In the book 'The Club' about the business of the Premiership, there is the chapter about how Manchester City has purchased soccer clubs throughout the world to develop their brand and to develop soccer talent. Manchester City (or rather the company that owns then) owns New York City FC of the MLS, as well as soccer clubs in Spain, Australia, and Uruguay.

Traditionally, clubs in England and elsewhere have developed players at their youth academies where players receive better training. Eventually, they can be promoted to the senior club or sold to other clubs. But the problem with the system is that players compete with similar players rather than better professional players.

So a player at City-owned Girona in La Liga may improve by going up against Real and Barca on a regular basis.

An NFL team can not by a university (e.g. NY Giants acquire Rutgers won't happen). But why couldn't an NFL team contract with a university to operate its football program. Piscataway Football LLC (PF) a wholly owned subsidiary of the NY Giants would pay a licensing fee to the university and rent their stadium, perhaps funding improvements and providing maintenance.

Fans might not support the Rutgers Giants with a dark blue color scheme, so they will remain remain the Rutgers Scarlet Knights. The university would agree to admit academically qualified players. PF would pay tuition, room and board, and salary for their players. PF might hold walk-on tryouts for ordinary Rutgers students.

PF can attract better talent by paying higher salaries. Rutgers gets a better football. Higher attendance increases their royalties. Giants get better players which they may use or trade. If they need to replace an injured player, call up a senior player at Rutgers. He might lose NCAA eligibility, but could continue to attend class (or possibly drop classes for the semester, just as might happen to an ordinary student who faced some sort of crisis, and remain in academic good standing).

Google "NFL draft"

(08-13-2022 06:29 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  In the book 'The Club' about the business of the Premiership, there is the chapter about how Manchester City has purchased soccer clubs throughout the world to develop their brand and to develop soccer talent. Manchester City (or rather the company that owns then) owns New York City FC of the MLS, as well as soccer clubs in Spain, Australia, and Uruguay.

Traditionally, clubs in England and elsewhere have developed players at their youth academies where players receive better training. Eventually, they can be promoted to the senior club or sold to other clubs. But the problem with the system is that players compete with similar players rather than better professional players.

So a player at City-owned Girona in La Liga may improve by going up against Real and Barca on a regular basis.

An NFL team can not by a university (e.g. NY Giants acquire Rutgers won't happen). But why couldn't an NFL team contract with a university to operate its football program. Piscataway Football LLC (PF) a wholly owned subsidiary of the NY Giants would pay a licensing fee to the university and rent their stadium, perhaps funding improvements and providing maintenance.

Fans might not support the Rutgers Giants with a dark blue color scheme, so they will remain remain the Rutgers Scarlet Knights. The university would agree to admit academically qualified players. PF would pay tuition, room and board, and salary for their players. PF might hold walk-on tryouts for ordinary Rutgers students.

PF can attract better talent by paying higher salaries. Rutgers gets a better football. Higher attendance increases their royalties. Giants get better players which they may use or trade. If they need to replace an injured player, call up a senior player at Rutgers. He might lose NCAA eligibility, but could continue to attend class (or possibly drop classes for the semester, just as might happen to an ordinary student who faced some sort of crisis, and remain in academic good standing).

It’s too late. NFL teams get their talent developed for them by the universities 100% free. No sense in paying for what you’re getting for free

(08-13-2022 09:30 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  It’s too late. NFL teams get their talent developed for them by the universities 100% free. No sense in paying for what you’re getting for free

Right - I don’t understand why so many people seem to miss this. The NFL is already quite *cheap* in terms of player compensation considering the revenue that they generate.

(08-13-2022 09:30 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  It’s too late. NFL teams get their talent developed for them by the universities 100% free. No sense in paying for what you’re getting for free

Are you familiar with the expression, "you get what you pay for?"

The P2 may be attempting to create a monopsony over college football, stockpiling players (120+ scholarships). Consider how many Heisman Trophy winners have been bust in the NFL. An NFL club could concentrate on developing talent for the NFL.

Imagine if MTSU would contract with the Titans to run their football program. There would probably be positive effect on attendance as Titan fans who can't afford Titans tickets could drive down to MTSU to watch future Titans.

