Non-Art Discussion for Artisan219's Developmental Football League

[Artisan219]

Since my shift in direction on my other thread has effectively killed additional discussion, I thought I'd just repost the last three comments as a new thread, since this is quite a divergence from the other thread. Again, just to be clear, this is not intended to be an artistic thread, but rather just a lot of what-if drivel, just to sate my own ego and curiosity.

I have a considerable amount of artwork left in this project, and I will continue to add art and revisions as I get to them. Eventually, when I have all of my teams set with logos and color palettes, I will post uniforms and maybe some merchandise concepts. But factoring in time I wish to spend on other projects and the only-occasional responses from the board the last several days, I think I'm going to change the focus of this thread for awhile.

Looking at my map of Designated Market Areas, I think a return to market research could perhaps generate some intellectual commentary as a break from the artistic input (which has been quite helpful, thank you).

EDIT: Map updated 07/03/12 3:24PM EDT

While this is by and large merely a hypothetical undertaking, I am nevertheless curious as to the real-world applications of this project. My initial selection of twenty-four markets represented some of the largest untapped sports markets in the country, and every city on my map is specifically chosen to specifically fill gaps in the NFL market coverage. Plus, the Europa series proved that the NFL does have the capacity to gamble on new markets. So this brings me to a simple question:

What would it take to actually field an NFL developmental league?

The simple answer would be yachts full of disposable income and a magic wand made from fossilized unicorn bones and imbued with the shattered dreams of orphans, but sadly I have neither of those things. Thankfully, I am not interested in the actualities so much as I am interested in figuring out all of the myriad hurdles involved in creating a league, and from there what would be the additional hurdles involved in continued league play.

The initial obstacles are inescapably interrelated: funding the minor league and NFL affiliation. A professional football league would obviously cost a fair amount of money. I read online somewhere that it costs over $3K to dress one player for the season, so just having uniforms and equipment for a full roster could easily run close to $200K. Counting player salaries, transportation costs, venue agreements, and other costs, even second-tier talent would be reasonably expensive. Granted, I use the word "expensive" in a relativistic sense, as the 2012-13 NFL salary cap is just over $120M, but in any case, individual franchise costs would be substantial, and the overall league costs would be nearly insurmountable without an official affiliate agreement with the NFL. But the NFL would only shoulder those costs if a developmental league was guaranteed to make money and foster product, while simultaneously not impacting the NFL's current markets or upsetting any NFL agreements with the NCAA programs.

So here's my input on those issues, and I invite the boards to comment other ideas.

I believe the best way for any developmental league to avoid stepping on the toes of the NFL or NCAA would be to play in the spring or summer. But even this "solution" would have its issues. The alternate schedule almost inescapably draws parallels to the ill-conceived XFL and would cause conflicts with the still-weak Arena Football League. Furthermore, both the NBA and the NHL have playoffs during the late spring and Major League Baseball is played throughout the summer. There is also the question of how many games the D-league should play. My suggestion would be 10 (each team plays the other three teams in its division twice, plus all four teams in another divisions), plus some form of playoff system. In any case, the D-league would have to be finished well in advance of the NFL exhibition season (if such a venture is still required with a D-league) so that D-league players could be moved to NFL rosters.

I believe to off-set franchise costs, a public ownership system could work. This system could be drawn from the Green Bay Packers' ownership model and tailored to allow part of each franchise to have private investors. Such an arrangement would allow local businesses the opportunity to ally themselves with teams and would also immediately add substantial resonance between each D-league franchise and its host city. Furthermore, I believe that football generates enough profit that even some charitable organizations would benefit from affiliations.

Wow, never seen a treatise like this on the boards. One piece of input I have is that I don't think the Arena Football League would interfere too much with a potential NFL minor league because if the league was officially affiliated with the NFL, the advertising money and promotion used by the NFL could blow the AFL out of the water within a couple years of the league's inception. I think the public ownership idea is a great one. It could be a 51-49% ownership thing with the public taking one slice and the parent NFL club picking up the rest of the tab. This is a very well-thought out idea, and I have always wanted to see an NFL minor league along these lines.

