^^^^^

Gross. So again, we will continue to see the TradeCentre/TradeDeadline Day coverage hype continue. I never understood who would sit and watch trade day programming when with the internet and your smartphone you get updates and find analysis very quickly for these sort of events. The hype machine for Trade Day for the NHL is one of my least favourite things about Canadian sports television.

There obviously is, since as we have this discussion there are 3-4 other leagues being planned for the USA to start playing football in 2020/2021. Again, if there was no demand for football as you claim why are so many leagues looking to startup?


AFC was successful USFL was widely successful and on the path to normally up until Trump steered them to the league's death.

WFL, sure it was a failure, largely because the Toronto Northmen ownership blew up salaries all before the Govt stepped in and stamped them out to protect the CFL.

Again, we as Canadians don't grasp the depth of love for football in America. You spend time in some of the parts of Texas and such where it is a religion and it really makes no sense.

Also, I don't agree that Americans lust for NFL football. NFL is just the biggest player in town but many Americans are not satisfied with that product but consume it for lack of other options. Thus, why so many startups are taking advantage in trying to carve out a niche in presenting new football product for Americans.

^ Viewership is cumulatively high but I doubt it's very long. I would think most people flip to TSN, watch the ticker for a few minutes to see whether there are any big developments and carry on.

Personally, I find apps like The Score or Twitter much better suited to tracking that stuff. The idea of sitting there watching TV waiting for news to break is straight out of the 80s.

Indeed. Trade Day usually means i'm on Twitter scanning through feeds and seeing what's going on. I haven't actually watched a trade deadline on TV in probably five or six years.

143K average over 10 hours would likely be better than whatever else they would be showing through the day (Lumberjack sports? ESPN talking heads?) but i'm curious what the average was between 1-3PM or 2-3PM when Stone was being moved. Obviously the big figures for them are the online and mobile activations.

This entire conversation is outside the realm of this thread as it exclusively pertains to American sport but I will note that new football leagues in the US are not contained to just AAF and XFL - two interesting startups are the American Flag Football League and Pacific Pro Football.

The former is, of course, a flag football league featuring many former NFLers and is picking up some decent steam. The latter is a new venture in California which looks to provide a place for high school graduates (who aren't going to school) a place to play and get paid. Offering an option for immediate pay at 18 or 19. Compensation would include potential tuition, injury-liability, etc.

CFL, USports working to realign Grey Cup and Vanier Cup
3Down Staff February 27, 2019

The Grey Cup and Vanier Cup could be getting back together.

The CFL championship and Canadian university football national title games haven’t been played in the same city since 2011 and 2012. The two events were paired in 2007 and 1973, both in Toronto.

CFL commissioner Randy Ambrosie has been working with USports CEO Graham Brown on a reunion of sorts.

“We’ve been talking about how we come together. If you look at the analysis of all the strongest pro sports in the world, they have a correspondingly very strong amateur football system and we can never reach the full potential of the Canadian Football League until we reach the full potential of USports,” Ambrosie said on CKRM The SportsCage.

“Graham and I and all of the USports community are talking about realigning Grey Cup and the Vanier Cup because we know that’s a winning formula. It’s something that we really need to focus on and make sure that we’re working together to help strengthen our university sports, the cascading effect of that is going to be a positive effect on amateur football in this country. And that’s something that we absolutely have to be dedicated to.”

The all-time Vanier Cup attendance record was set in 2012 at Rogers Centre when 37,098 watched Laval beat McMaster a rematch of the epic double overtime thriller from 2011 that the Marauders won 41-38.

The Vanier Cup is booked for Quebec City (2019) while the CFL has Calgary set (2019) and awarded the Grey Cups to Regina (2020) and Hamilton (2021.)

Holding the Vanier Cup in Quebec City has been an easy fallback option for USports because of the support in the city for football powerhouse Laval. If USports could find a way to move it for 2019 and link the Vanier Cup with the Grey Cup, that would be a win.

Great news!

Blast from the past

Best Game Ever - The 2011 McMaster Football Season

+1

It made little sense to separate them. One more wish is for the game to revert to its old name: The College Bowl. They could still keep the name of the trophy the Vanier Cup.

