dfosterf
15 years ago
Link 


Revenue sharing remains a key source of potential controversy
Posted by Mike Florio on March 21, 2010 7:45 PM ET
We've heard from multiple league insiders who agree with our assessment that the current unity among NFL owners is fleeting, and largely confined to one issue: Squeezing the players into taking less money.

As to the issue of owners sharing the money that their teams generate, the potential for discord remains. Indeed, four years ago we believed that, absent a comprehensive solution, the NFL possibly could split into two leagues -- one made up of teams willing to share every dollar and another composed of teams with an "every man for himself" mentality.

Supplemental revenue sharing, the redistribution of wealth from teams making the most to teams making the least, has turned out to be a Band-Aid at best. Meanwhile, the traditional notions of sharing have been challenged over the past decade.

A league source tells us that, for example, the traditional 60-40 split of ticket money between home team and road team doesn't apply universally. Per the source, the Cowboys have finagled an exception for club seat revenue, apparently to help defray the costs of the North Texas Football Cathedral. Other teams have worked out similar deals, many of which transactions have received little or no publicity.

Bottom line? If the NFL plans to maintain competitive balance via a salary cap and a salary floor based on total football revenues, any new agreement must account for the fact that a formula based on total revenues will increase the labor costs for low-revenue teams. Absent a long-term answer to this specific problem, the situation will continue to create controversy every time a labor deal is due to be renewed, and it will only get worse as the gap in the revenues continues to grow.

In the interim, the challenge for the NFL will be to keep that percolating problem tightly under wraps. For the NFLPA, the mission is clear -- find a way to force this core issue to the surface sooner rather than later.



Revenue sharing is what keeps the Pack competitive.

How's about throwing Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder out of the NFL?
They can both play with themselves, as far as I'm concerned.

I LIKE that idea.
Rockmolder
15 years ago
Thank you.

I was thinking the exact same thing when I read that. I'm getting more and moe annoyed by what Jones is trying to do, getting around revenue sharing, trying to get rid of the salary cap.

I really hope that no one will follow his lead. Getting the Dallas Yankees in the NFL will destroy the game.

And I know. He didn't go crazy spending money right now. I do think that, in the long haul, he'll make the Cowboys into the Yankees.
dfosterf
15 years ago
I bet that even the Cowboys fans would grow weary of playing the Redskins after about 15 weeks in a row, lol

Seriously though, when you think about it...The costs associated with those two teams far outstrip their value to the league as a whole, and if the idea ever gained traction to the point that either of them got a little nervous- well, the entire NFL would be better off if they kept their yaps and wallets closed.
Pack93z
15 years ago
Greed is at the root of all collapse in history... why would the NFL be any different?
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Stevetarded
15 years ago
I thought the Packers were one of the teams that had to pay into revenue sharing?
blank
all_about_da_packers
15 years ago

I thought the Packers were one of the teams that had to pay into revenue sharing?

"Stevetarded" wrote:




They are.... which leads me to be very confused as to why the Packers need revenue sharing to survive....

What stops any NFL team from being like the Yankees is that broadasting revenue is evenly split amongst all NFL teams, whereas in MLB it's solely dependent on what a team can get in its local market - hence Yankees get a lot more than, say, the Pirates.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
Pack93z
15 years ago

I thought the Packers were one of the teams that had to pay into revenue sharing?

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:




They are.... which leads me to be very confused as to why the Packers need revenue sharing to survive....

What stops any NFL team from being like the Yankees is that broadasting revenue is evenly split amongst all NFL teams, whereas in MLB it's solely dependent on what a team can get in its local market - hence Yankees get a lot more than, say, the Pirates.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



Which is exactly the problem, it will lead to competitive imbalance and will pull the overall league down. Currently, with the stadium redone our revenues are up... at the moment, probably isn't a huge deal, but that will last only so long.

What then.. selling more sod to redo Lambeau the next time? Water down the stock concept with more stock?

Sure we could go the route of the YES network here.. PACKTV is what you will have to subscribe to to get, fight with cable companies nationally to get it instituted into their packages, etc.

BTW, I believe the massive TV contract that the NFL signs prevents this from happening, which isn't the revenue stream that is being discussed.. it is the clubs revenue around ticket sales, merchandise and other local forms of revenue.

The beauty and honestly the success of the NFL is its competitive parity... start washing that away and it will become a violent version of baseball. They are both beautiful games, just MLB hasn't had to balls to level the playing field for all clubs.

Jerry Jones and his new temple provide a threat to the overall success of the NFL.. the sooner he is absent the better. Greedy SOB.

Does it suck having to fork cash over to say the Vikes.. sure it does right now.. but that more than likely won't stay a constant.. sooner or later the stadium issue will be resolved and their revenues may increase. Maybe some day they are forking cash out to other franchises.. maybe us.

It is a overgrown coop... a way to balance the revenue stream so that all parties make a profit and the overall league stays healthy.

Want to see what the NFL will become if they break that apart.. see the NBA.. almost all trades are to wash away contracts, many of them are aren't about equality in talent.. just salaries. The clubs that can take on the long term heavy payrolls gobble up the talent and deal in expiring contracts. Note the Dallas / Washington trade as the deadline.

That is not what I want for the NFL I love.. and it is not that teams are losing money. It is the greed of some, one in particular that build the second coming of Rome, that by the rules can't become the Yankees and corner the market.. and it bruises his precious little ego.

