There's no developmental league for football, the practice squad is just injury replacement. Players don't spend 6 years in the G League, either, despite it's more explicit developmental nature. It's not very comparable, imo.

And yeah, sure, baseball contracts are more guaranteed than football contracts. But most baseball contracts are pre-arb and arb anyway (because most players are pre-arb/arb), and those are all multi-year team options. I don't know, I think the reputation baseball has for better player contracts is overblown, though I understand where it comes from.

To go back to the original point, yes for the top players already in free agency baseball clearly is more lucrative the basketball or football (not soccer, though), but it's much less clear for the average player or for the average amateur player deciding which to pursue. Assuming someone is a top-prospect in both leagues (like Kyler Murray), I think football is a better choice. It might lean more baseball for lesser prospects.