2011 and the IFL

[daytonadan]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH.

For the 9,372 time.

It doesn't frakking matters which internet company the Podunk Bumfraks and their league go with.

It comes down to having the people who can either produce or coordinate quality daily update.

In the WIFL, the company forced upon me sucked donkey nutz. We still got it done. In Frisco, I had to code some php by name. We kicked intense a$$.

I'd love to see a team or league website do weekly 400-500 word player profiles. For the love of me, Jerry, I can't recall you quoting a player in the last four years.

I'd love to see sites updated daily during the season. Two or three articles per day. Yes, it can be done.

I'd love to see the audio and video department do daily updates. The one-hour weekly audio show? Obsolete.

I'd love to see a game story that has actual analysis, complemented by side bars and breakdowns and stat packages and photo/video galleries.

And yes, update the dancer section as much as possible. All those leftover shots from the calendar shoot need to be put to use.

If you have a league of over 10 teams, you need at least two PR people. And don't budget just $20K -- that's WalMart money. Do it right.

Spend the money or resources on quality PR people who can figure out a content management system and get it done. If you want to do it cheap and use internd, form a partnership with the College Sports Information Directors Association and establish a graduate program.

Any questions?

[jerry101jlh]

Unless I was doing a team or league website you won't find me quoting players or others. Not my thing. I disagree that what company designs a site doesn't matter. Quality from the foundation does count and matter.

Yes Dan you can take any site and do wonders with information and other stuff that you mention. All that is important and shouldn't be overlooked. I would mention that maybe two pr/media people might not be needed though. But yes, pay for quality professional people no matter the number. Leagues can get independent writers to add content just like the NFL does. Some might even do it for free. And yes, daily updating important. No not important, critical. All you propose is doable and doesn't need to break the bank in getting it done.

[jerry101jlh]

Wanted to expand further. I do agree with Dan that content more important than design although no reason why a league can't have both.

Streaming video these days is not that difficult. A simple set can be set up in league offices for maybe two shows a week. Everyday I don't think would work as not enough news normally to fill everyday spots. The weekly internet radio broadcast time has past, especially when technology makes video streaming pretty darn easy.

Most teams and league offices are located near colleges. Almost every college these days has a media department and or technology one as well. My feeling is that these departments might jump at the opportunity for their students to get involved with real life projects like video streaming of league broadcasts or even producing quality live game broadcasts. Lets face it, b2 sucks pretty much and so called national tv broadcasts a waste.

When it comes to producing quality content for a league site Dan again is right, need a professional or two. But I don't feel a league media department should be on its own, the teams should also get involved by producing player profiles and other stuff of fan interest. That would include attention paid to the dance teams. Not to toot my own horn, but I proved that fans do like seeing stuff on the dance teams, even getting them to take part on message boards.

I think too much attention is paid to Twitter and My Face, many teams and leagues relying on them way too much, when their efforts might be better served in other areas. Facebook and Twitter has pretty much doomed message boards when those boards are designed to bring fans together. Maybe message boards and chat rooms are things of the past, but still a useful tool in my opinion.

Overall Dan proposes a very aggressive plan and at first glance might look impossible, but its not. It starts with hiring professional forward thinking people and a league committed to making their media department the best it can be.

[newiflfan]

Content is essential, you guys are all spot on with that. I have reasons as to why I've had my thoughts about team website layouts/designs, though...

Some IFL teams have very, very poor websites, both in terms of design and content. From the browsing on team sites I've done, it seems like those two things usually go hand-in-hand. Part of me thinks that the teams with less-than websites aren't as motivated to update things on a regular basis. Maybe the motivation is lacking because their site seems difficult to update, maybe the motivation lacks because the team isn't proud of their site.

In my mind, if the league can mandate and help provide a clean looking, easy to update template, I think you'd see more frequent updates, along with better content. And what is key to what I'm thinking, is that after the initial build by a developer, the individual teams then get to control what goes on a site.

Back in my previous post I used MLB team websites as an example. If you look at the sites of various MLB teams, you'll see that for the most part, they are quite cookie-cutter'ish. You (you being "the league") don't have to go to quite that extreme. When looking to form a business deal with a web developer, allow them to offer options to team website templates, allow them to give teams the ability to put their own personal flair on things.

Basically, I just think that if a league could work a deal with a web developer to create a good looking, easy to maintain platform for team sites, you not only will have more a professional looking team web presence for all teams, but you might also help foster more frequent and more relevant updates.

[jerry101jlh]

[quote=""newiflfan""]Content is essential, you guys are all spot on with that. I have reasons as to why I've had my thoughts about team website layouts/designs, though...