Hmm.... I'd be against that. Don't know how old you are, but I'm 25 and never heard of the College Bowl, only ever the Vanier Cup. Sounds like something American... They got bowls, we got Cups! Stanley, Grey, Vanier, Memorial, Allan, MacTier, McCormack... Cups are better! :cheers:


Edit: of course I'm hugely in favour of combining the Vanier and Grey Cups again, it's only logical. Hope they get it done for the Hamilton GC in 2021.

I'm Generation X. I've only ever known the Vanier Cup too but 'College Bowl' is what it was originally called. I don't like when people mess with history and tradition. People who don't know about our history aren't going to value it ....but that's no excuse.

Big football games have always been known as bowl games. It's not country specific. Beside the Vanier Cup originally being the College Bowl, both semi-finals are bowl games. Even in the pros we affectionately label memorable football games using the word bowl: Banjo Bowl, Mud Bowl, Ice Bowl, Fog Bowl, etc. I didn't like the Atlantic Bowl being renamed either. I liked Larry Uteck and it was a nice gesture but the wrong way to honour him.

Btw, none of your examples are football except the Grey Cup.

I'm trying to remember the reason exactly CIS\USports split away the combination VC\GC? Was it because that GC overshadowed too much?

Pro football was a bit like the seniors' tour in golf, or maybe "professional poker". Football was overwhelmingly associated with colleges and college-age kids. Older men playing it professionally didn't really fit with the mental image that people had of the sport. That's still true today to some extent in many parts of the U.S.

Yes, football was developed at our universities (University of Toronto, McGill University, etc.) and was decidedly a vocation for youth. That the oldest football trophy on the continent is Ontario universities' Yates Cup speaks to the sport's youth focus. Even the early non-university teams like Parkdale and the Argonauts were offshoots of rowing clubs.

I believe it was 1950 when the University of Toronto had higher average attendance (was over 25,000) than the NFL. What's surprising is how university football got completed supplanted by professional football. I doubt the Varsity Blues pull more than 2,000/game these days.

Perhaps I'm not familiar with the football culture in the United States but are there really places down there that still associated football with school aged males? On 2nd thought, growing up in Halifax I associated football with guys 23 and under as high school/university football is all that exists there. I grew up following that first, the CFL second. In basketball, that association is even more pronounced for me. I followed/attended university ball. It wasn't until perhaps 10 years later that I took a look at the NBA. I still prefer the former but now watch both. The fans at pro sports are very 'different' to what I'm accustomed to.

Not Canadian football... two of them are Rugby Football ;)

That was kinda the point thought, almost all of our Championships are cups, and I like that. Even though I know football games are often bowls, I like having the national title be a Cup, and am fine with the bowls leading up to it. Perhaps if the College Bowl had never been changed I'd be arguing to keep it, but now we have the Vanier Cup and its been around since (now looking it up) 1965! And it always was the Vanier Cup awarded during the College Bowl, so even less reason to change back in my opinion.

Well there's never going to be 100% consensus on anything. I suppose I'll have to design my own College Bowl paraphernalia. :)

That's the assumption. Partnering with the GC means that the VC plays second fiddle. It's possible USports wanted to get away from a week/weekend where tickets for their event are considered less valuable than an event they're sharing time and space with.

The bigger picture, IMO, is that partnering with the GC means that the VC can't be played in areas with more historic or reliable crowds for the VC. VC can't be played in Quebec City if it's partnering with the GC, as one example.

The media push and the attendance for the Vanier cup was very good when it was paired with the Grey Cup and it felt like the event was gaining momentum. Since that time it has really fallen off a cliff and I don't even know who airs the Vanier cup on tv anymore? I hope going back to what worked can help bring some much needed life back into the event and Usports football in General. It is not healthy with a handful of programs now so dominant and the the rest of Usports football programs looking like junior high football squads.

