Johnston: UFL will return in same eight markets, no expansion for 2025

[4th&long]

Interesting complication for Michigan:



If the UFL continues to stay in its spring schedule, they have the possibility of picking one of the smaller outdoor stadiums (Rynearson hosted the Panthers' practices in '23). If they go back to the XFL, post-Super Bowl window... that pretty much guarantees they have to go back to Ford Field or else head at least somewhat further south.

And it'd be especially troublesome for the league to leave since Detroit is one of the league's biggest markets (I think it's third behind Arlington, as part of the Dallas-Fort Worth metro, and DC).

But honestly—and this is what PO's me about the whole decision to stay at 8—is that when Vince McMahon picked the original XFL markets, he did so with a lot of thought. It was an equal spread across the country for the most part, but teams had natural regional rivals. Seattle/Los Angeles (upper and lower West Coast), Dallas/Houston (Texas Throwdown), New York/DC (Eastern Seaboard). LA/St. Louis also has that "grudge match by proxy" effect that, had they not locked down the world, was bound to have fed the fire that was Battlehawk Nation into a frenzy.

Most of the USFL's markets are built differently. Birmingham is in Alabama, their big college rivalry is in-state ('Bama vs. Auburn). and the state is obviously too small for two pro teams. If they were to play in New Orleans, the big rivalry there, the Golden Boot, is LSU against Arkansas, a market that hasn't been seriously considered for pro football since the AAFL flamed out in 2008. And they've never actually played in New Jersey or Philadelphia, the big East Coast markets they named teams after.

Michigan's natural rival is Ohio. The USFL had a good relationship with Canton, which is on the outskirts of the Cleveland metro. Yet the UFL is not going back to Ohio, leaving Michigan floating out there. With the Guardians out of NY, DC is basically floating around out there, too.

There just doesn't seem to be the cultural awareness when it comes to their choice of markets. I don't want to see Michigan leave but it needs some help—help that, it appears, is not on the way.

(Side note: I know I get long-winded sometimes, but that's how my head works.)

While I agree with you on the rivalries and needing better geographic locations, the main drive behind Fox's interest was do a football league that could fill a timeslot and be no more expensive than the average broadcast costs of any shows that might be seen instead.

Economics has played a major factor into their stadium decisions.  They are not going to break the budget just to get a market they really need.  It sucks for enthusiastic fans, but the hope is that we eventually will get the teams we need and want. 

Agreed economics has played a major part in USFL/FOX but also in XFL ie 3 teams in Texas with central practice Hub. 

Also keep in mind 49+% of the USA population is in the Eastern Time Zone, 27+% in the central, Mountain is ~7% and Pacfic Time zone is ~17%.  And its why UFL will be too.
Its another reason why both leagues are heavy Eastern/Central

[steve42]

Also keep in mind 49+% of the USA population is in the Eastern Time Zone, 27+% in the central, Mountain is ~7% and Pacific Time zone is ~17%.  And its why UFL will be too.

 

 

Thanks for a bit of information that I had never considered. That's an interesting breakdown that is truly news to me.  We always think about how densely populated Los Angeles is but it's easy to forget that most of the Western states are deserts and forests.

So, when the UFL does consider westward expansion, do you think they:

• revive the Sea Dragons
• pick an NFL city like LA (Express/Xtreme/Wildcats), Phoenix (Wranglers/Outlaws), San Francisco (Demons) or Las Vegas (Vipers)
• try and repeat St Louis' success by picking another former-NFL city like Oakland (Invaders) or San Diego (TBD)?

It's fun to think about.

[4th&long]

Also keep in mind 49+% of the USA population is in the Eastern Time Zone, 27+% in the central, Mountain is ~7% and Pacific Time zone is ~17%.  And its why UFL will be too.

 

Thanks for a bit of information that I had never considered. That's an interesting breakdown that is truly news to me.  We always think about how densely populated Los Angeles is but it's easy to forget that most of the Western states are deserts and forests.

