CFL- NFL Comparison

[Drakonius26]

I meant that was most people looked down on him because he played Arena Football, not everyone, or myself, but it's similar to the old AFL, where for years until the Jets won, they were never considered equals to their NFL counterparts. My only thing is, that despite Kurt Warner being a good player, there were a lot of things (more so than for most NFL players) that had to align for him to have his chance in the NFL.

Furthermore, I find the NFL's talent evaluation system to be highly suspect as I mentioned before, because while I do think that most upper-tier NFL teams would probably beat any upper-tier CFL teams 8 times out of 10, you can't possibly tell me that some of the rosters are comprised of the best talent in the world. I mean, there's about one-quarter of the league that doesn't have a quarterback, and take away developing quarterbacks like the Carolina situation, and you still have usually a handful that are truly void of any talent whatsoever. In a league that signifies the "win now" mentality, I would think that you could easily have more polished products in the CFL be preferable than strictly using the NCAA for unproven and unpolished talent. How many times have we seen a general manager or coach draft a guy for his potential, and not because he's a finished product and get burned?

[Gothamite]

I think you're absolutely right about that, surprising that more teams don't look at the CFL as a potential talent mine.

Still not convinced that anyone looked down on Warner because he played Arena Football (I think it much more to do with a less-than-distinguished college resume). But agree to disagree. And it's in no way comparable to the NFL looking down its nose on the AFL. Unlike the AFL, which was a league on the move upwards, Arena Football was and remains strictly minor league.

Nothing wrong with that - all major leagues need minor leagues to develop players. But that's all the Arena League will ever be.

[Drakonius26]

The NFL should do what the NBA does and have a Developmental League, and I'm surprised they haven't bought the UFL to do just that. Not only could you develop talent, but you could also test out future markets for expansion, or non-traditional ones that would probably still support a tier-two NFL product. For example, Boise, Hartford, Omaha, Portland (possible expansion), San Antonio (possible expansion), etc. Maybe they could try out an international market or two.

[bosrs1]

The NFL should do what the NBA does and have a Developmental League, and I'm surprised they haven't bought the UFL to do just that. Not only could you develop talent, but you could also test out future markets for expansion, or non-traditional ones that would probably still support a tier-two NFL product. For example, Boise, Hartford, Omaha, Portland (possible expansion), San Antonio (possible expansion), etc. Maybe they could try out an international market or two.

They don't bother because they already have a developmental league in the NCAA. They more than fill their ranks every off season with players straight from the college level (so much so that there is always more players from college than spots in the NFL which is where in part the AFL, UFL and CFL fill their ranks as well). Add to that the short playing life of the average football player and they really wouldn't want to waste time "training" players using up the limited miles their bodies have rather than having them either start play immediately or sit on the bench unharmed for a few years learning from the masters (ala Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady).

[Drakonius26]

The NFL should do what the NBA does and have a Developmental League, and I'm surprised they haven't bought the UFL to do just that. Not only could you develop talent, but you could also test out future markets for expansion, or non-traditional ones that would probably still support a tier-two NFL product. For example, Boise, Hartford, Omaha, Portland (possible expansion), San Antonio (possible expansion), etc. Maybe they could try out an international market or two.

They don't bother because they already have a developmental league in the NCAA. They more than fill their ranks every off season with players straight from the college level (so much so that there is always more players from college than spots in the NFL which is where in part the AFL, UFL and CFL fill their ranks as well). Add to that the short playing life of the average football player and they really wouldn't want to waste time "training" players using up the limited miles their bodies have rather than having them either start play immediately or sit on the bench unharmed for a few years learning from the masters (ala Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady).

And that's why I mentioned the NFL buying the UFL and operating it like the NBA does with its Developmental League. Specifically for players who need more experience (actual playing time) with the professional game, or those who don't survive the final cuts and can't catch on anywhere else. Sitting on the bench and learning under an Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady is nice and all, but there's no substitute for real game action at almost any position (except for kickers).

[bosrs1]

The NFL should do what the NBA does and have a Developmental League, and I'm surprised they haven't bought the UFL to do just that. Not only could you develop talent, but you could also test out future markets for expansion, or non-traditional ones that would probably still support a tier-two NFL product. For example, Boise, Hartford, Omaha, Portland (possible expansion), San Antonio (possible expansion), etc. Maybe they could try out an international market or two.

