Photo

EDIT: XFL Returns


  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#1 ChaosLex

ChaosLex

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,532 posts

Posted 16 December 2017 - 09:35 PM

This is not a joke. Supposedly, an announcement is expected in the next month. LOL
@ChaosLex

Stannis Baratheon: "For the night is dark and full of terrors."

#2 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 12,852 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 16 December 2017 - 10:22 PM

Maybe I'm forgetting, but didn't the XFL allow even more head-to-head contact than the NFL did at the time? Yeah, that'll go over well today.



#3 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,306 posts

Posted 17 December 2017 - 08:33 AM

If the XFL keeps the few things that worked for them (custom nameplates, fun for the players, innovations in the broadcast of games) and does away with what wouldn't fly today, and didn't benefit them anyway (overt sexual exploitation, too much WWE influence), they could lay the groundwork for something. They also would need to, IMO, capitalize where the NFL is lacking. A few rules tweaks maybe. Refine a replay system. Common sense rule for what is a catch. Common sense rules for hits to the head. Not throwing a flag when a pass rusher trying to bat down a pass grazes the side of the helmet with a fingernail.

 

The biggest downfall of the XFL though was simply just bad football by semi-pro players. If they can't fix that, it won't matter what else they do. One way to improve that would be to have two a day camps again. More contact practices. Not advocating for Oklahoma drills, but O-lineman need to be able learn blocking technique. Use the two a days to teach heads up proper tackling. That way the semi-pro players become more polished and the product looks better. But thats a long game and it will take more than a year or two to get there. 


@BSLMikeRandall

#4 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,022 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 17 December 2017 - 11:06 AM

What they REALLY need to do is be prepared to lose a lot of money in the short term. Get solid ownership in place willing to spend a lot, and use that money AFL/USFL-style to sign quality college talent away from the NFL.

If they want to build something long-term, they can even establish some kind of training academy (with the eventual plan of breaking it off by team) as an alternative to college football for prospects who want to get paid.

The problem is the same problem that the original XFL had, which is that they didn't have a real long-term plan. They built a league based around buzzwords and perception, and when people tuned in the product wasn't up to those standards, so they were a miserable failure.

Basically, they were the Trump Steaks of professional sports.

Before I think that this would have a chance of working, I would need to see if Vince McMahon actually learned that lesson. They will couch this in terms of "real" football and the flag and respect and other concepts that are meaningless for what they are actually supposed to be creating. If they don't have the better foundation, though, they will get the same outcome, because nobody wants to watch bad football when they are being told that it's good.
@DJ_McCann

#5 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 12,852 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 17 December 2017 - 11:15 AM

At a time when one of the issues I hear with the NFL is over-saturation (which I agree) I don't know that it's ripe for a new football league.

 

But the first and foremost thing they have to do if they want a chance is get a good TV deal. And that doesn't necessarily mean they will make a lot of money off of it, but it needs to be on a major network with prime broadcast windows for the exposure. They also have to choose their markets for franchises wisely.



#6 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,022 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 17 December 2017 - 11:29 AM

At a time when one of the issues I hear with the NFL is over-saturation (which I agree) I don't know that it's ripe for a new football league.

But the first and foremost thing they have to do if they want a chance is get a good TV deal. And that doesn't necessarily mean they will make a lot of money off of it, but it needs to be on a major network with prime broadcast windows for the exposure. They also have to choose their markets for franchises wisely.


They had a fantastic TV deal last time. It didn't help. In fact, it probably hurt them more than anything else, because once the ratings started to fall off NBC panicked and the whole situation became a national joke.

What they need this time is a way to make sure people can watch games. Maybe that means a weekly nationally-televised game on a broadcast or major cable channel to go with streaming. Or maybe they just steam everything.

They will need a decent product that isn't over-hyped and eyeballs to watch it.
@DJ_McCann

#7 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,306 posts

Posted 17 December 2017 - 12:14 PM

Also need to have major sites offer a fantasy league platform around it. That wasn't as huge a deal back then as it is these days.


@BSLMikeRandall

#8 BSLMichaelWeber

BSLMichaelWeber

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,446 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 17 December 2017 - 12:20 PM

I'm not interested. 

 

If I were to get into another pro football league, which I'm not going to, it would probably be the Arena League with the team here and all. 



#9 Pedro Cerrano

Pedro Cerrano

    SportsGuy's Muse

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,112 posts
  • LocationEllicott City, MD

Posted 17 December 2017 - 12:48 PM

Pass on this. It failed once because the product was bad. It will fail again.

There is baseball, and occasionally there are other things of note

"Now OPS sucks.  Got it."

"Making his own olive brine is peak Mackus."

"I'm too hungover to watch a loss." - McNulty

@bopper33


#10 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,306 posts

Posted 17 December 2017 - 01:02 PM

If it get's major network exposure I may tune in the first week, or see how the build up to it goes. If it has the makings of a shit show, or if they can't get on anything better than like Spike TV, no thanks. 


@BSLMikeRandall

#11 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 12,852 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 17 December 2017 - 04:02 PM

They had a fantastic TV deal last time. It didn't help. In fact, it probably hurt them more than anything else, because once the ratings started to fall off NBC panicked and the whole situation became a national joke.

What they need this time is a way to make sure people can watch games. Maybe that means a weekly nationally-televised game on a broadcast or major cable channel to go with streaming. Or maybe they just steam everything.

