Let the Name Game Begin

[Joshawaggie]

A second pro league in America CAN make it - but only under the right set of circumstances. It has to have realistic expectations in terms of gate (15,000 or so per home game), it has to have an absolute cap on expenses during its first five years, it has to strive toward acquiring top-flight collegiate talent (in the process leaving the NFL to look for talent), it has to secure a deal with a television partner(s) that not only gives it proper exposure but which also provides a much-needed revenue stream no matter what else transpires (the XFL made the mistake of allowing opt-outs after its first year), and finally but perhaps most importantly, it would need an ownership group much like that of Major League Soccer: one that understands that the pennies they spend today won't come back as dimes tomorrow, but may come back as quarters or even dollars way down the road.

I've long believed that a spring-time NFL-owned development league, similar in structure to the NBDL, would be a fascinating idea. Basically, it would be NFL Europe but done domestically in mid-sized markets. I'm talking Portland, Albuquerque, Hartford, Oklahoma City, Memphis, whatever.

I'm not any kind of financing expert to know whether that's a crazy idea or not, especially since NFL Europe has now folded, but I've always thought the idea sounded fun.

I've been waiting for this to happen, and it never does. I honestly can't believe the NFL doens't try to capitalize on football fever with this idea. It's not like they haven't done the "minor league" system before (Europa). Now thats over in Europe, why, oh why not do it here in the US?!

[Brian in Boston]

It's not like they haven't done the "minor league" system before (Europa). Now thats over in Europe, why, oh why not do it here in the US?!

Because, the NFL already did it in the United States before they did it exclusively in Europe.

The World League of American Football pre-dated NFL Europe/NFL Europa. Six of the league's ten franchises were based in U.S. markets, one was located in Canada and three operated in European cities. After two seasons, the NFL powers-that-be came to the conclusion that the WLAF wasn't producing enough talent or generating enough revenue - particularly in the U.S. markets - to justify the expense of operating the venture. If it had been, NFL owners wouldn't have pulled the plug.

Subsequently, they set-up shop exclusively in European markets. The thinking was that the expense could be justified by the fact that new, international markets were being exposed to the sport of gridiron football. Eventually, they bailed-out on that experiment, as well.

There are numerous problems with the NFL launching and operating a "minor-league" player-development system in the United States. First of all, it is expensive. You're looking at a minimum roster of 35 to 50 players, plus the nature of the game means that injuries will take their toll more than in just about any other North American sport, thus driving up insurance costs.

Second, American markets such as Birmingham, Las Vegas, Memphis, Oklahoma City, Orlando, Portland, Sacramento, San Antonio, etc. want to play host to the NFL... not the NFL's minor-league. They've convinced themselves that they could do so, as well. After all, unlike having to generate crowds 81 times a year at major pro prices the way big league baseball teams have to, an NFL franchise only has to sell-out eight regular-season games.

Finally, the NFL recognizes that it already reaps the benefits of a cost-efficient talent-development system: major college football. Allowing NCAA football to develop football players that will ultimately ply their trade in the NFL costs the latter entity absolutely nothing. That's a far better price than the steep expenditures that a bona-fide minor-pro farm league would cost the NFL to maintain.

[Joshawaggie]

It's not like they haven't done the "minor league" system before (Europa). Now thats over in Europe, why, oh why not do it here in the US?!

lots of words

Very true, and yes I'm aware of that league, but that was 20+ years ago. Times have changed, why not try again? Plus, if those cities want to prove they are NFL worthy, wouldn't it be in their best interest to field a team in an NFL league, and show them what they got?

[Sport]

Sorry, but I think you're wrong. With the hispanic population in Los Angeles both those soccer teams draw pretty well.

Both? That depends upon what you mean by "draw pretty well".