They don't bother because they already have a developmental league in the NCAA. They more than fill their ranks every off season with players straight from the college level (so much so that there is always more players from college than spots in the NFL which is where in part the AFL, UFL and CFL fill their ranks as well). Add to that the short playing life of the average football player and they really wouldn't want to waste time "training" players using up the limited miles their bodies have rather than having them either start play immediately or sit on the bench unharmed for a few years learning from the masters (ala Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady).

And that's why I mentioned the NFL buying the UFL and operating it like the NBA does with its Developmental League. Specifically for players who need more experience (actual playing time) with the professional game, or those who don't survive the final cuts and can't catch on anywhere else. Sitting on the bench and learning under an Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady is nice and all, but there's no substitute for real game action at almost any position (except for kickers).

Except that ignores the "wear and tear" issue. You'd significantly shorten the careers of players like an Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady if they'd spent those years they were on the bench playing in meaningless minor league games. Which brings up another impediment to it ever happening, the NFLPA. They'd never allow it for that reason alone nevermind the money issues.

[Gothamite]

What was the NFLPA's stance on NFL Europe? Did they consider it something like a taxi squad, or was it more complicated?

Personally, I attribute a lot of the success of players like Favre or Brady (as well as Matt Hasselbeck) to the fact that they were allowed to sit on the bench and watch. They gained a couple years' experience without the accompanying wear and tear on their bodies.

[Drakonius26]

What was the NFLPA's stance on NFL Europe? Did they consider it something like a taxi squad, or was it more complicated?

Personally, I attribute a lot of the success of players like Favre or Brady (as well as Matt Hasselbeck) to the fact that they were allowed to sit on the bench and watch. They gained a couple years' experience without the accompanying wear and tear on their bodies.

From what I remember, it gave opportunities for players to play NFL-style football and there were success stories like Adam Vinatieri and Kurt Warner, so it wasn't hated for the most part. I'm sure you had the players who hated to travel overseas to play NFL football, but that was a small percentage. Mostly it was done to provide practice squad and fringe players with an opportunity to prove themselves to NFL personnel, and also spread the influence of American Football internationally. It mostly failed because the NFL lost a lot of money on the venture and had to field complaints from European Gridiron fans that the league didn't showcase the top players in the NFL. Basically they compared those games to soccer/football friendlies that weren't to be taken seriously, or be anything that you'd want to waste money on.

As for the players, look at John Elway, Dan Marino, Troy Aikman, Peyton Manning, and Ben Roethlisberger. All of them were thrust into the spotlight at an early age and managed to do just fine. You could say the same for Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco, but in terms of injury or ruining their confidence... all these players can get injured off the field, as much as they can on the field, and usually it's easy to spot a lack of confidence in a young quarterback fairly early in the evaluation process. The fact is, either way is a good way to develop quarterbacks.

[Gothamite]

I'm not claiming it's the only way to develop a QB, but I still think that sitting and watching without the pressure to perform immediately helped those two guys immensely.

[gosioux76]

The UFL serves its purpose today as a source of mid-season call-ups for NFL teams looking to fill holes or replenish practice squads deplenished by injury. I see no reason why the NFL would need to acquire it.

There were valid reasons to operate NFL Europe as a league-owned entity. In addition to serving as a minor league, it also exposed new markets to NFL football. It was as much a branding exercise as it was a player development tool.

In addition to the whole "wear and tear" issue already brought up, I'd thinking the NFL owning its own D-League-like operation would be an unnecessary drain on capital.

[illwauk]

What was the NFLPA's stance on NFL Europe? Did they consider it something like a taxi squad, or was it more complicated?

Personally, I attribute a lot of the success of players like Favre or Brady (as well as Matt Hasselbeck) to the fact that they were allowed to sit on the bench and watch. They gained a couple years' experience without the accompanying wear and tear on their bodies.

Uh... I think you meant "Rodgers," in which case... shame on you!

[dfwabel]

The NFL should do what the NBA does and have a Developmental League, and I'm surprised they haven't bought the UFL to do just that. Not only could you develop talent, but you could also test out future markets for expansion, or non-traditional ones that would probably still support a tier-two NFL product. For example, Boise, Hartford, Omaha, Portland (possible expansion), San Antonio (possible expansion), etc. Maybe they could try out an international market or two.

