They Ought to Have a D League

[texaspackerbacker]

The NFL ought to have a developmental league similar to what the NBA has - each NFL team having one team in it, of which they retain the rights for maybe half the players. There is plenty of talent around considering all the college players graduating each year. Pay them very little; Let ticket prices and fan interest mostly sustain the cost.

This shouldn't be that hard to do. Some of us remember the player strike a couple decades ago when the NFL teams threw together scab teams almost over night, and while way short of NFL quality, they didn't embarrass themselves either.

You could really draft and develop with that with a lot less reduction of quality on the major league level. I'm pretty sure fans would support it. I see no real down side to something like this.

[pbmax]

I whole-heartedly agree.

[gbgary]

with the violence of the game, and the small window of production that most players have, a d league wouldn't accomplish much imo. probably only get a handful of players that would ever make it to the nfl and then they'd be one-and-done most likely. costs would outweigh the benefit.

[red]

Absolutely they should imo

Then maybe get rid of the 3 years in college bs

[pbmax]

with the violence of the game, and the small window of production that most players have, a d league wouldn't accomplish much imo. probably only get a handful of players that would ever make it to the nfl and then they'd be one-and-done most likely. costs would outweigh the benefit.

Should be in place of college. Dump the 3 years after HS graduation requirement.

[Cheesehead Craig]

D-League has already failed. It was called the World League, then it was NFL Europe.

Like it or not, the NCAA is the NFL training grounds.

[texaspackerbacker]

The World League and NFL Europe did not (to my recollection) have teams directly tied to NFL teams. The primary benefit would be to NFL teams, being able to take their time developing "project" type players and being able to retain the rights to more players. I really don't think costs would be all that high if players were mostly paid about on the level of practice squad players, and if marketed right, it might even be a net money maker. Injuries shouldn't be that much worse than with practice squad members now. I'd eliminate the practice squad and have the D team practice with the big team - keeping the franchises geographically close - Waukesha Packers, Peoria Bears, Fargo Vikings, Flint Lions, etc.

I'd hate to see this replace the 3 year NCAA thing, as that would do major harm to college football IMO.

[red]

everything tex just said, i completely agree with (except the college part)

keep the teams close to home, because they are practicing with the main team, but put then out there in the surrounding areas

and the main downfall of nfl europe and the world league wasn't that they were developmental leagues, its that they were played in countries that don't give a shit about american football

the big hurdle to a real developmental league though is the NCAA, the aren't gonna loose they're cheap labor and cash cow without a huge fight

[Cheesehead Craig]

everything tex just said, i completely agree with (except the college part)

keep the teams close to home, because they are practicing with the main team, but put then out there in the surrounding areas

and the main downfall of nfl europe and the world league wasn't that they were developmental leagues, its that they were played in countries that don't give a shit about american football

the big hurdle to a real developmental league though is the NCAA, the aren't gonna loose they're cheap labor and cash cow without a huge fight

Those leagues were filled with guys who just needed some "developing" and their dreams were to make it to the NFL and 99% of them failed to make it there. The league failed because of a combo platter of that the product wasn't all that good and people didn't want to watch it.

The same thing would happen here. Nobody would give a shit about yet another football league. There's big signs of football fatigue already. Fans are complaining about the NFL on Thursday night as it is, and that's with the actual NFL and not a bunch of bottom of the roster, easily replaced scrubs. Who is going to pay to watch bad football? (insert Bears season ticket holders joke here).

The NFL is driven solely by money and a D-League is complete money pit, even if it's just in the US. No way the NFL is going to start something up that will only lose them money.

Besides, so long as the NCAA is giving the milk away for free, why invest in another herd of cows?

[Maxie the Taxi]

I totally agree with Cheesehead Craig. This is one of Tex's worst ideas ever, and he usually is football savvy.

Craig hit the nail on the head when he mentioned football fatigue. The "Waukesha Packers?" hahahaha Nobody in Waukesha I know is going to shell out any money at all to watch a bunch of college rejects play double-A minor league football in a high school stadium.

And if the NFL suspends the 3 year eligibility rule, college fans will go nuts, especially down South. College football is a blood sport down here. College fans won't stand for their All American players being replaced by high school JV players.

Is the Gator-Seminole rivalry going to be replaced by a rivalry between the St. Augustine Jaguars against the Clearwater Buccaneers? hahahaha

[red]

yet thousands of people show up for college games every week and high school games

and thousands show up up AA and AAA baseball games, but no one will show up for football ?

and it wouldn't be that big of a money pit, you wouldn't be paying these guys a half million dollars, you'd be paying them 1 or 2 thousand a week (for maybe 16 weeks) for maybe 40 guys. i bet with traveling and renting out local high school stadiums you could have a team for less then 1 or 2 million a year

and you really don't think people will show up? people are showing up by the hundreds to see 2 or 3 packers scrubs show up and schools, just because they're accosiated with the packers

every other sport in the world has figured out how to do developmental leagues, but the nfl

and if college is worried about losing players, maybe they should start paying for them. its almost like saying, "oh we could free the slaves", but the cotton industry would really suffer and the plantation owners would lose a ton of money"

[pbmax]

How is the Arena League still in business?
(checks Google to be sure Arena League is still in business -- YES!)