This season, Chivas USA is averaging just 14,286 fans per match at the 27,000-seat Home Depot Center. That's just 53% of the stadium's capacity. They rank 11th out of 14 MLS teams in average attendance. Only Colorado, Columbus and Kansas City are drawing fewer fans per match. Last year, Chivas USA averaged 14,305 fans per match (53%), ranking them 12th out of 13 MLS teams in average attendance. Only Kansas City was worse.

Bottom line? The "new" factor has worn off for Chivas USA. The team's average attendance has plummeted since the heady days of 2005 and 2006 when the team averaged 17,080 (63%) and 19,840 (73%) fans per match, respectively. in 2006 (73%) and 17,080 (63%) in 2005.

ahh, whatever. The post that I responded to took the stance that soccer isn't and never will be popular in America. I think that most of us will agree that soccer is growing as a professional sport in the United States.

[Panthers]

Plenty 'o facts n' figures

1) Smart people make very dumb decisions (talk to my -ex, she owes me $10k and lives two doors down from me!)

2) The case in New York and Hartford is as follows: money talks. With the credit crisis, bonds are being written down on a daily basis. Won't be long before those construction bonds/financings get looked at by Moody's and Standard and Poors. Cash is king.

3) The is a bitter and brutal memory among us former Jet fans and the City of the Jets being treated as trash. Remember '73? The Jets had to move their home game against Pittsburgh to Three Rivers Stadium and were indeed the home team that day. The Jets were not allowed to play at Shea until the Mets season was over. That ended in 1980 when the Jets opened the season against the Colts at Shea. by then it was a forgone4 conclusion the Jets would go to Giants Stadium (I think in '79 they played their home opener, also against the Colts there)

4) Cable/Satellite tv is so fragmented that Spike TV, TNT and others will bid for games. There is also Versus. In fact, didn't SI say at one point that Spike TV was looking to get a package of Thursday Night/Sunday night games?

5) Hugyhue is well known in the NFL and still respected. He did solid work for the WLAF, the Jags and the Lions.

6) The NFL, after losing anti trust suits left and right has the following tag line "We like all football. Football is good."

Having said that, please folks at the UFL, spare us the silly, stupid names, the dayglo uniforms (although I have one Orlando game worn at a recent eBay sale of one netted the seller $1,200). No more Birmingham, Memphis and Vegas, please - domed stadium iniative or not in the desert. No Galaxy, Fire or Thunder. I'll go with:

New York Cosmos (if Time Warner lets it go, but then again, everything is for sale at TW)

Orlando Pirates

New England (you knew CT would take that) Minutemen

Ohio Miners

Las Vegas Pioneers

Los Angeles Surf

San Francisco Gold

Salt Lake City Royals or Monarchs (c-branding w/ the Checketts group that owns Real Salt Lake)

And . . .

Mexico City Aztecs (just in case)

[rams80]

A second pro league in America CAN make it - but only under the right set of circumstances. It has to have realistic expectations in terms of gate (15,000 or so per home game), it has to have an absolute cap on expenses during its first five years, it has to strive toward acquiring top-flight collegiate talent (in the process leaving the NFL to look for talent), it has to secure a deal with a television partner(s) that not only gives it proper exposure but which also provides a much-needed revenue stream no matter what else transpires (the XFL made the mistake of allowing opt-outs after its first year), and finally but perhaps most importantly, it would need an ownership group much like that of Major League Soccer: one that understands that the pennies they spend today won't come back as dimes tomorrow, but may come back as quarters or even dollars way down the road.

I've long believed that a spring-time NFL-owned development league, similar in structure to the NBDL, would be a fascinating idea. Basically, it would be NFL Europe but done domestically in mid-sized markets. I'm talking Portland, Albuquerque, Hartford, Oklahoma City, Memphis, whatever.

I'm not any kind of financing expert to know whether that's a crazy idea or not, especially since NFL Europe has now folded, but I've always thought the idea sounded fun.

I've been waiting for this to happen, and it never does. I honestly can't believe the NFL doens't try to capitalize on football fever with this idea. It's not like they haven't done the "minor league" system before (Europa). Now thats over in Europe, why, oh why not do it here in the US?!

