The academic experience for football players is so doctored and controlled anyway, so it's not like players are doing something all that noble.

After reading what things were like even at Northwestern, I'll never be on a school's side on this stuff. I like this D league...I suspect schools won't. It will take a bite out of their bottom line. For so long, making athletics profitable, and carried by what can be made through football has driven major college athletics to this point. This alternative would compete against that chase, and I doubt college leaders are actually ready or hopeful to change their posturing on that investment.

And the pros would be wise to stay silent if there is a spat. CFB needs to change, and the pros shouldn't endorse the experience over this alternative.

Let's all pull together and buy this league. http://starsfootballleague.com/

(01-12-2017 12:57 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  The academic experience for football players is so doctored and controlled anyway, so it's not like players are doing something all that noble.

After reading what things were like even at Northwestern, I'll never be on a school's side on this stuff. I like this D league...I suspect schools won't. It will take a bite out of their bottom line. For so long, making athletics profitable, and carried by what can be made through football has driven major college athletics to this point. This alternative would compete against that chase, and I doubt college leaders are actually ready or hopeful to change their posturing on that investment.

And the pros would be wise to stay silent if there is a spat. CFB needs to change, and the pros shouldn't endorse the experience over this alternative.

That's the problem. The academic experience for most CFB players on scholarship is a joke. When you see that the majority of the team would not be accepted to the more restrictive P5 schools based on academic requirements alone, then there is a problem. CFB is broken when you view it through the lens of an academic institution. It's A-OK if you view it as a minor league system where the "student athletes" are players who have to go to school as a necessary "evil" in order to get their shot at playing professional sports.

The 4 year from HS seems odd. I see more value for a college grad who played in a non-pro offense. A NFL team not wanting to waste a draft pick on a marginal prospect could send him to the D league for a year.

The money doesn't seem right. They are saying $10 million per year just in player salary. With other expense, that's a $30 million budget. Where is the revenue?

(01-11-2017 03:50 PM)CenterSquarEd Wrote:  It looks like this league is being founded by a sports agent. I'll be curious to see if players end up agreeing to give up some portion of their future earnings. It could pay for itself. And, frankly, for some football players who aren't NCAA-eligible and end up toiling in junior college programs, it may even end up being a better deal.

Which would explain Southern California. Probably the last place you would want this sort of league. It will get no fan support or interest.

It would also explain the 4 years out of HS limit. They aren't interested in the 22-25 year olds who already got cut.

(01-11-2017 08:26 PM)panama Wrote:  

(01-11-2017 08:19 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Simply put: there are five-star talent high school players who never get a chance because school isn't for them.

Not enough to fill a league. And those same people tend to wash out at life when structure of any kind is presented to them.

Junior College.

And maybe that's what these people are thinking. Pull the kids in the California, Kansas and Mississippi JCs.

College coaches won't like it because they pretty much don't like anything that maybe, could be, possibly makes life a fraction tougher.

I can tell you from experience there are people walking the halls of colleges who have no business being there. If they belong in any college it is one that is less selective. Meeting NCAA initial eligibility does not mean you are ready to be a part of every university community.

If we don't think Bubba can cut it academically at Enormous State University, his ability to toss a football doesn't change that. Now Bubba might thrive at Small State because the kids in the classroom are closer to him in academic background.

I'm all for an alternative. Truth is there are some really good football players out there who give up when no FBS offers them, some go the juco route and some of them don't make it because they aren't interested in school or just not cut out for traditional curriculum and should have been learning to be a welder or HVAC tech or something that would make them a living if football won't.

As reported, I don't think this league stands a chance because the pay is too high for the players for the likely revenue. Likewise a six game schedule that's just not going to give guys the reps they need. You won't learn enough in six games to offset what a college guy gets.

I think the best opportunity is a partnership with someone like Nike or Adidas and set up a massive camp in one location. Play the proposed six game schedule then break the teams back up, form four new teams and play another six games. At least that way they get a full 12 games like a college player.

I hope someone figures out a good solution. Really sucks that guys who aren't cut out for college or just choose to make it a low priority don't have an option.

This is going to be a developed league for those who don't want to go to college and get paid to play to work with coaches who will develop players for the NFL style of competition.  
They are starting small which is good so that are not over extended.  This will take some players from college for sure and I think this could take off to some effect. It will be a waiting game to see if the NFL drafts players from this league as they been in there for 3 years.
If there is a need as described in the article, they could be successful in developing these players for NFL style of play instead of collegiate style the NFL gets and has to develop them into a NFL style of player.  We've seen many good players who were good in college but couldn't make it in the NFL.  (which seems to be an issue with the NFL from the article)
And yes, it sounds as if there are done after 4 years because after that, they are either ready to play in the NFL or not and will have other options like the CFL to move to if their talent is desired. 