Well, I'd hoped to have had some more replies in the last few days, but in any case, I figured I could add a little to my treatise of NFL minor-league hurdles.

What businesses/entities would invest in an NFL minor-league, and are there any figures that would seem likely candidates for owners?

What should be the target gate attendance, and which cities lack adequate facilities? Which college facilities would work?

While my DFL would not demand the athletic cathedrals of other major leagues, adequate facilities would nevertheless be a challenge for some of my selected markets. Many of these cities have college athletics, but there are a fair number that lack outdoor football facilities, such as Milwaukee, whereas other cities have football facilities below acceptable standards. For example Grand Rapids' Houseman Field would require substantial rennovations. This is a major reason I thought a significant public ownership option would be advisable.

[roldy54]

I think public ownership for a league like this would be a good idea, but I have a hard time thinking it would work for all 24+ teams. The likely outcome would be some markets (namely in the south, probably) would be quick to support another football league, whereas other teams would fold due to lack of collective interest. Public ownership wouldn't work for every NFL team, let alone spring football.

A league-wide total/majority public ownership would most-likely fail because:

1) Higher population density and cost of living (California & NYC) lead to a lack of general community and collective support for a team

2) There are better things to do in the summer besides watch football (Great Lakes, Northwest states)

Public ownership would probably most likely be successful in your red, purple, and lime market areas

As for potential owners, I think if the NFL endorsed the league, chances are you'd have some current NFL owners looking to own their own D-League teams, most likely the ones with the most potential profit, like the Cowboys. Some other ownership groups in some of the larger markets would likely buy a team, and some of the more profitable, successful teams might set up their own ownership groups. It all would most likely depend on profitability and fan support.

Looking into attendance, seeing as Arena League teams average anywhere from 7500-15000 fans per game, I would think a good minimum venue size should be around 10,000-15,000 to maintain a league-wide standard. Houseman Field would likely be too small, and seems to have very little room for media access or any parking whatsoever. Good facilities should have ample room for both in order to increase media exposure and encourage tailgating, and provide enough space and amenities to attract enough income from ticket sales to please the greedy NFL

I hope I didn't bombard you with too much information, but you have some very compelling questions. I think maybe you could move this to Sports In General as well

[Artisan219]

I hope I didn't bombard you with too much information, but you have some very compelling questions. I think maybe you could move this to Sports In General as well

Quite to the contrary, this is exactly the kind of open dialogue I wanted. You have excellent points across the board. As for moving to another subforum, I leave that to the admin/mods. I had started a similar thread with this focus, but it was moved to the Concepts area just because I was trying to ascertain a collective board opinion on city/team identities.

I think public ownership for a league like this would be a good idea, but I have a hard time thinking it would work for all 24+ teams. The likely outcome would be some markets (namely in the south, probably) would be quick to support another football league, whereas other teams would fold due to lack of collective interest. Public ownership wouldn't work for every NFL team, let alone spring football.

Public ownership would probably most likely be successful in your red, purple, and lime market areas

Yes, I agree. While I quoted the Packers' public ownership model, I really do not see any team exceeding a 40% public stake, but on the other hand, I do believe each team should have a minimum public stake. I take that position for the simple fact that football makes money. This the singular greatest reason that high schools and colleges invest in football programs, because revenue generated from tickets, concessions, parking, and merchandise can be put back into the school's budget. With the NFL, it is very hard to completely "follow the money" as very few teams are still singularly-owned, but aside from contractual obligations, such as player/faculty salaries and venue costs, much of the revenue generated from the NFL goes into individual pockets. Many of my selected markets could use a similar model to put money back into private coffers, for example, funding urban restoration with profits from football. Anyone that has lived in an area during a new stadium proposal is aware, to some degree at least, how much absurdity goes into the public funding of privately-owned football. Granted, the peripheral businesses (sports bars, restaurants, hotels, and even airline or bus services) benefit from a team in place. With that in mind, I feel using the DFL to shoulder some public costs is a good model.