They will need a decent product that isn't over-hyped and eyeballs to watch it.

 

It would probably need to be something similar to what NBC did with the NHL a while back, where it wasn't a set broadcast rights fee, but rather an arrangement where the two sides shared whatever revenues came from the broadcasts. I think that sort of arrangement helps ensure the league and its franchises are putting the best product out there that they can, rather than being able to simply count on a certain amount of money incoming no matter what. 



#12 BSLSeanJester

BSLSeanJester

    Restaurant / Travel Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,374 posts

Posted 18 December 2017 - 08:45 AM

I think streaming is the way to go.

 

That said, this either won't take off or it'll fail like it did last time.

 

I just think people are generally fed up with football...or are at the very least they're not looking for more football to watch.


I never had friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?


#13 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,306 posts

Posted 18 December 2017 - 10:15 AM

I would like to see this as an experimental league as far as what the NFL could change for the better.

The football will be bad, but try having a reveloutionary, faster replay challenge system. Try not throwing flags for incidental contact. Don't have illegal contact on WRs and DBs. Just blatant holds and PIs. Come up with a different, common sense "catch" rule and see if it works.

Maybe even try a 25 second play clock. Limit the ways the clock can stop in game. Advertise all over the field but limit TV timeouts. If they can get game time down to 2.5 hours or less, even for a bad product, it might be an easier watch.
@BSLMikeRandall

#14 tennOsfan

tennOsfan

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,314 posts
  • LocationJonesborough, TN

Posted 18 December 2017 - 11:17 AM

I gotta find out how to become an official for it!

 

I work a lot of local semi pro games. It gets rough at times. I white hatted a women's "national championship" game last year between Houston and D.C. where I ejected a total of three players, should've ejected more, and ended the game with a minute to go to keep it from degenerating into a brawl. One of the players I ejected was DeAndre Hopkins' sister.


  • Mike B, DJ MC and BSLMikeRandall like this

#15 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 12,852 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 18 December 2017 - 12:23 PM

BSLMikeRandall, on 18 Dec 2017 - 07:23, said:
I would like to see this as an experimental league as far as what the NFL could change for the better.


Unless the NFL is subsidizing them, why would they want to be little more than a laboratory for the NFL? I'd be all for them trying to make the game better for their own sake, but if your purpose of going into business is just to help out your behemoth competitor with new ideas, you probably don't have much chance.

#16 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,306 posts

Posted 18 December 2017 - 12:32 PM

Unless the NFL is subsidizing them, why would they want to be little more than a laboratory for their behemoth competitor? I'd be all for them trying to make the game better for their own sake, but if your purpose of going into business is just to help out your behemoth competitor with new ideas, you probably don't have much chance.

I wasn't clear there. They shouldn't do these things for the NFL. But they should take what people don't like about the NFL and try alternatives themselves. The college game has some different rules than the NFL, so it wouldn't be unheard of to do things different without making a mockery of the sport. 


@BSLMikeRandall

#17 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 12,852 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 18 December 2017 - 12:48 PM

I wasn't clear there. They shouldn't do these things for the NFL. But they should take what people don't like about the NFL and try alternatives themselves. The college game has some different rules than the NFL, so it wouldn't be unheard of to do things different without making a mockery of the sport. 

 

Gotcha. I think that was somewhat the approach they took the first time around. But that's been like 15 years ago, so obviously a lot has changed. Like back then people thought the NFL babied QBs too much, so the XFL was going to let you hit them just like any other player. Now we're mostly used to QBs having different rules, and when you see the caliber of play and interest in the games for someone like Green Bay when Rodgers was out, it's easier to understand why. (except Brady....he can get his ass driven into the ground all day as far as I'm concerned).



#18 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 112,279 posts

Posted 18 December 2017 - 01:25 PM

BSL: The Return of the XFL? 20 Unsolicited Suggestions

http://baltimorespor...ed-suggestions/


  • DJ MC and BSLMikeRandall like this

#19 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 12,852 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 18 December 2017 - 01:50 PM

^^^^^^

I'd add a couple things:

- Choose your markets wisely. For the most part, I'd avoid places that already have an NFL team. Maybe poll and see how it would go over in places like St. Louis, San Diego, and (soon) Oakland that just lost NFL teams. Target other cities that you think would be ripe for an NFL team that haven't had the chance yet, like San Antonio. Try college football cities like Birmingham, Omaha and Columbus and see if stocking those teams with ex Alabama/Auburn, Nebraska and OSU players, respectively, works. And go ahead and start off by going beyond the borders with Toronto and Mexico City (assuming the right ownership group is there). After a while, if you start off successful, look at London.

- You want as many household names as you can get. That might mean taking a chance on some players that have checkered pasts. Obviously there are some bridges you don't want to cross so you have to be very careful, or it will backfire and you will turn the public off. Greg Hardy is someone you want to stay away from, but if guys like Ray Rice and Johnny Manziel still want to play, I might take a flier on them. And then of course there is Kaepernick....he will bring you both positive and negative attention, but it will be lots of attention either way.
  • BSLChrisStoner likes this

#20 tennOsfan

tennOsfan

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,314 posts
  • LocationJonesborough, TN

Posted 18 December 2017 - 02:46 PM

I'd make the tickets absurdly cheap - $5. Fill the stadiums, and it'll look better on TV, which is where the money is to be made.


  • Mike B likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners