FB: USA South Athletic Conference

[CNU85]

The NJAC has had a 100 player roster limit for years. It was relaxed with next year's expansion, not tightened.

Thanks for the correction. Now my thinking is all whacked out! Again!

You were just thinking about it backward. We talk a lot about how schools use football to bring in tuition revenue. But some of the traditional NJAC schools are big. Some of the biggest in D3. An extra 25-50 tuition paying bodies on the football field isn't going to matter when your undergrad enrollment is 12K+ (Rowan, Willy Pat, Montclair and Kean). But those extra 25-50 players are expensive to the athletic department. Extra coaches, facilities space, equipment, compliance and even Title IX related offsets all come in to play. The 100 player cap was for expense management, a big deal at these schools. Just to put it in perspective I think Morrisville is the smallest of the NJAC public schools at 3500 or so. TCNJ and Cortland are 6500 or so.

I'm sure Wesley pushed hard to increase the numbers before joining the NJAC. Probably was a prerequisite for them because I'd have to believe they are on the football players = positive revenue side of the coin. I'd imagine S. Va. would have been interested as well, although their specific target audience may have made it less of an issue. In addition I'd imagine all the football staffs were pretty much in support. Having JV teams, especially if you play a couple JV games a year, is nothing but helpful.

But the 100 player limit wasn't exclusive to the NJAC. The WIAC does it as well, I believe NESCAC is even tighter. Maybe 75 player rosters. That's a different logic altogether. There are probably some other conferences with limits if you sniffed around.

I obviously didn't think about it the right way. You explained it very well and it made perfect sense. Thanks!

[CNU85]

As a side note, the NFL agreed to expand the practice squad by 2 players per team.  I'm happy to see this but wish it would've been even more.  I think NFL teams should have much bigger rosters than they do (maybe a 50-man active roster, which allows a full 2-deep to be dressed on gameday plus a handful of specialists (K/P/LS) and a few extra WR's or DB's, and then a 15-man practice squad).  The bigger practice squad would allow for better development of young players and result in fewer situations where a team is signing a guy in the middle of a playoff run who wasn't even on the roster in September and then starting him the next Sunday because they're desperately short at Position X.

Yeah, but this would cost the billionaire owners more money and would take away some of the story lines and intrigues that the game thrives on week to week. I think the NFL should have a complete farm system. If ever there was a sport that needed a true, if small, farm system it is football. One team per NFL team, exclusive players signed to that team. Imagine how much better the product would be if you could actually develop players for a year or two. Maybe not running backs with short lifespans, but qbs, linemen, and defenders. A drafted receiver most likely doesn't come into his own in the NFL until year 3. Gee, how much better a product would we have if you actually could take years 1 and 2 into a developmental league?

Ridiculous considering the amount of money spend. You can't tell me that if you ran a developmental league from late spring to mid fall that it wouldn't work? People would rather watch baseball? No way. Lots of cities that would kill for it and it would be perfect in 20-40,000 seat stadiums. College football might not like it, but you could stay away from a few key cities and be just fine. Especially if you did mid-week games. Tuesday and Wednesday nights or something like that. You'd have limited sports competition in the summer, MLB and MLS?, and while there is competition in the fall by then the season would be wrapping up.

Sure you couldn't have the guys in your pre-season camp, but they'd be in mid-season form when the NFL teams opened. If the minor league teams had the same philosophy as the NFL teams it would work fine. I think the NFL is stupid for not having done this years ago, but since they have a very weak, but completely free, farm system in D1, that probably trumps investing the start up costs.

What about injury factor if made a summer or spring league? If someone played earlier in the year in a development league, say 8-10 games, then went to camp, 4 preseason games, then a full 16 game season....that could be up to 30 games or more with playoffs.

The NFL is a money making machine. I'm sure if they could find a way to make money with a D league, they would give it a shot. But then again.....sometimes they do stuff I don't understand. Such as - NFL ticket available on on dish. I would think they would make more money going to the mega cable companies and offering Pay Per View. I will not get dish TV, but would pay $10/week to watch my favorite pro team.

[hasanova]

Isn't the CFL a bit of a development league?  And, besides, the DI colleges foot the bill for another "development" league.  I personally wouldn't pay to go to a minor league football game the same way I do for baseball, which, by the way, often drafts HS talent, something the NFL has a rule against.

[jknezek]

No the CFL is not a development league. It's more of a cast-off league. Plus NFL teams can't farm out guys they like but need development to a CFL team. There is no loan program like in European soccer. If someone is playing in the CFL they are essentially an NFL free agent (though their ability to move depends on their CFL contract).

As for it being a minor league, I can't imagine why people wouldn't go see it like they see A/AA/AAA baseball games. Why should one being a minor league matter and one not? The minor league baseball games are very creative in their marketing, I'd imagine NFL minor league teams would be as well. They'd also have the advantage depending on how you structured the season of not playing directly against the major league teams at times. You can't tell me teams in places like Memphis, Oklahoma City, Las Vegas, Portland, Sacramento, Providence RI wouldn't draw fans, especially not playing up against Sunday pro or Saturday college games.

Again, you aren't looking to fill 60,000 seat stadiums, you are looking for mainly 10-15K for a dozen Tuesday/Wednesday  night games played every other week from early July to end of November. Since it would be a true minor league there would be a "future stars" aspect to it and you'd have to imagine a lot of the fringe players would be local former University standouts who would otherwise have been NFL free agent camp fodder. That would keep local interest.

You could remove the h.s. draft provision though I don't know why you would. Football requires more mature bodies and you wouldn't want to antagonize the D1 schools that much. It would require a lot of start up capital, but I think it could at least break even and provide the NFL with a better final product. Fox Sports, NBCSports, ESPN45 or whatever they are up to, would absolutely pay to put more football on TV during the doldrum months.

[jknezek]

Because we were just briefly discussing this, check out this article I came across today. Hadn't heard anything about it until I read this article.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/136649/inside-slant-developmental-league-emerges

[D3MAFAN]

Because we were just briefly discussing this, check out this article I came across today. Hadn't heard anything about it until I read this article.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/136649/inside-slant-developmental-league-emerges

Same here, thank you for the post. I think this could be the start of something special.

[hasanova]

Here's a list of 8 fairly famous players who had CFL stints either before, after or, in some cases, in the middle of an NFL career:

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/04/nfl-stars-canadian-football-league-chad-johnson-doug-flutie

[D3MAFAN]

I spoke with a young man a couple days ago and he mentioned that he thought Oscar Smith could beat majority of Division III programs, including CNU. I told that young man that he was crazy and that Oscar Smith needs to find a way to win its own Division VI State High School championship and focus on Booker T. Washington. After reading the paper of that Booker T. Washington game, it is safe to say that Oscar Smith has a lot of work to do before people can start saying that they can beat a program such as CNU or any Division III program. Again, this is my strong opinion of course. How do you guys feel about some top High Schools fans saying that their high school team can beat majority of Division III programs?

[Pat Coleman]

Yeah. There's no way. I could see good high schools beating teams in the bottom 25 or so but at some point, the fact that they are 17 years old going against men in their 20s is going to be an issue.

[jknezek]

I spoke with a young man a couple days ago and he mentioned that he thought Oscar Smith could beat majority of Division III programs, including CNU. I told that young man that he was crazy and that Oscar Smith needs to find a way to win its own Division VI State High School championship and focus on Booker T. Washington. After reading the paper of that Booker T. Washington game, it is safe to say that Oscar Smith has a lot of work to do before people can start saying that they can beat a program such as CNU or any Division III program. Again, this is my strong opinion of course. How do you guys feel about some top High Schools fans saying that their high school team can beat majority of Division III programs?

