Around the NFL: NFL Offseason

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by Scalper

They don't view themselves as farm leagues for NFL, LOL. They have a new starting QB every 3-4 years. You dumb down the system so it can be quickly and easily learned and mastered rapidly. Without talent over the field, as in NFL, also easier to exploit matchups which spread etc. makes way easier.

A lot of NFL teams have new coaches/schemes/QBs every 3-4 years too. I still have never understood why the NFL hasn’t created a developmental team for each NFL franchise in smaller market cities. They would make a fortune in additional revenue.

[Scalper]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

A lot of NFL teams have new coaches/schemes/QBs every 3-4 years too. I still have never understood why the NFL hasn’t created a developmental team for each NFL franchise in smaller market cities. They would make a fortune in additional revenue.

Probably not. College team support is almost a cult. Why should the NFL pay for a developmental farm league when the corrupt NCAA and farcical American education system provide one for free? You aren't thinking like enough of a corporate shyster.

A lot of teams NFL do have new schemes every 3-4 years, but not the ones that win consistently. :-) Especially under the new CBA, where practice is so limited.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

A lot of NFL teams have new coaches/schemes/QBs every 3-4 years too. I still have never understood why the NFL hasn’t created a developmental team for each NFL franchise in smaller market cities. They would make a fortune in additional revenue.

No, they wouldn't. The bulk of the NFL's revenue comes from TV money. That kind of revenue just doesn't exist at the local level. The NFL would have to financially support a developmental league which would undoubtedly operate at a loss. That's why so many leagues come and go, without that TV money it's almost impossible for them to just break even.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by MTK

No, they wouldn't. The bulk of the NFL's revenue comes from TV money. That kind of revenue just doesn't exist at the local level. The NFL would have to financially support a developmental league which would undoubtedly operate at a loss. That's why so many leagues come and go, without that TV money it's almost impossible for them to just break even.

It's why the AAF and XFL folded.. I know the Rock thinks he can make it work but he won't... Nobody gives a shit about minor league football. In fact nobody really cares about that in any sport.

When was the last time you watched a Minor League baseball game?

[AnonEmouse]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

It's why the AAF and XFL folded.. I know the Rock thinks he can make it work but he won't... Nobody gives a shit about minor league football. In fact nobody really cares about that in any sport.

When was the last time you watched a Minor League baseball game?

I must admit I always find it unusual how much of a difference there is between the US and other nations when it comes to tier 2+ sport. i.e. Lower league football over here is well supported, almost as well as the Premier League, and has the revenue to support quite good salaries in the 2nd tier (Championship) and at least enough in the next level (League 1) to live off. Lower divisions do tend to have more part time players, and the lowest levels are lucky if they get expenses, but between the top 3 tiers that's 68 teams, with many players in the PL earning similar if not more money to NFL players. They play more games here obviously, so a direct comparison doesn't really make sense. But is it more a case that there are other sports competing for the audience (baseball, basketball, CFB), that a spring league professional set up couldn't; make the revenue? Or is it that the players wouldn't accept more economic salaries for the risk etc.?

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by AnonEmouse

I must admit I always find it unusual how much of a difference there is between the US and other nations when it comes to tier 2+ sport. i.e. Lower league football over here is well supported, almost as well as the Premier League, and has the revenue to support quite good salaries in the 2nd tier (Championship) and at least enough in the next level (League 1) to live off. Lower divisions do tend to have more part time players, and the lowest levels are lucky if they get expenses, but between the top 3 tiers that's 68 teams, with many players in the PL earning similar if not more money to NFL players. They play more games here obviously, so a direct comparison doesn't really make sense. But is it more a case that there are other sports competing for the audience (baseball, basketball, CFB), that a spring league professional set up couldn't; make the revenue? Or is it that the players wouldn't accept more economic salaries for the risk etc.?

The US has a problem that if you are not at the "Top level" of your field then nobody really cares about the rest..

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by AnonEmouse

I must admit I always find it unusual how much of a difference there is between the US and other nations when it comes to tier 2+ sport. i.e. Lower league football over here is well supported, almost as well as the Premier League, and has the revenue to support quite good salaries in the 2nd tier (Championship) and at least enough in the next level (League 1) to live off. Lower divisions do tend to have more part time players, and the lowest levels are lucky if they get expenses, but between the top 3 tiers that's 68 teams, with many players in the PL earning similar if not more money to NFL players. They play more games here obviously, so a direct comparison doesn't really make sense. But is it more a case that there are other sports competing for the audience (baseball, basketball, CFB), that a spring league professional set up couldn't; make the revenue? Or is it that the players wouldn't accept more economic salaries for the risk etc.?

The closest we have to this is baseball and hockey. Without knowing the set up of football over there, most players for baseball and hockey are drafted and signed by the major league club to either a major league or minor league deal. Most minor league baseball and hockey are big draws in attendance but no real tv revenue and only a small radio revenue. Not as many players are making what we would consider a livable salary unless they are a prospect or a role player that bounces back and forth to the major league club.

[Number44]

Originally Posted by AnonEmouse

I must admit I always find it unusual how much of a difference there is between the US and other nations when it comes to tier 2+ sport. i.e. Lower league football over here is well supported, almost as well as the Premier League, and has the revenue to support quite good salaries in the 2nd tier (Championship) and at least enough in the next level (League 1) to live off. Lower divisions do tend to have more part time players, and the lowest levels are lucky if they get expenses, but between the top 3 tiers that's 68 teams, with many players in the PL earning similar if not more money to NFL players. They play more games here obviously, so a direct comparison doesn't really make sense. But is it more a case that there are other sports competing for the audience (baseball, basketball, CFB), that a spring league professional set up couldn't; make the revenue? Or is it that the players wouldn't accept more economic salaries for the risk etc.?

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that a team in the 2nd tier has the possible opportunity to move up to the Premier League, with a team that wasn't as successful moving down. That can't happen in American professional sport. I wish it could.