Furthermore, the NFL bylaws prohibit any team being corporately-owned, but that may not necessarily apply to a minor league, which means that local businesses could by stakes in a DFL franchise. For example, chocolate juggernaut Hershey might be well-served to own some percentage of the Harrisburg franchise, as the business affiliation could draw audiences to Hershey Park and vice versa. Universal Studios or Disney may opt to buy into an Orlando franchise.

As for potential owners, I think if the NFL endorsed the league, chances are you'd have some current NFL owners looking to own their own D-League teams, most likely the ones with the most potential profit, like the Cowboys. Some other ownership groups in some of the larger markets would likely buy a team, and some of the more profitable, successful teams might set up their own ownership groups. It all would most likely depend on profitability and fan support.

Yes, this goes without saying, yet it does warrant some discussion. Infamous Cowboys owner Jerry Jones has a history of personal involvement, and obviously with each DFL team comprised of second-line players on NFL contracts, NFL owners would ultimately control the player pool and coaching. I could see a lot of overlap between DFL head coaches and NFL offensive coordinators and so forth, as much like the players would be competing for a higher position, some of the middle echelon of NFL faculty would want to use the DFL to try to gain exposure or compete for NFL head coaches postitions. The bottom line, however, is that the NFL coaching staff would take a vested interest in how the DFL franchise were executed, which would obviously affect which teams would be most successful at the D-league level, but I would imagine with every player in the DFL trying to make the leap to the NFL parent franchise, a high degree of competition would emerge quickly enough, so that even teams that are not operated to necessarily win DFL games would still be formidable.

Looking into attendance, seeing as Arena League teams average anywhere from 7500-15000 fans per game, I would think a good minimum venue size should be around 10,000-15,000 to maintain a league-wide standard. Houseman Field would likely be too small, and seems to have very little room for media access or any parking whatsoever. Good facilities should have ample room for both in order to increase media exposure and encourage tailgating, and provide enough space and amenities to attract enough income from ticket sales to please the greedy NFL

This is, I fear, easily the most complex issue to my fictional DFL. Moving a minor-league team into an existing NCAA facility seems easy, but with some NFL facilities dwarved by collegiate facilities, putting a crowd of 15,000 into a 150,000 seat stadium would look poorly on television (though this would allow the collegiate facility the option of selling more ticket, and would also afford the option of fans getting lower-bowl seats for potentially less money). The other side, however, is that a fair number of my markets do not have adequate outdoor facilities, and stadium construction costs are not to be underestimated. Still, with soccer-specific MLS stadiums becoming more commonplace, these costs must not be as insurmountable as they would be for an NFL-designed stadium.

[roldy54]

This is, I fear, easily the most complex issue to my fictional DFL. Moving a minor-league team into an existing NCAA facility seems easy, but with some NFL facilities dwarved by collegiate facilities, putting a crowd of 15,000 into a 150,000 seat stadium would look poorly on television (though this would allow the collegiate facility the option of selling more ticket, and would also afford the option of fans getting lower-bowl seats for potentially less money). The other side, however, is that a fair number of my markets do not have adequate outdoor facilities, and stadium construction costs are not to be underestimated. Still, with soccer-specific MLS stadiums becoming more commonplace, these costs must not be as insurmountable as they would be for an NFL-designed stadium.

I think as a developmental league for the NFL, fan interest could be at a level much higher than one might expect. Unlike baseball, rookies and newly signed players typically do not take long to develop, giving fans a "sneak peek" at the upcoming season. As a Seahawks fan, I think it would be awesome to see Matt Flynn play before season starts in the fall. I don't imagine you plan for this DFL to head quite in that direction, but the concept is about the same. Were this league to be real, I would expect the amount of fan interest to be about the same, if not a little higher than the NFL Preseason. Not incredible, but enough to bring in a fair amount of ticket sales.

