major announcement - big changes to cfl playoff and season start

[blue_gold_84]

Viewership, ad revenue, and gambling.

Physical attendance is getting increasingly less important.

I'd think a league like the CFL would have to rely on all of those revenue streams to remain solvent, much less profitable. Advertising and gambling revenues can only go so far for a league with just nine franchises.

The two franchises in the black also happen to have the best attendance figures in 2025.

[Jesse]

I'd think a league like the CFL would have to rely on all of those revenue streams to remain solvent, much less profitable. Advertising and gambling revenues can only go so far for a league with just nine franchises.

The two franchises in the black also happen to have the best attendance figures in 2025.

Sure, it's just no longer 100% of the pie.

I also don't believe league propaganda that only 2 franchises are profitable.

[blue_gold_84]

Sure, it's just no longer 100% of the pie.

I also don't believe league propaganda that only 2 franchises are profitable.

Therein lies a problem with how the CFL operates, IMO. It leaves us to wonder, speculate, or question how healthy it actually is.

[theaardvark]

Why?

To assume the status quo has any kind of longevity is pie in the sky.  The league has rebounded slightly from its lows where most teams were red ink, but there is still too much red ink to sustain the at least 9 team league, and if we drop below 8 teams, its not a league.

So, we need new life, new blood, we need to attract new eyeballs and butts.

Saying "This IS your grandfather's CFL" isn't gonna cut it.

Saying "We have new and exciting things for you to come see" at least gives the opportunity for growth.

The CFL will lose more fans to aging out than to "I can't take the change".

Without a new generation of fans to replace the ones Father Time collects, the league is done.

The "controversy" about the rule changes is getting a lot of mention in the news, and as they say, "Any coverage is good coverage, as long as they spell your name right".  Fans that may have looked at the CFL as archaic are now being given a chance to look at it again.

The league is literally moving the goalposts to make it better.  Cosmetically, that change alone make the league look a lot more professional, and as much as we all love the 55 yard line as being quirky, removing it cleans up the field even more.  But it is still 65 yards wide, and the EZ is 50% deeper than the NFL, so it will remain a much more open game.  Even the modernization of the rouge is great.  It's still there, but no longer a reward for failure.  You are going to have to TRY to get a rouge now.

Best of both worlds.  I think the BOG Goldilock's it.  Not too much, not too little, but just right.

There is no CFL if changes do get made.

Both statements are equally meaningless at this moment in time.

So, are you saying that a few cosmetic changes will mean this isn't the CFL anymore, or are you saying that the changes will hurt attendance/viewership?

It is still the 12 man, 3 down, 65 yard wide CFL game.  So the first contention is wrong.

As for the second, sure, there will be a few diehards that will protest.  For the first 3 games.  They will come back.  As to part time or non fans, all the discussion that has gone on will no doubt get some extra eyeballs on the game, if only for curiosities sake.  And we all know, once you watch the excitement of a CFL game, its easy to get hooked.

[blue_gold_84]

So, are you saying that a few cosmetic changes will mean this isn't the CFL anymore, or are you saying that the changes will hurt attendance/viewership?

I was pointing out how neither statement has any value at the present time. And I think you knew as much.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Attendance is THE stat the CFL needs to increase, not a cherry-picked stat.

The yo-yo comparison is likely the worst comparison you've ever made, and you've made some doozies.

You realize that you're directly  comparing attendance (sales) figures from an era where most CFL games weren't even televised, and those that were, were often blacked out locally, to 2026 where significant revenue comes from tv, advertising and sponsorship deals, yes?

Do you know how silly that sounds? Every time you guys start talking about this it's patently clear that none of you are the least bit qualified to even speak on the subject, let alone put forth proper arguments.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Sure, it's just no longer 100% of the pie.

I also don't believe league propaganda that only 2 franchises are profitable.

Exactly, the league would not agree to expanding the roster and increasing the SMS with the CFLPA if the majority of teams were losing millions.  Neither adjustment improves their bottom line and the majority of teams agreed to these terms.

[bomber beetle]

Sure, it's just no longer 100% of the pie.

I also don't believe league propaganda that only 2 franchises are profitable.

While we don't know the bottom line of 7 teams, interpolating the numbers from the Bomber's financial report can give some insights. Subtract the revenue from 10,000 tickets each game. Along with that, a proportional amount of the concessions along with merchandise. The profit is probably gone. Furthermore, how many teams get the same sponsorship numbers and run their own stadium? How many charge less, on average, per ticket? It gets real easy to see that the league is probably losing between 10 and 20 million dollars every year. I recall that Edmonton lost around four million in the final year of public ownership and I think they were averaging decent crowds of 23,000 or so.

[bomber beetle]

Exactly, the league would not agree to expanding the roster and increasing the SMS with the CFLPA if the majority of teams were losing millions.  Neither adjustment improves their bottom line and the majority of teams agreed to these terms.

I believe those increases are tied to revenue, not profit.
We all know that the costs for everything are up significantly. Expenses, very likely, are easily keeping pace with revenue.

[jets4life]

In stadium attendance is a cherry picked stat which has some relevance but mostly pats a few folks on the back in an attempt to sell a stupid "golden years"  narrative.

The entertainment landscape in 1980 was incredibly different from today. The economies are different. Buying power is different. What people are willing to pay for is different.

It's like owning a Yo-Yo brand, pointing to the 1980s sales charts, and then saying they should copy the original colours of the 1980s because it was a good time for Yo-Yos.

Don't go into business folks. Nice try.

No offence,  but this post in unintentionally hilarious.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

No offence,  but this post in unintentionally hilarious.

None taken. Can't fault folks for being truly ignorant.

[TBURGESS]

You realize that you're directly  comparing attendance (sales) figures from an era where most CFL games weren't even televised, and those that were, were often blacked out locally, to 2026 where significant revenue comes from tv, advertising and sponsorship deals, yes?

That's exactly why I said it's never coming back in the first place.

You realize that the changes being made won't significantly increase revenue... right?

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Can you explain to me h

That's exactly why I said it's never coming back in the first place.

You realize that the changes being made won't significantly increase revenue... right?

How about you explain to me how adding playoff games that never existed before wouldn't earn significant revenue?

[ModAdmin]

None taken. Can't fault folks for being truly ignorant.

Look we don't need comments that clearly posted to insult people. Agree or disagree but keep personal disparaging comments you of discussions.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Look we don't need comments that clearly posted to insult people. Agree or disagree but keep personal disparaging comments you of discussions.

What about posts that start with "no offense" but are clearly meant to offend?