I believe all U-Sports are currently in a deal with Sportsnet, but the Vanier might be aired on Sportsnet360. Not sure though. I think the lack of promotion is because Sportsnet does an inferior job to TSN hyping up their products. They made the world jrs. a huge thing, and I remember seeing more Canadian University sports on TV when TSN had the broadcast rights. Maybe because they have a larger marketing budget, or maybe the association with CTV helps. It's too bad for U-Sports.

Not necessarily. I would think that if Montreal was to host the Grey Cup Laval could host the Vanier. It would make the celebrations sorta province wide! Obviously the university of Montreal may have something to say about it though.

Montreal won't be hosting the GC until 2023/2024 at the very earliest. When VC was open for bids I think Laval was the only team bidding in some years.

The point i'm making is that the VC will be moving from going to Quebec City every year/every other year to once a decade at best if paired with GC longterm.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the GC is looking to be moved slightly earlier on the calendar - how would this affect VC and USports football as a whole moving forward?

I don't think the Vanier Cup has to be played in lockstep with the Grey Cup every year as that would basically lock out an entire conference and a good chunk of another from ever hosting again, but history shows us that there are clear benefits when the Vanier piggybacks on the Grey Cup. The 2007 and 2011 Vanier Cups were memorable events with big (for U Sports) crowds.

U Sports and its member schools do not seem terribly motivated to draw any attention to what they're doing, though. They signed a broadcasting deal with Rogers who promptly buried them, and individual schools appear indifferent to whether or not anyone pays attention their teams. That's fine, that's totally their prerogative.

DAZN offered a free stream of Andreescu's final at Indian Wells on its Twitter on Sunday. As mentioned by SBC, over 480,000 unique visitors watched at least part of the stream.

AFAIK, the stream was geolocked to Canadian users.

@sportsbizcanada
480,000+ viewers watched Bianca Andreescu's on Twitter. @cam_gordon @chrisdoyle @TwitterSportsCASports
8:57 AM - 18 Mar 2019

As of right now the full match is available on their Twitter and it's nearing 500K views.

https://twitter.com/DAZN_CA/status/1107385637483761666

I'd like to see the VC paired with the GC even if it's not held in the same city. Having the VC piggy back on GC weekend marketing is important at this stage in its development. Most football fans in Canada don't pay attention to U Sports whatsoever. Exposing them to it is the first step. Once the VC can stand on its own they could then look into separating them.

It is incredible that in this day and age, with sports channels coming out the wazoo and CBC almost exclusively focused on amateur sports, that U-Sports still can't get a weekly football game on national television. The only U-Sports football I ever see on TV is in French, on Radio Canada.

Until they figure that out the Vanier Cup will continue to flounder as an event. You can't really get people to reliably care about a single game.

Blue Jays offering lower prices for concessions:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2BfKGtXcAMQF3j.png
via @BlueJays on Twitter

Only at one concession stand per level is what I heard. Blue Jays fans already aren't known for being the most... docile.

Can't wait to see what goes down in the 100+ person line for $5 beer.

Cam Gordon @cam_gordon
These four under-20 [Canadian] athletes have all enjoyed triple-digit follower growth on Twitter in the past 12 months
@Bandreescu_ +977%
@AlphonsoDavies +679%
@RjBarrett6 +352%
@felixtennis +181%

Currently:
Andreescu 28.9K
Davies 27.0K
RJ Barrett 67.5K
Auger-Aliassime 21.9K

The Blue Jays were in Montreal to play the Milwaukee Brewers last night as part of what has become a spring tradition, shortly before the official start of the season.

Attendance was about 25,000 which is a good crowd but short of the 50,000 per game (for each of two nights) we've seen in recent years. So the shine for this specific baseball offering is wearing off a bit - and I think that was to be expected.

But the talk of the eventual return of the Expos is getting hotter than ever.

https://montrealgazette.com/sports/b...oser-than-ever

Bronfman needs to wait on Oakland and Tampa first.

• Then either buy those teams and relocate them or be granted an expansion ($$$).
  
• Then $50M for Griffintown land.
  
• Then $$$ for a new stadium.

