ozzyman314

The XFL may be making a comeback

Recommended Posts

On 12/16/2017 at 6:38 PM, BringBackTheVet said:

 

Quoting myself here just to bring this over to this thread.

 

"Power 5" college football is bull :censored:, and blue-chip high schoolers need a better option than to be taken advantage of by a farce of an institution like college football.

 

 

 

I would love to see powerful group of investors get behind a Pro U-25 (under 25 years of age) football league. Think of all the money that was wasted trying to develop rival leagues to the NFL. That money could have been better spent trying to take on College Football.

I think a U-25 league would have success going after 17 year old kids in high school and offering them decent contracts. I think those kids would rather be paid publicly instead of under the table like they do now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/18/2017 at 4:38 AM, Samurai said:

I would love to see powerful group of investors get behind a Pro U-25 (under 25 years of age) football league. Think of all the money that was wasted trying to develop rival leagues to the NFL. That money could have been better spent trying to take on College Football.

 

I come back to the same question I had about the XFL, the same question I have every time somebody suggests a new professional football league: what market do you think the new league would serve?

 

There is already a glut of football in this country.  Between the reach of the NFL (which is in no way limited to the cities in which it plays) and the 130 division 1 college football programs, that's a lot of football to follow right now.  And most of those teams have decades' worth of head start, at least, on any new entrant.

  

So what's the market?  What's the niche your new league will fill, would-be investors?  In the 1960s, that niche was "There are big-league cities without pro teams and deep-pocketed would-be owners waiting to spend."  And they made that work.  They got teams in Boston, Denver, Oakland, Houston, Miami, Kansas City, places the NFL ended up wanting.  They got owners who spent enough to draw the very best and most high-profile college players away from the NFL.  And they leveraged that solid niche into a merger with the established league.

 

But since then, the rise of television has expanded the reach of clubs.  Expansion has filled almost any market hole (I mean, where would you put an expansion NFL franchise today?), while ensuring there are at least as many teams hiring as talented players to fill the rosters.

 

So that's a one-off and new leagues can't go back to that one.  And therefore since the merger, the niche has been "We'll play games in the spring when those 162 teams you mention are sitting around being lazy!"   But that same history shows it's not a hole that needs plugging; there just doesn't seem to be a market for it.

 

The XFL's niche was "Football is too wussified!  More blood and guts and sex!"  But they learned almost immediately that football fans don't care about blood and guts and sex nearly so much as they care about, you know, good football.  So the XFL tanked just as quickly.

 

So any new league has to demonstrate that it is filling an actual niche in the market not currently being served.  Maybe the NFL is too hidebound, too driven by rules.  But any league that wants to go "rule free!" will learn quickly that there's a reason for many of those rules. The same fans who hate "roughing the passer" also hate to watch backup QBs facing off in a late-season game.  And even if by some miracle this new XFL finds the sweet spot between regulating and encouraging play, they'll still have to draw better talent this time around.

 

So again, for anyone who takes this possibility even remotely seriously, what market do you think a new XFL would serve?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/17/2017 at 12:50 AM, DG_Now said:

 

The NFL needs less holding, less reception issues, and less tedious instant replay review. It also needs a better approach to dealing with head injuries.

 

I don't know how the XFL can improve the latter, but it can improve the former.

 

If they do a reboot, they really need to look north of the border to the CFL for some changes. I've watched almost every game from the last two CFL seasons and they regularly finish up in 3 hours or less, not the 4+ hour monstrosities that NFL games have become, and they review A LOT of plays. Shorter play clock and the "command center" seems to be right on top of replays. I mean really, I can sit in my living room, watch like 30 seconds of replays and know whether or not a call should be overruled...it's not that difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They’ll create their own niche by taking the top recruits from the D1 programs because they can (legally) pay them pennies on the dollar to play, which will over time (this is what the bet would be) diminish the appeal of NCAA football, essentially turning it back into true amateur athletics. 

 

Its something that could take a generation to pull off, but taking out the NCAA is a goal worth pursuing. 

