Lingerie Football League on OSC?
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 799
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 7:45 am
- Location: Saskatoon, SK
Lingerie Football League on OSC?
Over on UFLAccess.com there was some mention that this site should cover the Lingerie Football League. So I figured I'd ask what the reasoning was that the league was not covered here? I'm not necessarily advocating coverage if the league doesn't warrant it, but figured I'd ask why it isn't covered?
My guess is because it's not a legitimate sporting competition. Its sole purpose is to titilate.
Now, I have absolutely nothing against titilation, mind you. It absolutely has its time and place and the free market will decide if the league itself will actually succeed.
But the amount of "coverage" these "teams" get is likely as scant as their wardrobe.
Also, not that I am condemning that.
Now, I have absolutely nothing against titilation, mind you. It absolutely has its time and place and the free market will decide if the league itself will actually succeed.
But the amount of "coverage" these "teams" get is likely as scant as their wardrobe.
Also, not that I am condemning that.
Old enough to remember when bashing the ABA was fun.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 799
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 7:45 am
- Location: Saskatoon, SK
[quote=""Sam Hill""]My guess is because it's not a legitimate sporting competition. Its sole purpose is to titilate.
Now, I have absolutely nothing against titilation, mind you. It absolutely has its time and place and the free market will decide if the league itself will actually succeed.
But the amount of "coverage" these "teams" get is likely as scant as their wardrobe.
Also, not that I am condemning that.[/quote]
Initially it was. But in watching the competition, you can tell the women are trying to actually play. Over the course of the Bowl games and now the league, there has been a shift away from models and into more athletic players. There are a few players from the IWFL/NWFA (or whatever the big women's outdoor league is now) playing in the league. Also, the majority seem to have sports backgrounds possibly not beyond high school, but they aren't simply paid to look pretty.
But I agree that local coverage isn't huge from what I've seen. But then again I don't live anywhere near a team, closest to me is Seattle and that is about a 18 hour drive. But the question did raise an interesting point when I saw it. So I was curious.
Now, I have absolutely nothing against titilation, mind you. It absolutely has its time and place and the free market will decide if the league itself will actually succeed.
But the amount of "coverage" these "teams" get is likely as scant as their wardrobe.
Also, not that I am condemning that.[/quote]
Initially it was. But in watching the competition, you can tell the women are trying to actually play. Over the course of the Bowl games and now the league, there has been a shift away from models and into more athletic players. There are a few players from the IWFL/NWFA (or whatever the big women's outdoor league is now) playing in the league. Also, the majority seem to have sports backgrounds possibly not beyond high school, but they aren't simply paid to look pretty.
But I agree that local coverage isn't huge from what I've seen. But then again I don't live anywhere near a team, closest to me is Seattle and that is about a 18 hour drive. But the question did raise an interesting point when I saw it. So I was curious.
I'm certain there are players in the LFL who are deadly serious about it and are competitors. I take nothing away from them or what they're trying to do. But this site is about collecting coverage into one focal point and I'm not sure there's much coverage to collect.
What would happen, do you think, if they suddenly put all the LFL players into actual football uniforms with pads?
What would happen, do you think, if they suddenly put all the LFL players into actual football uniforms with pads?
Old enough to remember when bashing the ABA was fun.
"We expect a crowd of 20,000-plus, standing room only," (LFL founder Mitch Mortaza) said back in December when the championship game was announced.
They got 3,000....and the tickets were free.
The competitors themselves obviously take it seriously. The world does not.
They got 3,000....and the tickets were free.
The competitors themselves obviously take it seriously. The world does not.
Old enough to remember when bashing the ABA was fun.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 612
- Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 3:04 pm
- Location: Baltimore, Md.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 799
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 7:45 am
- Location: Saskatoon, SK
[quote=""Hockey""]LFL has a real national TV deal. That makes them more successful then most of the sports covered by OSC. Perhaps they are too "big league".[/quote]
Though is MTV2 better than being on Versus like the NLL? Granted the LFL is probably the only league on here (aside from the CFL) to have all their games broadcast nationally. The UFL comes close but I don't think NESN is available nationally. But I doubt they are too "big league" especially since the NLL, MLS and WNBA are covered. All three of those leagues have extensive coverage, games broadcast nationally and have highlights featured on Sportscenter/Sportscentre (TSN).
I think it probably boils down to the availability of local coverage as to why they aren't on here. But it would be interesting to hear from Paul himself as to why they aren't covered.
Though is MTV2 better than being on Versus like the NLL? Granted the LFL is probably the only league on here (aside from the CFL) to have all their games broadcast nationally. The UFL comes close but I don't think NESN is available nationally. But I doubt they are too "big league" especially since the NLL, MLS and WNBA are covered. All three of those leagues have extensive coverage, games broadcast nationally and have highlights featured on Sportscenter/Sportscentre (TSN).
I think it probably boils down to the availability of local coverage as to why they aren't on here. But it would be interesting to hear from Paul himself as to why they aren't covered.
[quote=""Hockey""]LFL has a real national TV deal. That makes them more successful then most of the sports covered by OSC. Perhaps they are too "big league".[/quote]
So you consider an edited, tape-delayed version of each game, with Tom Dore and Sean Salisbury pretending it's an actual competition, on MTV2, late on Friday nights, to be "a real national TV deal?"
Really? Honestly? That's your idea of "a real national TV deal?"
So you consider an edited, tape-delayed version of each game, with Tom Dore and Sean Salisbury pretending it's an actual competition, on MTV2, late on Friday nights, to be "a real national TV deal?"
Really? Honestly? That's your idea of "a real national TV deal?"
Old enough to remember when bashing the ABA was fun.