(01-11-2017 08:03 PM)panama Wrote:  16 year old kids do not dream of going to play in a developmental league.

That depends. If they start getting some players into the NFL they'll get some interest.

As it stands now, the way to the NFL is via college. With this league and sports agents involved with this league, this will be another avenue. In addition, the players are going to be developed to the NFL style of play and not college. It'll be interesting to see how this will turn out and how the coaches of this new league develop the players.

I have no doubt that the P5 will work with the NFL to kill this in the crib. The industrial complex that has monopoly control over football (development) for those aged 18-20/21, will absolutely accept zero risk for an option that allows football to flourish outside their context --- school.

If you want football, you pick a school, you play for a school. That's how the monopoly works.


Thing is, ask almost any four or five star recruit the following question:

"would you be interested in exploring an option where you live in an apartment with other players, near a training facility, spend your days studying the game, working out, rehabbing, etc. and playing games in a developmental league against other developmental prospects, while having your living expenses and food paid for, health insurance and any injuries taken care of, and even earning a small amount of money on the side??"

Guaranteed that a high percentage of those players would be interested in that option.


Absolutely some would prefer to get a scholarship to school and play for a school team, fine. But I just can't see why both options shouldn't exist.

Might even be the case that almost all of the top X recruits (four and five star players) would go to the developmental league, while universities would mostly get two and three star players with an occasional four star that wanted a degree from a specific school (like Stanford).


That'd be just fine with me. I love three star players. That's what Minnesota mainly gets, and they can be developed into NFL level players.

(01-11-2017 08:19 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Simply put: there are five-star talent high school players who never get a chance because school isn't for them.

I think you are talking about a handful of players here - maybe one or two a year at most. There are plenty of major college programs where virtually any high school kid with a pulse and 4.3 speed can stay academically eligible.

I doubt you see many highly prized recruits opting for PPFL until there is a track record of making payroll and getting guys drafted. Again I don't see how a six game season does much for them.

Now if a kid is looking at junior college for two years before they can play, that guy may well go ahead and take the leap.

What will these kids be doing during the 44 weeks a year when there are no games scheduled? Are the coaches going to provide the structure and discipline 19 year old young men desperately need?

And don't underestimate the importance of one thing to college age males. Proximity to college age females! A lot of top players will opt for an environment where they will be treated like gods, or princes with harems, rather than the sterile environment of a D-league.

(01-12-2017 03:08 PM)ken d Wrote:  I think you are talking about a handful of players here - maybe one or two a year at most. There are plenty of major college programs where virtually any high school kid with a pulse and 4.3 speed can stay academically eligible.

No, I'm talking kids who can't even pass the NCAA clearinghouse, but have four/five star raw talent (relative to the high school level).

I will agree that's not a huge number, but it is a significant number.

The reply on the thread so far as been simply "JUCO", and that's probably what those kids do. As they know trying to get into the NFL is the only chance they have to do anything above menial work in their life.


But I've moved past that now, to the bigger picture: how many players actually want the school component that is monopolistically tied to (developmental) football for ages 18-20/21 ?? Now you're talking a much bigger picture ....

(01-12-2017 03:14 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I doubt you see many highly prized recruits opting for PPFL until there is a track record of making payroll and getting guys drafted.

Forget the money part of it. I know that's what you keyed in on, but just forget that part for a second. I mean afterall, how much real money are P5 players "making" during college? They're not. They get expenses paid for, is what it is, but they're not getting much in the way of checks being cut to them.


You ask four/five star kids this question: "given the choice of two pathways that will give you exactly equal chances of being a professional NFL player (development, opportunity to showcase, being drafted, etc.), would you choose the path that has a school component or would you choose the path that has no school component ??" and I think you get a lot of interest from some players in the no-school path.

But, like you said, it has to prove out that this alternative pathway can produce in terms of getting players signed or at least on OTA tryouts.

(01-12-2017 03:15 PM)ken d Wrote:  What will these kids be doing during the 44 weeks a year when there are no games scheduled?

Same thing as NFL players do in the off-season, I suspect. Train, study the game, improve skills, improve speed/agility, rehab, take some time off.

(01-12-2017 03:15 PM)ken d Wrote:  Proximity to college age females! A lot of top players will opt for an environment where they will be treated like gods, or princes with harems, rather than the sterile environment of a D-league.

You don't have to be enrolled in school to get that same proximity. You can be invited to the parties all the same.

And then you don't have to be worried about the school applying some unfair standard to kick you out of school when some female says you did this and that with no evidence.

(01-12-2017 03:16 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 03:15 PM)ken d Wrote:  Proximity to college age females! A lot of top players will opt for an environment where they will be treated like gods, or princes with harems, rather than the sterile environment of a D-league.

You don't have to be enrolled in school to get that same proximity. You can be invited to the parties all the same.

And then you don't have to be worried about the school applying some unfair standard to kick you out of school when some female says you did this and that with no evidence.

I don't know what Community College you went to, but most of the ones I'm familiar with aren't exactly known for having spontaneous parties to which they invite people off the street that they've never heard of. And that is what these kids will be - people you've never heard of - and not BMOC's with their pick of campus coeds.

(01-12-2017 03:16 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  You ask four/five star kids this question: "given the choice of two pathways that will give you exactly equal chances of being a professional NFL player (development, opportunity to showcase, being drafted, etc.), would you choose the path that has a school component or would you choose the path that has no school component ??" and I think you get a lot of interest from some players in the no-school path.

The question you ask is making a huge assumption: namely, that both paths give exactly equal chances of being a professional NFL player. That is far from a given. They may develop skills, but I doubt they get the same exposure (read "marketability") in a D-league as they would at a major D-I program.

(01-12-2017 03:16 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 03:14 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I doubt you see many highly prized recruits opting for PPFL until there is a track record of making payroll and getting guys drafted.

Forget the money part of it. I know that's what you keyed in on, but just forget that part for a second. I mean afterall, how much real money are P5 players "making" during college? They're not. They get expenses paid for, is what it is, but they're not getting much in the way of checks being cut to them.


You ask four/five star kids this question: "given the choice of two pathways that will give you exactly equal chances of being a professional NFL player (development, opportunity to showcase, being drafted, etc.), would you choose the path that has a school component or would you choose the path that has no school component ??" and I think you get a lot of interest from some players in the no-school path.

But, like you said, it has to prove out that this alternative pathway can produce in terms of getting players signed or at least on OTA tryouts.

At age 18 given the choice of no rent, no utilities, no cable bill, and $400 spending money per month vs. the proposed $50,000 and still have to pay for your own rent, own utilities, and own meals in some undetermined spot in Southern California, you can potentially end up with about as much disposable income playing college, depending on where this ends up being based.

But whether or not the plan that emerges is financially viable (and I absolutely do not believe $50,000 for six games is viable) it is going to come down to success.

A five star kid isn't telling USC, Bama or Michigan no thanks I'm going developmental league until the developmental league can prove that its players are at least as well prepared for the NFL as playing college ball.

The first four or five classes will be the hardest to sign until the league proves it can deliver. If I'm leading the league, the first group I'm running every contact I have to find high caliber sophomores in college that aren't happy where they are because I don't want to start with 18 year olds and have to wait three years to deliver results.

(01-12-2017 03:15 PM)ken d Wrote:  What will these kids be doing during the 44 weeks a year when there are no games scheduled? Are the coaches going to provide the structure and discipline 19 year old young men desperately need?

And don't underestimate the importance of one thing to college age males. Proximity to college age females! A lot of top players will opt for an environment where they will be treated like gods, or princes with harems, rather than the sterile environment of a D-league.

Yeah, as if you can't pop off into a night club or bar after playing a game. A D-League lets them work and make money while preparing for the NFL.

(01-12-2017 03:52 PM)ken d Wrote:  And that is what these kids will be

Sure, if you say so.

(01-12-2017 03:52 PM)ken d Wrote:  not BMOC's with their pick of campus coeds.

Yep that's definitely how it is now. *rolls eyes*

(01-12-2017 03:56 PM)ken d Wrote:  The question you ask is making a huge assumption: namely, that both paths give exactly equal chances of being a professional NFL player

(directly underneath what you quoted, was this)

But, like you said, it has to prove out that this alternative pathway can produce in terms of getting players signed or at least on OTA tryouts.

(01-12-2017 04:28 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  At age 18 given the choice of no rent, no utilities, no cable bill, and $400 spending money per month vs. the proposed $50,000 and still have to pay for your own rent, own utilities, and own meals in some undetermined spot in Southern California, you can potentially end up with about as much disposable income playing college, depending on where this ends up being based.

So like I'm getting at, forget the money part of it. The actual lure here is a pathway to the NFL without having to go to school.

(01-12-2017 04:28 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  A five star kid isn't telling USC, Bama or Michigan no thanks I'm going developmental league until the developmental league can prove that its players are at least as well prepared for the NFL as playing college ball.

Yes -- and not even just defacto as well prepared. It has to actually produce results.

When a QB from the D-League gets drafted as the first QB in the draft, that would be a huge momentum shift.