This comes up every now and then. It's a joke. Almost every starter on decent D3 football program was a recognized all league player for their h.s. as an upperclassmen. Might have been 3rd team all county, but you get the point. Then they went to college and continued to grow, work out in the weight room, mature, and learn more football skills. Other than the worst couple teams in D3 versus the best couple h.s. teams in the country, those h.s. teams are going to lose physical battles all over the field. They might have individuals good enough and strong enough to play the game, but not a whole three phases worth. Especially in places like special teams. High school teams use a lot of underclassmen in those positions because they have to. A decent college team is going to be using underclassmen in those positions who were some of the best players on h.s. teams as upperclassmen. Basic logic tells you what is going to happen...

[tigerfanalso]

I completely agree that HS teams cannot beat D3 teams. I've had that conversation with numerous HS coaches and they all agree on the topic. Some think D3 is a continuation of HS football until their kid shows up at a D3 school thinking he will make 1st team AA only to watch that kid sit the bench for 4 years or decide not to play any longer. The blue chippers will continue to play D1 but most of the good D3 programs have kids good enough to play D1 but just not big enough, tall enough, fast enough, but were dominate in HS.

[narch]

Because we were just briefly discussing this, check out this article I came across today. Hadn't heard anything about it until I read this article.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/136649/inside-slant-developmental-league-emerges

anything with the word experimental in the name probably should not be taken seriously as a long-term venture - if this league gets off the ground (that's a big if), i don't see it lasting long-term - player salaries alone are going to be in the range of $1,000,000...add another $200,000 to $250,000 or so for coaches salaries, along with facility rental, administrative and marketing costs...expenses are easily going to into the $2.5 to $3 million range for a 6 week, 4 team league that has no brand awareness, no television contract and will likely see very small crowds - the league is scheduled to start in 43 days, 10 hours and 15 minutes and we don't know who will play on any of the teams, or when/where the teams will play each other - it all seems rushed and doomed to failure...just like every other start-up professional football league (a11fl, ufl, xfl, etc.)

until the nfl gets behind a developmental league, i'm not buying stock in one...

[jknezek]

until the nfl gets behind a developmental league, i'm not buying stock in one...

100% agree with this. And I only linked to it because it was timely in the discussion, not because I think it will succeed. I do think you were overestimating the salary costs based on the numbers provided in the story, but I don't disagree that it seems rushed and doomed to fail.

[D3MAFAN]

Because we were just briefly discussing this, check out this article I came across today. Hadn't heard anything about it until I read this article.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/136649/inside-slant-developmental-league-emerges

anything with the word experimental in the name probably should not be taken seriously as a long-term venture - if this league gets off the ground (that's a big if), i don't see it lasting long-term - player salaries alone are going to be in the range of $1,000,000...add another $200,000 to $250,000 or so for coaches salaries, along with facility rental, administrative and marketing costs...expenses are easily going to into the $2.5 to $3 million range for a 6 week, 4 team league that has no brand awareness, no television contract and will likely see very small crowds - the league is scheduled to start in 43 days, 10 hours and 15 minutes and we don't know who will play on any of the teams, or when/where the teams will play each other - it all seems rushed and doomed to failure...just like every other start-up professional football league (a11fl, ufl, xfl, etc.)

until the nfl gets behind a developmental league, i'm not buying stock in one...

Even though they initially said they will only be targeting players a few years of leaving college, I think they may go after some younger guys that may decide not to attend college. It was also mentioned in the article that they will not be paying those hefty salaries. I think the league stays committed to a good budget and hopefully maintain and last a couple years, you may see young guys opting out to go to college and make $250-$1,000 a week instead of going to college and receiving that same stipend, without having to attend classes and deal with college by-laws.

[narch]

I do think you were overestimating the salary costs based on the numbers provided in the story, but I don't disagree that it seems rushed and doomed to fail.

i wasn't really estimating at all...i was doing the math provided in the story

40 players per team x $1,000 per week x 4 teams x 8 weeks = $1,280,000

40 players per team x $1,250 per week x 4 teams x 8 weeks = $1,600,000

I actually under-stated salaries

Each team will have 40 players, with between six and eight coaches per franchise. As part of their eight-week contracts, coaches must agree to avoid exotic schemes and use a traditional approach to maximize players' NFL preparedness...Players will earn between $1,000 and $1,250 per week.