Rebellion with a Letterhead
It finally happened: the whispers became signatures, the DMs became a declaration, and the quiet hallway mutiny got its own press office.
On July 16, 2025, eight franchises — Frankfurt Galaxy, Rhein Fire, Vienna Vikings, Madrid Bravos, Raiders Tirol, Prague Lions, Paris Musketeers, and Panthers Wrocław — dropped a joint statement that hit like a thunderclap across the European football scene.
They called it the European Football Alliance (EFA).
What sounded like yet another sports acronym was actually a full-blown manifesto: the EFA was born out of the Football Franchise Association (FFA), a sort of union that had been quietly forming since early 2024. Now, it was official — and public.
For a Fair Future of European Football
That was the headline of the German PDF release — you can still read it in full on football-austria.com or endzone.ch.
It didn’t mince words:
The eight founding members have formed the European Football Alliance (EFA) with the goal of creating a fair, transparent and sustainable future for European football.
And then the hammer drops.
The statement demands a full disclosure of all central contracts and income streams — TV rights, sponsorships, merchandising, the whole money trail. No more black boxes. No more ‘just trust us.’
It goes further: the EFA wants clear rules about ownership and conflicts of interest, to stop teams connected to league management from getting “unfair advantages.”
Also on the list: support mechanisms for financially weaker franchises, so that the league doesn’t just look like a glittering top layer with a crumbling base.
It reads less like a polite suggestion and more like an indictment wrapped in a mission statement.
We are not licensees — we are partners
That line, echoed by multiple teams that shared the post, captures the mood perfectly.
They’re done playing tenants in someone else’s house.
They want equity, voice, and transparency — the trifecta that’s been missing since the ELF launched under the Esume / Karajica model back in 2020.
For years, the ELF sold a dream of “NFL-style football in Europe.”
Now the EFA was saying: “Sure — but NFL-style also means NFL-style governance.”
In other words, if you’re going to copy the product, copy the playbook too: owner committees, financial audits, shared broadcast revenues, and actual power for the teams that put players on the field.
A polite declaration of war
The tone of the release is classic German corporate diplomacy: civil, lawyer-approved, and ice-cold under the surface.
It never once says “ELF is broken.”
But it doesn’t have to. Every line implies it.
It talks about “creating a stable and professional structure” — translation: we don’t believe the current one is stable or professional enough.
It calls for “clear rules” and “fair participation in revenues” — translation: we’re not getting our fair share.
And it ends on the kind of positive-sounding note that in PR language usually means “we’re done being ignored.”
The fallout
Within hours, the statement hit every football-adjacent timeline across Europe.
Rhein Fire’s post got thousands of reactions on Instagram.
Vienna Vikings reposted the press release with the caption “For the Future.”
Footbowl EU dropped their now-infamous thread comparing it to “a declaration of independence with more commas.”
Meanwhile, ELF HQ stayed silent — which, honestly, said more than any press release could.
In the weeks that followed, commissioner Patrick Esume’s resignation would land via his lawyer, and CEO Željko Karajica would start rearranging titles on his LinkedIn.
The timing wasn’t coincidence; it was aftershock.
Why this day matters
This was the day the split stopped being rumor and became paperwork.
For the first time, Europe’s top franchises weren’t just grumbling privately — they were going public with demands, names, and a logo.
The EFA wasn’t a protest group anymore; it was a rival league in waiting.
Whether you called it a rebellion or a rescue mission depended on which jersey you wore.
Either way, the fault line in European football had been drawn — neatly, officially, and with company letterhead.
The revolution will be PDF’d.
PM_German_European_Football_Alliance___Fuer_eine_faire_Zukunft_des_europaeischen_Footballs
The European Football Alliance (EFA)—an association of several franchises within the European League of Football (ELF), including some of the league’s most traditional and successful organizations—calls for structural reform, economic fairness, and true transparency.