 

The main obstacle is that fans have allegiances to their alma maters, so people will still go crazy for tOSU games and not so much for the Columbus Xtreme. Chipping away at the quality of play at the college level is really the only way to do it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

They’ll create their own niche by taking the top recruits from the D1 programs because they can (legally) pay them pennies on the dollar to play, which will over time (this is what the bet would be) diminish the appeal of NCAA football, essentially turning it back into true amateur athletics. 

 

I would love to see that, but you immediately identify why it won't work:

 

8 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

The main obstacle is that fans have allegiances to their alma maters, so people will still go crazy for tOSU games and not so much for the Columbus Xtreme. 

 

How long do you think it would take to break the back of the NCAA?  Twenty years?  Thirty?  At least a generation, surely.  And in the meantime they'd need to lure young players away from the established order with dollars on the dollar, not pennies.  How much money do you think the owners would have to lose in the meantime to get fans to forget their collegiate allegiances?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

They’ll create their own niche by taking the top recruits from the D1 programs because they can (legally) pay them pennies on the dollar to play, which will over time (this is what the bet would be) diminish the appeal of NCAA football, essentially turning it back into true amateur athletics. 

 

Its something that could take a generation to pull off, but taking out the NCAA is a goal worth pursuing. 

 

The main obstacle is that fans have allegiances to their alma maters, so people will still go crazy for tOSU games and not so much for the Columbus Xtreme. Chipping away at the quality of play at the college level is really the only way to do it. 

If the XFL version 2.0 or any start up league starts paying 18 to 21 year olds the NCAA will start compensating the players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

They’ll create their own niche by taking the top recruits from the D1 programs because they can (legally) pay them pennies on the dollar to play, which will over time (this is what the bet would be) diminish the appeal of NCAA football, essentially turning it back into true amateur athletics. 

 

Its something that could take a generation to pull off, but taking out the NCAA is a goal worth pursuing. 

 

The main obstacle is that fans have allegiances to their alma maters, so people will still go crazy for tOSU games and not so much for the Columbus Xtreme. Chipping away at the quality of play at the college level is really the only way to do it. 

If stripping the mine before NCAA does, then wait six months for Pac Pro as that's their mission.

 

However they haven't said a word in months and the testimonials on their website read like fiction.

 

http://www.pacprofootball.com/

 

There's also the issue of returning to the old safe haven cities for alt-football yet again and asking them to be burned...again. Birmingham, Memphis, Orlando, Omaha, Hartford, possibly St. Louis now. The first three actually now have winning NCAA teams which they don't support en masse.

Edited by dfwabel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ltp74 said:

If the XFL version 2.0 or any start up league starts paying 18 to 21 year olds the NCAA will start compensating the players.

 

Then either way the players win, and that’s all I want to see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beyond current amateur rules, there are two potential markets a new XFL could serve:

 

One is people who would like to see a safer league with less obtuse rules that provides more power to the players. More like the NBA.

 

Another is people who like the military and flag stuff, care less about player safety, and say things like "act like you've been there before."

 

You have to pick one, and by doing so, you alienate the other and existing NFL fans. So @Gothamite is right. The XFL doesn't really have an audience to serve.

 

However, as a thought experiment, I think it's fun to dream of what a slimmed down, less insane NFL might look like. And there really was a lot about the original XFL to like, including player nicknames, the original Madden cam, bonus careers for guys like Rod Smart and Tommy Maddox, and some pretty fun uniform/helmet designs. And that time they called their title game "The Big Game at the End" before they changed it. The blood n' guts, The Rock, and the sexxxy cheerleader stuff needn't ever come back though (and much of that was rooted out by the end of the season anyway).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

Then either way the players win, and that’s all I want to see. 

The players won't win if Vince McMahon is running things, they'll be "Independent Contractors" just like his wrestlers and tossed to the trash heap when they're no use to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DG_Now said:

Beyond current amateur rules, there are two potential markets a new XFL could serve:

 

One is people who would like to see a safer league with less obtuse rules that provides more power to the players. More like the NBA.

 

Another is people who like the military and flag stuff, care less about player safety, and say things like "act like you've been there before."

 

You have to pick one, and by doing so, you alienate the other and existing NFL fans. So @Gothamite is right. The XFL doesn't really have an audience to serve.

 

However, as a thought experiment, I think it's fun to dream of what a slimmed down, less insane NFL might look like. And there really was a lot about the original XFL to like, including player nicknames, the original Madden cam, bonus careers for guys like Rod Smart and Tommy Maddox, and some pretty fun uniform/helmet designs. And that time they called their title game "The Big Game at the End" before they changed it. The blood n' guts, The Rock, and the sexxxy cheerleader stuff needn't ever come back though (and much of that was rooted out by the end of the season anyway).

NBC was using the Madden/Spider cam in bowl games before they used it in the XFL, it was a NBC thing not a Vince McMahon thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone who thinks this new football league will be just like before, just know: WWE hasn't focused on sex and violence in a long time. WWE doesn't even do chair head shots or blood (on purpose) anymore. You get fined for doing that. I'm pretty sure this "New" XFL (if it even becomes a thing, which I doubt) won't be focused on violence, just good football. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ltp74 said:

The players won't win if Vince McMahon is running things, they'll be "Independent Contractors" just like his wrestlers and tossed to the trash heap when their no use to him.

 

Theyll have the ability (and necessity) to unionize, which isn’t possible in WWE. 

 

They’ll get what they deserve, either from him or from a backtracking NCAA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Theyll have the ability (and necessity) to unionize, which isn’t possible in WWE. 

 

I'm not that familiar with the WWE - why isn't it possible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

I'm not that familiar with the WWE - why isn't it possible?

 

 

Mostly just fear.  Jesse Ventura tried to start one and essentially got blackballed.  Lots of ex wrestlers (including some stars) have advocated for it, but Vince has all the power and despite my belief that they really need to unionize, nobody will ever have the balls to organize the talent.  I doubt there's any legal reason why they can't.

 

Not sure what their union would be - they're not "actors", but they're not "athletes".  "Sports Entertainers Association"?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Not sure what their union would be - they're not "actors", but they're not "athletes".  "Sports Entertainers Association"?

 

Teamsters, probably.  They’ve been the go-to for workplaces that  don’t have any labor union coverage. 

 

If high-profile performers like wrestlers can’t exert enough influence to unionize, I doubt that we’d see it from a group of 17- or 18-year-olds being paid almost entirely for what they might do, not what they have demonstrated they actually can do. Wrestlers are the star attraction, the marquee names.  These no-name kids would have no power at all.  Especially if you’re right, and the league pays them pennies on the dollar. 

 

Kids entering the pros now are being signed on the strength of college performance.  They have a track record and leverage that to a payday.  Colleges done need that track record, signing high school players with little or no risk and cutting them at will.  If those high-schoolers jump right to a pro league, they’ll have to take what scraps they’re given and like it.  They’ll be sold on this hypothetical league as a springboard to greater things, not a career in and of itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing the original XFL should have done, and any new league might look into (especially one gearing toward television) is to simply go the Big 3 route. Teams but no city attachment. Play games around the country as a doubleheader or so.  Maybe have certain sites host games regularly, and have the same team that trains somewhere play there more than once, but otherwise leave it open ended. And get rid of territorial rights for television markets. Just air the best game if there's two against each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That approach only makes sense if you have big names in the league.  If you’re not going to tap into local pride, you need some other reason to get people in the seats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

 

Mostly just fear.  Jesse Ventura tried to start one and essentially got blackballed.  Lots of ex wrestlers (including some stars) have advocated for it, but Vince has all the power and despite my belief that they really need to unionize, nobody will ever have the balls to organize the talent.  I doubt there's any legal reason why they can't.

 

Not sure what their union would be - they're not "actors", but they're not "athletes".  "Sports Entertainers Association"?

 

 

Yeah, only a certain few wrestlers, namely John Cena and David Batista are a part of a union (that being the Screen Actors Guild).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GDAWG said:

 

Yeah, only a certain few wrestlers, namely John Cena and David Batista are a part of a union (that being the Screen Actors Guild).

 

But that union doesn't cover their wrestling work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now