So, when the UFL does consider westward expansion, do you think they:

• revive the Sea Dragons
• pick an NFL city like LA (Express/Xtreme/Wildcats), Phoenix (Wranglers/Outlaws), San Francisco (Demons) or Las Vegas (Vipers)
• try and repeat St Louis' success by picking another former-NFL city like Oakland (Invaders) or San Diego (TBD)?

It's fun to think about.

Well honestly - they may not in near future, if they do it could be Seattle or Portland, but LA is the 800 pound Gorilla.
At under 17% of the US market is the WC worth it?

California is a business nightmare, yet has the two largest Markets LA (#2, 4.76% usa household share) and SF/Bay area (#10, 2.1%).  San Diego is a much smaller TV market at #30, .89%.  And the state of California may have 2/3 of the TV households.
Seattle is #12, 1.71% and has NFL, MLB and now NHL.
Portland is #22, 1.05% and has no MLB, NFL, NHL.

IMO - If they are looking for TV audience its LA with Seattle next.  If its a well attended team with mid-mkt its Portland.  And Seattle is likely the in between.  But LA maybe logical choice here as its over 25% of the PST market in itself.

Mountain time zone has Phoenix (#11, 1.73% and Denver (#16, 1.45%).  Denver has 2 CFB and all 4 major sports while Phx has 3/4 major sports in a better business state.  Where they play on hot Phx would need to be the Dome ($$).

I'ts likely LA, Phx, Seattle and Portland - likely in that order and if cost are main driver California is OUT, leaving the other 3.   If they can get a good deal in Cardinals stadium - that could be #1.

But IMO they have neglected the East.  And that's where they need to Target. 
In Florida there's TB (#13, 1.67%) and Orlando (#17, 1.43%);
NJ/NY at #1, 6.24% - which should be #1 place to go.
Philly at #4, 2.51% another big eastern city that loves FB.
Cleveland/Canton with a ready made stadium in Canton at  #19, 1.25%.

I'd rather see them add 2 teams in East where Half the country lives.

[johnnyangryfuzzball]

Just remember, though, that percentage of the population is an arbitrary measure to an extent depending on how far you want to go into the suburbs. And, of course, there are a lot of other mitigating factors that make it a somewhat poor choice as a sole criterion. Not that I haven't had this discussion before, but...

Seattle: 2020, it was the only winter pro sport in town. Now, they have the Kraken, on top of the Sounders who have some partial overlap. It's not the only factor in the Sea Dragons losing some of their popularity (more on that later) but it was certainly part of it.

Los Angeles is one of the most crowded sports markets in America. San Diego is not. Like 2020 Seattle, a UFL team would have the market all to themselves. Oakland has nothing left—and I doubt that the Coliseum is going to be demolished right away. Both have good weather in February and March—not a trivial issue. But Portland, again, they have the Blazers and the Timbers.

You still have to strike a balance between market size and competition. Remember, St. Louis was the smallest market in the 2020 XFL but had the highest attendance. San Diego is right in the same ballpark. Their attendance for the Fleet in the AAF wasn't terrible and that was with a league known to be a clusterbuck.

Then there's stadiums. Philadelphia, unless they go into the NFL venue, no longer has an ideal option: you're basically looking either at Franklin Field (age, parking and having to deal with an Ivy League college owning the facility are stumbling blocks), or going up to the Lehigh Valley, which is a trek. New York-New Jersey has a few halfway decent choices (Hinchliffe in Paterson, NJ; the Staten Island stadium that used to be a baseball park before the low-minors got jettisoned a couple years ago) but are likely a step down from the current UFL venues, though not as bad as Cashman! Or, again, you go up north to Albany, the state capital, which has a couple of venues (and a nice play on the "New York" name) and supports the Firebirds in Arena ball pretty well... but again, that's a trek, and probably bigger than Philly-to-Easton. On the West Coast, San Diego State built Snapdragon Stadium (but again, that's a university stadium), and Balboa, which would need to be re-expanded and might be comparable to Cashman in its current state.