Both the USFL and the XFL put butts in seats until one got dumb and moved out of the spring and the other couldn't decide whether to be sportstainment or football.

People will go. I bet you could put a franchise in each of St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland right now with a few enthusiastic supporters.

[red]

those other leagues also tried to compete directly against the nfl (other then arena which is almost another sport)

also, football is more popular then ever before, not like the 70's or 80's when other leagues failed

[red]

How is the Arena League still in business?
(checks Google to be sure Arena League is still in business -- YES!)

Both the USFL and the XFL put butts in seats until one got dumb and moved out of the spring and the other couldn't decide whether to be sportstainment or football.

People will go. I bet you could put a franchise in each of St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland right now with a few enthusiastic supporters.

canton bulldogs
kenosha maroons


you could really bring back some old school teams and cities that were a part of the early nfl

[QBME]

I miss Patler. He would put some logic into this that escapes me.

[texaspackerbacker]

First of all, the NCAA shouldn't have objections if the 3 year thing was kept. A D league definitely would NOT be designed to replace college football. While development would be a part of it, it wouldn't be the primary thing either. If you had a couple of players a year per team come up through the ranks, that would be fine. It would be a way for the NFL team to stockpile more than the current practice squads, and I do think people would pay a little bit to watch, assuming the teams were linked to the local NFL team. I know I would. A key element to this would be having the parent team retain rights to at least a large part of the players - as they basically do not with practice squads now.

[pbmax]

First of all, the NCAA shouldn't have objections if the 3 year thing was kept. A D league definitely would NOT be designed to replace college football. While development would be a part of it, it wouldn't be the primary thing either. If you had a couple of players a year per team come up through the ranks, that would be fine. It would be a way for the NFL team to stockpile more than the current practice squads, and I do think people would pay a little bit to watch, assuming the teams were linked to the local NFL team. I know I would. A key element to this would be having the parent team retain rights to at least a large part of the players - as they basically do not with practice squads now.

They currently don't want to expand rosters past 63. There is literally no appetite for it even though many teams each year would benefit when they have a run of injuries.

They would only actually expand rosters if the thing could make money and the way to make money would be to take talent that does not want to go to college and put them in a professional league.

[Cheesehead Craig]

yet thousands of people show up for college games every week and high school games

and thousands show up up AA and AAA baseball games, but no one will show up for football ?

and it wouldn't be that big of a money pit, you wouldn't be paying these guys a half million dollars, you'd be paying them 1 or 2 thousand a week (for maybe 16 weeks) for maybe 40 guys. i bet with traveling and renting out local high school stadiums you could have a team for less then 1 or 2 million a year

and you really don't think people will show up? people are showing up by the hundreds to see 2 or 3 packers scrubs show up and schools, just because they're accosiated with the packers

every other sport in the world has figured out how to do developmental leagues, but the nfl

and if college is worried about losing players, maybe they should start paying for them. its almost like saying, "oh we could free the slaves", but the cotton industry would really suffer and the plantation owners would lose a ton of money"

High school and College are the NFLs D Leagues already. The NFL doesn't have to pay a dime to have their players already get developed. So again, why fix something that's not broke?

People coming to a meet and greet for a known Packer name does not equate to the tens of thousands that would be needed each game for each week to make some awful D-League team full of absolute nobodies to just break even on salaries. There's no way there's enough interest and money from the fans to make it financially worthwhile, and that's what matters to the league, the money.

Look at how fans even hate having to pay for and watch pre-season. The casual fan hates those games. They are full of scrubs anyways. You think a league full of the worst of them is remotely financially viable? Dream on.

I think you're way off on your estimate of cost for the team. Travel, hotel, and food costs are massive, NFL teams travel with anywhere from 120-160 total people. I'd think these guys could likely get by with 85-95. But your total budget won't even cover these items.

I just think the NFL is already on the down slide. Granted, it's from an unbelievable high point. But the ratings are dropping, the participation in youth is dropping, the game is changing to where people think it's too wussified and are losing interest. it's just too late in the game to start up a D league. Not when there's already an extremely comparable thing already in existence that's free.

[bobblehead]

with the violence of the game, and the small window of production that most players have, a d league wouldn't accomplish much imo. probably only get a handful of players that would ever make it to the nfl and then they'd be one-and-done most likely. costs would outweigh the benefit.

Not true. Many NFL europe players made it onto NFL rosters and excelled. I think Cullen Jenkins was one.

Most notably James Harrison couldn't make a team out of college. He played in NFLe and later was defensive player of the year.

[bobblehead]

and if college is worried about losing players, maybe they should start paying for them. its almost like saying, "oh we could free the slaves", but the cotton industry would really suffer and the plantation owners would lose a ton of money"

I believe that pretty much WAS the argument from the south.