They don't bother because they already have a developmental league in the NCAA. They more than fill their ranks every off season with players straight from the college level (so much so that there is always more players from college than spots in the NFL which is where in part the AFL, UFL and CFL fill their ranks as well). Add to that the short playing life of the average football player and they really wouldn't want to waste time "training" players using up the limited miles their bodies have rather than having them either start play immediately or sit on the bench unharmed for a few years learning from the masters (ala Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady).

And that's why I mentioned the NFL buying the UFL and operating it like the NBA does with its Developmental League. Specifically for players who need more experience (actual playing time) with the professional game, or those who don't survive the final cuts and can't catch on anywhere else. Sitting on the bench and learning under an Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady is nice and all, but there's no substitute for real game action at almost any position (except for kickers).

No current NFL team loses money, meanwhile the NBA states that nearly a third of teams lose money and that does not include the balance sheet of those who own NBDL franchises. The NFL as a whole lost money on NFL Europa, and did not want to continue. Why should they take on the UFL which lost $32M in 2009 and $45-50M in 2010 especially, if they will have to factor them into any new CBA and healthcare costs for the rest of their careers? Heck the XFL lost $65-70M in their one year and they had a national TV contract with NBC.

[The_Admiral]

wouldn't you think that players like . . . Henry Burris . . . would honestly play fairly well in the NFL?

He did play in the NFL and he was unspeakably terrible. And this guy is one of the best CFL players?

[Stampman]

wouldn't you think that players like . . . Henry Burris . . . would honestly play fairly well in the NFL?

He did play in the NFL and he was unspeakably terrible. And this guy is one of the best CFL players?

Well he did develop.

In the NFL he didn't get to do that--he is much better the last few years than when he was previously in the CFL & the NFL

[Gothamite]

What was the NFLPA's stance on NFL Europe? Did they consider it something like a taxi squad, or was it more complicated?

Personally, I attribute a lot of the success of players like Favre or Brady (as well as Matt Hasselbeck) to the fact that they were allowed to sit on the bench and watch. They gained a couple years' experience without the accompanying wear and tear on their bodies.

Uh... I think you meant "Rodgers," in which case... shame on you!

Ugh. Mea culpa.

Although... had Favre been the starter in Atlanta, he too might have washed out before he could be sent to Green Bay.

[Island_Style]

There are only 8 teams in the CFL. Cleo Lemon starts for one of them. That to me speaks volumes of the talent level in the CFL compared to the NFL.

[IceCap]

There are only 8 teams in the CFL. Cleo Lemon starts for one of them. That to me speaks volumes of the talent level in the CFL compared to the NFL.

Derek Anderson landed a starting job as a QB in the NFL. It's closer then you think.

I maintain that the Als could give the Detroit Lions a run for their money

[Lights Out]

Please. Suh would smash the Als by himself. His teammates wouldn't even need to come to Montreal.

[Island_Style]

There are only 8 teams in the CFL. Cleo Lemon starts for one of them. That to me speaks volumes of the talent level in the CFL compared to the NFL.

Derek Anderson landed a starting job as a QB in the NFL. It's closer then you think.

I maintain that the Als could give the Detroit Lions a run for their money

Yeah, out of 32 teams. Big difference from 8. Lemon being a starter out of 8 teams is the joke. The CFL is where NFL rejects like R.J. Soward go. Look at the rosters. A lot of NCAA players. You think they told the NFL to screw off? Other way around.

[IceCap]

There are only 8 teams in the CFL. Cleo Lemon starts for one of them. That to me speaks volumes of the talent level in the CFL compared to the NFL.

Derek Anderson landed a starting job as a QB in the NFL. It's closer then you think.

I maintain that the Als could give the Detroit Lions a run for their money

Yeah, out of 32 teams. Big difference from 8. Lemon being a starter out of 8 teams is the joke. The CFL is where NFL rejects like R.J. Soward go. Look at the rosters. A lot of NCAA players. You think they told the NFL to screw off? Other way around.

And? I'm not entirely sure what your point is. Other then my half-joking comment about the Als being able to go head to head with the NFL Lions no one's really saying the CFL is the superior league, talent-wise. We all know all roads lead to Rome (the NFL). Yet we Canadians, and a fair amount of Americans, find the CFL brand of football exciting.

So other then to be a jerk and rain on our parade, what's the point of your remarks? To re-assert the fact that AMERICA does FOOTBALL and EXPLOSIONS better then anyone else? We already knew that.