Some markets in the south that typically host bowl games such as Birmingham, Memphis, Shreveport, and Orlando could renovate their stadiums to a higher "pro" standard, and while they may be slightly larger, they could definitely pull in attendance above 30,000 per game. Another option for some markets would be to host spring teams at the NFL venue itself, especially with markets like Milwaukee with no adequate stadiums, and not quite enough fans to pack UofW's stadium, the die-hard Packers fans could see their own team develop at their home field, with the training complex right across the street. Probably not quite the solution you were looking for, but it's a suggestion.

[Artisan219]

That raises an interesting question. The current NFL schedule includes four pre-season exhibition games, but with a D-league in place, as well as recent discussions to extend the regular season, would the NFL still need those exhibition games?

Season ticket holders dislike the current exhibition system and the players have always been rather begrudged to play full-contact games (with chance of injury) that ultimately do not count. Really the only purpose of those exhibition games is to allow coaches to make final roster decisions, but much of that work would be done with the D-league. Would the season move to an 18-game season and retain two exhibition games, or would the NFL drop the hammer and move to a full-on 20-game season? Such a change actually wouldn't impact the schedule significantly, as those games are on the calendar either way, but it would require a change in roster limits which would thus impact salary caps and so on.

Also, as far as NFL facilities being used for the DFL, I must admit that I had always understood that a spring schedule would allow, possibly even encourage, existing NFL markets to field their own D-league teams. This is why my original concepts aimed at potential expansion markets, as I thought the D-league could support, in theory, more teams than the NFL, but while this made sense as the pragmatic solution to an NFL farm league, it severely limited my options for original logos and so I simply chose to ignore NFL markets (with the exception of San Diego, again here assuming the Chargers return to Los Angeles). You'll notice that other than the NYC market on my map, I deliberately left gaps. Niether Cleveland or Cincinnati are included with Columbus because there is nothing preventing those markets from also having teams. Similarly, Orlando shuns both Jacksonville and Tampa, and so forth. In all honesty, while I was curious if anyone else would come to this conclusion, I really had hoped against it.

[OfficialBailey7]

A few suggestions on the map:

For Charelston I think you could include the Greenville-Spartanburg area, as it is a fast growing, populated area, and fairly close (3-4 hours).

Also, Augusta, GA could be a market for Savannah. It is very close and might be bigger (don't quote me on that). I just don't see how it could not be included.

I tip my hat to you on this, its really remarkable.

[Artisan219]

Augusta is a little smaller than Savannah, but it is less than a three-hour drive (barely) so it is a valid point. I'll have to update my map shortly to include it.

Here are the composite markets for a Charleston franchise:

Charleston Market = 3,828,967

Columbia, SC = 953,628 (115 miles or approx 1H54M driving)

Savannah, GA = 796,706 (108 miles or approx 2H16M driving)

Charleston = 752,498

Myrtle Beach = 692,140 (98 miles or approx 1H56M driving)

Augusta = 633,995 (152 miles or approx 2H54M driving)

You'll notice that Charleston is not the largest, or even second-largest, city in this region, but Charleston has a relatively central location. The distances between the other four cities to Charleston averages 118 miles or 2H15M driving.

[B@ltim0r3R@v3n5]

But what are charleston's age demographics? What are the age demos for those other cities. The main problem with why some franchises went defect us because people aren't moving/ living there any more age demographics is a huge factor to take in to thought I mean tampa bay is lucky that their age demographic is growing(ie more young people are moving there). Tampa bay was one I the worst sports cities because so many old people live there but now younger ppl are starting to move and living there. That's why la San antonio Orlando, Omaha, and okc are such prime targets for sports franchises right now people are wanting to move there.

[Artisan219]

The median age for Charleston is 33.2 years. For comparison, the median age for the whole of South Carolina is 36.3 and the national median age is 36.9 years old.

FYI: I updated my map to include a few more secondary/tertiary markets. I did add Augusta, as it is an adjacent media market to Charleston, but I did not include Greenville, SC, because it's more than 200 miles from Charleston (Greenville, NC, however is included in both the Raleigh and Virginia Beach markets). OfficialBailey7 raises an interesting question though. What is the average maximum distance traveled for football games? Having grown up in the suburbs of Pittsburgh, I know Steeler fans travel better than most fans, but what distance or drive time would be too much? I also understand that this is one of those trends that varies drastically by region. I know from my discussions on the UFL forum that New Yorkers are terrible when it comes to leaving the city (which is why I felt I could justify a team in Long Island, because it accounts for an astonishing number of people within 30 minutes of travel).

[Artisan219]

I just wanted to take a look at how much other league sports would overlap my proposed DFL. Only four of these cities have baseball teams, only four have hockey teams, and only six have arena football teams. I was a little surprised to see how many cities had basketball teams, though, with ten NBA markets not represented in professional football. This, to me, means that as long as DFL scheduling is not a conflict with the NBA, the spring/summer season could work.

Baseball

• Long Island (Mets)
  
• San Diego (Padres)
  
• Milwaukee (Brewers)
  
• Toronto (Blue Jays)
  

Hockey

• Columbus (Blue Jackets)
  
• Long Island (Islanders)
  
• Raleigh (Hurricanes)
  
• Toronto (Maple Leaves)
  

Basketball

• Portland (Trailblazers)
  
• Sacramento (Kings)
  
• Salt Lake City (Jazz)
  
• Oklahoma City (Thunder)
  
• San Antonio (Spurs)
  
• Orlando (Magic)
  
• Memphis (Grizzlies)
  
• Long Island (Nets)
  
• Milwaukee (Bucks)
  
• Toronto (Raptors)
  

Arena Football

• Spokane (Shock)
  
• Orlando (Predators)
  
• Milwaukee (Mustangs)
  
• San Antonio (Talons)
  
• Salt Lake (Blaze)
  
• Iowa (Barnstomers) - My DFL would have a team in Cedar Rapids, but would still overlap Des Moines
  

[omnivore]

The real issue with a minor league football situation is 1) you can't create a ton of teams from the outset and 2) people have to care. And the bottom line is, history has essentially shown that the NCAA has filled the vacuum of minor league football and people don't care. Much less enough to sustain a second-tier of professional football. It's not impossible, it's just not a venture that's ever likely to be profitable.

People would rather watch teams they care about. High school contains kids they know. College sports outside of the D1 level have 1) kids they know/2) some community connection and even those programs struggle to really connect.

You'd need aggressive local ownership, a ton of vested interests coming together and again, a market and a will. There's just not those confluence of things viable enough to make such a venture really worthwhile in cities that don't really have a lot of people in them to begin with. And for every city with the perfect storm of those things, there are others that simply won't.

MLS had the right idea where they had a few few rich owners subsidizing things for a while. In a situation like this, when money is less of an issue, then you'd at least have slightly less to worry about. And even then, it's almost extremely unlikely to work.

Concocting a league with the idea of being the developmental league of a league that doesn't need one isn't a great starting approach either. It's akin to those startups who think "if I just had 1% of that market, we'd be rich." It's hard to capture that kind of the market.

Public ownership of a sports team in an era where cities are cutting actual services wouldn't work. Maybe 50 years ago and perhaps if your team is the Coyotes and has an arena built for them already but otherwise? No dice.

[Artisan219]

Great contribution. I appreciate the input and this is a very well-thought, well-articulated rebuttal to some of my points. I appreciate and understand that this is very much just a fool's errand project. But that said, I do want to touch on your post in some depth (which is why I haven't responded earlier).

