Death of the Alliance of American Football

[dfwabel]

7 minutes ago, GDAWG said:

 

Bill Polian sounded more subdued and calm than Ebersol.

It wasn't his money, or so it was written/previously reported to make it seem.

Wickersham and the co-writer indicated that Polian had a title of co-founder, but was more of a creative consultant. 

[MJWalker45]

10 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

But we just got done criticizing ESPN for trying to push an agenda?

Sometimes it can be a bit of both. It can be that in the case of the AAF they choose not to give it as much attention as they could.  It's also likely, actually pretty obvious according to the ESPN article, that Ebersol did not engage the networks as aggressively as he could have to get them to buy in to coverage. When you appear to be more upset about not having your first meeting in a private room than you are about figuring out how to distribute players it would have affected how networks would view you if they heard about it. 

[GDAWG]

I also had no idea that the NFL had vetted Tom Dundon when the Carolina Panthers were for sale.

[dfwabel]

1 hour ago, MJWalker45 said:

Sometimes it can be a bit of both. It can be that in the case of the AAF they choose not to give it as much attention as they could.  It's also likely, actually pretty obvious according to the ESPN article, that Ebersol did not engage the networks as aggressively as he could have to get them to buy in to coverage. When you appear to be more upset about not having your first meeting in a private room than you are about figuring out how to distribute players it would have affected how networks would view you if they heard about it. 

The AFL and ESPN have an agreement to show games on ESPN3.  Yet we don't see three minutes of  highlights on SportsCenter over the weekend and rightfully so.

https://www.arenafootball.com/article/afl-espn-2019

[MJWalker45]

2 hours ago, dfwabel said:

The AFL and ESPN have an agreement to show games on ESPN3.  Yet we don't see three minutes of  highlights on SportsCenter over the weekend and rightfully so.

https://www.arenafootball.com/article/afl-espn-2019

I'm not sure what makes it rightfully so, but you would think if they want people to use the ESPN3 app that you'd highlight the sports that are on it. 

[dfwabel]

14 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

I'm not sure what makes it rightfully so, but you would think if they want people to use the ESPN3 app that you'd highlight the sports that are on it. 

If SportsCenter is 44 minutes of highlights in an hour,with NBA, NHL (2 minutes), MLB, NFL and either NCAA Football/Basketball are part of a broadcast, how much time should've been given to a first year football league which until their initial week was known to be a league which paid CBS/CBSSN for air time? And whose boss publicly said they would be aired on both TNT and NFLN before it was actually signed?

 

:censored:, NFLN took their money yet NFLN shows really didn't care and that's their real target. NFLN Total Access didn't give a $hit and it wasn't because they weren't paid as that became apparent later. 

[Gothamite]

58 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

I'm not sure what makes it rightfully so, but you would think if they want people to use the ESPN3 app that you'd highlight the sports that are on it. 

 

But then we get into the “ESPN is using its platform to promote its own sports programming!” complaint.

 

Better they keep them separate.  Sports that deserve coverage on SportsCenter get coverage on SportsCenter regardless of whether ESPN broadcasts them or not.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

On 6/15/2019 at 4:29 PM, Gothamite said:

 

USL1 games are compelling.  You yourself know that NASL games were sometimes compelling. 

 

None of this is incompatible with “minor league”.

 

I will try one more time, because this is bothering me.

 

The appelation "minor league", when it comes to football, simply means "not the NFL". So, then, you are arguing that any league that is not the NFL does not merit being covered on news shows simply by virtue of it not being the NFL. That can't be right. This argument is far below your customary standard of reasoning

 

Considering the financial backing that this particular minor (i.e.: non-NFL) league appeared to have accumulated, and considering the calibre of players and most especially the calibre of coaches that it had signed, and considering the fact that its games were shown nationwide (with respectable ratings), this league certainly rated inclusion in national sports news shows (again: even though it was not the NFL, and was therefore, by definition, a "minor league").

 

Let us note that the XFL will be a minor league as well, in that it, too, is not the NFL. It shares with the AAF the high calibre of coaches; and we can presume that its players will be of a similar calibre to those of the AAF. Also, the XFL, like the AAF, will have its games shown nationally.  By virtue of these factors, it is safe to assert that the XFL will also merit inclusion in national sports news shows.

 

But, whereas ESPN did not include AAF highlights in its news show, it will surely include XFL highlights, despite the two leagues being identically situated. The only difference is that ESPN is the network that will be showing the XFL's games.

