Jump to content

Mac the Knife

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Mac the Knife

  1. If the family's business is big enough? There's even a place in it for its idiot.
  2. The Arena Football League (or "AFL 2.5," as I call it... AFL 1.0 dying in 2008, AFL 2.0 being upgraded to 2.5 when ownership got whittled down to Jaws and Leonsis) is dead. It's just that no one's yet to turn off the life support system. Leonsis believes that legalized gambling is going to save the league, but he's wrong - as if you can lay a wager down on an AFL game, you're more than likely going to plunk that $20 or $50 or whatever on baseball, basketball, hockey, or some other sport with greater popularity than AFL 2.5 now enjoys. AFL 1.0's mistake was allowing C. David Baker to turn it into a franchise Ponzi scheme. AFL 2.0's was having a guy in charge (Jerry Kurz) with the personality of a wet rug and a willingness to operate on the cheap, permanently diminishing the perceived value of the product. A one-two punch like that is one you don't rebound from except in exceptional circumstances, and not even legalized gambling will provide those circumstances in their case.
  3. I give you my firm assurance that I, for one, will never attack you as a crybaby or an old man. In part because I'm 49 years old myself, and in part because you're well on your way to getting yourself banned from here by the moderators anyway for your general demeanor, so I won't have to.
  4. See, right there, any point you were trying to prove got lost. I'm a parent. I'm not an idiot.
  5. Stop giving people ideas, Goth... next thing you know we'll be back to seeing head coaches smoking Lucky's on the sidelines.
  6. Do you have kids, Ferdinand? I'm guessing, based on that response, that you don't. It depends entirely on the age of who your "newbie" is, and whether they actually want to be exposed to it or are being exposed to it via osmosis. Kids have the attention span of gnats (they did when I was a kid, and it's just as bad today) - so exposing them to any sport via television as you suggest simply doesn't cut it. But get them there, in person, have them put the cell phone away for 3 hours, and immerse them in the overall experience? And you can 'land the hook' so to speak. I can't compel my two daughters to watch a 2-minute highlight package of a sporting event, any sporting event. But I can get them to watch a 4-hour baseball game in person, all the while being peppered with questions that tell me they want to learn about what's going on around them.
  7. There are some things you can't adequately explain; you just know them when you see them. I'm not going to defend the position. If you think differently? That's fine. I just see a lot of similarities historically between the Braves and Indians, particularly where the scripts are concerned. If you don't? That's fine.
  8. "Don't look at the hole in the donut. Look at the whole donut." -- Gabe Paul
  9. Go look at the general uniform histories of the Braves and Indians dating back the past 70 years. If after that you don't see what I'm referring to, I'm afraid I wouldn't be able to explain it clearly enough for you to understand it. Suffice to say the Indians and Braves have a history of putting together a similar general look.
  10. That's like saying the difference between my aunt and my uncle is that one has a penis... MONEY is the impetus behind every rebrand during the past 40 years. How can we jump-start revenue? Come up with some bat**** new name for our team, put some bull**** cutesy branding around it, and it'll sell until people tire of it. Then lather... rinse... repeat.
  11. And if it weren't "borrowed" from the Braves? I'd agree with you. But damnit, be at least a little original in your branding.
  12. I actually wish some team had the stones to use "Florida Flamingos." I think done right there's a lot of branding potential there. But it'd have to be just right.
  13. I grew up with the Greek "C" but to be honest was never a huge fan of it either. It's just that save Wahoo, the Indians uniform/logo history is so bland overall that there's little else that has distinguished them, for better or worse. Hold the phone, Chief. The Greek look of the 1970's was overall one of the ugliest, most ridiculously conceived and mismatched looks in the history of Major League Baseball. The only redeeming feature of it was the "C" cap, and even that was only because it wasn't as bland as what came before it, or what came after it. Other than that? It's in the ash heap of history where it belongs. Well, appropriating the look of the Boston/Milwaukee/Atlanta Braves for a good bit of your history will cause that. There's a nostalgia for it, again as I posted above, because it was distinctive. Wahoo was beloved. The Greek "C" is liked. If I had but five wishes left that could be fulfilled before I died, one would be that the Cleveland Indians abandon that ****ing Atlanta Braves-like "Indians" script for all time. Ugh.
  14. No offense, but that's painful to look at, even in such a small form. Holy pink pinstripes, Batman!
  15. I have to pull for the Blue Bombers now. Again where the CFL's concerned I just enjoy a good game, but another RedBlacks-Stamps Grey Cup just doesn't hold the same appeal as a RedBlacks-Blue Bombers matchup would.
  16. 27-6 and it's not even halftime... welp, thanks for playing, Hamilton. So... who do the RedBlacks get in the Grey Cup? And who should they want to face off in it?
  17. I have this little voice inside my head that tells me that an AAF/XFL merger is actually something that's been discussed at some point already, only after the 2020 season, presuming the AAF makes it that far. DICK Ebersol and Vince McMahon are very, very good friends. For them to have contrived these as separate leagues only to combine them after a few seasons, consolidating into a single, 12-team league after identifying which of their combined 16 markets will best support their concept? Wouldn't surprise me at all.
  18. You know what? Sometimes life can't be simple enough to be put into soundbytes. Sometimes you have to pay attention for more than 10 seconds to learn something.