First and foremost, I will admit that I never actually intended this project to get to 32 teams, I simply expanded the number of logos over a few iterations. I started with some NFL expansion/rebranding ideas and it evolved from there to under-served markets unlikely to ever see an NFL expansion or relocation (Memphis, for example).

But secondly, I have to question your statement that people do not care. Do you mean that people don't care about college football or that people don't care that the NFL doesn't have a minor league?

We are well into an age where college NCAA football has become its own monster, replete with endorsement deals and television contracts. In some markets, college football has the same following that would be expected of an NFL franchise. Some colleges in "smaller market" cities have surprisingly large stadiums, and they sell out at that. There is clearly an interest, even with players graduating and leaving, the colleges still maintain turnout.

In any event, yes, I agree that the largest singular hurdle to any official developmental football league has historically been the NCAA. College programs have developed talent for the NFL throughout the league's history. But the substance of that statement hangs on a key word: historically. Things do change, however, and as rookie salaries have gone higher and higher, the expectation that first- and second-rounders pay off in the franchise quickly has become equally augmented. The NBA, NHL, MLB, and even MLS all have the ability to send players back to the minors, but the NFL cannot send players back to the NCAA, which has caused the NFL draft to become something of a roulette wheel. Furthermore, out of the 53-man roster, I would imagine seldom do more than 40 players actually contribute to the season, with ten or more players never leaving the bench, or else not leaving the bench for long. These are all players being paid to do nothing but expected to fit into a team dynamic with very little notice, usually with long stretches between game experiences. Second-string players at large would benefit most from a development league.

Daunte Culpepper, former quarterback for the Minnesota Vikings, played for the likely-defunct UFL for a few seasons. Opinions regarding the UFL aside, he did have a quote that I found rather interesting.

"I'm glad that I have a chance to compete against guys like Jeff Garcia and Ahman Green and just guys around the league... It doesn't just stop in the NFL, for whatever reason the NFL is only, what, 1,500 players. But I believe there's more than 1,500 players in the United States that can play pro football."

The actual size of the NFL is a little higher than Culpepper's ballpark figure, with 1,696 players in the NFL, plus another 256 players on practice squads. Even cutting off the lowest end of football talent, in a country of more than 150 million men, I'm sure there are another 2,000 people that can and would be willing to play professional football. Like I said, only 224 college players make the draft, and not all of those make the cut. In only three seasons and no more than five teams, the UFL had Culpepper, Garcia, Green, former Steelers runningback Willie Parker, etc. There is more talent right now in football than available roster slots in the NFL. I'm not saying that the talent in a D-league would be comparable, but I do recall an article questioning whether or not the Las Vegas Locomotives (arguably the best team in the UFL over its three seasons) could beat the Buffalo Bills (arguably the worst team in the NFL that season) in an exhibition setting.

So all this later, what's my point? Quite simply, there is enough talent floating around outside the NFL that only a small percentage of players would actually move from the D-league to the majors per season. Many college athletes would be more than satisfied playing professional football at a fraction of NFL minimum salary. I believe that if there is a market for minor league hockey, one of the least attended sports in the country, then there should be a market for minor league football. It is a matter of finding that market and utilizing it properly. If there wasn't such a market, the USFL, UFL, and XFL would never have happened. Granted, all of those leagues failed, but I believe that is an indication that the market for minor league football has not been exploited properly yet. The USFL overspent on big name players and put too much faith in what turned out to be a massively Pyrrhic lawsuit. The XFL produced some NFL players but alienated viewers with mid-season rule changes and a high ratio of gimmick vs sport. The UFL was arguably the most successful in terms of the level of play but was ludicrously mismanaged and failed to find stable media relations (the league never really had enough footing to actually sell itself as a legitimate league, even though the level of football was impressive).

