ISL 2025–26 Finally Set to Go, But AIFF’s ₹24.26 Crore Plan Leaves Clubs Cornered

With the 2025–26 ISL season hanging in the balance, the All India Football Federation has put forward an internal budget to run the league on its own. The proposal, presented to clubs during a high-stakes virtual meeting with the Joint Secretary of Sports, has less to do with long-term vision and more with immediate survival.

Rather than offering a roadmap to rebuild confidence in the league, the plan outlines a stripped-down, cost-focused structure that leaves clubs facing a stark choice. Officials demanded a straight “yes or no” on the proposed formats, leaving little room for negotiation or discussion on commercial, operational, or sporting concerns.

A Binary Choice in a Complex Situation

The Indian Super League has faced uncertainty for months, primarily due to the absence of a confirmed broadcaster and commercial partner. Against this backdrop, AIFF’s approach surprised several clubs. Instead of collaborative problem-solving, the meeting effectively cornered clubs into accepting or rejecting a framework built on assumptions that have yet to materialise.

At the heart of the proposal are two possible formats for the 2025–26 season, each with its own financial and logistical risks.

Option 1: Single-leg Home-and-away Model (₹24.26 crore)

The first option is a reduced single-leg home-and-away format, projected to cost ₹24.26 crore in total. Clubs would host a limited number of matches in their home cities, cutting travel and operational expenses.

AIFF claims it would cover 40 per cent of the total cost, amounting to ₹9.70 crore. However, the fine print tells a different story:

• Only 10 per cent of this contribution is guaranteed AIFF funding.
• The remaining 30 per cent depends on securing a commercial partner — something the federation has failed to do in its last attempt, which reportedly drew zero bids.
• From the ₹9.70 crore contribution, AIFF plans to recover most of the amount by charging clubs ₹1 crore each as franchise fees.

In effect, the federation’s net financial exposure is minimal, while clubs shoulder the bulk of the risk.

Budget Breakdown (₹24.26 crore model)

Broadcast Production: The Biggest Red Flag

The most concerning line item is production and transmission. AIFF has earmarked just ₹9.77 crore for broadcast operations. In recent ISL seasons, broadcast and transmission costs alone have hovered around ₹70 crore per season.

Such a drastic reduction almost certainly implies a visible drop in production quality — fewer cameras, reduced technical standards, and limited storytelling. This, in turn, risks making the product unattractive to broadcasters and sponsors, creating a vicious cycle of declining commercial value.

Option 2: Centralised Venue Model (₹38 crore)

The second option, proposed by clubs, is a centralised venue format similar to the bio-bubble seasons during the COVID-19 outbreak. All matches would be staged in a single city, most likely Goa, using two or three stadiums.

This model is estimated to cost around ₹38 crore. AIFF has indicated it could contribute up to 40 per cent of this cost, capped at ₹25 crore. Yet, even this figure hinges on financial clarity that does not exist. Without confirmed broadcast or commercial deals, the promised contribution remains theoretical.

While operationally simpler, the centralised format also limits local fan engagement and matchday revenue, pushing clubs further into dependency on central funding and sponsorships.

A “Take-it-or-leave-it” Presentation

What unsettled clubs most was not just the budget size, but the manner in which the decision was driven. The ₹24.26 crore plan was not presented as a discussion document. Structural issues, revenue-sharing mechanisms, and commercial risks were brushed aside in favour of urgency.

With no confirmed broadcaster, no secured commercial partner, and no clarity on how revenues would be shared, clubs fear that accepting either model could leave them absorbing most of the operational and financial liabilities.

Timeline Under Pressure

AIFF’s internal timeline leaves little margin for error:

Expecting broadcasters and sponsors to commit within weeks, especially to a downgraded product, is a significant gamble.

Survival Mode, Not a Revival

Taken together, AIFF’s ₹24.26 crore ISL plan reads less like a strategy to rebuild Indian football’s flagship league and more like an emergency measure to simply get the season underway. There is no allocation for youth leagues, no parachute payments, and no clear pathway to restore the league’s commercial credibility.

Whether this approach merely keeps the ISL alive or accelerates its decline hinges on one unresolved question: can AIFF realistically secure a broadcast and commercial partner in time — and at a level that preserves the league’s value?

For now, the answer remains uncertain.

Read More: Inter Kashi FC Sign MOU with CM Anglo Bengali College for Rs 60 Crore AFC-Compliant Stadium in Varanasi

FAQs