At least he's committed to not building a stadium until he has ownership/direction of a team. Either way, two points:

• I think the NBA is a more enticing fit for Montreal and it doesn't require a new multi-million dollar facility to operate. Basketball's potential seems higher than baseball's on the whole.
  
• What's the point of putting $200M into Olympic Stadium's roof if there's going to be no permanent tenant? Would it not make more sense for that funding to partly be funneled to a potential MLB stadium?

Last year people were really there for one thing, to see Vlad Jr.

I think people in both cities like a good show. Give them star power and a winning product and you can draw good crowds as we saw with the Jays in 2015/16.

^ You can't sustain enthusiasm for fairly meaningless preseason games forever. I mean, most people only get tickets for those games because their ticket packages include them. Montreal has made its point, IMO.

That said, I wonder if there is a bit of an indefinite hiatus on team relocations to Canada with the dollar being the way it is these days?

I can see that point but it does inconveniently bump into plans for the FIFA World Cup. For which there is likely no going back.

In some ways it's lower hanging fruit because the facility's already there with a sufficient number of open dates every year. (Or at least, room can certainly be made for an NBA schedule in the Bell Centre's calendar.)

Baseball has way deeper roots and more demonstrated interest as a spectator sport in Montreal and Quebec (in spite of the Expos debacle), but basketball is growing here as it is pretty much everywhere. An NBA team in Montreal would definitely be an "in" thing, at least for a while. (Though the rebooted Expos would be "in" as well, in much the same way.)

On some level the NBA offers much of the upside potential of baseball but without any of the overhead of requiring a new venue. I mean, Montreal likes baseball, but does it like it enough to justify the half billion+ dollar publicly funded stadium that would be required?

Also, if the province (and possibly feds too? I forget) are dumping a bunch of money into the Big O to fix it up, will there an appetite to spend money on another new stadium on top of that? All this not long after spending a fortune to build the world's most opulent junior hockey arena? Even in Quebec, I would think the appetite for taking on those types of expenses must have its limits.

85% of the tickets for the Memorial Cup in Halifax are sold according to Mikael Lalancette of TVA Sports.

City and province to provide Winnipeg pro sports with $16.6M this year

Bartley Kives · CBC News · Posted: Mar 06, 2019 5:00 AM CT | Last Updated: March 6

Winnipeg's professional sports clubs are in line for about $16.6 million of government assistance this year in the form of gaming revenue, tax breaks, tax refunds and tax exemptions.​

City budget documents reveal a modest rise in combined municipal and provincial support for the Winnipeg Jets, Manitoba Moose, Winnipeg Blue Bombers and Winnipeg Goldeyes, mainly because of improved ticket sales at Bell MTS Place.

​True North Sports & Entertainment, the company that owns the National Hockey League's Jets, American Hockey League's Moose and the teams' downtown hockey arena, is slated to receive an estimated $14.8 million in operating subsidies and other forms of public assistance in 2019. That's up from an estimated $14.1 million in 2018.

The public assistance this year is roughly equal to the combined salaries of Jets centre Mark Scheifele and his wingers Blake Wheeler and Patrik Laine, as well as goalie Connor Hellebuyck, accordingly to salary-tracking website capfriendly.com.

...

Economic Development Winnipeg president and CEO Dayna Spiring said the public expenditure on those parties more than paid for itself in terms of marketing Winnipeg to the rest of the continent through NBC and Hockey Night broadcasts.

The economic impact of the Jets, Moose, Bombers and Goldeyes more than justifies the municipal and provincial assistance for professional sports in Winnipeg, she added.

...

The Winnipeg Blue Bombers are in line to receive a $1.45-million entertainment tax rebate from the city this year. That's down from $1.85 million in 2018.

The drop is due to a reduction in ticket sales by the non-profit Winnipeg Football Club from 2016 to 2017, the most recent year documented in the club's financial statements.

The football club will publish its 2018 financial statements in April and will report a small decrease in ticket revenue due to poor weather last year, Bombers public relations director Darren Cameron said in a statement.

The Bombers also don't pay city business taxes or any property taxes on Investors Group Field, which sits on land owned by the University of Manitoba.

