Plus, there are always diamonds in the rough, like a 62nd round catcher who shows some talent, or a 19th round firstbaseman who's got a good bat and glove.

And then there's the internationalization of baseball -- how do you add to a combine all the Asian & Latin American players.

Another difference between the MLB and NFL is the way the Big Leagues acquire and develop talent.

In the NFL, the typical rookie has had 2-4 years of collegiate football experience (a type of minor leagues) before the Professional Club gets a chance to develop the player themselves. In most cases, rookies are now expected to produce immediately.

In the MLB, a Pro Club can sign players as an experienced free agent from Asia or via the draft or or often times, right off the street from Latin American countries. The draft consists of US high school and collegiate talent, which often need development in the Pro Club's minor league system for a few years before they're ready to produce at the MLB level.

Not sure I buy the argument about the talent pool difference between football and baseball. Take out the starters in football and you'd have essentially the same product? Hardly. The now defunct XFL tried this a few years ago. It didn't get them very far.

You're painting with an awfully broad brush, especially saying how the football draft is "easy". I know about 32 GM's who would disagree.

The XFL tried to compete with the NFL. That's different.

Even the most ardent NFL fan couldn't tell the difference between the third-string cornerback and the fourth-string. He probably couldn't even name the defensive lineman who's sixth on his favorite team's depth chart. Guys like that get injured and get replaced by someone on the practice squad and no one notices. How many devoted football fans could even explain the personnel changes on third down?

The college ranks are full to bursting with big, athletic guys who, with intensive coaching, can execute a blocking plan. Sure, some are better than others, and that difference can be the difference between mediocrity and greatness for the team over the course of a too-long season, but how many fans could see the difference on a play-by-play basis?

Aside from a half-dozen stars, most of the players on a football team's roster are almost completely anonymous to the casual fan, and at least half of them are anonymous to the devoted fan, too. Except for the two guys waiting on the goal line, how many would even notice if the entire kickoff-return team were replaced from one kick to the next? You take the best football player from any of 200 college teams at random and he could play on special teams competently enough that nobody in the stands would even notice he's never done it before.

All 32 NFL teams draft players who are ready to play in the NFL tomorrow. The difficulty in the NFL draft isn't that you might draft someone who lacks the skills to play at the highest level, but that you might not pick the best player available (or your guy has drug / psychological problems, etc.).

Compare that to a baseball team putting its utility fielder in at second, or its fourth outfielder in right. Everyone knows it. The change can't be reversed (unlike football) and the guy (or someone else) is on the spot 1/9 of the time on offense - quite unlike the second-string long-yardage nickel back.

Baseball is, to a large extent, an individual sport played in a team context. Other than relay throws, double plays and controlling the running game, the players are basically on their own. You make the catch or pitch, or you don't. You get a hit or you make an out. It's just you, no one else. But football is a true team sport. If the offensive line sucks, the quarterback and receivers aren't good.

The individual nature of the sport is one huge reason why first round MLB players often don't make the majors, or never "live up to their potential." (Injuries, of course, are the other huge reason - and the NFL has an advantage there, too, because it's drafting players who have already gone through "the minors" - on someone else's dime. The guys who are fated to blow our their ACL in "the minors" have already been eliminated from the pool.)

I think he's overstating it a little bit (there was a noticeable drop in the quality when the NFL went on strike, but the end product was still good enough), but the basic point is the same.

Even the XFL wasn't that bad. They just made the mistake of hyping it like it was wrestling, when it was basically like watching 2 bad teams play. So they got huge ratings, but then they deflated. But even at its nadir, they were still better than NHL on TV