Cohon Talks Maritime Expansion

Although the players did agree to give up their percentage the salary cap will still increase (although not by too much really until the new TV deal is signed). Then it will increase even more, just not to the same rate of overall revenues. Also, the league itself get a cut of TV money so it gets split 10 ways. Finally, teams need to make a heck of a lot more than $10 million to break even. The Riders brought in over $30 million to make a profit of $6 million last season. Its safe to assume only the 2 Southern Ontario teams bring in less than $15 Million a season.

Since 2008 the Canadian Currency has gone up around 21percent against the greenback. Imports have had a nice increase just on the value of the currency alone. Not NFL money but still worth their while especialy the way their economy is at home.

I think we all knwo the CFL will never be able to offer NFL money. especially the franchise tag.
But it would be nice to be within reasonable proximity. our starters need to make more then the PR in the NFL. SO we need to raise the salary cap. But at the same time, we need more players on the roster. the blance in the CFL is almost there, but not quite.

I prefer a perfectly balanced schedule, but I'm not sure that I am in the majority.
If you owned the Stampeders, would you rather have an extra potential home gate with the Eskimos or Roughriders, or would you rather see Ottawa and a maritime team?
A 10 team league schedule where you would play division opponents three times per season (12 games), and non-division opponents once per season (5 games), plus one extra game against the non-division opponent that finished in the same spot in their division as you did in yours (1st vs 1st, 2nd vs 2nd, etc.) could work.

IMO, a 10 team league should schedule each team to play eachother 2ice. Once home and once away.

This way, every team gets the same shake. No team can beat a weak team 3 or 4 times for easy wins, while a team in a tougher divisions has more of an up-hill climb for a playoff spot.

Not to mention, playing teams of the opposite division only once per season kinda mess things up for season ticket holders who might not get to see a team in the other division that they like to see.

They did it this way when Ottawa was in the league years ago (9 teams) and could very well do it again. Teams could save money on travel costs too. No?

^^^This^^^

The owners wouldn't want a balanced schedule for the exact reason you mentioned. Additionally, a balanced schedule renders divisions pointless and there would be more crossovers. I also considered the exact same division-based schedule you did, with the last non-divisional game against the equal placed team. So, good thinking, hahaha.

Of course, they could also go in the middle and play two division opponents three times and the other two twice (10 games). Then, they could play three non-division opponents twice and the other two twice (8 games).

Personally, I prefer the first option.

You need to play everybody twice so that the home fans actually see every team once a year. In a league this small there's no excuse to only have Winnipeg playing in Saskatchewan every other season.

And as for the crossover... with a theoretical 10 team league there's no need for it any more. 3 teams out of 5 get in for each division, that's made things more competitive.

In a league with a balanced schedule, there's no need for divisions.

Agreed as well. Make the divisions actually worthwile. If you play each team home and away, you make the divisions pointless and might as well scrap them. Now that won't happen either because the CFL wants to assure an east-west Grey Cup.

I think the only reason why having teams play home and away with each team is because that way you'd assure that each team plays in each city and so that you have your marquee players marketing the league in all markets. You don't want to have a situation like the NHL where Sidney Crosby or Alex Ovehkin come west only once in a blue moon. Otherwise, a non-balanced system is the best way to go.

Not true. Sponsors and TV networks don't tend to like it when 5 teams from the West and 1 team from the East makes the playoffs. Divisions are there to enforce some regional representation.

Besides... if you're an owner in the East do you really want the Riders (and their fans money) only showing up once every two years? Of course not.

I'm going to insert also beyond the media preferences what should be from "Professor Obvious" on this absurd idea of scrapping divisions or conferences in any pro football.

Having divisions at the core is also a competitive and mathematical construct such that potentially wins over an division opponent can be worth than wins over others given the tie-breaking procedures in place.

Having this construct in place produces better clashes towards the end of the season between otherwise historic rivals because now those games otherwise played mean much more for sake of the road to the playoffs and the Grey Cup.

From these clashes of rivals, by example we get sometimes down to having head-to-head records of teams in the same division or having the divisional record as tie-breakers. Both teams know that going into the clash otherwise too of course.

By all means keep the divisions in place!

i always hope its not a lot of hoopla then it turns out to be a bad idea... Like NFL toronto. NOt as awesome as they innitially thought.