Merger timeline speculation

[MarkNelson]

It mostly click bait. Some could be true, but how would you know? Now there is a headline in here saying the announcement will happen this week. even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[FootballYoda]

This convo is beyond tedious.

[4th&long]

This convo is beyond tedious.

Well Said.

So at this point... all these rumors likely have little to do with USFL vs XFL negotiations. But rather trying to nail down what makes sense for tv, costs, travel, stadium availability, logistics, stadium contracts, and trying to achieve what they agreed to on paper and making it work in real world 2024 etc...

This is why the rumors are all over the place as they likely solve one problem and run into another and its back to the drawing board. They likely want as many large TV markets mixed with cheap to operate markets and StL as the attendance king but logistically running into road blocks.

Maybe that's way off but its been 6-7 weeks since Axios broke the news and all indications are its 100% going to happen its now just gymnastics making it happen in a short time window.

It likely would not hurt if the leagues issue another joint statement along these lines.

If the ink isn't dry on the deal, which I doubt, its really get late in the game especially for XFL Feb season.

[MGB01]

Moose was mad that the USFL didn't trounce the XFL in the ratings. So yeah, I do sense a degree of vengeance. They're merging with the league to destroy it—and Gerry Cardinale really doesn't care all that much. In fact, this might fit Cardinale's vision of a minor league even more.

There's always that possibility, see Lachlan Murdoch--who let's face it, is really running the show.

But Moose couldn't do this even if he wanted to. While the main thing is none of the 90s Boys give a crap about their rep (at least Jones/Jimmy/Irvin/Deion. Aikman and Emmitt probably do) he has some semblance of it, and the other is while the USFL's superior to the XFL production-wise, big deal. Right now it's Summerall and Madden doing a D3 game 40 years ago during the strike. He still has keep a league running, all the targets don't go away, and in some cases the expectations probably just accelerated.

And it doesn't matter to Murdoch that WWE gets respectable numbers on Friday nights while he just came off the lowest rated World Series of all time. Ad rates is all he GAF about, and stand by if Moose doesn't deliver (which is why they're starting to put on the '83 USFL blitz--though you can argue they did it last year with the draft). So even if this were the case, his mission isn't accomplished, on the contrary his job just got harder. He won't be spiking the ball here.

[Rmbay]

I continue to be flummoxed by the idea that they're going to keep all eight USFL franchises and only four XFL ones. I put my XFL biases on the table, but I have trouble making out the rationale for keeping teams that have never played a down in their "home" city over teams like Orlando and Seattle that actually have legitimate fan bases there (and for some, like Seattle and Houston, two seasons of that). Orlando may have only drawn 7,000 or whatever, but it's more than the USFL teams that have never played in their cities.

Orlando, Seattle, etc. don't even have to play there; they can be teams that are in an alternate hub city. But at least they have an existing fanbase in that city. So what's the answer here? Does Fox think it'll be easier to sell franchises called NJ and Philly? Do they have some evidence that they have more fans in those cities than we think? Does it make the league more attractive to advertisers to have more major cities like that? Is it just spite from the Fox end of things? What am I missing here?

I'm not crazy about an 8-4 split either, but I can see some logic behind it. You've got 16 "pieces of property" and you're only going to keep 10 or 12. They have to make that business decision on which ones are positioned to perform now and in the long term, and unfortunately for the XFL the USFL has 2 consecutive seasons of building the brands, and that might mean something from an investor standpoint that none of us are privvy to. For the XFL, Las Vegas was a disaster and Orlando was vastly disappointing. Seattle should make the cut but they're most likely a victim of their own location. I think the Roughnecks should make it over the Gamblers but there could be money behind the scenes driving that. If not I think it's a mistake. The Roughnecks appear to be the hotter brand.

In the end, taking a Philly or NJ over an underperforming Orlando or the mess that was Vegas may very well be the better long-term solution on a few levels. And it might very well be driven by the amount of interest they may be getting behind the scenes, even if they may not have a home yet.

[GDAWG]

Howard Balzer interview with Dirty of the X Fan Show:

[GregParks]

I continue to be flummoxed by the idea that they're going to keep all eight USFL franchises and only four XFL ones. I put my XFL biases on the table, but I have trouble making out the rationale for keeping teams that have never played a down in their "home" city over teams like Orlando and Seattle that actually have legitimate fan bases there (and for some, like Seattle and Houston, two seasons of that). Orlando may have only drawn 7,000 or whatever, but it's more than the USFL teams that have never played in their cities.

