XFL Bankruptcy Thread

[4th&long]

That's all interesting enough. But, it's nothing that we have not heard before.

I think we won't know anything concrete until mid-August. These are going to be the longest 3 weeks of my life!! The answer can't come soon enough.

Agreed, its all noise until we hear the word... but its still has my attention!

[4th&long]

There's another opportunity here:

The politicizing of sports is likely a major turnoff for fans... XFL can avoid this and prosper while other leagues suffer. Stick to the "for the love of Football" mantra and just have fun and play the game. These players don't have the pull or career desire other than to focus on making $$$, and FB is great for all those involved.

As far as COVID. If the buyers have the cajones and they can play in stadiums - do it. Follow the German Soccer player model. Those sick sit out, those testing neg play on. Since its not a name league this can work.

[Metallifreak10]

There's another opportunity here:

The politicizing of sports is likely a major turnoff for fans... XFL can avoid this and prosper while other leagues suffer. Stick to the "for the love of Football" mantra and just have fun and play the game. These players don't have the pull or career desire other than to focus on making $$$, and FB is great for all those involved.

As far as COVID. If the buyers have the cajones and they can play in stadiums - do it. Follow the German Soccer player model. Those sick sit out, those testing neg play on. Since its not a name league this can work.

So, next Sunday I’m going to a Chicago Dogs baseball game in Rosemont. The American Association that is playing a 60-game 6-team season has a reasonable policy in place. Last week, a player on the Milwaukee team tested positive before a game. They postponed the game and tested the entire team. The rest came back negative and they played their next game.

So, that is how they go about it, and I think it’s reasonable. They have played 23 of the 24 scheduled League games thus far.

I can’t wait to see some live sports next Sunday!

[GregParks]

Something I thought of last night: The widely-accepted purpose of Vince McMahon resurrecting the XFL in the first place was to cash in on sports TV rights fees, of which the bubble had not yet burst. After pouring hundreds of millions into the league the first three years, McMahon would then recoup at least a large portion of that, if not more, by selling the rights fees to the highest-bidding network.

In this bankruptcy proceeding, it seems most fans are excited about the potential of ESPN/ABC or FOX buying the XFL. Makes sense - it would automatically return the league to a prominent television partner. But if the original intent was to make most of the league's revenue through a TV contract, how do the networks bidding on the league expect to make money? ESPN isn't going to pay itself $250 million for the rights to show the games. Our own Mike Mitchell noted on Twitter that the league had already made $20 million in revenue halfway through the season, and would project to make $46 million if the season had been able to finish, but that's up against the hundreds of millions of dollars it took to start up and sustain over time.

A few things could be in play here:

(a) A network will bid on the league to provide itself content, taking the monetary loss over time in the hopes of eventually selling the league down the line when the reputation has been rehabilitated and it has sustained itself over multiple years; or the networks will eventually sell the individual franchises, recouping the money that way (as had been talked about on this board).

(b) One of the networks will buy the league, show SOME of the games, but eventually farm out some to other networks, getting money from THEM (though I'm not sure how many competing networks would willingly put money in the coffers of a rival).

(c) The networks are going to cut costs everywhere, including player/coach/commissioner salaries and perhaps not have the same number of staff at the league or team levels.

I feel like I must be missing something in order to make this make sense financially for the networks that are potentially bidding on the XFL to restart it. Not only will they have to outbid others for the assets, but as McMahon has shown, it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to run it professionally.

[johnnyangryfuzzball]

Something I thought of last night: The widely-accepted purpose of Vince McMahon resurrecting the XFL in the first place was to cash in on sports TV rights fees, of which the bubble had not yet burst. After pouring hundreds of millions into the league the first three years, McMahon would then recoup at least a large portion of that, if not more, by selling the rights fees to the highest-bidding network.

In this bankruptcy proceeding, it seems most fans are excited about the potential of ESPN/ABC or FOX buying the XFL. Makes sense - it would automatically return the league to a prominent television partner. But if the original intent was to make most of the league's revenue through a TV contract, how do the networks bidding on the league expect to make money? ESPN isn't going to pay itself $250 million for the rights to show the games. Our own Mike Mitchell noted on Twitter that the league had already made $20 million in revenue halfway through the season, and would project to make $46 million if the season had been able to finish, but that's up against the hundreds of millions of dollars it took to start up and sustain over time.

A few things could be in play here:

(a) A network will bid on the league to provide itself content, taking the monetary loss over time in the hopes of eventually selling the league down the line when the reputation has been rehabilitated and it has sustained itself over multiple years; or the networks will eventually sell the individual franchises, recouping the money that way (as had been talked about on this board).

(b) One of the networks will buy the league, show SOME of the games, but eventually farm out some to other networks, getting money from THEM (though I'm not sure how many competing networks would willingly put money in the coffers of a rival).

