AI assistants and search decision

Aifootball

A technical user can reproduce the directory and API features quickly, but they'd lose access to FootballGPT (a private model/beta) and 360TFT's curated ecosystem which are core differentiated assets.

Visit website

Built by Kevin Middleton | FootballGPT, who ships 7 products in this index

You pay

Not priced

No pricing page we fetched carried a figure, so there is nothing to compare against. The build side is still real.

You’d pay instead

$100one-off36 h to build

$0/mo3 h/mo upkeep

No published price to break even against.

No open-source build does this yet

Nothing published replaces this one, so a replacement starts from an empty file. Here is what it would have to cover.

What a replacement has to do

  • Allow users to browse and install football AI tools; let builders submit and manage listings; provide a developer REST API and OAuth sign-in.

What it still won’t have

  • Built-in access to the FootballGPT API (private beta) and any proprietary models behind it
  • Manually-reviewed curation and trust signaling from 360TFT
  • Tight integration with the 360TFT ecosystem and existing MCP/agent packaging

What remains hard

  • Proprietary modelsBuilt on the FootballGPT API
  • Proprietary modelsCurrently in private beta.
Read the build prompt

First-year cost

No published price

Aifootball does not publish a price we could read, so there is nothing to compare against. What building costs is below.

Money you would actually spend

Keep paying
—

Subscription price × seats × 12

Build it
—

AI build —APIs + hosting —

Time you would spend

—

—

What you would spend

What we assumed

The verdict above measures whether you could build it. This one is only about money.

Runnable build prompt

Not run yet
Build a searchable directory web app in Node.js (Express) + PostgreSQL + React for the frontend, deployed on Vercel (frontend) and a single VPS or Render (backend). Core features: public searchable listings with categories and tags, detail pages, Google OAuth sign-in, submission form with server-side validation, admin review UI to approve/publish listings, a small REST API to list tools and issue a simple API key, and static documentation pages. Out of scope: training or hosting any ML models and any paid billing subsystem. Include error handling, input validation, pagination, rate limiting, basic tests for API endpoints, and deployment scripts.
How we checked3 sources · 1/3 runs agreed · evidence score 52

How the score was reached

  • Partly verdict base52
  • 3 cited sources+3
  • Hard moats found in the evidence-3
  • Evidence score52

The base comes from the verdict. Everything under it is a check that either happened or did not, and each one is a fact frozen in this record rather than a judgement made at render time - so the same evidence always produces the same number.

How scoring works →

Cited sources · 3

Every page the run actually retrieved.

Integrity checks

What held up, and what did not.

! 1 of 3 runs agreed; the verdict is the middle of them✓ Citations limited to fetched pages! 2 moats quoted from the page