 

This is clearly not an appropriate criterion on which to base the decision of whether to include a league's highlights in the news show. If you are seriously defending this practice, then that makes the second position that you have taken up that is far beneath your usual standards, this time on ethics.

[dfwabel]

Wilbon was right.

https://www.espn.co.uk/video/clip?id=25954491

[Gothamite]

43 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

I will try one more time, because this is bothering me.

 

The appelation "minor league", when it comes to football, simply means "not the NFL". So, then, you are arguing that any league that is not the NFL does not merit being covered on news shows simply by virtue of it not being the NFL. That can't be right. This argument is far below your customary standard of reasoning

 

To which I say: Oh, piffle.   

 

The AAF was a minor league not because it was not the NFL, but because it was not trying to be the NFL.  Unlike the AFL, which set out from the beginning to be a competitor, the AAF never had the organization, the business plan, or the money to do so.

 

In fact, by the end of its short existence the AAF was reduced to publicly begging the NFL to take it on as a developmental league.  Not only was it a minor league, it was utterly desperate to become the NFL’s minor league.

 

So yes, any league that does not compete for players or coaches or sponsors or stadiums or markets with the NFL is by definition a minor league. (Some that hypothetically do compete could still be a minor league, but that isn’t the case here.). You want to be treated like a major league?  Then be a major league. 

 

There seems to be this misconception that “minor league” is somehow equivalent to “morally inferior”.  It’s not.  Minor league sports are wonderful.  I am utterly besotted with Forward Madison FC now, but I don’t think Sports Illustrated or Bleacher Report should give them the same level of coverage that they give to MLS. 

[dfwabel]

On 6/15/2019 at 3:17 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Nonsense. The games were compelling. Equally important, the stories were compelling: Trent Richardson, Garrett Gilbert, Steve Spurrier, Luis Perez, the return of Manziel, the embrace of the Commanders by San Antonio, the participation by several former NFL coaches, the rule changes, etc.

 

ESPN's act of ignoring the AAF's games might have made sense from the perspective of corporate interests. But from the sports journalism standpoint, this represented a dereliction of duty.

 

Frankly, we probably cannot expect any better from corporate media. But an honest observer ought to be able to recognise this impropriety.

Each of the bolded are neither in NFL camp rosters no on Indoor teams as I post this.

 

Sing Naked Eyes!

 Or do we have to use Spoon?

 

[Cosmic]

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

The appelation "minor league", when it comes to football, simply means "not the NFL".

If I were starting a league, and I threw enough money around that I consolidated many of that year’s NFL free agents and high-to-mid-round draft picks into the small number of teams in my league, then I think most people would be forced to admit that it was a competing major league. The AAF was mostly guys that were practice squad level or below, with a dash of more talented guys on their fifth chances.

[dfwabel]

10 minutes ago, Cosmic said:

If I were starting a league, and I threw enough money around that I consolidated many of that year’s NFL free agents and high-to-mid-round draft picks into the small number of teams in my league, then I think most people would be forced to admit that it was a competing major league. The AAF was mostly guys that were practice squad level or below, with a dash of more talented guys on their fifth chances.

Which nobody really wants to pay between $10-45 do see play even with unlimited booze and free parking

[GDAWG]

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

 

To which I say: Oh, piffle.   

 

The AAF was a minor league not because it was not the NFL, but because it was not trying to be the NFL.  Unlike the AFL, which set out from the beginning to be a competitor, the AAF never had the organization, the business plan, or the money to do so.

 

In fact, by the end of its short existence the AAF was reduced to publicly begging the NFL to take it on as a developmental league.  Not only was it a minor league, it was utterly desperate to become the NFL’s minor league.

 

So yes, any league that does not compete for players or coaches or sponsors or stadiums or markets with the NFL is by definition a minor league. (Some that hypothetically do compete could still be a minor league, but that isn’t the case here.). You want to be treated like a major league?  Then be a major league. 

 

There seems to be this misconception that “minor league” is somehow equivalent to “morally inferior”.  It’s not.  Minor league sports are wonderful.  I am utterly besotted with Forward Madison FC now, but I don’t think Sports Illustrated or Bleacher Report should give them the same level of coverage that they give to MLS. 

 

I have been to Texas Rangers games and then games of their Double A affiliate The Frisco Roughriders.  The Roughriders games are a lot more fun than the Rangers games. 