  19. Over 35 years I have studied all four versions of the AFL, the AAFC, the WFL, the USFL, the original XFL, the UFL and the AAFL, and was invited to be involved in one aspect or another in the launch of the "new USFL" and the A-11 League. I say this not to gloat but to give an idea that I have at least a clue as to what I'm seeing here. If I had to classify it, at this moment, I'd put AAF somewhere in the WFL/UFL/second AFL category: a league that's being slapped together on the fly, and one in which the end result is not likely to be good. They resemble the WFL in that they've been organized by someone with no prior experience in professional football. Unlike Gary Davidson, Charlie Ebersol doesn't even have experience in sports of any kind - unless making a documentary about the XFL counts. They resemble the WFL in that despite their promotional posturing, they scrambled like hell to put its teams in their markets, announcing cities probably about a week or so after the ink was dry on their respective lease agreements. The proof of this was in the way they rolled them out itself - if you have a league starting in eight cities, you (1) line up your cities, (2) determine your ticket pricing plans for each, then simultaneously (3) announce all eight cities and (4) immediately start selling tickets in each of the markets, simultaneously. You do not piss away a month teasing potential cities you're going to enter, announce them one at a time, then wait another month before releasing your ticket pricing packages. They resemble the UFL in that they're extolling how well they're capitalized and prepared for the long haul, but not actually spending any significant capital. Think about it. For all the media coverage AAF has received, what have they actually spent in preparing for this inaugural season thus far? My guess, tops, would be $20 million. They're taking some other tacks which to be are, well, tacky... They still have key front office positions and some coaching positions in certain markets unfilled, and they're less than three months from kickoff. They've reportedly signed in excess of 600 players (the equivalent of a 75-man roster for each of the eight teams), yet are still offering potential players tryouts, if they're willing to pay them $99 for the privilege. Professional football is the only industry on Earth I've ever heard of where employers actually charge potential future employees for the privilege of an "interview." If you're as well capitalized as AAF is? You don't need some poor bast***s $99 - you need his talent, if he has any. And if he doesn't? You can weed him out with sets of group sprints from goalpost to goalpost. Total investment on your part? 20 seconds per group of maybe 50 "players," tops. No cash required. By a similar point in the history of the USFL, the USFL had not only a network television deal firmly in place but also had lined up a serious list of corporate sponsors - an official airline, a beer brand, an official car, all sorts of "official" this'es and that's. The AAF meanwhile is still "lining things up" in these regards, whatever that means. The CBS deal sounds good at a glance, but in truth is nothing more than a revenue sharing deal at best - there's no guaranteed revenue there, whereas the USFL had guaranteed (albeit insufficient) rights fees each year). Finally... Their start-up capital is less than optimally diversified, relying essentially on three VC partners to stick with their plans for the next several years. Venture Capitalists don't work that way - they expect losses for three years, tops. If those losses greatly exceed what's expected? They'll bail, and bail immediately. And even if those losses are right on target after three years? Profitability - or a clear exit strategy - had better be on the horizon for the next three, without significant investment of additional capital. VC guys don't care about football. They care about dollars. Now, under normal conditions if you were comparing AAF to XFL, you'd say that was an advantage to the AAF, as the XFL's launch is being solely funded by Vince McMahon. The difference is that Vince has been down this road before and knows what to expect. He won't be rattled by losing $100 million in year one, or year two or three. And he's going to be far more motivated to keep putting money into the venture than a group of VC guys who no matter what will be looking for their way out, no matter how well AAF does, by year seven.
  20. But wait... they've by their own reporting signed 600 players already. Enough to give each of the 8 teams a 75 man roster. So why are they conducting tryouts and charging people for the privilege? Especially since they're allegedly so well capitalized, per Charlie Ebersol? Hmmmm...
  21. Yes. They produced four different versions of that ball. One was a 'mini-ball' with grey plastic laces, the kind you could fit in your palm and toss around a room with little chance of breaking anything. The second was a 'mid-size' ball, also with grey plastic laces. The third was what was termed a 'game ball,' but with the same grey plastic laces and was not actually used in games. All of these proved worthless as potential investments. The only one that didn't was the style I bought: the actual game ball, which featured white, leather laces rather than grey plastic ones. If you go to eBay odds are you'll find at least one of each of these styles, both purporting to be the 'game ball' of the XFL - but only the white lace version was. And those I wound up only breaking even on really (adjusted for inflation), because most people 15 years removed didn't recognize the difference between them.
  22. I can understand that. I wish I had the kind of talent that I could do something along those lines.
  23. It's a "low level minor league" until it demonstrates itself to be otherwise. I adored the USFL, but if I had to classify it objectively, I'd do so at a "AAA" level of pro football - one step behind the NFL. The only league's that have gone beyond that are the AAFC (which if you objectively look at pro football in the late 1940's, you put eyeball-to-eyeball with the NFL, if not even slightly higher in terms of talent level), and the fourth AFL... but only after they signed their TV deal with NBC for 1965. Until then, the AFL was a similar "AAA level" circuit. I haven't, but only because I'm trying to decide if investing in AAF merch will result in an appreciation in value 20 years from now. I didn't bother with the XFL save a few select items and am really glad I didn't. The only things that I made any real money from were the white, actual game balls (as opposed to the grey lace almost-game balls, the 'tweener' size ball and the mini-ball, which you can now get on eBay for about a fifth of what they originally sold for). But to wear any of it? Nope. Won't buy a stitch.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.