Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-09-2019, 11:36 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,287

AAF 1 (football)


The Alliance of American Football started play today. I caught the end of the San Antonio/San Diego game (San Antonio won); it was pretty much as billed: like watching a bunch of NFL backups play each other. That's not bad, but it's kinda like post-NCAA football instead of high-flying NFL football.

I was sorry I missed threat of the game as I'd have liked to see some of their rules in play, particularly the "no kickoffs" thing. In NCAA football, the fair catch is called something like 95.75% of the time (citation needed) and even when they don't the ball rarely moves more than 5 yards upfield on the return. IMO it just makes sense to do away with an injury-prone nearly useless special team play in favor of just letting the offense get to work.

My only complaint with the league so far is that the team names and logos are terrible. Worse than clip art, even. They seem like they were going for "stalwart, grandiose sounding" names but IMO they should have taken note of what minor league hockey teams have done and gone for "interesting, possibly humorous & ludicrous" names and really cool gotta-have-a-sticker-to-put-on-something logos.

Personally, I hope they find an audience and make a go of it. I think their rule changes sound like good ideas and I like the pay structure a lot. I'd like to see them dent the NFL and initiate some change there, if nothing else.
  #2  
Old 02-10-2019, 07:14 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,695
[Moderating]
Moving to the Game Room.

Also, it's not possible to put a title in all caps, even for a mod, so I've added (football) to the end of the title.
  #3  
Old 02-10-2019, 08:38 AM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,544
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
The Alliance of American Football started play today. I caught the end of the San Antonio/San Diego game (San Antonio won); it was pretty much as billed: like watching a bunch of NFL backups play each other. That's not bad, but it's kinda like post-NCAA football instead of high-flying NFL football.

I was sorry I missed threat of the game as I'd have liked to see some of their rules in play, particularly the "no kickoffs" thing. In NCAA football, the fair catch is called something like 95.75% of the time (citation needed) and even when they don't the ball rarely moves more than 5 yards upfield on the return. IMO it just makes sense to do away with an injury-prone nearly useless special team play in favor of just letting the offense get to work.

My only complaint with the league so far is that the team names and logos are terrible. Worse than clip art, even. They seem like they were going for "stalwart, grandiose sounding" names but IMO they should have taken note of what minor league hockey teams have done and gone for "interesting, possibly humorous & ludicrous" names and really cool gotta-have-a-sticker-to-put-on-something logos.

Personally, I hope they find an audience and make a go of it. I think their rule changes sound like good ideas and I like the pay structure a lot. I'd like to see them dent the NFL and initiate some change there, if nothing else.
On the other hand, Mrs. Cups and I attended the Orlando/Atlanta game and it was fun as hell. It always helps when your team beats the other by 40 points, but it was still fun.

There is a rule change on defense (presumably to protect the QB) that you can only rush 5 guys at a time. This lead to a few illegal formation penalties on defense which confused the hell out of us in the audience. The other rule change is a shorter playclock and the teams musn't have gotten the memo because there were three or four delay of game penalties in the first quarter alone.

As far as gameplay goes, Orlando certainly looked good. Atlanta's team got into some turmoil in the last few weeks losing both their O-coordinator and their head coach in the span of a few weeks, so they could be feeling those effects. That being said, Orlando's D-line was stunting and confusing the hell out of Atlanta's O-line and their QB forcing a few INTs and constant pressure.

The league is billed not as competition to the NFL, but as a sort of an advanced minor leagues. The video they played before the game literally said "we're here to make these players look good and if they get a call from the big leagues we'll shake their hand and wish them luck".

We didn't spring for season tickets because we have other random things that will prevent us from going to most of the home games, but we went to this one and we have one other to play with.

Go Apollos!
  #4  
Old 02-10-2019, 10:08 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
[Moderating]
Moving to the Game Room.

Also, it's not possible to put a title in all caps, even for a mod, so I've added (football) to the end of the title.
Thanks much, Chronos.
  #5  
Old 02-10-2019, 10:13 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir T-Cups View Post
The league is billed not as competition to the NFL, but as a sort of an advanced minor leagues. The video they played before the game literally said "we're here to make these players look good and if they get a call from the big leagues we'll shake their hand and wish them luck".
I think it's awesome that y'all went to the opening game! That's an opportunity, to see the start of a new sports league, that shouldn't be passed over lightly, IMO.