But we do agree on Florida, and with Arizona and Denver being the only real options in Mountain Time, Denver being overcrowded and Arizona having a shockingly bad record with the Hotshots and the NHL's Coyotes, I don't see either one in the near future.

---

Then you get into TV. Remember, this is largely a TV exercise, and part of the UFL raison d'etre is to plug holes in the schedule. The West Coast provides opportunities to play games in late-night time slots that the networks like ESPN and FS1 might otherwise find difficult to fill. (2023 Seattle was a classic example of that—even if their odd choice of Thursday nights, due to ESPN having to accommodate all the basketball conference championships and NCAA winter sports championships, ended up hurting attendance badly.) Also remember that a lot of the difference in population in the West and East is in the areas between the major cities, and the amount of population sprawl into the midwest and south that the West doesn't have as much of outside of California. With Fox having a Friday night broadcast slot, that would be a perfect chance to put games on for its West Coast affiliates—no different than the "regional coverage" except affiliates who want to air the games outside prime time (instead of infomercials or syndicated fare that won't draw flies) could, instead of being confined to one game.

You can't build an entire league around the Birmingham, Memphis and New Orleans-es of America... but there are 42 major league markets in the United States (yes, Memphis and New Orleans included). The vast majority of those don't have a full slate of competition in the NHL, NBA and MLS. There's room for the UFL and IMO, that sweet spot is the middle-sized (3 million-ish) markets without a lot of direct competition and strategic advantages.

[steve42]

Well honestly - they may not in near future, if they do it could be Seattle or Portland, but LA is the 800 pound Gorilla.
At under 17% of the US market is the WC worth it?

California is a business nightmare, yet has the two largest Markets LA (#2, 4.76% usa household share) and SF/Bay area (#10, 2.1%).  San Diego is a much smaller TV market at #30, .89%.  And the state of California may have 2/3 of the TV households.
Seattle is #12, 1.71% and has NFL, MLB and now NHL.
Portland is #22, 1.05% and has no MLB, NFL, NHL.

IMO - If they are looking for TV audience its LA with Seattle next.  If its a well attended team with mid-mkt its Portland.  And Seattle is likely the in between.  But LA maybe logical choice here as its over 25% of the PST market in itself.

Mountain time zone has Phoenix (#11, 1.73% and Denver (#16, 1.45%).  Denver has 2 CFB and all 4 major sports while Phx has 3/4 major sports in a better business state.  Where they play on hot Phx would need to be the Dome ($$).

I'ts likely LA, Phx, Seattle and Portland - likely in that order and if cost are main driver California is OUT, leaving the other 3.   If they can get a good deal in Cardinals stadium - that could be #1.

But IMO they have neglected the East.  And that's where they need to Target. 
In Florida there's TB (#13, 1.67%) and Orlando (#17, 1.43%);
NJ/NY at #1, 6.24% - which should be #1 place to go.
Philly at #4, 2.51% another big eastern city that loves FB.
Cleveland/Canton with a ready made stadium in Canton at  #19, 1.25%.

I'd rather see them add 2 teams in East where Half the country lives.

Portland is a possibility I didn't consider.  They've had various other leagues' football (Arena League, IPFL, WFL) there over the years and even were home to the original USFL's Breakers in 1985. 

Phoenix is kind of an interesting point.  Aside from Arena League, I can't find another pro- or semi-pro effort there until the NFL moved the Cardinals to town.  Obviously no one affiliated with any of the other leagues saw a market there.  Does the success of the Cardinals make the city more desirable?

Seattle was in the same situation as Phoenix back in the 60s-70s.  They had a COFL team (Rangers) in 1967 and 1968 who had a better than .500 W/L record and then in 1974 the Seahawks were formed.  

Los Angeles is a train wreck for business and infrastructure but if they averaged the same percentage of their metro attendance as Birmingham did this season, they'd have to build a stadium that held 132,000 attendees!   Between LA and Long Beach, they've had about a dozen teams outside the NFL over the years.

