outside of wrestling has.

[Neely2005]

Wow, $40M Cdn per year from US TV? I'll take that bet.

Right now TSN is paying $35+ Million a year just for the Ottawa Senators LOCAL TV rights. The CFL TV rights are National and for the entire league, not just one team.

http://ottawasun.com/2014/01/29/live...9-0c9352b14533

TSN is massively under paying for the Canadian CFL Canadian TV rights.

The US has ten times our population and the CFL is putting up good numbers with little or no promotion. Do you really think it's a coincidence that all this talk of moving the season up is gaining traction at the same time that the US CFL TV deal is about to expire?

[paulwoods13]

Right now TSN is paying $35+ Million a year just for the Ottawa Senators LOCAL TV rights. The CFL TV rights are National and for the entire league, not just one team.

http://ottawasun.com/2014/01/29/live...9-0c9352b14533

TSN is massively under paying for the Canadian CFL Canadian TV rights.

The US has ten times our population and the CFL is putting up good numbers with little or no promotion. Do you really think it's a coincidence that all this talk of moving the season up is gaining traction at the same time that the US CFL TV deal is about to expire?

I have no doubt the league thinks it might get a big score from US TV. And I have little to no doubt it will not come even close to getting $40M/year for spring and summer coverage of a league that most Americans do not follow or care about.

The league is smart to see if it can increase revenues -- in fact, I argued many times that increasing revenue and growing the business was the primary factor they should look for in a new commissioner -- but that doesn't mean a windfall is about to happen.

What TSN pays for local hockey rights is completely irrelevant in this discussion, as is what TSN pays the CFL. Whether or not Bell is getting a bargain in its CFL deal is a matter of conjecture, but I can guarantee NFL Network does not base its programming purchase decisions on any economics other than how any deal would affect its own bottom line.

[rdavies]

What TSN pays for local hockey rights is completely irrelevant in this discussion, as is what TSN pays the CFL.

This part I don't agree with, and whether these two things can be conflated or not.

It says to me the CFL is being underpaid for what it is delivering but that doesn't mean TSN has to give the CFL more than they do the Sens. It's TSN's choice and the unfortunate part is the CFL doesn't have much choice. Maybe their best option is to try and parcel out games to different carriers, hopefully one of which is an OTA network. As a member of the growing cord cutter club I'd like to see the CFL back on CTV and CBC.

[paulwoods13]

This part I don't agree with, and whether these two things can be conflated or not.

It says to me the CFL is being underpaid for what it is delivering but that doesn't mean TSN has to give the CFL more than they do the Sens. It's TSN's choice and the unfortunate part is the CFL doesn't have much choice. Maybe their best option is to try and parcel out games to different carriers, hopefully one of which is an OTA network. As a member of the growing cord cutter club I'd like to see the CFL back on CTV and CBC.

What TSN pays the CFL and the Senators absolutely has relevance to the CFL and to the Senators, but it has zero relevance to the NFL Network. It will pay whatever it pays, if anything, based on what CFL rights are worth to the NFL Network, not based on what TSN is paying for hockey or football.

The CFL signed the current rights agreement with Bell in good faith. Both parties agreed on the price. If the CFL got taken to the cleaners (which a lot of people who have no access to Bell's profit-and-loss statements for CFL broadcasts seem to take for granted), the CFL has no one to blame but itself.

If the CFL can negotiate a bigger score next time the contract is up, either with Bell or with someone else, or a combination, great! But like all negotiations, it will end with a number all parties can agree to. Just as the last one did. And just as the CFL's negotiations with the NFL Network, if they actually happen, will.

[KCargosfan]

What TSN pays the CFL and the Senators absolutely has relevance to the CFL and to the Senators, but it has zero relevance to the NFL Network. It will pay whatever it pays, if anything, based on what CFL rights are worth to the NFL Network, not based on what TSN is paying for hockey or football.

The CFL signed the current rights agreement with Bell in good faith. Both parties agreed on the price. If the CFL got taken to the cleaners (which a lot of people who have no access to Bell's profit-and-loss statements for CFL broadcasts seem to take for granted), the CFL has no one to blame but itself.

If the CFL can negotiate a bigger score next time the contract is up, either with Bell or with someone else, or a combination, great! But like all negotiations, it will end with a number all parties can agree to. Just as the last one did. And just as the CFL's negotiations with the NFL Network, if they actually happen, will.

Agreed wholeheartedly. I honestly would be surprised if the NFL Network shelled out more than $5 million.

[Rich]

Agreed wholeheartedly. I honestly would be surprised if the NFL Network shelled out more than $5 million.

