Jump to content

Should the NFL bring back a farm system like NFL Europe?


TecmoSuperJoe

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, youngosu said:

The XFL averaged over 20,000 fans per game. That is not empty. And the league didn't really go bankrupt. NBC was not committed to the league. Had NBC been committed the league could have easily continued. 

FANS also means viewers. NBC pulled their 2 year commitment because NO ONE WATCHED ON TELEVISION. The Chicago vs. NY-NJ received a freaking 1.5, the lowest ever (at the time) for any major network primetime weekend first run sports television broadcast in the history of the United States!

But, you go ahead and continue living in whatever fantasy land/alternate reality that you want. You seem happy enough there.

7 minutes ago, youngosu said:

Now, yes the XFL lost money in 2001 but that is because any and every league is gonna lose money early on. NBC decided they didn't have the stomach for it. But a league that can get over 20,000 fans per game (and the XFL did) can easily survive and eventually become profitable (see Major League Soccer). 

Is it common for most leagues to lose $35 million and only recoup 30% of their initial investment in less than one season? I'd love to see the numbers because I highly doubt it. Vince McMahon used the words "colossal failure" when describing his own investment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MWil23 said:

And fans aren't buying that product, attending their games, or buying merchandise

You sure about that? I know I’d go watch some football live if it was a fraction of the cost then an NFL game is. The cost of going to an NFL game is just stupidly overpriced when there is a better viewing experience on my couch. Now, drop those prices to a fraction and people will go for the atmosphere. It’s hilarious that people think Vince is some huge moron for trying this again. Dude built WWE to what it is today by doing things different and thinking outside the box and not being afraid to fail more then once. Do you really think he didn’t learn from his mistakes the first go round? Does that mean this time it’ll be a success? Heck no, but everyone brushing it off simply because of the failure the first time is about as short sighted as it gets. I for one am excited to see what XFL turns out the be and if it equals more quality football, why would any of us be opposed to that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

FANS also means viewers. NBC pulled their 2 year commitment because NO ONE WATCHED ON TELEVISION. The Chicago vs. NY-NJ received a freaking 1.5, the lowest ever (at the time) for any major network primetime weekend first run sports television broadcast in the history of the United States!

But, you go ahead and continue living in whatever fantasy land/alternate reality that you want. You seem happy enough there.

Is it common for most leagues to lose $35 million and only recoup 30% of their initial investment in less than one season? I'd love to see the numbers because I highly doubt it. Vince McMahon used the words "colossal failure" when describing his own investment.

MLS claims to have lost 250 million in its first 6 seasons. Just over 40 million per year. 

http://www.latimes.com/sports/soccer/la-sp-soccer-baxter-20151206-story.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, youngosu said:

MLS claims to have lost 250 million in its first 6 seasons. Just over 40 million per year. 

http://www.latimes.com/sports/soccer/la-sp-soccer-baxter-20151206-story.html

First, I've already stated above why MLS is the exception to the rule, but apparently you missed that. I suggest you go back and re-read it.

Secondly, please ignore everything else I wrote, which you obviously have no answer for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

First, I've already stated above why MLS is the exception to the rule, but apparently you missed that. I suggest you go back and re-read it.

Secondly, please ignore everything else I wrote, which you obviously have no answer for.

Where do you state MLS is an exception? I'd love to see those reasons why MLS is somehow different. The only thing that makes MLS different is they accepted such a reality and worked through it. A spring football league would need to be willing to do the same. It does make for an easy argument when you ask a question and dismiss the answer. 

And I didn't ignore anything. You cited 1 TV rating. Yes, the original XFL was poorly conceived and turned off many viewers. I never claimed the original XFL would have succeeded without massive changes. No one watched the original XFL because they presented a product that wasn't ready and overhyped that product (claiming it would be better than the NFL). Their marketing over sold the product. You can't do that. 

I have claimed new leagues lose lots of money and that spring football could succeed. I 100% stand by both claims.

 

That said, I don't want to argue over rather a spring league can or cannot work because that isn't what this thread is about. Its about rather the NFL should have a developmental league and developmental leagues aren't about TV numbers or really even making a profit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, youngosu said:

Where do you state MLS is an exception? I'd love to see those reasons why MLS is somehow different.

Page 1, 5 hours ago.

"Its the same for MLS soccer. It’s ok here because it doesn’t have European high level competition right here in the US." MLS doesn't have a competitor here in the United States, period. Plus, if the Euro-leagues/clubs were here, MLS would be bankrupt and out of business.