The club has been meeting its commitments to pay back a stadium-building loan of $75 million, plus interest, but the province no longer expects to recoup a separate $85-million component of the loan that was supposed to be financed by new developments at the old Canad Inns Stadium site.

...

The Winnipeg Goldeyes, who play at Shaw Park in downtown Winnipeg, are set to receive $368,000 in public assistance this year, up from $342,000 last year.

The Fish are in line to receive a $325,000 entertainment tax rebate and a $43,000 city property tax grant.

Winnipeg Goldeyes chief financial officer Jason McRae-King declined to comment on government assistance for the baseball club, which is owned by former Winnipeg mayor Sam Katz.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...dies-1.5041908

LOL, here we go with fucking NBC again. What she doesn't say is that it's NBC Sports Network that pulls in infomercial-level ratings for NHL games in the US which televised the Jets this season.

I'm sure the 5,000 American shut ins who couldn't get up to change the channel after golf ended are well aware of Winnipeg now.

Lapointe group will not be buying the Alouettes according to Herb Zurkowsky of the Montreal Gazette:

https://montrealgazette.com/pmn/spor...9-bcbcd34e62da

On his Twitter he's saying that the CFL will be assuming control of the team as the Wettenhall family has walked away from owning the team.

"I will reiterate, according to my information, the Wetenhall family is out. Whether it’s now or an hour from now. And the league knows it won’t look good to say it’s running the team. As for Eric Lapointe, indeed, he’s out, regrettably. He and his group would have been good."
https://twitter.com/HerbZurkowsky1/s...23293186363393

Sound the alarm, football crisis in Montreal.

I'm not sure what the Wetenhalls' end game in all of this is, but it is bizarre. They could have sold the team a few years ago for what would have probably been a healthy price. Or they could have done the fixer-upper thing and gotten the team back into decent shape, and then put it on the market.

Waiting until the team hits rock bottom on and off the field and then just walking away from it seems like the worst possible thing to do, but then, what do I know about owning a sports team?

Their reluctance to sell to Eric Lapointe's group is just bizarre. They were apparently not willing to have discussions with him.

Surely it must be a price issue, what else could it be? The team's current value must be fairly straightforward... maybe the losses from the past few years are the sticking point? I'm sure the rough last few years have done a number on Wetenhall's overall profits from the team.

Wetenhall: "Now that we've agreed on a price, add X dollars to cover my losses since 2012"

Lapointe: "F U" (walks away)

I'm exaggerating but you get my point.

On another note, I just learned that the AAF died this week. I was expecting it, but not so soon, perhaps after 2 or 3 seasons.

I'm assuming ownership of the debt is the sticking point on the team and its valuation. It's possible the Wetenhalls are asking prospective owners to take on the debt plus the fee for the team. In such a scenario it makes sense that the CFL comes in as middleman....CFL takes on team, absorbs its losses, and then sells team to new ownership without the debt attached to it.

There must be another owner in the works or they wouldn't have shot Lapointe down or they didn't want to sell directly to Lapointe as he has done a lot of talking basically disparaging the Wetenhalls.

How much would it cost the CFL to take on the team and who would pay? I can't see other team owners (or publicly owned teams board of directors)agreeing to pay to run an opposing team.

That's a good question. It depends on how much debt the Alouettes/Wetenhalls are carrying and how much that is compared to the team's overall value [it's a good assumption at this point, the Alouettes lost money on a yearly basis according to Wetenhall]. If the Wetenhalls are stepping away from the team then they're effectively handing the team over to the CFL for free, which would imply that debt is effectively valued at more than the value of the team, or thereabouts. CFL expansion franchises fetch ~$7M so I imagine the Alouettes are somewhere around there in value sans debt.

Theoretically, if the Als are valued at $7M but have $7M of debt, then no prospective owner is going to take on the debt and pay anything for the team itself. It's possible that potential owners do not want to buy the team prior to this season without a guarantee that they won't lose money. I assume this is a sticking point.