I definitely don't think the league will compete with the NFL (they don't even play at the same time of year, for one) but I do think it can help change the NFL. The AAF offers a chance to try new rules in a setting where if things don't work, 100s of millions of people won't be pissed off and trillions of dollars aren't at stake.
  #6  
Old 02-10-2019, 10:50 AM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
I was sorry I missed threat of the game as I'd have liked to see some of their rules in play, particularly the "no kickoffs" thing. In NCAA football, the fair catch is called something like 95.75% of the time (citation needed) and even when they don't the ball rarely moves more than 5 yards upfield on the return. IMO it just makes sense to do away with an injury-prone nearly useless special team play in favor of just letting the offense get to work.
Whatever one thinks about the viability of the AAF, I have to say this; their rule changes were clearly made based on actual evidence, statistics, and common sense. They aren't just random nonsense or Vince McMahon looking to get more people hurt. They actually thought this through.

The only part of the kicking game fans like at all are long field goals. Anything done to eliminate kicking is a good idea in principle, and the AAF's getting rid of kickoffs is objectively brilliant, as well as a lot of other stuff they've done.

Quote:
My only complaint with the league so far is that the team names and logos are terrible. Worse than clip art, even. They seem like they were going for "stalwart, grandiose sounding" names but IMO they should have taken note of what minor league hockey teams have done and gone for "interesting, possibly humorous & ludicrous" names and really cool gotta-have-a-sticker-to-put-on-something logos.
If you think about it, EVEN IN THE BIG LEAGUES, many of the best names are silly, no longer relevant to the franchise after they moved, humorous, or oddly modest:

Boston Red Sox / Chicago White Sox
Toronto Maple Leafs
Philadelphia Phillies (perennial winner of the "Least Thought Put Into A Name Award")
Los Angeles Lakers
Los Angeles Dodgers
Green Bay Packers
Arizona Cardinals
Any team named after a songbird
San Diego Padres
Utah Jazz
Vancouver Canucks
Oakland Athletics
Buffalo Bills
Cleveland Browns
Montreal Canadiens
Brooklyn Nets

For a long time the CFL had one team called the Rough Riders and another team called the Roughriders. Eventually, the Rough Riders died and left the field to just the Roughriders, but later that city, Ottawa, got another team, which is now called, I swear to God, the Redblacks. They are called that because their colours are red and black. Attendance has been great. Who knew?

Honestly, I think what makes a name great is just time. "Philadelphia Phillies" is an objectively preposterous name, and "Sox" and "Leafs" aren't even words, but over time fans love the team and those names became words and images and histories of their own.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!

Last edited by RickJay; 02-10-2019 at 10:57 AM.
  #7  
Old 02-10-2019, 11:09 AM
betterlifethroughchemistry is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 540
I did watch the some of the San Antonio/San Diego game and it struck me as being akin to the second half of a NFL exhibition game where the vast majority of the players on the field will not make the final roster...but, it's the first game of a new season in a new league with slightly different rules, so sloppiness is to be expected...I like the concept of the league, i.e., a AA/AAA development league for the NFL, it's a great laboratory for trying out new rules without sending NFL or NCAA fans into a revolt, and I really like the concept of showing the review process live...I didn't actually see one live, but watched a replay of one from the SA/SD game...if the NFL did this, it would really demystify the process and show the difficultly of make those decisions in a very short period of time...
  #8  
Old 02-10-2019, 11:10 AM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,172
Every major sport league has some bad team names, the AAF is just following along.

I didn’t get a chance to watch any games but I’m going to try to.
  #9  
Old 02-10-2019, 11:26 AM
betterlifethroughchemistry is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 540
Didn't look into this until this thread, but one of the new rules is pretty intriguing: "The officiating crew includes a ninth referee who sits in the booth and constantly reviews game action. The sky judge has the power to make calls or overturn penalties in case the on-field officials miss them."

The only issue I have with this is that one could probably call holding on 90% of the plays run, and no one wants a game full of penalties. I would hope this would be used for glaring referee missed calls/miscalls such as the no-call during the NFC Championship game and overruling really bad calls rather that greatly increasing the number of penalties...

