Let's say you just gave $800,000,000 for the Redskins.

You feel like the league gives you anything?

How long do you suppose it takes to make back good $ on $800,000,000?

Edited: Snyder only gave 800,000,000 for the Redskins.

It's about Return on Investment.

If you pay a dishwasher salesman a million dollars to sell $100,000 dollars worth of dishwashers.... that is an enormously wasted expense, especially when you consider that a good chunk of that $100,000 went into production expenses to make dishwashers, costs to store/ship it, etc....

An investment in only 53 players can get 80,000 people on any given night to shell out over $100 to watch them. Even more when you factor in concessions and parking. A lot more when you factor in jersey sales and other licenses to merchandising.

C'mon, man. Are you really going to tell me that a dishwasher salesman brings even an ounce of the same money into the organization as Peyton Manning does for the Colts?

Don't the players make all their money from the same public funded facilities that the owners do? That's just a bad argument.


PhilFree:arrow:

Well I exaggerated a little. That would be an extreme answer. But the stuff that the players are asking for will kill the league. They are clueless. I just want to have football long term and they cannot sustain the salary increase pace that they have been undergoing over the last 10 years.

So who fronted the money to buy the franchise? I'm not against sharing profits, just think the players' percentages should be dropped. This whole process is a delicate balance to maintain level competitive opportunities across the league which is what keeps the NFL interesting and the most popular sport in North America. Bottom line is that the league will not continue as it has been. Not the way the economy is trending, period. Most of the owners' requests are very fair and reasonable and would ultimately benefit the league across the board.

1. MLB is so good right now they are now in their 4th year of lower attendance. And you are stupid if you don't think money is the main problem in baseball.

2. WTF? The players are underpaid? Are you ****ing kidding me? You have fat Albert Haynesworth who maybe played 6 games last year getting a $100 million dollar contract. What a joke.

And yes smaller market teams are getting hurt by bigger market teams. I posted a piece about this exact same thing early in the thread.

3. The salary cap\salary floor along with revenue sharing is the main reason why football exploded in popularity because it evened the playing field for all teams and every year every team has a legit chance to win the SB. You can't say that about any other major sport.

So when you buy a house for $200,000 (let's say you $200,000 down), you have no expectation that you're going to sell your house?

Dan Snyder shouldn't be expected to make $800M in profits. That would be outrageous. The investment is that between the selling price and all the money he makes every year off the franchise, he will end up over $800M. And yes, you'd be crazy to think he's not making an enormous amount of money when all is said and done.

Man, I wish I could invest in a stock that had probably close to a 100% chance of making money and a high % chance of making a killing.

I agree the owners have every right to tell the players to screw off and hire a bunch of scrubs if they want, they own the team. And I haven't really weighed in on the "showing the books" issues... I think you could make the argument they don't have to show the players the books. I also think they aren't doing it just because it won't help their cause with 1) the players or 2) the small market owners when they realize just how much Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder are pulling in each year, and that will start more fighting amongst the owners.

But, and I've made this argument before with people on here who run a business. It doesn't matter what business you own, this doesn't have to be football with millions of dollars at stake....

You start a business. Whether it's an auto shop, basket weaving, whatever. You hire the absolute best people in the world at that particular job. Whether it be a world class mechanic, world class basket weaver, whatever. There is literally nobody in the world better at that job. Your efficiency goes up, people start buying your product or service because they know you're the best. Profits go through the roof. You can't keep up with the customers, so you expand your shop... you use local tax breaks to expand your business, move into a brand new shop. You hire more workers, once again, among the best in the world. Your reputation is sterling, everybody comes to you because you are the best. Nobody else can touch you, they don't have the talent or resources... you can charge whatever you want. Your business is expanding every year.

Then you turn around and tell your employees that you're not making enough profit, and they're going to get a smaller share of the revenue. They flip out. You could get rid of them. Once you do that though, you no longer have the best of the best. Your efficiency goes down, there are more mistakes fixing cars, weaving baskets, whatever... your reputation takes a hit, people stop coming to you because now it's some hack working on their car. It's not worth the price they're paying. Now you've set up this huge business model and are charging exorbitant prices for work that is no longer world class quality

Of course, if you think that NFL players are not the most talented in the world, then all that really doesn't hold water. Then you just go out and find all the guys with an equivalent skill/speed/talent level to guys like Peyton Manning, Jamal Charles, Calvin Johnson that are sitting on the street right now not playing football.

The NFL didn't even have a salary cap prior to 1994. To claim that this would mark the death knell for the league is absurd.

that cash wasn't fed into a shredder. You can sell at any time and probably get back equal or more than what you paid.

That 800 million Snyder put in still exists and is appreciating and/or returning income.

No. Absolutely not. Not if the owner is taking a disproportionate share of revenue increases. The owner doesn't have a cap on how much $'s he can collect. The players do.

That is just tough shit, they need to either get over that hangup or sell out. In every other sport, every team knows every ugly dirty detail of every other team, and it is NOT unreasonable for the NFLPA to expect full disclosure before agreeing to concessions. If the NFL doesn't want to do what every other major sport does, then fine. Have fun competing without a draft and without ANY player control.

I don't have time to look up the article but a corporate accountant did an article on this very subject and pretty much proved the franchises are not worth what is claimed by Forbes.

Selling would be a bitch especially right now in the current state of the banking market and economy.

Al you smashed this thread. I don't feel like going through all 22 pages but whats your prediction moving forward?

I'm pretty sure most players are in favor of a salary cap because it comes with a salary floor. Even if it's done away with, as long as the profit sharing stays intact, competitive balance can be maintained. (Although there are a few owners looking to do away with profit sharing as it is.)

The NBA has a salary cap and it is as bad as baseball when it comes to competitive balance. The reason, IMO, lies largely in the style of the game. While it takes stars to win in any sport, football is much more team oriented than either of those sports.

I'm not saying Goodell doesn't make a couple good points. The wide open free agency market would be detrimental to the game, but I think the apocalyptic future he paints is pretty laughable.

The game is different than it was in 1994. Money levels and exposure are completely different. In 1986, the baseball markets were also much more competitive...the Royals won the World Series. Since the 90's smaller market baseball clubs have become basically farm clubs. The smaller market teams that make a decent run can't sustain because the following year, their players are bought out from under them by the Yankees, the Red Sox or the Dodgers.

The NFL has been the best run professional sports business in the country. I'm just saying that most of the conditions suggested by the owners seem very reasonable, practical and good for the league as a whole.