Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Quote

The new deal provides them with a $400 per week housing stipend.

 

$400 per week is not petty change especially since it will not prevent some guys renting a house and sharing.

Posted
17 minutes ago, wppete said:

What a joke. I’d rather watch the CFL. 

 

I'm curious what the joke is exactly. Guys trying one more time to make their dream?  

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Vomit 1
Posted

Yes that's what was lacking in the USFL, higher salaries! They can't put a good product on the field but luckily they are going to bankrupt their investors even faster this time

Posted
6 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

Yes that's what was lacking in the USFL, higher salaries! They can't put a good product on the field but luckily they are going to bankrupt their investors even faster this time

Each iteration of these leagues gets a little better and more stable than the last. It's almost like we're watching the growth of football in the 1940s all over again.

Posted
3 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

Each iteration of these leagues gets a little better and more stable than the last. It's almost like we're watching the growth of football in the 1940s all over again.

Don't agree. I've started multiple businesses and employees who start out with "I want to make a lot of money and have good benefits" is not how you build a business. I've started out working for free many times. The goal should be to build something lasting and sustainable, not make a guaranteed income when you have no product. Give the players some equity ownership in the league and they either sink or swim based on their performance and their engagement.

Posted
7 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

Don't agree. I've started multiple businesses and employees who start out with "I want to make a lot of money and have good benefits" is not how you build a business. I've started out working for free many times. The goal should be to build something lasting and sustainable, not make a guaranteed income when you have no product. Give the players some equity ownership in the league and they either sink or swim based on their performance and their engagement.

Don't agree with what? It's a fact that each iteration gets a little better and more stable. When they started, they couldn't make it through a season and were primarily streaming online. Now they're going into their 2nd season and have multiyear deals on major networks.

 

Football in the early 1900s had no product, either. It was a bunch of regional club leagues and they still played their players.

Posted
2 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

Don't agree with what? It's a fact that each iteration gets a little better and more stable. When they started, they couldn't make it through a season and were primarily streaming online. Now they're going into their 2nd season and have multiyear deals on major networks.

 

Football in the early 1900s had no product, either. It was a bunch of regional club leagues and they still played their players.

You pay employees with income generated. The WNBA for example has never made a profit. It's charity, not business. If they are paying players 5k per week then they are operating at a huge loss and are just hoping it works. They might as well play the lottery because that's not how a business is run.

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...