(08-17-2022 10:58 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 09:30 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  It’s too late. NFL teams get their talent developed for them by the universities 100% free. No sense in paying for what you’re getting for free

Are you familiar with the expression, "you get what you pay for?"

The P2 may be attempting to create a monopsony over college football, stockpiling players (120+ scholarships). Consider how many Heisman Trophy winners have been bust in the NFL. An NFL club could concentrate on developing talent for the NFL.

Imagine if MTSU would contract with the Titans to run their football program. There would probably be positive effect on attendance as Titan fans who can't afford Titans tickets could drive down to MTSU to watch future Titans.

But they are paying nothing and generating the most revenue of any sports league in the world. They clearly don't give that much concern to busts/player turnover. I think this is one of those situations where that saying doesn't apply.

(08-13-2022 06:29 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  In the book 'The Club' about the business of the Premiership, there is the chapter about how Manchester City has purchased soccer clubs throughout the world to develop their brand and to develop soccer talent. Manchester City (or rather the company that owns then) owns New York City FC of the MLS, as well as soccer clubs in Spain, Australia, and Uruguay.

Traditionally, clubs in England and elsewhere have developed players at their youth academies where players receive better training. Eventually, they can be promoted to the senior club or sold to other clubs. But the problem with the system is that players compete with similar players rather than better professional players.

So a player at City-owned Girona in La Liga may improve by going up against Real and Barca on a regular basis.

An NFL team can not by a university (e.g. NY Giants acquire Rutgers won't happen). But why couldn't an NFL team contract with a university to operate its football program. Piscataway Football LLC (PF) a wholly owned subsidiary of the NY Giants would pay a licensing fee to the university and rent their stadium, perhaps funding improvements and providing maintenance.

Fans might not support the Rutgers Giants with a dark blue color scheme, so they will remain remain the Rutgers Scarlet Knights. The university would agree to admit academically qualified players. PF would pay tuition, room and board, and salary for their players. PF might hold walk-on tryouts for ordinary Rutgers students.

PF can attract better talent by paying higher salaries. Rutgers gets a better football. Higher attendance increases their royalties. Giants get better players which they may use or trade. If they need to replace an injured player, call up a senior player at Rutgers. He might lose NCAA eligibility, but could continue to attend class (or possibly drop classes for the semester, just as might happen to an ordinary student who faced some sort of crisis, and remain in academic good standing).

Exactly who would PF play against? The Lancaster FC?

(08-13-2022 06:29 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  An NFL team can not buy a university (e.g. NY Giants acquire Rutgers won't happen).

Theoretically....why not? A school like Wagner in Staten Island has an endowment of just $83 million. That's less than half the Giants' salary cap this year.

(08-18-2022 09:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 06:29 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  In the book 'The Club' about the business of the Premiership, there is the chapter about how Manchester City has purchased soccer clubs throughout the world to develop their brand and to develop soccer talent. Manchester City (or rather the company that owns then) owns New York City FC of the MLS, as well as soccer clubs in Spain, Australia, and Uruguay.

Traditionally, clubs in England and elsewhere have developed players at their youth academies where players receive better training. Eventually, they can be promoted to the senior club or sold to other clubs. But the problem with the system is that players compete with similar players rather than better professional players.

So a player at City-owned Girona in La Liga may improve by going up against Real and Barca on a regular basis.

An NFL team can not by a university (e.g. NY Giants acquire Rutgers won't happen). But why couldn't an NFL team contract with a university to operate its football program. Piscataway Football LLC (PF) a wholly owned subsidiary of the NY Giants would pay a licensing fee to the university and rent their stadium, perhaps funding improvements and providing maintenance.

Fans might not support the Rutgers Giants with a dark blue color scheme, so they will remain remain the Rutgers Scarlet Knights. The university would agree to admit academically qualified players. PF would pay tuition, room and board, and salary for their players. PF might hold walk-on tryouts for ordinary Rutgers students.

PF can attract better talent by paying higher salaries. Rutgers gets a better football. Higher attendance increases their royalties. Giants get better players which they may use or trade. If they need to replace an injured player, call up a senior player at Rutgers. He might lose NCAA eligibility, but could continue to attend class (or possibly drop classes for the semester, just as might happen to an ordinary student who faced some sort of crisis, and remain in academic good standing).