[dfwabel]

2 minutes ago, GDAWG said:

 

I have been to Texas Rangers games and then games of their Double A affiliate The Frisco Roughriders.  The Roughriders games are a lot more fun than the Rangers games. 

And..Want a cookie or a sticker?

Those in Birmingham went to an Iron game and a Barons game, yet it failed.  Memphis Express had a fan or four see both them and the AAA team.  Both football teams failed. We can have homeboy talk about the lack of attendance for the Legends too.

 

 

[CaliforniaGlowin]

ESPN would have time for more highlights if they weren't on the NBA's dick.  I love Sportscenter, but about half of it is NBA talk.  Season, playoffs, finals, trades & draft, summer league.  Repeat ad naseum every year.

[Scrumptious Ham]

With today's social media, Sportscenter is a lame way to figure out about a league. They would have showed more highlights if there were a demand for them to be shown. There was no demand. 

[Red Wolf]

On 6/16/2019 at 7:57 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

The appelation "minor league", when it comes to football, simply means "not the NFL". So, then, you are arguing that any league that is not the NFL does not merit being covered on news shows simply by virtue of it not being the NFL. That can't be right. This argument is far below your customary standard of reasoning

 

Nobody is arguing that. The AAF was a minor league because they did not compete for players or coaches who were expected to be on NFL payrolls. They were picking up scraps and rejects. They were minor league because literally every talking head affiliated with the league specifically promoted them as a minor league. We're just (un)lucky that we didn't get to see Bill Polian and Kurt Warner literally on their knees begging Goodell to let them be the NFL's servant boys. You pick weird hills to die on.

 

On 6/16/2019 at 10:13 PM, GDAWG said:

 

I have been to Texas Rangers games and then games of their Double A affiliate The Frisco Roughriders.  The Roughriders games are a lot more fun than the Rangers games. 

 

I've argued that minor league baseball is the best version of baseball. You go out to the park with your friends when the weather is nice, drink the cheapest beer you can find and enjoy a game. If the team loses, who cares? You just watched the Seattle Mariners prospects lose to the San Diego Padres prospects in North Little Rock, Arkansas. You'll be fine and you had some fun.

 

59 minutes ago, Scrumptious Ham said:

With today's social media, Sportscenter is a lame way to figure out about a league. They would have showed more highlights if there were a demand for them to be shown. There was no demand. 

 

This is what I find odd about the internet outrage about ESPN. You want to complain about how they broadcast their games (let's talk about Zion and have a split-screen about him in the middle of this game between two Pac-12 teams!) then sure. But if you're on the internet complaining about how they organize their highlights on SportsCenter, then I'm just baffled. Why are you relying on that show when you're clearly already on the internet where every highlight to ever exist is just a keystroke away?

[CrimsonBull9584]

I thought I shared this before, but I can't seem to find where I might have said it, so if I'm repeating myself, I apologize.

 

Keep in mind these were rumors that were going around with people I was close with in the AAF, and I have no evidence to back them up, but they were rumors that persisted the entire season and I trust the sources to the point that I'm 99% sure if season 2 had happened, these rumors would have come to pass.

 

I think everyone, in and out of the league, knew with almost 100% certainly that if the AAF made it to a second season, Salt Lake would have relocated. But there was a possibility of staying in Salt Lake for year 2, but it would not be at Rice-Eccles. Apparently the AD "hated" the Stallions and imposed a lot of rules and regulations on them, hence the lack of painting the field. Rio-Tinto and LaVell Edwards was thrown out there, but I never heard anything specific from anyone at Salt Lake, just from other teams. If they were to leave Salt Lake, I never heard of any possible landing spots.

 

Speaking of which, Memphis also seemed to struggle with their home venue. According to at least two colleagues of mine, Memphis was exploring the possibility of relocating to Nashville for year 2 and playing their home games at Vanderbilt Stadium.

 

As for Atlanta, well, we felt that if we didn't get a .500 record, that we'd be the Charlotte Legends. But that was more of a joke than anything anyone official was saying. As far as I knew, Atlanta was not planing on moving for season 2.

 

So yeah, a few rumors about relocation for anyone that might have been interested.

[Sodboy13]

4 hours ago, CaliforniaGlowin said:

ESPN would have time for more highlights if they weren't on the NBA's dick.  I love Sportscenter, but about half of it is NBA talk.  Season, playoffs, finals, trades & draft, summer league.  Repeat ad naseum every year.

 

I hope you start posting more in The Lounge so I can get Incel Bingo.