How Would Moving the CFL Season Earlier Affect the Argos?

[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.

[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

[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.

[Argofan_1000]

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.


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.

I think there are things in play right now and moving the season was also for a US TV deal. Just reading between the lines. There is an 8 month NFL gap currently and the CFL can fill some of that in the US with summer football. Football on a Football Network - seems to be a calling. I was hoping CFL would let TSN know what they want from a US TV deal and let TSN negotiate it with ESPN and NFL networks or anyone else. TSN could also use it to showcase their brand. Making the right moves now will only grow the CFL in the US.

If CBA moves to 8 - 10 million it does change how it would be viewed in the US college ranks as it could move all active roster players to $100K +. We might even have our 1st $1M dollar player in a long while

[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.

[KCargosfan]

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.

You seem to think both of those networks have that kind of money to burn, which isn't the case. ESPN, for sure, isn't going to shell out any kind of substantial cash with its financial position.