Some IFL teams have very, very poor websites, both in terms of design and content. From the browsing on team sites I've done, it seems like those two things usually go hand-in-hand. Part of me thinks that the teams with less-than websites aren't as motivated to update things on a regular basis. Maybe the motivation is lacking because their site seems difficult to update, maybe the motivation lacks because the team isn't proud of their site.

In my mind, if the league can mandate and help provide a clean looking, easy to update template, I think you'd see more frequent updates, along with better content. And what is key to what I'm thinking, is that after the initial build by a developer, the individual teams then get to control what goes on a site.

Back in my previous post I used MLB team websites as an example. If you look at the sites of various MLB teams, you'll see that for the most part, they are quite cookie-cutter'ish. You (you being "the league") don't have to go to quite that extreme. When looking to form a business deal with a web developer, allow them to offer options to team website templates, allow them to give teams the ability to put their own personal flair on things.

Basically, I just think that if a league could work a deal with a web developer to create a good looking, easy to maintain platform for team sites, you not only will have more a professional looking team web presence for all teams, but you might also help foster more frequent and more relevant updates.[/quote]

I don't disagree with what you say, but I think the core problem isn't one of hard to update or even being embarrassed by the design. I think the core problem is they don't care and will use all sorts of excuses as to why not doing a better job.

In my opinion a league ought to have control over team websites, minimum quality and minimums on the updating. Once again an area a league that cares about the future may have to force teams to do what is right for them.

[super390]

Jerry, you're right. The Tucson team makes no sense. It's about 800 miles from its closest opponents now. There aren't even teams it could poach from other leagues now that Ogden is toast. An entire division will have to be created before next spring?

If there's one thing I like about AIFA, it's easy to keep its two divisions straight in my mind. There's the good one, and the bad one. Reading right to left. Soon to become a much shorter read.

A 4-division IFL would be a lot easier for me to follow.

[Caballo Diablo]

[quote=""super390""]Jerry, you're right. The Tucson team makes no sense. It's about 800 miles from its closest opponents now. There aren't even teams it could poach from other leagues now that Ogden is toast. An entire division will have to be created before next spring?

[/quote]

Would this help the travel schedule?

COYOTES MEET WITH “IFL”AS A POTENTIAL OPTION FOR 2011
by Coyote Staff
April 19, 2010
http://www.cvcoyotes.com/current_news.php?news_id=352

Central Valley Coyotes officials and management recently attended an introductory meeting in Phoenix, AZ with league officials from the “Indoor Football League” (IFL). The meeting was hosted by IFL Commissioner Tommy Benezio and his staff with the goal of creating a Southwest Division for the 2011 IFL season.

In addition to the Coyotes, potential teams/owners from Las Vegas (NV), Albuquerque (NM), Tuscan (AZ), Prescott Valley (AZ), and El Paso (TX) were in attendance. “The meeting was very informative and our attendance was important since we had minimal knowledge of the business structure of the IFL,” stated Coyotes Head Coach/General Manager Fred Biletnikoff, Jr.

The IFL was founded in 2008 and was created from a merger between the Intense Football League and United Indoor Football. The IFL’s inaugural season fielded 19 teams, all competing for the first ever United Bowl Championship. Since the 2009 United Bowl, nine expansion franchises have been added to the IFL. Currently the league is operating with 25 teams including four teams (Amarillo, Arkansas, Green Bay and Tri Cities) that participated with the Coyotes in the arenafootball2 league (af2) in 2009.
“Obviously a lot has changed in the arena/indoor football community in the past six months. The af2 ceasing operations after the 2009 season was something totally out of our control,” Biletnikoff Jr. added. “What is in our control is finding the right league to potentially bring professional football back to the Valley in 2011 and that is what we are in the process of doing.”

[super390]

This does explain the strategy, but it smacks of the AIFA's endless succession of Western Divisions. The Coyotes have been gone for so long that they won't have much of an advantage coming back - as some Arena League teams have proven this year. So really it's an all-expansion division. I'd rather concentrate league resources on adding Wyoming, Wenatchee and Yakima from AIFA because they fit so well with what it has.

Now has anyone heard about any of the AF2 refugees in the new AFL giving up and dropping down to the IFL? Specifically Bossier-Shreveport and Alabama?

[Bouncer_Texxx]

wait.. creating a divisio whole cloth our of thin air... excuse me who moved my niffle...

[Indoorfootballguy]

How about an IFL Franchise in Milwaukee? I think Milwaukee can still support a team. Both the Bonecrushers and Iron are/were not marketed at all. Most people in Milwaukee do not even know the Iron exist. The team could play at the U.S. Cellular Arena. Even with the Bonecrushers, at first they had between 4,000-5,000 fans at there first home game. You just need to avoid scheduling Home games on the same day as Brewers games.

They would be good rivals with Green Bay, Chicago, and La Crosse.