Denver and Colorado Springs combined have held six teams that I can find.  The USFL's Denver Gold had incredibly good attendance numbers although they fell off in year 3.

I'm with you on Florida; I think they need at least one team.  Tampa Bay's fans never had a chance to support the modern-era Bandits before the team got moved to Memphis.  I feel like Orlando is too entertainment-rich to pay much attention to spring football, but the XFL was prepared to give them a shot.

[GDAWG]

The thing with future expansion is that the stadiums in those sites have to be in favor of the UFL playing in their stadium.  I hear all of the time suggestions of various MLS stadiums in various cities and if it was that easy, Philly and New Jersey would have been back already and playing in MLS Stadiums in Chester and Harrison.  Portland and Denver have MLS stadiums but there's no guarantee that the MLS teams in those cities want to share their stadiums with a UFL team.  For all we know, DC United might be the exception to that.  MLS teams in MLS stadiums have first priority even if they don't actually own the stadium.  

MLS stadiums are absolutely the perfect size for UFL teams, but Audi Field could up being a complete outlier and other MLS teams have to be open to the UFL and they might not be.  As long as the Portland Timbers and Colorado Rapids of MLS say no, Portland and Denver will not be in the UFL, unless the UFL is willing to pay an exorbitant amount to play at Mile High.  Now, the LA Galaxy might be open to allowing a UFL team in LA playing in their place, but LAFC probably won't be.

Yes, Lumen Field also hosts an MLS team, but the Seattle Sounders are not the primary tenant, as the Seahawks are the main tenant.  If the UFL goes back to Orlando, it will be back to Camping World Stadium as I doubt Orlando City FC will allow the UFL to play at their place.

So unless the MLS teams say yes or they are willing to pay a lot to rent out an NFL stadium for five games, I can't see the UFL going to Philly, New Jersey, Portland, Denver or Los Angeles.  I get the size of these markets, but does it matter if the UFL can't get stadiums in any of those places?

[4th&long]

The thing with future expansion is that the stadiums in those sites have to be in favor of the UFL playing in their stadium.  I hear all of the time suggestions of various MLS stadiums in various cities and if it was that easy, Philly and New Jersey would have been back already and playing in MLS Stadiums in Chester and Harrison.  Portland and Denver have MLS stadiums but there's no guarantee that the MLS teams in those cities want to share their stadiums with a UFL team.  For all we know, DC United might be the exception to that.  MLS teams in MLS stadiums have first priority even if they don't actually own the stadium.  

MLS stadiums are absolutely the perfect size for UFL teams, but Audi Field could up being a complete outlier and other MLS teams have to be open to the UFL and they might not be.  As long as the Portland Timbers and Colorado Rapids of MLS say no, Portland and Denver will not be in the UFL, unless the UFL is willing to pay an exorbitant amount to play at Mile High.  Now, the LA Galaxy might be open to allowing a UFL team in LA playing in their place, but LAFC probably won't be.

Yes, Lumen Field also hosts an MLS team, but the Seattle Sounders are not the primary tenant, as the Seahawks are the main tenant.  If the UFL goes back to Orlando, it will be back to Camping World Stadium as I doubt Orlando City FC will allow the UFL to play at their place.

So unless the MLS teams say yes or they are willing to pay a lot to rent out an NFL stadium for five games, I can't see the UFL going to Philly, New Jersey, Portland, Denver or Los Angeles.  I get the size of these markets, but does it matter if the UFL can't get stadiums in any of those places?

Sure it depends if they can get in their stadium, it also depends on what the UFL is willing to pay with their Cost discipline. But that goes for any stadium anywhere.

