Originally Posted by thurmas (Post 9683111)

I think its Toronto wants star players and because cfl salary constraints is unable to sign stars like it could in years gone by is a big reason for the decline in Toronto. Back in the 70s they could sign some of the best players out of US colleges and draw 45 to 50 thousand fans a game. Even in the early 90s Rocket Ismail they were averaging 36,000 a game and Ricky Williams in 2006 30,000 fans a game. If the CFL could sign even 1 star player per team would likely generate a lot more interest.

Originally Posted by JHikka (Post 9683094)

Perhaps the issue isn't so much MLSE not doing its job but that the CFL or gridiron cannot be marketed and/or successful in Toronto in the way that CFL fans are expecting.

Saying that Toronto is too 'American' or that Canadians prefer a league with US teams is simply a coping mechanism for the steady decline of the CFL at this point. Leagues like the CHL continue to exist (and yes I know there are US teams) despite the supposed unwillingness of Canadians to be supportive of purely domestic ventures. I think it's weird to throw the American angle in as a reason when so many CFL players are American to begin with and something the CFL relies on for talent.

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN (Post 9683113)

Yes the CFL has really dropped the ball on selling itself to Canada. But the growing chorus of Canadians who hate the CFL because it doesn't give million dollar contracts or that a US college team could easily beat a CFL team just prove they know nothing about the game and talent level.

I'm also pointing out that CPL, CEBL and even CHL teams are having difficulty in filling their barns as well. Finally that our "National Sports Networks" are more than willing to buy access to mainly US sports products instead of putting a mediocre amount of effort (like showing highlights) in promoting Canadian entities.

Originally Posted by jonny24 (Post 9683417)

OHL teams also struggle in the GTA compared to elsewhere.

Toronto just thinks it's too big TIME for Canada-only leagues.

As for what diffrerent owners would do differently - I think they would do a lot of the same things, only they would try harder, stick with it longer, and actually care about it working. MLSE can't be arsed with giving the Argos their own president.

Originally Posted by Acajack (Post 9683428)

Fixed that for you ;)

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN (Post 9683113)

I'm also pointing out that CPL, CEBL and even CHL teams are having difficulty in filling their barns as well.

Originally Posted by jonny24 (Post 9683417)

OHL teams also struggle in the GTA compared to elsewhere.

Originally Posted by jonny24 (Post 9683417)

Toronto just thinks it's too big for Canada-only leagues.

Originally Posted by jonny24 (Post 9683417)

As for what diffrerent owners would do differently - I think they would do a lot of the same things, only they would try harder, stick with it longer, and actually care about it working. MLSE can't be arsed with giving the Argos their own president.

Originally Posted by JHikka (Post 9683510)

Yes and no. I'm not caught up on CEBL crowds but some CPL teams are on pace to set season records for average crowds, namely Victoria and Calgary. CHL crowds, last I saw, weren't drastically different from pre-COVID, although we'll need likely another season to see if there's any sort of widespread trend.


Oshawa does fine. Demographics everywhere else, like Mississauga and Markham, don't really add up for CHL teams, and don't make economic sense within the city itself. Hockey, like gridiron, isn't an urban sport.


If you say so.


I see.

Originally Posted by JHikka (Post 9683045)

Which new owners? Would love to know who would want to own the team once the CFL is rid is MLSE's supposed mismanagement.

Originally Posted by JHikka (Post 9683045)

If MLSE is giving up on the team what makes you think they would want to retain them as a tenant? Neither Lamport nor Varsity are really feasible for CFL teams unless the league wants to drop its gameday quality and amenities substantially in order to stay in the market.

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN (Post 9683115)

2007 and most CFL stadiums were at or near capacity for their games and then the league signed an exclusive TV contract with TSN and its been a steady decline since then. Hmmm.

Originally Posted by elly63 (Post 9689169)

The 3downnation folks are starting to ask why there are no games on CTV and trying to promote Sunday games in the summer, both subjects need to be explored.

Originally Posted by JHikka (Post 9689182)

Bell can use each in each silo to push numbers in both directions. It's fair to assume that CFL games on TSN wouldn't raise advertising rates and so their exclusivity on TSN is to encourage people to not cut the cord on that platform. I'm assuming the guys at 3down know this already.

Originally Posted by thurmas (Post 9689386)

I read today fox is paying the USFL 150 million over 3 years on their TV deal for 8 teams which is almost 2 million more per club then what tsn is paying the CFL these days. CFL needs to diversify their content providers

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime (Post 9689672)

Comparing American TV contracts to Canadian TV contracts is apples to oranges. That said, the CFL should do what they can to try and get a better contact with ESPN in the future. Their games draw quite well for a foreign league, which just goes to show how football-hungry the States are.

Originally Posted by thurmas (Post 9689676)

CFL is better quality players and game and far more valuable an asset to TSN than what USFL is to Fox programming i think in this instance its a fair comparison.

Originally Posted by thurmas (Post 9689678)

CFL usually gets 100 to 250k viewers on ESPN 2 but its been stuck in that zone for years now not sure they can get more out of ESPN than what they already get