Exactly who would PF play against? The Lancaster FC?

PF would pay Rutgers to license their symbols. They would compete as Rutger. They would play teams like Maryland operated by Clambake LLC a subsidiary of the Ravens, Temple operated by 1776 LLC a subsidiary of the Eagles, EMU operated by 8 Mile LLC a subsidiary of the Lions. Schools like Michigan will probably choose to operate their own teams.

(08-18-2022 01:20 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(08-18-2022 09:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 06:29 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  In the book 'The Club' about the business of the Premiership, there is the chapter about how Manchester City has purchased soccer clubs throughout the world to develop their brand and to develop soccer talent. Manchester City (or rather the company that owns then) owns New York City FC of the MLS, as well as soccer clubs in Spain, Australia, and Uruguay.

Traditionally, clubs in England and elsewhere have developed players at their youth academies where players receive better training. Eventually, they can be promoted to the senior club or sold to other clubs. But the problem with the system is that players compete with similar players rather than better professional players.

So a player at City-owned Girona in La Liga may improve by going up against Real and Barca on a regular basis.

An NFL team can not by a university (e.g. NY Giants acquire Rutgers won't happen). But why couldn't an NFL team contract with a university to operate its football program. Piscataway Football LLC (PF) a wholly owned subsidiary of the NY Giants would pay a licensing fee to the university and rent their stadium, perhaps funding improvements and providing maintenance.

Fans might not support the Rutgers Giants with a dark blue color scheme, so they will remain remain the Rutgers Scarlet Knights. The university would agree to admit academically qualified players. PF would pay tuition, room and board, and salary for their players. PF might hold walk-on tryouts for ordinary Rutgers students.

PF can attract better talent by paying higher salaries. Rutgers gets a better football. Higher attendance increases their royalties. Giants get better players which they may use or trade. If they need to replace an injured player, call up a senior player at Rutgers. He might lose NCAA eligibility, but could continue to attend class (or possibly drop classes for the semester, just as might happen to an ordinary student who faced some sort of crisis, and remain in academic good standing).

Exactly who would PF play against? The Lancaster FC?

PF would pay Rutgers to license their symbols. They would compete as Rutger. They would play teams like Maryland operated by Clambake LLC a subsidiary of the Ravens, Temple operated by 1776 LLC a subsidiary of the Eagles, EMU operated by 8 Mile LLC a subsidiary of the Lions. Schools like Michigan will probably choose to operate their own teams.

I think the first reply nailed it. Google "NFL draft"

Why would any NFL pay a school to develop players that stand a 99% chance of being drafted by someone else?

I think something like a coaching consortium might be better.

Your school hires Saban Inc, Sweeny Systems, or Meyer Associates and they provide coaches, systems, playbooks, practice regimens etc.

(08-18-2022 03:06 PM)Claw Wrote:  I think something like a coaching consortium might be better.

Your school hires Saban Inc, Sweeny Systems, or Meyer Associates and they provide coaches, systems, playbooks, practice regimens etc.

Doesn't this basically happen already? Both at the NFL and College level teams/schools hire the assistants of successful coaches. The proverbial "coaching tree". Sometimes it works. Often times it does not. Besides that, I think most organizations would at least prefer to know who they are hiring, and not be stuck with some unknown guy Saban, Inc. decides to send out.

(08-18-2022 03:43 PM)Jericho Wrote:  

(08-18-2022 03:06 PM)Claw Wrote:  I think something like a coaching consortium might be better.

Your school hires Saban Inc, Sweeny Systems, or Meyer Associates and they provide coaches, systems, playbooks, practice regimens etc.

Doesn't this basically happen already? Both at the NFL and College level teams/schools hire the assistants of successful coaches. The proverbial "coaching tree". Sometimes it works. Often times it does not. Besides that, I think most organizations would at least prefer to know who they are hiring, and not be stuck with some unknown guy Saban, Inc. decides to send out.

The coaching tree is real, but I'm talking about coordinated coaching.