I wouldn't. NFL Network is competing against ESPN for the rights. The audience for CFL games on ESPN was very promising this year, and they added extra games mid-season. June and July is a dead zone for US sports -- that's one-sixth the entire year -- and the networks are desperate for good content. There are so many football fans down there, it's not too far-fetched to imagine they could grow their viewership for CFL games over a few seasons, given the right presentation and good scheduling.

[AngeloV]

I wouldn't. NFL Network is competing against ESPN for the rights. The audience for CFL games on ESPN was very promising this year, and they added extra games mid-season. June and July is a dead zone for US sports -- that's one-sixth the entire year -- and the networks are desperate for good content. There are so many football fans down there, it's not too far-fetched to imagine they could grow their viewership for CFL games over a few seasons, given the right presentation and good scheduling.

Personally, I think many on here have overvalued what CFL rights are worth in the US. For starters, ESPN pays next to nothing for the current rights, and I highly doubt that a bidding war will emerge for a league that has no teams in the United States.

[doubleblue]

Personally, I think many on here have overvalued what CFL rights are worth in the US. For starters, ESPN pays next to nothing for the current rights, and I highly doubt that a bidding war will emerge for a league that has no teams in the United States.

I was wondering just how much the CFL is getting from ESPN now. When it all started we heard it was next to nothing just for the exposure. But as the viewership has grown maybe there is some money coming to the CFL now. Reason I say that is there seems to be more money available now for more Coaches and more high profile US Head Coaches. Trestman is rumoured to be making in the 600-700,000 range. June Jones and Mike Sherman wouldn't be coming to the CFL for 250,000 IMO.
Then all of a sudden people with big money are interested in putting a team in Halifax. I think something is in the wind. The old saying money always talks.
Good for the CFLP as that should translate into a much higher salary cap in 2019.

[paulwoods13]

The old saying money always talks.
Good for the CFLP as that should translate into a much higher salary cap in 2019.

Again, I'll believe it when I see it. The PA got taken to the cleaners in the last round of barg. The CFL's lead negotiator is one of the smartest mgmt.-side labour lawyers in Cda, and the PA has the historical problem of being divided, with INTs and NATS often on different sides of the issues, and with different interests. The league and its owners are in the business of making money so they will not give a lot away without a fight. No doubt a raise will be forthcoming, and maybe we'll even have a labour disruption to force a deal, but I'll be surprised if the cap goes up a lot.

[R.J]

Whether or not the CFL can get a decent tv deal from down South, I hope the PA can at least get significantly more money for the next CBA. $50,000 cap increases are pathetic IMO.

[Neely2005]

Personally, I think many on here have overvalued what CFL rights are worth in the US. For starters, ESPN pays next to nothing for the current rights, and I highly doubt that a bidding war will emerge for a league that has no teams in the United States.

The CFL usually gets better ratings on ESPN than MLS does. Right now ESPN is paying 37.5 Million USD a year for those MLS rights.

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/t...html?mobi=true

[paulwoods13]

Ergo CFL should get more than $37.5M for US TV rights . . . Except MLS has teams in the U.S., many of its franchises have book values way higher than CFL franchises, and soccer is both a worldwide sport and perceived even in North America as a growing venture. I will be surprised if the CFL gets even $10M/season from any new US TV deal.

[R.J]

The CFL usually gets better ratings on ESPN than MLS does. Right now ESPN is paying 37.5 Million USD a year for those MLS rights.

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/t...html?mobi=true

The MLS' tv deals (ESPN, Fox, Univision) aren't just for the MLS though, it includes tv rights for the Men's and Women's National teams, so a chunk of that money goes to the USSF. The USSF needs the MLS to be successful, so they combined the rights.

Ergo CFL should get more than $37.5M for US TV rights . . . Except MLS has teams in the U.S., many of its franchises have book values way higher than CFL franchises, and soccer is both a worldwide sport and perceived even in North America as a growing venture. I will be surprised if the CFL gets even $10M/season from any new US TV deal.

The MLS' regular season ratings are similar to the CFL's (Playoffs: the MLS pushes well ahead), but I think you're right, $10 million US would be surprising. Heck, I'd love to see a $20 million US deal, and for the next Canadian rights deal to be $100 million, but being hopeful and realistic are two different things sometimes.

[Neely2005]

The CFL usually gets better ratings on ESPN than MLS does. Right now ESPN is paying 37.5 Million USD a year for those MLS rights.

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/t...html?mobi=true

Forgot to mention that this MLS deal was signed in May 2014.