For all the positive things that the European League of Football (ELF) has achieved, there are also some problems. Most are business related. Overall, the franchises are satisfied with the sporting area, which is primarily led by Commissioner Patrick Esume. At least that’s what we hear again and again.
But the ELF’s sporting side also has a huge problem: imbalance. The difference between the top teams and those who are happy to win at all is huge. The outcomes of most games are predictable, and in the vast majority of cases the results are very clear.
This has consequences in two areas. First: The ELF product becomes unattractive. If everyone already knows that Team A will win against Team B 40:10, no one likes to watch it. Second: The play-offs will be distorted. With a bit of luck in the schedule, a team can have a huge advantage because in the end the point difference is a tiebreaker.
In the third and final part of our ELF series we address these two topics. So: How can the gap between the teams be closed? We are also looking at a rule regarding the playoffs that we would definitely like to change.
Who will make it to the play-offs and why?
In the first two parts of the series we covered the teams, which conferences we would put them in and who should play against whom.
When the regular season is over, it’s time for the play-offs. We wouldn’t change anything about the basic format; Six teams come in, two get a day off in the first round. The three winners of the conferences and the three best teams based on the number of wins come in.
But in our opinion, there is a need for action when determining the wild cards if two teams have the same number of wins. The current ELF regulation stipulates that the direct comparison counts. This is logical and should stay that way.
But what if that doesn’t work because there wasn’t one or there are more than two teams involved? Finally, the difference between points scored and points allowed was considered. In 2024, this ensured that Stuttgart Surge had the edge over Rhein Fire, moved straight into the semi-finals and enjoyed home advantage there. Stuttgart deserved that too, no question about it. Nevertheless, the game plan was considerably easier than Rhein Fire’s, so the better point difference was logical.
It would make more sense to ignore the point difference and instead take into account the difficulty of the game plan. So, as is the case in the NFL. The ELF is largely guided by its rules anyway.
After the direct comparison, there are a few tiebreakers in the NFL that do not apply to the ELF. But then there are, for example, “Strength of Victory” and “Strength of Schedule”, i.e. difficulty of victories and the game plan. It works like this: The number of games won by a team’s defeated opponents are added up and divided by the total number of games played by those opponents. This results in a quotient, the “Strength of Victory” (SOV). The difficulty of the game board would be similar, except that all opponents are involved, defeated or not.
Using these tiebreakers would provide a more reliable picture of the true strength of two teams when they have not played against each other. The point difference is more for football, where hardly any points are scored.
More imports for more equal opportunities?
The idea of the ELF is to create the same conditions for all teams. The salary cap or the import regulation, according to which a maximum of ten foreign players can be in the squad, should ensure this. Here too, similar to the NFL. It basically doesn’t matter whether one team has more money available than the other because it can’t invest that money anyway.
But the calculation only works to a limited extent. Franchises with better financial resources are not allowed to pay their players more salaries, but they are allowed to create better conditions than others. This includes coaching, training conditions, apartments and so on.
There are also location advantages. The teams from Germany and Austria in particular have significantly better local players than most others. Of the four ELF finals, two consisted only of German teams; in the other two, a German team played against an Austrian team. That’s not a coincidence.
In addition, one crucial thing is missing compared to the NFL: the draft. There is no college system, no structure where the weakest team from the previous year can select what they consider to be the best player. In the NFL, equal opportunities are fundamental.
The draft system cannot be transferred to the ELF. But maybe the basic idea behind it: the weakest teams from the previous season get a small advantage in order to catch up. Maybe through an additional import player? There are problems with many of the weaker teams, especially in the offensive line. Maybe it would make sense to allow them one additional American there? Or should perhaps the limit on imports from Europe be lifted entirely?
These are things that have been brought up again and again by players or those responsible in the league. It might help. But at the same time it brings with it other challenges: Can the teams even finance another US import? Where is the line drawn between who gets one and who doesn’t? Or should all teams simply be allowed an additional import for the offensive line? And if we’re talking about lifting the limit on e-imports: won’t the best Europeans just end up with the best teams?
To be honest: we don’t have a silver bullet either. Getting the weakest teams in the league to even begin to reach the level of the best is incredibly difficult. But one thing is certain: the ELF must do something.
Exchange with whom and about what?
“Every year in the off-season, the rules are looked at, checked and, if necessary, adjusted,” said Andreas Nommensen, Director of Sports at the ELF, to our editorial team a few weeks ago. It was about the play-off regulations mentioned above, but the statement is general enough to apply here too, especially in the second part: There is “a regular exchange on various topics” with the “teams and committees” of the ELF “, explained Nimmensen further. Just who these “committees” are and what they are about is unclear, as are the results.
Commissioner Patrick Esume explained the discrepancy within the ELF teams before this year’s final to the SID by saying that “we are trying to achieve the transfer from amateurism to professionalism in American football”.
This is extremely difficult and takes time, but Esume gets the point. Nevertheless, it would be desirable if it could be recognized that one’s own rules were really reconsidered and, if necessary, adjusted in order to actively ensure more equal opportunities. So far it seems as if the teams have been left alone with this. So some won’t be able to catch up.
Solutions could certainly be found in collaboration with the teams. But it doesn’t seem like that’s happening. And if so, it is not communicated sufficiently. It’s a shame.