A corporation that shares scouting reports on both players and teams. Offensive and defensive analysis of your opponents. Expert supervision of position coaches, strength coaches, and dietary plans.

Other than perhaps some consultants, this isn't really done. Why not? You could offer better job security to coaches. Corporate housing in the city of the school. You could provide better coaching for less money. If a coach dies, or has a new baby show up, corporate can supply another coach that already understands the system and the school.

I should be rich.

(08-18-2022 02:27 PM)Jericho Wrote:  

(08-18-2022 01:20 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(08-18-2022 09:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 06:29 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  In the book 'The Club' about the business of the Premiership, there is the chapter about how Manchester City has purchased soccer clubs throughout the world to develop their brand and to develop soccer talent. Manchester City (or rather the company that owns then) owns New York City FC of the MLS, as well as soccer clubs in Spain, Australia, and Uruguay.

Traditionally, clubs in England and elsewhere have developed players at their youth academies where players receive better training. Eventually, they can be promoted to the senior club or sold to other clubs. But the problem with the system is that players compete with similar players rather than better professional players.

So a player at City-owned Girona in La Liga may improve by going up against Real and Barca on a regular basis.

An NFL team can not by a university (e.g. NY Giants acquire Rutgers won't happen). But why couldn't an NFL team contract with a university to operate its football program. Piscataway Football LLC (PF) a wholly owned subsidiary of the NY Giants would pay a licensing fee to the university and rent their stadium, perhaps funding improvements and providing maintenance.

Fans might not support the Rutgers Giants with a dark blue color scheme, so they will remain remain the Rutgers Scarlet Knights. The university would agree to admit academically qualified players. PF would pay tuition, room and board, and salary for their players. PF might hold walk-on tryouts for ordinary Rutgers students.

PF can attract better talent by paying higher salaries. Rutgers gets a better football. Higher attendance increases their royalties. Giants get better players which they may use or trade. If they need to replace an injured player, call up a senior player at Rutgers. He might lose NCAA eligibility, but could continue to attend class (or possibly drop classes for the semester, just as might happen to an ordinary student who faced some sort of crisis, and remain in academic good standing).

Exactly who would PF play against? The Lancaster FC?

PF would pay Rutgers to license their symbols. They would compete as Rutger. They would play teams like Maryland operated by Clambake LLC a subsidiary of the Ravens, Temple operated by 1776 LLC a subsidiary of the Eagles, EMU operated by 8 Mile LLC a subsidiary of the Lions. Schools like Michigan will probably choose to operate their own teams.

I think the first reply nailed it. Google "NFL draft"

What would any NFL pay a school to develop players that stand a 99% chance of being drafted by someone else?

Why would the NFL continue a system that is concentrated in very few schools that are not necessarily interested in developing NFL-level talent. If the school is forced to share a coach with the local high school, and players have to police the field for rocks and rebuild the bleachers before they begin each practice they will produce few NFL players.

(08-18-2022 07:39 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(08-18-2022 02:27 PM)Jericho Wrote:  

(08-18-2022 01:20 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(08-18-2022 09:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 06:29 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  In the book 'The Club' about the business of the Premiership, there is the chapter about how Manchester City has purchased soccer clubs throughout the world to develop their brand and to develop soccer talent. Manchester City (or rather the company that owns then) owns New York City FC of the MLS, as well as soccer clubs in Spain, Australia, and Uruguay.

Traditionally, clubs in England and elsewhere have developed players at their youth academies where players receive better training. Eventually, they can be promoted to the senior club or sold to other clubs. But the problem with the system is that players compete with similar players rather than better professional players.

So a player at City-owned Girona in La Liga may improve by going up against Real and Barca on a regular basis.

An NFL team can not by a university (e.g. NY Giants acquire Rutgers won't happen). But why couldn't an NFL team contract with a university to operate its football program. Piscataway Football LLC (PF) a wholly owned subsidiary of the NY Giants would pay a licensing fee to the university and rent their stadium, perhaps funding improvements and providing maintenance.

Fans might not support the Rutgers Giants with a dark blue color scheme, so they will remain remain the Rutgers Scarlet Knights. The university would agree to admit academically qualified players. PF would pay tuition, room and board, and salary for their players. PF might hold walk-on tryouts for ordinary Rutgers students.