This is part of why I suggested local business investment. A lot of the revenue generated by the NFL comes from national brand advertising (McDonalds, Budweiser, etc), but a developmental league could cater to more regional advertisers. Region-specific businesses and vendors could find the DFL favorable, as buying the same amount of airtime during an NFL game or buying ad space at an NFL stadium would be too costly and likely at too great a distance from potential customers. The nearest NFL franchise to Charleston, South Carolina, is as one might expect, the Carolina Panthers, but Charlotte is more than 200 miles away and Charleston interests wouldn't benefit from advertising in Charlotte. Many of the areas on my map have no other sports franchises at all, and of the teams that do have sports franchises only six of my selected cities have more than one franchise, which means there would be little competition in selling tickets on a local basis.

Keep in mind also that the core of the issue is defining profitability. The NFL was willing to shell out for NFL Europa for several years, losing millions on the venture. The NFL ultimately gave up on the European venture, but the fact remains that league officials were willing to foot the bill for teams in Europe over several years, even without seeing returns on the investment. The major failure of the league was a poor reaction to American football in Europe, with most teams relocating, effectively voiding many of the international TV contracts. Here in the States, there are many open markets that would react positively to minor league football (though admittedly not likely to be another 32 teams).

Concocting a league with the idea of being the developmental league of a league that doesn't need one isn't a great starting approach either. It's akin to those startups who think "if I just had 1% of that market, we'd be rich." It's hard to capture that kind of the market.

If the NFL was willing to shoulder a small amount of the league, it would immediately add legitimacy and create interest. Many of the larger cities on my map (San Antonio, Portland, Sacramento, etc) might very well compete for some of the first franchises. Such an announcement would be the largest football news since the NFL-AFL merger and would be the first major second-tier approach since the XFL, and also the first significant NFL expansion since the mid 1990s (not counting the new Cleveland Browns or Houston Texans). Furthermore, such a move would allow the NFL complete control on essentially all professional football in the country, which would prevent other start ups like the UFL, SFL, or the supposedly-returning USFL from trying to snag a periphery market. Granted, this does revolve around NFL affiliation, but consider that the NFL lost $40M in the last year of NFL Europa (the league was selling tickets and did have some television contracts in place, so the NFL likely paid significantly more than that for the year).

For forty million dollars, a lot can be done. While it might not be enough to build a new stadium, it would be enough to cover most of the equipment costs for eight franchises, plus coaching staff, and still leave room for a $60K per player on a 48-man roster (which equates to 12 players from each NFL franchise, essentially a full second-string, and many of them would be under contract with their NFL team, so the $23M I appropriated for player salaries could go to other uses). Using a ballpark attendance figure concocted from UFL turnout and arena football games, if the DFL could sell 15,000 tickets at say an average of $20 per ticket, it would yield $300K per home game. In eight markets, that would translate to $1.2M generated per week, and with a ten week schedule, could generate $12M. This would still be a $28M loss to the NFL, and doesn't factor other costs, like venue leasing or transportation costs, but I'm only counting gate sales. Assuming a spring schedule and including the adjacent media markets to my 32 selected D-league cities, I've accounted for just over 36% of the total US television markets. That is an incredibly large slice of pie, and much of it is outside the NFL's current sphere of direct influence (a lot of these markets and cities are themselves periphery markets of the NFL, so the NFL still controls a lot of the territory on my map). Even cutting down to my eight largest franchises, my map could account for 13% of the US television market, which still very sizable (though it also means a quarter of my proposed league accounts for more than a third of the total media coverage). Adding in merchandise sales and additional television contracts (The NFL Network is very sparse during the off-season. Plus, I don't know how many more times SPIKE plans to air the Star Wars hexalogy but that network really needs more original programming and is primarily aimed at male viewers.), a developmental football league could recoup much of the NFL's initial investment, or at the very least, develop talent to acceptable levels. Imagine having a backup quarterback that could actually throw the ball because he had game-day experience in the off season.