[GDAWG]

The thing with future expansion is that the stadiums in those sites have to be in favor of the UFL playing in their stadium.  I hear all of the time suggestions of various MLS stadiums in various cities and if it was that easy, Philly and New Jersey would have been back already and playing in MLS Stadiums in Chester and Harrison.  Portland and Denver have MLS stadiums but there's no guarantee that the MLS teams in those cities want to share their stadiums with a UFL team.  For all we know, DC United might be the exception to that.  MLS teams in MLS stadiums have first priority even if they don't actually own the stadium.  

MLS stadiums are absolutely the perfect size for UFL teams, but Audi Field could up being a complete outlier and other MLS teams have to be open to the UFL and they might not be.  As long as the Portland Timbers and Colorado Rapids of MLS say no, Portland and Denver will not be in the UFL, unless the UFL is willing to pay an exorbitant amount to play at Mile High.  Now, the LA Galaxy might be open to allowing a UFL team in LA playing in their place, but LAFC probably won't be.

Yes, Lumen Field also hosts an MLS team, but the Seattle Sounders are not the primary tenant, as the Seahawks are the main tenant.  If the UFL goes back to Orlando, it will be back to Camping World Stadium as I doubt Orlando City FC will allow the UFL to play at their place.

So unless the MLS teams say yes or they are willing to pay a lot to rent out an NFL stadium for five games, I can't see the UFL going to Philly, New Jersey, Portland, Denver or Los Angeles.  I get the size of these markets, but does it matter if the UFL can't get stadiums in any of those places?

Sure it depends if they can get in their stadium, it also depends on what the UFL is willing to pay with their Cost discipline. But that goes for any stadium anywhere.

For MLS stadiums, it's not just the cost, it's also whether or not the MLS team that is the primary tenant wants American football to ruin their field while their season is running and many MLS teams will probably say no for that very reason, even if the UFL gives them a lot of money.    

[4th&long]

The thing with future expansion is that the stadiums in those sites have to be in favor of the UFL playing in their stadium.  I hear all of the time suggestions of various MLS stadiums in various cities and if it was that easy, Philly and New Jersey would have been back already and playing in MLS Stadiums in Chester and Harrison.  Portland and Denver have MLS stadiums but there's no guarantee that the MLS teams in those cities want to share their stadiums with a UFL team.  For all we know, DC United might be the exception to that.  MLS teams in MLS stadiums have first priority even if they don't actually own the stadium.  

MLS stadiums are absolutely the perfect size for UFL teams, but Audi Field could up being a complete outlier and other MLS teams have to be open to the UFL and they might not be.  As long as the Portland Timbers and Colorado Rapids of MLS say no, Portland and Denver will not be in the UFL, unless the UFL is willing to pay an exorbitant amount to play at Mile High.  Now, the LA Galaxy might be open to allowing a UFL team in LA playing in their place, but LAFC probably won't be.

Yes, Lumen Field also hosts an MLS team, but the Seattle Sounders are not the primary tenant, as the Seahawks are the main tenant.  If the UFL goes back to Orlando, it will be back to Camping World Stadium as I doubt Orlando City FC will allow the UFL to play at their place.

So unless the MLS teams say yes or they are willing to pay a lot to rent out an NFL stadium for five games, I can't see the UFL going to Philly, New Jersey, Portland, Denver or Los Angeles.  I get the size of these markets, but does it matter if the UFL can't get stadiums in any of those places?

Sure it depends if they can get in their stadium, it also depends on what the UFL is willing to pay with their Cost discipline. But that goes for any stadium anywhere.

For MLS stadiums, it's not just the cost, it's also whether or not the MLS team that is the primary tenant wants American football to ruin their field while their season is running and many MLS teams will probably say no for that very reason, even if the UFL gives them a lot of money.    

Well... everyone has a price.  So the MLS will "want" the UFL at some $$$ level.  That might be an unreasonable level to be sure but its possible.  Just like Alliegiant field in LV, at a price they'd gotten in but it was unreasonable.  We are only talking 5-6 games. 

And my point is we don't know if its UFL playing hardball on price or MLS / Stadium - you may be right, its all MLS but we really dn't know for sure.