Because they have a free one in the NCAA. And they have the CFL and AFL for a few "leakers."

------------------------------------------------

Wasn't Huyghue associated with the Arena League at one time? Perhaps that explains the "smoke and mirrors" approach to his marketing and getting owners.

[Gothamite]

I honestly can't believe the NFL doens't try to capitalize on football fever with this idea. It's not like they haven't done the "minor league" system before (Europa). Now thats over in Europe, why, oh why not do it here in the US?!

Because they have a free one in the NCAA. And they have the CFL and AFL for a few "leakers."

Bingo.

[Mac the Knife]

Oh, BTW, TimeWarner doesn't own the Cosmos name. The guys who launched MLS wanted to use it for the NY-NJ franchise when the league was founded but its owner (forget his name but it was an individual) wanted megabucks for its use, and MLS balked.

[Gothamite]

Oh, BTW, TimeWarner doesn't own the Cosmos name. The guys who launched MLS wanted to use it for the NY-NJ franchise when the league was founded but its owner (forget his name but it was an individual) wanted megabucks for its use, and MLS balked.

Pepi claims that he owns it. His claim is questionable, but Warner seems to have abandoned any claim they had.

His price is $2 million.

[B-Rich]

It's not like they haven't done the "minor league" system before (Europa). Now thats over in Europe, why, oh why not do it here in the US?!

lots of words

Very true, and yes I'm aware of that league, but that was 20+ years ago. Times have changed, why not try again? Plus, if those cities want to prove they are NFL worthy, wouldn't it be in their best interest to field a team in an NFL league, and show them what they got?

No, the WLAF (with teams in North America) played in 1991 and 1992, 16-17 years ago, not 20+ years ago.

The World League/NFL Europe/Europa reformed in 1995 and only ended operations officially in 2007 (last year).

Brian's "lots of words" are right, particularly these:

"There are numerous problems with the NFL launching and operating a "minor-league" player-development system in the United States. First of all, it is expensive. You're looking at a minimum roster of 35 to 50 players, plus the nature of the game means that injuries will take their toll more than in just about any other North American sport, thus driving up insurance costs.

Plus in the time period since the hiatus of the WLAF, the NFL has also become HEAVILY involved in the AFL, with quite a number of teams being owned by the same owner in the same market. Not necessarily as a "feeder" market (Kurt Warner notwithstanding) but they've already got their hands full with an off-season moneymaker.

.... the NFL recognizes that it already reaps the benefits of a cost-efficient talent-development system: major college football. Allowing NCAA football to develop football players that will ultimately ply their trade in the NFL costs the latter entity absolutely nothing. That's a far better price than the steep expenditures that a bona-fide minor-pro farm league would cost the NFL to maintain..

Exactly. And as earlier posters have noted, on the "fan" level, it'll be tough to see a pro team get the kind of support that an existing 'big name' college team has. Do you really think a Birmingham NFL franchise would get the same fan base as Auburn or Alabama, much less a Birmingham "minor league NFL" franchise? Because THAT'S who they'd be competing against in terms of fan support, particualrly if they played a fall schedule..... As another example, after more than 40 years, it's still quite obvious that the Georgia Bulldogs have a stronger and bigger following than the Atlanta Falcons in metro Atlanta.

Second, American markets such as Birmingham, Las Vegas, Memphis, Oklahoma City, Orlando, Portland, Sacramento, San Antonio, etc. want to play host to the NFL... not the NFL's minor-league. They've convinced themselves that they could do so, as well. After all, unlike having to generate crowds 81 times a year at major pro prices the way big league baseball teams have to, an NFL franchise only has to sell-out eight regular-season games.