In a scenario where the Alouettes move from Wetenhall -> CFL -> new owner, the debt travels with the team from the Wetenhalls to the CFL, and then the CFL eats the debt and sells the team to new owners with a fresh balance sheet. Value would presumably take a hit if potential owners are able to see books.

This sort of sticking point is similar to what the Senators will eventually go through when somebody takes the team over from Melnyk, the difference being that the Senators debtload isn't nearly as high as the team's overall value.

Indeed, but if the CFL taking the team on prevents the team from going bankrupt then that's a pill they'll have to swallow. Better the league take on the debt than the team (very publicly) collapsing.

Sigh. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Als were a financial basket case for much of their existence, most notably in the 80s.

Much was made of the Als resurgence in the late 90s, both on the field and off. That turned out to be a 10 - 15 year reprieve. Right around 2012 - 2014, their attendance and corporate support starting to nosedive. I suspect this is when the losses starting to mount and it continues to this day. The average crowds were announced as 17,000 for the season, but you could tell watching on tv that the actual numbers were 10 - 12,000. Lots of freebies and discounted tickets given to corporate sponsors, football and charitable organizations.

I imagine the cumulative losses the past half-decade are well over $10 million given the charming, yet antiquated stadium, minimal merchandise revenue, and no Grey Cups hosting duties for over a decade. Offhand, I have heard that Wettenhall was carrying a debt on the team close to or at 8 figures. I can see him not covering the annual losses once he came close to exhausting the profits from the "golden years" of the 2000s, so the reported cumulative debt would make sense.

As stated above, I wouldn't be surprised if Wettenhall has demanded that any prospective owners carry his outstanding debt in addition to a fee to acquire the team. Not an enticing prospect for an organization that plays in a fickle market with no real assets and with no prospect of hosting a Grey Cup any time soon.

Unfortunately, I too believe the league will take over the team and incur the outstanding debt. Hopefully, they will find someone who will buy the Als for approx. the going rate of an expansion team - $7 million. Then, it will be a question as to how this will be split between the CFL and the Wettenhalls. I would suspect the Wettenhalls would receive nearly all, if not the entirety of the proceeds, as a thank you from the league for investing in the team and Percival - Molson Stadium for all these years.

I suspect one of the conditions of the sale by the prospective ownership group will be a couple of Grey Cups within a specified time period. The Olympic Stadium roof will be ready replaced in either 2023 or 2024, and the city and province will be eager to make full use of it. A 2024 Grey Cup followed by another in 2027 - 2029 might do the trick.

The Toronto Arrows lost to New Orleans in the first ever professional rugby union match in Canada this past weekend. Sold out the York Alumni Stadium with a crowd of 3,081 and ran out of beer for a short while :haha:. Arrows will play three more games at York Alumni before playing their final four at Lamport.

https://nationalpost.com/pmn/sports-...r-to-nola-gold

Speaking of which...

Ontario to legalize tailgate parties; amendment to be introduced in budget
The Canadian Press April 8, 2019

TORONTO — Sports fans in Ontario will soon be able to have a drink and tailgate before a game.

The government will announce in its budget this week that it will legalize the practice often seen in parking lots at sporting events in the United States.

Premier Doug Ford’s executive director of strategic communications tweeted that the change means the government is treating adults like adults.

Tailgating parties will be made possible by amending a regulation that sets out the terms for special occasion liquor permits.

Any parking lot or venue within a reasonable distance from a major sports complex, such as Toronto’s Rogers Centre or Scotiabank Arena, would be able to apply for the permit.

^ Haha, count on a Doug Ford government to bring in that piece of legislation :haha:

But kidding aside, it's about damned time that we moved out of the prohibition era and loosened up the shackles a bit when it comes to alcohol. The rest of the world seems to manage without having to regulate every facet of how people drink and imposing stiff fines on trivial contraventions.

Agree. I have zero interest in living in a nanny state. When one has absurd laws on the books people start viewing the law as archaic and invalid. Not being able to drink liquor in public? If I want to do a few shots of tequila while going for an outdoor skate I'm bloody well going to have some.

Society is going to have problems when people, en masse, start ignoring laws. After awhile people will pretty much only respect laws they agree with.