Orlando, Seattle, etc. don't even have to play there; they can be teams that are in an alternate hub city. But at least they have an existing fanbase in that city. So what's the answer here? Does Fox think it'll be easier to sell franchises called NJ and Philly? Do they have some evidence that they have more fans in those cities than we think? Does it make the league more attractive to advertisers to have more major cities like that? Is it just spite from the Fox end of things? What am I missing here?

They have to make that business decision on which ones are positioned to perform now and in the long term, and unfortunately for the XFL the USFL has 2 consecutive seasons of building the brands, and that might mean something from an investor standpoint that none of us are privvy to.

Absolutely, and I sort of acknowledged in my post that there may be behind-the-scenes reasons (or reasons I can't think of) that all USFL teams would survive the merger. I would disagree slightly with the idea that they need to focus on performing now and in the long-term: The "now" is much more important. As we've seen, if you don't make the correct decisions now, there is no long-term, unless Fox is investing way more into this project than we think. And for the "now," you need to get as much interest and eyeballs on the product over the short-term as possible to make your potential investors believe it's worth their time and money. To me, doing that means keeping the teams that already have dedicates fanbases in those markets (even if you move those teams to a hub) over teams that while they may have played for two years, have never played in the home market and have no connection to fans there.

For the XFL, Las Vegas was a disaster and Orlando was vastly disappointing. Seattle should make the cut but they're most likely a victim of their own location.

But if you move Seattle to a hub, like Detroit for instance, their location shouldn't matter (nor should the fact that Orlando or Vegas were disappointing, because they'd be moved to hubs too in this scenario). I'm of course stipulating to the fact that hubs are happening. If you're looking for investors, is it the devil you know versus the devil you don't know, i.e. it may be harder to get investors involved when there is a disappointing history of attendance there versus a NY or Philly where you don't have any data about possible support in that city? I don't know the answer to that.

In the end, taking a Philly or NJ over an underperforming Orlando or the mess that was Vegas may very well be the better long-term solution on a few levels. And it might very well be driven by the amount of interest they may be getting behind the scenes, even if they may not have a home yet.

I just find it hard to believe, as I've expressed before, this league/USFL is going to get investors willing to pay the kind of money to buy franchises that have no history in those cities (especially as expensive as it likely would be to run a team in Philly or NJ, outside of the purchase and maintenance cost). As you suggest, maybe there's interest that we don't know about. I'm not going to sit here and defend Vegas, but for Orlando and Seattle, you have a base of fans there, as disappointing as those numbers were. So maybe that evens things out (Orlando/Seattle fans but disappointing attendance vs. NY/Philly big markets but no history there).

[Rmbay]

How this all shakes out is pretty fascinating. I truly hope Howard Balzer or his source mis-heard and it's 2 team hubs (XFL style, like one in Arlington and one in Canton) as opposed to 2-team hubs which would take a couple of teams away from their home crowds. Maybe you get some type of odd mixture, who knows. But if the 8x4 model is to be believed you could put 2 team hubs in the locations mentioned above and the travel is pretty centrally located for the most part, especially if you play most of the games in your own conference/division.

The idea of a team relocating or teams merging have been bandied about also. I know the USFL didn't really release attendance numbers, but did the Maulers ever really draw in Canton? Seems like it was/is a tough sell for a Steeler-like branded team to draw in Ohio. Would you move one of the 4 excluded XFL teams there instead?

[XFLUSFLGUY]

Xflnewshub states that information being passed around on the internet/twitter is wrong in terms of teams and timelines. Also states that government approval has NOT happened yet and are still going back and forth about issues. Announcement probably not next week either.

I’m getting CFL/XFL merger implosion vibes here. What are the chances this doesn’t actually happen?

[MGB01]

Xflnewshub states that information being passed around on the internet/twitter is wrong in terms of teams and timelines. Also states that government approval has NOT happened yet and are still going back and forth about issues. Announcement probably not next week either.

I’m getting CFL merger vibes here. What are the chances this doesn’t happen?

Be surprised at nothing. Hell I just saw a video today on Youtube about how this is really a buyout by the USFL (um, no no and no).

So point there is, is sabotage possible and who is it? (SPOILERS: 1)yes, yes, and yes; 2)already answered)