I think Brian is right in this regard, but I think the bigger picture needs to be explored. All of those cities, to one degree or another want to be in the BIG leagues, not the minor leagues. And they've convinced themselves that they could do so, as well. But the reality is, not many of them really have the wherewithal, market size, and to tell the truth, the DRIVE to be on par with existing NFL cities (and Los Angeles).... the most successful "second" league was the AFL, who saw a key need at the time-- cities like Dallas, Houston, Minnesota, Denver, and St. Louis were BEYOND ready for NFL franchises, but couldn't get in. The AFL was formed to address that need; the NFL reacted to the AFL, there was an expansion market "battle", and eventually a merger of the two leagues. IN that sense, the AFL was completely successful.

In today's market, I don't see a strong, concerted effort from any city on that list that can realistically be a home for an NFL franchise (other than LA).... and there's not a large enough amount of markets to justify a "second" league. It's not like in 1959, or for that matter in the 1980s when there were clear expansion pressures on the NFL.... Think about it. Out of the finalists for the 1995 NFL expansion, all of the finalists (give a little leeway and say Tennessee for Memphis) actually wound up getting teams one way or another. And Oakland, which was on the initial list but not a finalist, got the Raiders back.

Other than the LA market, there's no expansion pressure on the NFL

[Gothamite]

And even that's pretty weak.

[B-Rich]

Just one more point (had to leave for a meeting in Baton Rouge while finishing up the earlier post; just got back).

The idea that "if those cities want to prove they are NFL worthy, wouldn't it be in their best interest to field a team in an NFL league, and show them what they got?" was actually the opposite of what happened with the WLAF. The original WLAF fielded teams in 1991-92. It was also in 1991 that the NFL began taking bids for their two upcoming expansion teams.

The only WLAF cities that even submitted bids to join the "big league" NFL were Raleigh-Durham, Sacramento, and San Antonio. None were named as finalists. Meanwhile, none of the five NFL expansion finalists (Baltimore, Jacksonville, Memphis, Charlotte, St. Louis) bothered with the 'interim' WLAF step.

[jab8281965]

How about the following for Hartford..

Hartford Actuaries

Hartford Fighting Insurance Salesmen

Hartford Deductibles

;-)

[Panthers]

That is correct. Memphis had a chance to join the WLAF but Fred Smith dumped the club back in the laps of the league and said he wanted to concentrate on a NFL team. Mike Lynn promised him that the WLAF attendance and hosting a club would not affect his bid. nevertheless, Smith said no and the team wound up in Frankfurt.

Mexico City and Milan were to get teams as well.

[Legend]

As long as the NY franchise doesn't have a name like the Empire

Why not? I really like that name. With a skyline logo, I love that.

I'm hoping for a Tampa based team or Atlanta based team.

[Wellsandt]

Some questions for the WLAF historians around her:

Over the last years I read the following infos...

(Regarding the reasons the NFL did start up the WLAF)

- Some stories said other investors were planning a international league.

- One report said that Donald Trump had plans for a IFL and that when the NFL announced it's plans for their international league (also named IFL) he claimed that they had stolen his idea. Thereafter the NFL renamed it the "World-wide American Football League" and shortly after to WLAF.

- The ILAF (another league or was that Trumps?) was going to start in Europe by 1990. Because of the World cup '90 in italy they moved the start to 1991, which never happened because they folded before that.

- The later WLAF coaches Jack Elway, Jim Criner, Ray Willsey and some others were originally hired by the ILAF.

- Another spring league was planed for 1992, the PSFL, which folded during training camp.

(Regarding the NFL losing money)

- the fee for a WLAF franchise in 1991 was $11m. (what happened with that money when they folded the league in 1992?)

- Believe the league had 6-7 owners, the other teams were operated by the NFL.

- Raleigh-Durham lost $1m in 1991, so the owner gave the franchise back.

- The league lost $9m in 1991, $7m in 1992.

- when NFLE folded last year that Bergheim dude said the league lost around $500m since 1995. Anually $30-40m.

So the experts might now tell me if all the above stuff is true. If that's the case, I'm just wondering (I'm probably kind of blonde here): If they did run the league in Europe for 13 years losing $30-40m annualy why did they fold the WLAF in 1992 when they lost a much smaller amount and had 6-7 team owners in place?