(c) The networks are going to cut costs everywhere, including player/coach/commissioner salaries and perhaps not have the same number of staff at the league or team levels.

I feel like I must be missing something in order to make this make sense financially for the networks that are potentially bidding on the XFL to restart it. Not only will they have to outbid others for the assets, but as McMahon has shown, it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to run it professionally.

It's no different than spending money on a scripted series. If they can make more money in advertising than they spent, there's the profit.

Remember, the $20 million in revenue the XFL took in was without the benefit of any real revenue sharing plan: the networks paid nothing and kept all of the ad inventory. So, with the networks buying in, they will have that revenue stream in addition to the league sponsorships (like Bud Light Seltzer), gate revenue and merchandise.

It's not easy, to be sure, and under ordinary circumstances, professional football is not profitable, as the AAF, UFL, USFL, and many others tragically found out. But what Vince McMahon has apparently come close to finding is that "Goldilocks zone:" how little can the XFL spend while still putting a product good enough that people will watch?

[MGB01]

(SWERVE) The NFL emerges as the winner, Dan Snyder renames the Redskins D.C. Defenders, and the team is moved to San Diego when/if then the NFL decides to do the NFL Europe thing again (END SWERVE)

Now granted there's a better chance of Fight for the Fallen being advertised on RAW tonight than any of that happening, but actually switching to the D.C. branding wouldnt be too far out of left field (esp if you don't trash Hail To The Redskins, just officially rename it Hail since it includes Redskins and Braves and then ends with D.C., encompassing all three "eras")

[johnnyangryfuzzball]

I can't rule out that idea. Snyder did mention that the new name would honor the military so it wouldn't surprise me if he makes a move to acquire the DC Defenders name and trademark because it does have some currency in DC.

[ManOnTheMoon]

If they do take the Defenders name wouldn't that be cultural appropriation? Lol.

Next thing they will do is take the sacred Beer Snake.

[MGB01]

What impact, if any, does the NFL ditching preseason in the last few have on what the restarted league looks like?

On one hand you got between 160-320 players (assuming the overall numbers were between 5 and 10 UDFA signings per team on avg) with no reps. On the other, you already had a fair number of 2019 undrafteds playing in the XFL anyway, so probably not much difference. It's worth pondering.

You could say caving but I don't think so, matter of fact this is a big win for the NFL (which obviously you're going to read the opposite). Goodell's been trying to ditch the preseason, now it shifts over to the NFLPA--Never take the public position of effectively playing class warfare, whether it's intended that way or not.

Hell if somebody out there wanted to go all Chet Simmons but this time merely adjust his target and say 'Hey if you're not a first or second day pick the NFL wants nothing to do with you, because now even the NFLPA is on the record', sure might be dirty pool but not untrue--hey the players opened this door with their little Twitter tantrum.

Only problem is that seems sort of combative, but the pacifist role worked for about two weeks before the jackholes came back out, the other problem is "playing nice" essentially dictates your TV deal.

But if you get somebody like Mark Cuban (not that it would be him) who wins the bidding and deems the time is right to (re)declare war only this time not warring for Trevor Lawrence or Justin Fields but basically the early UFL strategy--that like pretty much everything UFL died on the cutting room floor--of day three picks and undrafteds.

After all, the play that everyone remembers in the Super Bowl (a recent one anyway) involved four undrafted free agents: Malcolm Butler, Ricardo Lockette, Brandon Browner, and Jermaine Kearse. A game which was also decided in part by undrafteds Julian Edelman and Danny Amendola and late-round QB Tom Brady torturing third day corner Tharold Simon, also turned on the injuries to third day/late round picks Jeremy Lane and Cliff Avril, and of course ended on a stupid bailout penalty by undrafted Michael Bennett (also lest I forget the "contributions" of undrafted Doug Baldwin and third day Richard Sherman).

Like I said, worth pondering. It could be time to "go back".

[GregParks]

What impact, if any, does the NFL ditching preseason in the last few have on what the restarted league looks like?

While I think a lack of preseason is detrimental to late round/undrafted types, you're right that XFL 2020 was littered with those kinds of players anyway, so it may not make a ton of difference.

What it will do is make a difference to those players, who can no longer use those games to put work on tape for other teams to see. You may see fewer fringe players get claimed on waivers after cut-downs. Another thing is in-season tryouts; if the NFL decides to limit or eliminate those as they have during the summer, that could lessen the roster churn during the season.

It'll also make a difference if teams can only take 80 players to camp rather than 90; an announcement on that is supposed to be made tomorrow. That's 320 players who won't even get an opportunity with a team.

Perhaps the bigger issue for the XFL securing talent is the NFL increasing the size of practice squads and whatever other in-season roster tinkering they may end up doing. That will make several players who normally would just miss the cutoff for being on an NFL squad and could potentially be in-play for the XFL, who are now going to be under NFL contract.