We believe in the ELF project. Our organizations have helped build it over the years and have supported it through difficult conditions. The idea is solid, and the athletic potential is real. However, five years after the league’s founding, recent ELF statements highlight fundamental structural issues:
“The ELF was founded in 2020 to professionalize football in Europe and give the sport the stage it deserves. In just five years, we’ve created structures that have never existed before in this form. The ELF has international reach, a strong partner network, and football fans around the world.”
Operational quality, financial integrity, and the sports product have stagnated—and in many areas, have clearly deteriorated. The league and its leadership have failed to attract, retain, or strategically develop sponsors, due in large part to the league’s poor business reputation and disappointing management record. As a result, franchise credibility is also harmed, making it difficult to build long-term partnerships and secure financial stability.
“At the same time, the ELF is still a start-up, and it’s inevitable that not everything will work perfectly.”
The “start-up excuse” directly contradicts the previous statement and is no longer acceptable. As ELF itself has communicated, it is the league’s responsibility to provide an appropriate framework for the successful operation of all organizations—a responsibility that is currently not being met. Furthermore, this justification reveals a growing disconnect from reality, as well as a lack of seriousness and respect when structural and financial challenges faced by franchises are downplayed with phrases like “it’s inevitable that not everything will work perfectly”—especially when some of these problems are failures of the league itself, such as delayed or nonexistent revenue distributions.
“The league maintains regular communication with representatives from all franchises, takes criticism seriously, engages with it, is always open to constructive conversations, and continuously works to optimize its processes.”
The perception of constructive dialogue with franchises does not match reality. Discussions between the parties yield no results, are delayed, or are devalued through vague generalizations. The openness the ELF claims to demonstrate does not align with the franchises’ experience.
Franchises do not receive reliable information about key revenue sources such as TV contracts, sponsorship deals, or merchandising income. In many cases, payments are delayed significantly or not made at all, while open claims against franchises remain unresolved.
“Franchises are independent businesses and responsible for building their own structures. The league provides a framework and offers support and guidance. The ELF’s goal remains the sustainable development of football in Europe together with all stakeholders.”
While the league controls central revenues, franchises bear the majority of operational costs. There are no support mechanisms for financially weaker markets. Instead, the league operates under a structural model that increases the burden on franchises, hinders their financial development, and caters to one-sided interests. Franchises that are financially closer to league ownership receive preferential treatment in terms of access to resources, media visibility, and operational support.
Additionally, the “framework” mentioned has not evolved since the league’s founding. It has been overstretched by unplanned expansion, and in light of multiple franchise withdrawals and insolvencies, has clearly exceeded its limits.
This uneven distribution of resources, combined with the economic pressures faced by many franchises, inevitably leads to a noticeable decline in the overall athletic quality of the league. Financially struggling teams cannot invest in professional healthcare, sustainable infrastructure, or stable game-day operations. As a result, player injury risks increase, and the quality of training and competition decreases—damaging the overall product.
Conclusion
In the past five years, the league has failed to sustainably improve its operational standards, financial foundation, or the structural conditions necessary for athletic success. Despite growing its fan base, it has not succeeded in establishing reliable sponsorships or in distributing central revenues fairly and transparently. New franchises have been admitted without proper due diligence, resulting in financial instability and insolvencies.
As a result, athletic competition suffers, players face greater injury risks, and investor, partner, and fan confidence continues to decline. The franchises that make up the EFA can no longer and will no longer support this direction. We demand a fundamental reorientation of the league, rooted in true transparency, economic fairness, and structural accountability.
The EFA Demands:
Full transparency regarding contracts and central revenue sources (TV, sponsors, merchandising).
Fair and structured franchise participation in league revenues.
Clear regulations on conflicts of interest and ownership structures.
Support mechanisms for financially weaker franchises.
Development of a league structure based on equitable partnerships.
Based on the experience of the past five years, we seriously doubt that the league’s current leadership has the will to engage in meaningful dialogue or to take the urgent action needed to improve European football. Therefore, EFA members explicitly reserve the right to explore all options that serve the long-term preservation and development of their organizations.