26 minutes ago, youngosu said:

The only thing that makes MLS different is they accepted such a reality and worked through it.

And they have no other real competition in the same sport.

26 minutes ago, youngosu said:

A spring football league would need to be willing to do the same. It does make for an easy argument when you ask a question and dismiss the answer. 

Or if you have two other major examples of complete failure in the USFL and the XFL, both in two different decades.

26 minutes ago, youngosu said:

And I didn't ignore anything.

I brought up multiple examples and you didn't respond. That's called ignoring.

26 minutes ago, youngosu said:

You cited 1 TV rating.

Because THAT WAS THE CHANNEL THE XFL WAS ON!!!!

26 minutes ago, youngosu said:

Yes, the original XFL was poorly conceived and turned off many viewers. I never claimed the original XFL would have succeeded without massive changes. No one watched the original XFL because they presented a product that wasn't ready and overhyped that product (claiming it would be better than the NFL). Their marketing over sold the product. You can't do that. 

And a litany of other reasons, including sub par players, former NFL busts/cast-offs, and no one wanted to watch it on television.

26 minutes ago, youngosu said:

I have claimed new leagues lose lots of money and that spring football could succeed. I 100% stand by both claims.

As I've stated countless times, the only way it ever succeeds is if they're able to poach freshmen/sophomores who want to go pro early and NFL busts with big personalities or college talent like Tebow and Manziel. They'll also have to poach a lot of arena league talent for depth. Most of the 22 year olds who can't make the NFL are ready to start careers, not play for peanuts and delay the rest of their lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About the TV rating comment, I realize that was the channel the XFL was on, it was still 1 game. Not every game got a 1.5. The average for the season was a 3 on NBC. That was why I said you picked 1 rating for 1 game which is ridiculous. The problem was NBC stupidly promised advertisers a 4.5. The XFL would have played in 2002 had McMahan been willing to shorten a WWF broadcast by 30 minutes. That was what actually killed the XFL. As for the USFL, it likely would have succeeded had it not been stupid enough to try to move to the fall. An attempted move to the fall killed the USFL, not a lack of interest. The USFL failed specifically because it stopped being a spring football league. The USFL is exactly what a spring league should model itself after. Play a longer season that starts around April 1st and ends in mid July and don't be afraid to go to major markets. 

But, I am not going to argue about spring football. You want to have that debate we can gladly start another thread. You win within this thread. I don't really care to go point for point about it here. This thread is about an NFL developmental league. 

That said, I will focus on your last comment about 22 year olds unwilling to play in a league other than the NFL and instead decide to start careers. Because that is simply untrue. Hundreds of players spend years trying to make NFL rosters often times spending little to no time on an NFL or even practice squad roster. Go look at you favorite NFL teams 90 man offseason roster and you will find plenty of 22-25 year old players with little to no NFL game experience. Those players would jump at the chance to play in an NFL developmental league (which again is what this thread is about) for peanuts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MWil23 said:

blah blah blah

All you have offered is that it didn't work 18 years ago and that you wouldn't participate. So what ?

They don't need you and they don't care about you. And neither does the NFL, which is why they changed the game to go after casuals and spent eleventy million to attract women and are hell-bent on going to Europe, Mexico and Asia. Like I said, there are vastly more non-NFL consumers than there are NFL fans and that's what everybody is going after. And while the big networks are partnered with the NFL, streaming and other services are more than capable of reaching and capturing a global audience. That wasn't the case in 2000, but times have changed.

Don't like it ? You certainly don't have to watch. But don't delude yourself into thinking your participation matters to them or their success... ( it doesn't)

Your response wasn't a total bust though - I did get a smile out of an 0-16 browns fan riffing about an inferior product.   That's just beautiful ! 

Everybody funny, now you funny too 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, JustAnotherFan said:

If the players aren't good enough to earn a draft selection by competing at the college level then they don't deserve a spot on an NFL roster to begin with. 

Well that's just stupid. Not everyone develops to their peak at the age of 19-22. Some guys take a little longer to develop and show their skills. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

Nah. There aren't enough good players to come out of there. I can only think of 1-2 guys that were serviceable coming out of that league. There's no point in creating an entire separate league to give the 1-2 guys that could use the chance that opportunity.

That is because it was in the spring and NFL teams didn't send their best players in need of development. Its why it needs to be in the fall like developmental leagues in every other sport. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...