[brudgers]

>"The NFL has managed this shift quite remarkably, in a fashion that has gotten them so that virtually very team is profitable"

Professional football's labor economics are radically different from other sports. They have virtually no development costs associated with talent - development of talent is largely done by universities (many tax supported).

In addition the market value of players is based upon barter - trades typically don't involve transfer fees, they involve other players sometimes and usually involve draft picks.

Draft picks are interesting because high round picks are associated with a greater out of pocket expense for the team receiving them should they choose to exercise the pick - i.e. the signing bonus and salary of the first overall pick are substantial outlays, whereas a second round pick will involve less money.

[cube13]

>Professional football's labor economics are radically different from other sports. They have virtually no development costs associated with talent - development of talent is largely done by universities (many tax supported).

The NHL has a similar system, though. They draw on NCAA and international minor league talent, neither of which are paid for by the league.

The NBA is similar, though I would argue that the out of high school and "one and done" draft rules have hurt the league much more than anything else.

[msbarnett]

> The NHL has a similar system, though. They draw on NCAA and international minor league talent, neither of which are paid for by the league.

Not at all. Most NHL talent development is done through an extensive farm system affiliated with and financially supported by their NHL teams, similar in some but not all respects to the MLB.

Prospects pursuing the NCAA route vs junior leagues and the AHL are widely regarded as inferior, facing significantly less stiff competition. A typical player (ie, more than 50% of current players) would grow up advancing through various levels of midget hockey, forgo college to play in one of the CHL leagues (QMJHL, WHL, OHL), from which they would be drafted by an NHL team and assigned to their AHL or ECHL affiliate. This is true even of international players, who are often sent from their home countries to stay with Canadian host families while playing in the Canadian junior leagues.

Making the NHL out of NCAA is the exception, rather than the rule. The system is much, much less subsidized by tax payer funded schooling than the NFL's.

[malyk]

The big difference is that NFL players are typically drafted at the age of 22 after they've gone through college. NHL players are typically drafted at 18.

Very few of them go the NCAA route. Those that do go that route can't be paid in any way by NHL teams, so these players are just like their NFL brethren with the exception that NFL players are a known commodity coming out of the NCAA. NHL teams picked their players before they entered college, so it's a little bit of a crap-shoot whether or not they'll turn into an NHL player.

Those who don't go the NCAA route either play for the CHL or in Europe. When they turn 18, if they don't make their respective NHL teams, they typically join a teams AHL affiliate or maybe even their ECHL affiliate. Both of those lower tiers are supported by the NHL clubs.

[brudgers]

Other collegiate sports offer scholarships, but not like football. NCAA Division I schools have 88 scholarships apiece. Division I hockey, 18. There are more Division I football scholarships in Texas than total Division I scholarships for hockey. Division II with its 65 football scholarships per school dwarfs a handful of DII hockey schools with 13.5 scholarships each.

The resources for developing football players probably exceed those of any other sport in the world, e.g. Nick Saban earns a salary comparable to managers at top footballing clubs. And the NFL pays for none of it.