PF can attract better talent by paying higher salaries. Rutgers gets a better football. Higher attendance increases their royalties. Giants get better players which they may use or trade. If they need to replace an injured player, call up a senior player at Rutgers. He might lose NCAA eligibility, but could continue to attend class (or possibly drop classes for the semester, just as might happen to an ordinary student who faced some sort of crisis, and remain in academic good standing).

Exactly who would PF play against? The Lancaster FC?

PF would pay Rutgers to license their symbols. They would compete as Rutger. They would play teams like Maryland operated by Clambake LLC a subsidiary of the Ravens, Temple operated by 1776 LLC a subsidiary of the Eagles, EMU operated by 8 Mile LLC a subsidiary of the Lions. Schools like Michigan will probably choose to operate their own teams.

I think the first reply nailed it. Google "NFL draft"

What would any NFL pay a school to develop players that stand a 99% chance of being drafted by someone else?

Why would the NFL continue a system that is concentrated in very few schools that are not necessarily interested in developing NFL-level talent. If the school is forced to share a coach with the local high school, and players have to police the field for rocks and rebuild the bleachers before they begin each practice they will produce few NFL players.

Because it's working great. The NFL is doing great. The NFL draft and combine are big entertainment events. And the draft helps distribute talent around the league. Player development is done for free by the colleges for the NFL.

Sure, some major programs don't do a great job of developing NFL pros. They may win games and win Heisman trophies, but they don't produce NFL players. OK guess what? Competitors use that against them in recruiting. "You want to peak at 21? Go ahead and sign with Oklabama Tech. You want to play in the NFL? Oklabama State's OC was an assistant O-Line coach for the Dallas Cowboys."

It would be an insane risk to junk that wildly successful system to move to some sort of minor league farm system because--let me see what the "because" is supposed to be

Quote:Why would the NFL continue a system that is concentrated in very few schools that are not necessarily interested in developing NFL-level talent.

So you're complaining that there are not enough colleges producing NFL level talent? The NFL draft indicates otherwise, there are always at least a couple of players drafted in the first few rounds out of the G5 and FCs. More in later rounds.

Quote:If the school is forced to share a coach with the local high school, and players have to police the field for rocks and rebuild the bleachers before they begin each practice they will produce few NFL players.

Um, okay. What in blazes are you talking about? Where is that happening?

(08-18-2022 07:56 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  [quote='jimrtex' pid='18381358' dateline='1660869580']

Quote:Why would the NFL continue a system that is concentrated in very few schools that are not necessarily interested in developing NFL-level talent.

So you're complaining that there are not enough colleges producing NFL level talent? The NFL draft indicates otherwise, there are always at least a couple of players drafted in the first few rounds out of the G5 and FCs. More in later rounds.

Quote:If the school is forced to share a coach with the local high school, and players have to police the field for rocks and rebuild the bleachers before they begin each practice they will produce few NFL players.

Um, okay. What in blazes are you talking about? Where is that happening?

College football is in transition with power increasingly concentrated in fewer and fewer schools. The big schools not only seek to have media deals worth $100M each, they are trying to force other schools to get by on $20M.

Should the NFL ignore this?

(08-18-2022 08:51 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(08-18-2022 07:56 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  [quote='jimrtex' pid='18381358' dateline='1660869580']

Quote:Why would the NFL continue a system that is concentrated in very few schools that are not necessarily interested in developing NFL-level talent.

So you're complaining that there are not enough colleges producing NFL level talent? The NFL draft indicates otherwise, there are always at least a couple of players drafted in the first few rounds out of the G5 and FCs. More in later rounds.

Quote:If the school is forced to share a coach with the local high school, and players have to police the field for rocks and rebuild the bleachers before they begin each practice they will produce few NFL players.

Um, okay. What in blazes are you talking about? Where is that happening?

College football is in transition with power increasingly concentrated in fewer and fewer schools. The big schools not only seek to have media deals worth $100M each, they are trying to force other schools to get by on $20M.

Should the NFL ignore this?

Pretty much? Better than junking the NFl draft in favor of....?