First, let me be clear: I'm not trying to attack the CFL.  I enjoyed watching the CFL when it was on US television, though I have to admit I haven't kept up with it since it hasn't been televised here in years.  But I'm concerned with the double standard the CFL seems to be developing when it comes to this issue.  Here at BR.com we have a pretty good mix of NFL, CFL, and AFL fans, so I thought this would be an interesting place to get some opinions regarding the current contract dispute between the CFL and the AFL.

It seems the CFL teams are a bit upset that their players are signing AFL contracts while still under contract with the CFL.  It also seems like they're conveniently forgetting the CFL's history of doing the same thing to the AFL over the years.  The AFL even has a designation for this: the Exempt List, which is for players who are under contract or whose rights still belong to AFL teams but are playing in the NFL, CFL, or NFL Europe.  These players receive no compensation from their AFL team, but at the same time the AFL teams are given no compensation for that player's absence.  They're just out of luck.  As the CFL teams are now finding out, that's not a particularly enjoyable situation to be in.  But the AFL had proposed an agreement several years ago with the CFL not to sign each other's players.  The CFL refused it.  Now that the tables have turned somewhat and the AFL appears to hold the upper hand in the situation, the CFL is upset about it.  The Canadian media is calling it "stealing" and "swiping", among other things.  Funny, I don't remember hearing any griping when the CFL was raiding AFL rosters.

I've always thought that the CFL has tried to protect it's "image" and it's occasionally blow up in there face. The CFL needs to realize that a lot of these players aren't exactly making the big money and some may see the AFL as a better chance to get noticed by the NFL. Let's face it, the NFL is the ultimate football league. This is not a slight to any CFL fans either. Survey every CFL player and ask them that if they had a secure roster spot in the NFL would they leave the CFL? Speaking of the AFL, have I read correctly that ESPN has the broadcast rights? That would suck for me since we don't have ESPN up here.
 

Geoff, ABC/ESPN does have AFL rights. Most games will be on ESPN/ESPN2 and there's no word yet as to whether TSN or anything will pick the games up in Canada. But the season opener and the ArenaBowl are on ABC, with the possibility of other games being added (though any games they add will likely be ESPN games not ABC games).

I was thinking that eventually, once the contract with the Disney empire expires, I could see the NFL Network making a bid for the AFL tv rights. It might seem like a odd pairing but I think it could work pretty well. Mind you, that'll be years from now.

They were negotiating a contract with NFL Network in addition to the ESPN/ABC and Fox Sports Net deals until just recently, but it was reported that talks broke down.

Doesn't hurt my feelings any, I have zero time for the NFL Network.  It's an absolute joke.  Living in the middle of Packer territory, as well as less than 100 miles from the Metrodome, yet because of the NFL Network's ridiculous asking price combined with a silly antiquated rule over what defines a team's "home market", nobody here saw the Packer-Viking game when they were on NFL Network unless they had a dish.

It seems that the NFL Network is available in some areas in the US and not in the others. It's part of my package with no real charge involved. Oddly enough, I had to watch there thursday night games on TSN since they were never on the NFL Network, I guess Canada was blacked out?

The NFL Network is available nationwide, but their ridiculous asking price has several of the major cable companies (Charter, Time Warner, etc) not picking them up.

Charter (which is what I have, and which has a monopoly on this market) used to carry NFL Network when it first started. But when NFL Network picked up live games this year, they tripled their asking price and demanded to be on basic cable rather than on the digital sports tier. I'm not a Charter fan, but they were right in telling them they were nuts.

Then, the NFL has in place a policy that the home markets of individual teams still get to see their games on local TV if they're on NFL Network, therefore if you lived in say Green Bay or Milwaukee you'd still get the game on broadcast TV even if you didn't have cable, dish, or NFL Network. But because of their crazy rules, the Eau Claire/Chippewa Valley market (and La Crosse also) is considered neither Packers territory nor Vikings territory. So even though we were the market that probably had the *most* interest, being located  between the two cities (Minneapolis is 100 miles west, GB is 200 miles east), we have a fair amount of fans of both teams (though make no mistake this is first and foremost Packer country), we were shut out from the game entirely.

It seems like there are too many companies in the US with cable and dish services. If I remember correctly, wasn't there a politician getting involved with the blackout/availability issue? Since the NFL Network had the Rutgers bowl game on the last week of December and people in that area couldn't get the channel, the NFL ended making that week a free preview.

 
On the subject of blackouts, SportsNet up here in Canada, (#2 to TSN) has SportsNet East, West, etc and each time there is a hockey game on the west channel, it's blacked out. What makes it odd is that the game is taking place on the other side of Canada!

Actually the problem is just the opposite. There aren't enough companies that offer cable services. Charter has a complete monopoly on this market, so they can choose to do pretty much whatever they want, and aside from dish services they have no head-to-head competition to worry about people switching to. That situation is common across the country, where only one company has a monopoly of a market.  If there were actually competition, you can imagine rates would come down and one of the two would be trying to add NFL Network (despite its ridiculous asking price) to hold it over the other company until they too added it.  And yes, Senator Ron Kind wrote a very good letter to the NFL prior to the Packer-Viking game, but to no avail.

Leagues have strange rules regarding blackouts sometimes, it probably has to do with that somehow.