I'll probably make a point of sitting down to watch a whole game to see how it works.
  #10  
Old 02-10-2019, 01:59 PM
garygnu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Port Orchard, WA
Posts: 11,327
I'm looking forward to some attempts at truly innovative offensive systems, or at least interesting to watch.
__________________
°o°
  #11  
Old 02-10-2019, 08:36 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
You mean he's STILL here?
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 25,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by garygnu View Post
I'm looking forward to some attempts at truly innovative offensive systems, or at least interesting to watch.
From the one quarter I saw of the San Diego/San Antonio game, the biggest offensive innovation I saw was telling the O-line not to worry about protecting the quarterback.
  #12  
Old 02-11-2019, 07:56 AM
CastletonSnob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 210
Now that Week 1 of the AAF is in the books, how do you feel about the league? Do you think it'll succeed, or will it go the way of the original XFL?

I think the AAF has a lot of good ideas, like the sky judge and the no kickoff rule, which helps with the flow of the game. I also like how you can see and hear the process of a challenge being decided. But, the quality of play is a bit iffy, and every game I've watched so far has had audio problems.
  #13  
Old 02-11-2019, 08:40 AM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,069
The odds are the AAF will fail. All rival leagues fail. The XFL failed, the USFL failed, the CFL's foray into the USA failed, the WLAF failed. Even arena football is an ongoing series of failures. The AFL was eaten by the NFL but that was a dramatically different situation.

It's not the rules. The AAF's ideas are in many cases really fantastic, but in a lot of respects CFL rules are better, too. It's jut that people only have room in their hearts and wallets for so much of a given sport, and the perception of the AAF (or whatever previous football abbreviation you want to mention) as a minor league is impossible to overcome unless you're willing to lose a fortune for years and years and years. Decades, even.

Hell, I'm not even sure quality of play is a big deal - people watch college football, after all, which is sub-AAF quality but has a century of tradition to keep it going and a wildly different business model. Triple-A baseball teams have attendance a fraction of major league teams despite ticket prices 75-90% lower, and the quality of play is, to most fans, indistinguishable from major league ball. Even in cities that are low-MLB size like Charlotte, Indianapolis and Austin, attendance is below 10,000 a game; were in not for their development relationship with the majors most minor league teams would die.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #14  
Old 02-11-2019, 09:26 AM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,172
I really wish the AAF could serve the function the minor league serves for MLB. College is not the ideal place to prepare for the NFL; the pace is slower, linemen don’t play the same, and after your senior year you’re in the NFL or on the steeet. And it’d be nice if players could be “sent down” from the NFL to AAF and promoted from it.
  #15  
Old 02-11-2019, 10:17 AM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 17,542
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
people watch college football, after all, which is sub-AAF quality but has a century of tradition to keep it going and a wildly different business model.
IMO, that's the AAF, or any alternate football league's main competition. People aren't generally watching college football for the stellar, high-level play, but rather because it's regional in a way Texas, all the New Mexico schools and that the NFL isn't- even in wide geographic stretches between NFL teams, there will still be college teams who locals and alumni can follow. And even in places where there are NFL teams- like say... Houston, there's also a lot of latitude for people to follow U of H, A&M, Rice, UT, Sam Houston or even LSU.

I'd think the best thing that could happen for the AAF would be for it to become an official NFL minor league. It worked fairly well in the World League/NFL Europe days as far as player development was concerned, and I'd think that the NFL could subsidize teams in order to develop players.
  #16  
Old 02-11-2019, 10:19 AM
Barkis is Willin' is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,353
Too bad all these teams are in the South and Southwest. I'd be much more interested in attending a game than watching on TV. It's something I'd tune into for maybe a quarter, but can't imagine I'd watch an entire game on TV. That said, I really hope this league sustains. It's obviously not competing with the NFL, but it's nice to have some kind of alternative.
  #17  
Old 02-11-2019, 10:58 AM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 14,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barkis is Willin' View Post
Too bad all these teams are in the South and Southwest.
I believe that that was an intentional choice on their part, to make sure that they were playing in cities in which they had a better-than-average chance of the weather not being particularly horrid at this time of year.
  #18  
Old 02-11-2019, 11:00 AM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,544
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
The odds are the AAF will fail. All rival leagues fail. The XFL failed, the USFL failed, the CFL's foray into the USA failed, the WLAF failed. Even arena football is an ongoing series of failures. The AFL was eaten by the NFL but that was a dramatically different situation.

It's not the rules. The AAF's ideas are in many cases really fantastic, but in a lot of respects CFL rules are better, too. It's jut that people only have room in their hearts and wallets for so much of a given sport, and the perception of the AAF (or whatever previous football abbreviation you want to mention) as a minor league is impossible to overcome unless you're willing to lose a fortune for years and years and years. Decades, even.

Hell, I'm not even sure quality of play is a big deal - people watch college football, after all, which is sub-AAF quality but has a century of tradition to keep it going and a wildly different business model. Triple-A baseball teams have attendance a fraction of major league teams despite ticket prices 75-90% lower, and the quality of play is, to most fans, indistinguishable from major league ball. Even in cities that are low-MLB size like Charlotte, Indianapolis and Austin, attendance is below 10,000 a game; were in not for their development relationship with the majors most minor league teams would die.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
I really wish the AAF could serve the function the minor league serves for MLB. College is not the ideal place to prepare for the NFL; the pace is slower, linemen don’t play the same, and after your senior year you’re in the NFL or on the steeet. And it’d be nice if players could be “sent down” from the NFL to AAF and promoted from it.
Except AAF isn't a rival league and is, in fact, a bit of a minor league for the NFL.

The reason I suspect this league has at least the slightest chance of succeeding is because of two factors: Who started it and its intentions.

Bill Polian has a lot of pull and respect in the NFL and even the other former-players-turned-execs of Heins Ward and Jared Allen mean that REAL football people are behind this. That says a lot. I imagine that's how the league has gotten as far as it has. They secured TV deals and deals with former coaches (Spurrier, Martz, Singletary) probably on Polian's pedigree alone.

It's intentions are to be a feeder system to the nfl and to give guys who couldn't cut it another chance for REAL football. The pool of players will only grow each and every year and they have provisions in the contract for players leaving for the NFL. The old AFL and XFL (and probably even the new XFL) were created to be rivals to the NFL, AAF is not that. I'm not going to declare victory for the AAF just yet, but it has a chance.

As for the first week being done: You can tell the teams who are good from the teams who aren't right now...but I suspect all teams will get better as the season progresses. I'm interested to see next week's Orlando/Birmingham matchup because from what I saw out of the Apollos, their D-line is great and really good at stopping the run, and B-ham has a really good running game with Trent Richardson.
__________________
Want to see more of my adventures in Orlando? Follow Mrs. Cups and me @theorlandoduo on Instagram. And check out our blog too: TheOrlandoDuo.com
  #19  
Old 02-11-2019, 11:45 AM
jaycat is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,251
Looks like they were on free TV for the first week only. Too bad, or I would have taken a look.
  #20  
Old 02-11-2019, 11:52 AM
zoog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 774
I watched a bit of last night's game (SLC-ARI) and it looked a lot like a pre-season game. Which should be expected, I suppose given that A) a lot of these guys are the types of guys you'd see playing the bulk of a pre-season game and B) they really haven't had time to work out a lot of their timing in actual game environments yet. It'll probably get a bit better later in the season. I was confused about what they meant by illegal formation on the defense (WTF is that?) and the guys in the booth were no help in explaining that. Sounds like that has to do with rushing more than 5 guys. It was kind of confusing, and it seemed to get called pretty frequently in the part I saw, including once from the "sky judge".

I may go see a game later this year down in San Antonio, it's only about a 90 minute drive down and the tickets are pretty reasonable. They have some good seats at around $36.50. They also have seats I saw as high as $235.50, which makes me wonder who the hell would pay that much money to go see what is effectively minor league football.
  #21  
Old 02-11-2019, 12:13 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 17,542
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycat View Post
Looks like they were on free TV for the first week only. Too bad, or I would have taken a look.
They're not going to be on broadcast TV normally? That's what's going to kill them right there.
  #22  
Old 02-11-2019, 12:14 PM
Pixel_Dent is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,150
I watched pretty much all of two games this weekend. My impressions...

1) It fills the weekend sports void for me until Baseball starts. This time of year I pretty much just watch College Hockey and they usually don't play on Sunday.
2) It moved fast. Not just the shorter play clock but the "No TV Timeouts" rule as well. After one team scored they next team ran their 1st and 10 play less than a minute later. That was pleasant.
3) Biggest difference in talent was the WRs dropped too many catchable passes.
4) Birmingham's QB Luis Perez was fun to watch. He dropped one sweet 30 yard pass over the outside shoulder of his receiver on a sideline route.
5) It was funny watching coaches challenge calls only to discover the replay videos weren't near NFL quality. Hard to tell if a pass hit the ground when all you see a a vague blur. I suspect we'll see far fewer challenges going forward when they realize it's simply hard to tell on most plays when you only have two cameras.
6) I love getting rid of extra points so every touchdown is followed by a two point play.
7) I understand they use the "one foot inbound" rule on a catch. NFL should do that too so NCAA and NFL are using the same standard. I'm not going to argue about an extra catch or two every week because of it.
8) I like the idea of replacing onside kicks with the kicking team getting the ball "4th and 12" from their own 28. That's a reasonable substitution for on side kicks if you're going to get rid of kickoffs.
9) After destroying at least one Fantasy Football team for me, I had fun rooting against Trent Richardson and watching him cough up a fumble. Lots of other recognizable NFL and NCAA names playing and coaching.
10) I understand there actually is some level of affiliation between NFL teams and AAF teams. Something like if the Patriots cut a player then Birmingham has first dibs on claiming him before anyone else in the AAF can. Even if this doesn't mean that much it gives NFL fans a rooting interest. I know my son was cheering for Birmingham because he's a Patriots fan.
  #23  
Old 02-11-2019, 12:20 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 14,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
They're not going to be on broadcast TV normally? That's what's going to kill them right there.
Doesn't look like it. They'll be on cable (CBS Sports Network, NFL Network, and TNT), and a couple of streaming options. It also looks like their championship game will be on CBS.

The Wikipedia article suggests that the teams may also be running on local-market broadcast stations, but it's not clear to me.
  #24  
Old 02-11-2019, 12:30 PM
Barkis is Willin' is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
They're not going to be on broadcast TV normally? That's what's going to kill them right there.
Maybe. The NFL Network will broadcast two games per week. CBS Sports Network will show one game per week. You can livestream any game that's not on the CBS Sports Network. So games will be somewhat accessible. But yeah, obviously having a game every week on CBS would have been ideal.
  #25  
Old 02-11-2019, 12:48 PM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,544
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoog View Post
I watched a bit of last night's game (SLC-ARI) and it looked a lot like a pre-season game. Which should be expected, I suppose given that A) a lot of these guys are the types of guys you'd see playing the bulk of a pre-season game and B) they really haven't had time to work out a lot of their timing in actual game environments yet. It'll probably get a bit better later in the season. I was confused about what they meant by illegal formation on the defense (WTF is that?) and the guys in the booth were no help in explaining that. Sounds like that has to do with rushing more than 5 guys. It was kind of confusing, and it seemed to get called pretty frequently in the part I saw, including once from the "sky judge".

I may go see a game later this year down in San Antonio, it's only about a 90 minute drive down and the tickets are pretty reasonable. They have some good seats at around $36.50. They also have seats I saw as high as $235.50, which makes me wonder who the hell would pay that much money to go see what is effectively minor league football.
You can only rush a max of five guys and no blitzing from the secondary. This usually means teams have a standard four down men and then they send a linebacker. Although sometimes they have a fifth guy on the line, to which then you can't send anyone else additional.

That's the rule. How teams kept getting called for it I haven't the faintest. One of the downsides to the game being so fast is there is no room for replay so there is even less room for analysis. I mean, if you're a D-coordinator and you know the rule, then, you know, don't send more than five guys? Don't blitz a safety? The reason for the rule is for safety an also because the players aren't as good the QBs would be getting killed every down.

Did anyone see the AAF app? They are able to live track all the players so they have an interactive fantasy game where you pick the play and its result. Unfortunately the app doesn't have anywhere to see stats...
__________________
Want to see more of my adventures in Orlando? Follow Mrs. Cups and me @theorlandoduo on Instagram. And check out our blog too: TheOrlandoDuo.com
  #26  
Old 02-11-2019, 01:41 PM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir T-Cups View Post
Except AAF isn't a rival league and is, in fact, a bit of a minor league for the NFL.
Which was the point of my post. Minor leagues struggle to succeed. The other minor leagues are all in cooperation with their parent leagues, but are largely dependent upon major league subsidies, or are extremely unstable, and sometimes are unstable even with a formal relationship with the bigs. It's just the nature of the North American market.

Competing with or against the big league isn't really the point; the XFL played at almost exactly the same time as the AAF does, starting only after the Super Bowl, so in no way that matters were they competing directly with the NFL. The USFL played in spring and summer - they were a bit more open about being a rival league, trying to compete for real players, but again it was not a head to head contest. People just didn't care about minor league football.

It's not impossible to succeed, obviously. It's really, really hard, though.

The AAF has another thing going for it, though - the teams aren't franchises. A common theme in many failed leagues is that the leagues are doomed by a lack of unity among the various owners. Getting eight, twelve or eighteen egotistical millionaires to agree of anything is like herding particularly willful cats. The USFL, contrary to how people tend to remember it today, had a pretty good first season and might have done something had they stuck to its founders' plan, which included strict salary caps and regional drafts. Instead, the various owners starting blowing their wads on star players, causing an arms race and unsustainable costs. You'll also end up with a few duds among your millionaire owners, finding out only after the fact that they're not as rich as you hoped, and a franchise or three folds or moves and the league looks like a Mickey Mouse operation.

The AAF has no franchises, only league-owned teams, thus eliminating all those risks and headaches.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #27  
Old 02-11-2019, 04:20 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
They're not going to be on broadcast TV normally? That's what's going to kill them right there.
Very few new leagues have the ability to convince broadcast TV folks to broadcast their games. The first week being on CBS was something of a coup in and of itself.
  #28  
Old 02-11-2019, 09:33 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 17,542
I had interpreted "free TV' as meaning broadcast TV or basic cable, when maybe I shouldn't have.

Still... I don't think that limited viewability is going to do them any favors in the long run.

And what else are the TV networks going to show in the meantime that would out-rate it? Pro/college basketball and *maybe* early baseball games (although I have my doubts) are about it.
  #29  
Old 02-12-2019, 06:50 AM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
I had interpreted "free TV' as meaning broadcast TV or basic cable, when maybe I shouldn't have.

Still... I don't think that limited viewability is going to do them any favors in the long run.
That's for sure. But, whaddya gonna do? You can't force the networks to carry it at gunpoint.

Universal streaming is the likely future for this sort of thing.

Quote:
And what else are the TV networks going to show in the meantime that would out-rate it? Pro/college basketball and *maybe* early baseball games (although I have my doubts) are about it.
Well, for this kind of thing, there is a baseline number of viewers you need to make it worth carrying instead of a rerun or poker or whatever.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #30  
Old 02-12-2019, 08:22 AM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 17,542
Good point.

I'd think the best thing they could do is whatever they need to for official recognition as the NFL's minor league/developmental league.

That way, they could slap the NFL brand on stuff, and a lot of skeptical fans might be willing to give it a fair shake, as it's "official", versus some kind of off-brand football a-la the XFL (either incarnation)
  #31  
Old 02-12-2019, 11:25 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,272
That worked great for the WLAF.
  #32  
Old 02-12-2019, 12:20 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 17,542
16 years isn't exactly terrible.

I think that to some degree any developmental league has the handicap of having what amount to also-ran players versus the main league's players. They probably would need to take a page from the minor leagues in baseball and hockey, as well as the European lower-level soccer teams and figure out how to best make it work.

One thing I'd think they could do well with is to put their franchises in areas that's not near any NFL teams and if possible, not near major power 5 colleges either. San Antonio is probably a good example- the closest NFL team would be Houston, and the closest Power 5 college program would be UT in Austin, 80 or so miles away. A terrible place would be somewhere like say... Columbus, OH. It's within 160 miles of four NFL teams, and is the hometown of one of the premier college football programs. Any minor league football team is going to look shabby by comparison.
  #33  
Old 02-12-2019, 12:27 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 14,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
One thing I'd think they could do well with is to put their franchises in areas that's not near any NFL teams and if possible, not near major power 5 colleges either.
It seems like part of their initial strategy has been, in fact, to place franchises in areas (if not actual cities) with strong college football followings -- Birmingham, for example, has a team in large part because of how Alabamians avidly follow the teams from the University of Alabama and Auburn University. It also looks like they're initially trying to make sure that their teams have players from the local colleges, to add some fan recognition and interest.
  #34  
Old 02-12-2019, 12:54 PM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
It seems like part of their initial strategy has been, in fact, to place franchises in areas (if not actual cities) with strong college football followings -- Birmingham, for example, has a team in large part because of how Alabamians avidly follow the teams from the University of Alabama and Auburn University. It also looks like they're initially trying to make sure that their teams have players from the local colleges, to add some fan recognition and interest.
I am not sure if it's that they want those fans so much as they need the high quality stadium the existence of fans means will be there. High quality facilities means so much to a sports team. The AAF has managed to locate itself in some reasonably high quality stadia.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #35  
Old 02-12-2019, 03:51 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 17,542
Sure, but wasn't one of the WLAF's contentions that the US teams didn't do well because nobody wanted to watch guys play who couldn't make the NFL?

Having high quality stadia isn't going to be much of a selling point if people are going to continually compare your games to the "big" leagues.

IMO, what they need to do is try to make the games more than just a football game- make them events where people can show up, hang around for a few hours, eat, watch football, see a band or two, etc... And make tickets cheap - it's essentially second-rate play, so charge a second-rate fee. Even at $15 for the cheap seats, I think that's too high.
  #36  
Old 02-13-2019, 12:58 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,272
Tickets in Orlando are $100 except in the end zones.

No.
  #37  
Old 02-13-2019, 01:26 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 14,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Tickets in Orlando are $100 except in the end zones.

No.
Wow. Is that face value, or is that what resellers / brokers are charging?
  #38  
Old 02-13-2019, 01:31 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,272
Let me back up. That was for their opening game only. Now that's only the price for the home sideline, otherwise they're $63, $45, and down to $20 in GA. A bit of realism seems to have set in.

Maybe. But they're still a bunch of rejects.
  #39  
Old 02-13-2019, 02:29 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 17,542
IMO, the AAF needs to charge ticket prices in the same ball park as a minor league baseball team or maybe major league cheap seats.

That's their main competition on a spring/summer weekend for people to attend sporting events- they have to make their games more attractive to people than that, and if there's a major league baseball team in town, they also have to compete with the idea that they could go see major league baseball vs. dev-league football.
  #40  
Old 02-13-2019, 03:04 PM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,069
$63 sounds pretty steep to me to watch the minors.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #41  
Old 02-13-2019, 03:12 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 14,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
$63 sounds pretty steep to me to watch the minors.
I agree. It's a (relative) bargain, compared to an NFL ticket, though a little bit of digging suggests to me that tickets to major conference college football games aren't that different from the AAF prices.

They aren't paying their players a lot, compared to the NFL (about $80K a season), though the simple facts of roster sizes (and the coaching and training staffs) means that the teams likely do have pretty significant payrolls. Plus, as you noted a few posts ago, they're playing in pretty nice stadiums, and the rental fees for those are probably also pretty steep.

Last edited by kenobi 65; 02-13-2019 at 03:12 PM.
  #42  
Old 02-13-2019, 04:25 PM
friendlessboob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by kunilou View Post
From the one quarter I saw of the San Diego/San Antonio game, the biggest offensive innovation I saw was telling the O-line not to worry about protecting the quarterback.
Been doing that in Seattle for years : ) Actually this year was much improved
  #43  
Old 02-13-2019, 07:52 PM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,544
Mrs. Cups and myself opted in for season tickets when they came out, but after putting the down payment in we realized we could only go to two of the games. I tried to back out but the ticket sales guy converted my 100 down to two 25 dollar tickets for both games.

They were in the endzones (as was mentioned upthread) but seeing two games for 100 bucks isn't bad at all IMO
  #44  
Old 02-13-2019, 08:20 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir T-Cups View Post
Mrs. Cups and myself opted in for season tickets when they came out, but after putting the down payment in we realized we could only go to two of the games. I tried to back out but the ticket sales guy converted my 100 down to two 25 dollar tickets for both games.

They were in the endzones (as was mentioned upthread) but seeing two games for 100 bucks isn't bad at all IMO
That's about what it costs to watch Alabama beat up on whatever creampuffs they scheduled this year, and well cheaper than an SEC or rivalry game.
  #45  
Old 02-14-2019, 09:58 AM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 17,542
Sure, but would you rather see two unknown teams of scrubs play football in San Antonio, or go see a couple of Spurs games?

For my $100 and a weekend in San Antonio, there's no contest- I'd see the Spurs. Top notch NBA basketball is far better than backups for the same price.

Now if it was a Missions game vs. a single Commanders game for the same price, I'd choose the Commanders because I prefer second-rate football to second-rate baseball.

Same thing- if I had the option of watching Alabama play a SEC team vs. scrub football, I'd watch the Alabama game hands down.
  #46  
Old 02-14-2019, 01:53 PM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,544
I could spend the same amount of money to see a shitty Magic game too, but what can I say? I like football more than basketball. Not to mention I like pro/semi-pro football way more than college football anyway. I fully understand that an Alabama team could probably beat (or at least give a run-for-the-money) an AAF team, but college football kinda makes me sick to my stomach...so I'd choose this.

Tomato,Tomahto...I just like this better is all.
__________________
Want to see more of my adventures in Orlando? Follow Mrs. Cups and me @theorlandoduo on Instagram. And check out our blog too: TheOrlandoDuo.com
  #47  
Old 02-15-2019, 08:16 AM
Barkis is Willin' is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,353
Colin Kaepernick was reportedly approached about joining a team in the AAF but he wanted $20 million. If true, this guy is not serious about playing football. Not that he necessarily should have taken the $250k or whatever the AAF offered, but $20M is insane.

ETA: Tim Tebow was also approached but would rather focus on baseball.

Last edited by Barkis is Willin'; 02-15-2019 at 08:17 AM.
  #48  
Old 02-15-2019, 11:56 AM
Omniscient is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 17,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
Whatever one thinks about the viability of the AAF, I have to say this; their rule changes were clearly made based on actual evidence, statistics, and common sense. They aren't just random nonsense or Vince McMahon looking to get more people hurt. They actually thought this through.

The only part of the kicking game fans like at all are long field goals. Anything done to eliminate kicking is a good idea in principle, and the AAF's getting rid of kickoffs is objectively brilliant, as well as a lot of other stuff they've done.


If you think about it, EVEN IN THE BIG LEAGUES, many of the best names are silly, no longer relevant to the franchise after they moved, humorous, or oddly modest:

Boston Red Sox / Chicago White Sox
Toronto Maple Leafs
Philadelphia Phillies (perennial winner of the "Least Thought Put Into A Name Award")
Los Angeles Lakers
Los Angeles Dodgers
Green Bay Packers
Arizona Cardinals
Any team named after a songbird
San Diego Padres
Utah Jazz
Vancouver Canucks
Oakland Athletics
Buffalo Bills
Cleveland Browns
Montreal Canadiens
Brooklyn Nets

For a long time the CFL had one team called the Rough Riders and another team called the Roughriders. Eventually, the Rough Riders died and left the field to just the Roughriders, but later that city, Ottawa, got another team, which is now called, I swear to God, the Redblacks. They are called that because their colours are red and black. Attendance has been great. Who knew?

Honestly, I think what makes a name great is just time. "Philadelphia Phillies" is an objectively preposterous name, and "Sox" and "Leafs" aren't even words, but over time fans love the team and those names became words and images and histories of their own.
As I'm sure you know, many of these came about organically, which I think is the key.

One example you omitted is the Chicago Cubs, who were named that somewhat derisively by a local paper and it stuck. The "Cubs" moniker being a criticism of the team's youth during a rebuilding process following a couple decades of massive success.

I don't know the history, but I'm betting the Phillies were probably called that because back in the day it was easier to say and type than Philadelphia Baseball Club. Not because anyone chose the name. This is essentially where the "Sox" came from, lazy newspaper typesetters.

Last edited by Omniscient; 02-15-2019 at 11:56 AM.
  #49  
Old 02-15-2019, 01:54 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,272
You are correct, sir.
Quote:
Also in 1884, the team changed its name to the "Philadelphias", as it was common for baseball teams in that era to be named after their cities (for instance, the "Bostons" and "New Yorks"). However, as "Philadelphias" was somewhat hard to fit in newspaper headlines, some writers still continued to call them the "Quakers" while others began shortening the name to "Phillies."[9] The nickname "Phillies" first appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer for April 3, 1883, in the paper's coverage of an exhibition game by the new National League club. At some point in the 1880s, the team accepted the shorter nickname "Phillies" as an official nickname.
  #50  
Old 02-15-2019, 03:54 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,404
Something that sets them apart from other attempts is that they aren't focusing on making money from football. They imagine themselves as a tech company that's trying to get their network speed fast enough to do near real time play display on mobile devices. That ties into now legal sports betting including betting on the results of the next play. The app could potentially gather data for marketing and serve up advertising as well. That open up options to be the backbone for other sports or the NFL. They even see the efforts to process, compress, and deliver data in near real time having impacts in transportation and "physical therapy." (I have no idea about the PT but it's in this cite.)

It's a tech and gaming company that is using football as a loss leader and development environment. That does set them apart for other attempts IMO. Whether it works any better is a different question. Lots of tech startups fall flat on their face.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017