[quantum]

(1) I'll believe the UFL is on when they inflate a football and kick it off.

(2) I don't understand the shock at using the new NY stadium. Mets games aren't sacrosanct, grass is replaceable, and they need to use the place for something.

(3) Huyghue's welcome in NFL camps because the UFL poses no threat to the NFL whatsoever. Had it actually launched when originally planned however, they'd shut him out completely.

(4) Hartford as a UFL city over a number of other locations demonstrates that they have an owner there who they aren't disclosing yet - one with bucks, but also one with no brains.

(5) Six franchises won't be enough to hold interest even for a first season. A new pro league needs to be in at least ten markets in my opinion to have any real shot; for some reason people won't take it seriously otherwise.

I was thinking 12 teams minimum.

As for a team name, I'd like New York to go with Syndicate. The logo could be the bust of a guy wearing a suit and Fedora. The uniform could include pinstripes like a stereotypical mafioso would wear in the movies.

[Mac the Knife]

Oh, BTW, TimeWarner doesn't own the Cosmos name. The guys who launched MLS wanted to use it for the NY-NJ franchise when the league was founded but its owner (forget his name but it was an individual) wanted megabucks for its use, and MLS balked.

Pepi claims that he owns it. His claim is questionable, but Warner seems to have abandoned any claim they had.

His price is $2 million.

Well, there must be something to the claim then, because no doubt it would've been used by someone, somewhere if it were bogus.

[Needschat]

For the Hartford team, let's go back in time, to the early 80s. The original MISL had the Hartford Hellions. I've always thought that was a great name!

[Herk]

It's not like they haven't done the "minor league" system before (Europa). Now thats over in Europe, why, oh why not do it here in the US?!

Because, the NFL already did it in the United States before they did it exclusively in Europe.

The World League of American Football pre-dated NFL Europe/NFL Europa. Six of the league's ten franchises were based in U.S. markets, one was located in Canada and three operated in European cities. After two seasons, the NFL powers-that-be came to the conclusion that the WLAF wasn't producing enough talent or generating enough revenue - particularly in the U.S. markets - to justify the expense of operating the venture. If it had been, NFL owners wouldn't have pulled the plug.

Subsequently, they set-up shop exclusively in European markets. The thinking was that the expense could be justified by the fact that new, international markets were being exposed to the sport of gridiron football. Eventually, they bailed-out on that experiment, as well.

There are numerous problems with the NFL launching and operating a "minor-league" player-development system in the United States. First of all, it is expensive. You're looking at a minimum roster of 35 to 50 players, plus the nature of the game means that injuries will take their toll more than in just about any other North American sport, thus driving up insurance costs.

Second, American markets such as Birmingham, Las Vegas, Memphis, Oklahoma City, Orlando, Portland, Sacramento, San Antonio, etc. want to play host to the NFL... not the NFL's minor-league. They've convinced themselves that they could do so, as well. After all, unlike having to generate crowds 81 times a year at major pro prices the way big league baseball teams have to, an NFL franchise only has to sell-out eight regular-season games.

Finally, the NFL recognizes that it already reaps the benefits of a cost-efficient talent-development system: major college football. Allowing NCAA football to develop football players that will ultimately ply their trade in the NFL costs the latter entity absolutely nothing. That's a far better price than the steep expenditures that a bona-fide minor-pro farm league would cost the NFL to maintain.

While I agree the NFL does have a cost-efficient farm league in NCAA football, their are several shortcomings of that system.

Many players come out of college unprepared for NFL-style play and ideally need a few years to develop. That cannot be done in the current NFL format, those guys are just thrown on the practice squad and or third stringers for a few years before the next batch comes. These guys never have a chance to develop. Players like Jake Delhomme and Kurt Warner would not be where they are today without the post-collegiate development system, as both spent a few years in Europe.