Greed has taken down many an empire.. trust me the NFL is an empire.. and it can fall to greed just like any other empire.

Will it mean instant doom for the NFL.. nope.. but we have a couple of posters here than compare the Packers to the 70's and 80's... IMO, lack of revenue sharing (BTW, we are not talking about TV contracts) will start to bring that fate to some of the weak right now.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Zero2Cool
15 years ago
Okay, who's posting as Shawn? That was too well written and even I understood what he said. What have you done with our Shawn? :P



I do not mind giving money we earn to others. This year we scratch their back, maybe next year they scratch ours. And if that's what it takes to keep a competitive league, so be it.
UserPostedImage
bozz_2006
15 years ago
dfosterf, can you explain to me (a guy who doesn't have much knowledge of labor deals and revenue sharing) how revenue sharing is what keeps the Pack competitive? Are you saying that it benefits the Packers more than other teams (besides the Redskins and Cowboys) or do you mean that the Packers and most other teams rely on revenue sharing to stay competitive? So, my questions are
1) How does revenue sharing help the Packers?
2) What other teams need revenue sharing for the same reasons the Packers do?
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
15 years ago

Okay, who's posting as Shawn? That was too well written and even I understood what he said. What have you done with our Shawn? :P

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



Hmmm, you really don't read a lot of my posts do you.. lol. ;)

Bozz...

http://football.calsci.com/SalaryCap.html 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2781759 
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Fan Shout
dfosterf (1h) : Just gotta figure out how.
dfosterf (1h) : Could have been a worse start, so there is that.
beast (1h) : Yeah, someone tell the Packers football season has started, seems like they weren't ready for it
Mucky Tundra (2h) : Sooooooo many penalties
Mucky Tundra (2h) : It may only be preseason, but this game is a trip to the dentist
Zero2Cool (2h) : Packers do bad -- FREAK OUT!!!!!!
Zero2Cool (2h) : Packers do good -- eh only preseason
dfosterf (2h) : Well that half was fun
Zero2Cool (4h) : Great, zayne is down
Zero2Cool (4h) : 13 minutes away from kickkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkoffff
Zero2Cool (6h) : Had Celebration of Life for my uncle up north. wicked rain hope it dont come south
Mucky Tundra (8h) : THE GREEN BAY PACKERS ARE PLAYING FOOTBALL TONIGHT!!!!!! THIS IS NOT A DRILL!!!!
Zero2Cool (9h) : Woo-hoo
TheKanataThrilla (9h) : NFL Network is broadcasting the game tonight, but not in Canada. Not sure why as no local television is showing the game.
beast (8-Aug) : But the Return from IR designations had to be applied by the 53 man cutdown.
beast (8-Aug) : It's a new rule, so it's not clear, but my understanding was that they could be IR'd at any time
Mucky Tundra (8-Aug) : *had to be IRed at 53
Mucky Tundra (8-Aug) : beast, I thought the designate return from IR players had to be IR at cutdowns to 53, not before
beast (8-Aug) : It's a brand new rule, either last season or this season, prior, all pre-season IRs were done for the season
beast (8-Aug) : But the Packers would have to use one for their return from IR spots on him, when they cut down to 53.
beast (8-Aug) : I think the NFL recently changed the IR rules, so maybe the season might not be over for OL Glover.
Zero2Cool (8-Aug) : Packers star Howton, first NFLPA prez, dies at 95 😔
dfosterf (8-Aug) : Apparently it is too complicated for several to follow your simple instructions, but I digress
dfosterf (8-Aug) : Zero- Did you see what I posted about Voice of Reason and his wife? She posted over at fleaflicker that they are both "In"
Zero2Cool (7-Aug) : Well, not crazy, it makes sense. Crazy I didn't notice/find it earlier
Zero2Cool (7-Aug) : it's crazy how one stored procedure to get data bogged everything down for speed here
dfosterf (7-Aug) : to herd cats or goldfish without a bowl. They reminded me of the annual assembly of our fantasy league
dfosterf (7-Aug) : out on a field trip, outfitting them with little yellow smocks. Most of the little folk were well behaved, but several were like trying
dfosterf (7-Aug) : Yesterday my wife and I spent the afternoon on the waterfront here in Alexandria, Va. A daycare company took about 15 three/four year olds
wpr (7-Aug) : seems faster. yay
dfosterf (7-Aug) : Wife of reason posted on the in/out thread on fleaflicker that both she and vor are in
Zero2Cool (7-Aug) : This page was generated in 0.135 seconds.
Mucky Tundra (7-Aug) : Tbh, I can never tell the difference in speed unless it's completely shitting the bed
Zero2Cool (7-Aug) : Sure does feel like site is more snappy
Zero2Cool (6-Aug) : I thought that was the Lions OL
Mucky Tundra (6-Aug) : Travis Glover placed on IR; seasons over for him
Zero2Cool (6-Aug) : found bad sql in database, maybe site faster now?
dfosterf (5-Aug) : I'm going to call that a good move.
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : Packers sign CB Corey Ballentine
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : I'm not sure how to kill the draft order just yet so it's not so confusing.
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : *to be able
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : and because it's not a dynasty league (which makes a lot more sense to be ability to trade picks)
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Oh I know; I was just exploring and it blew my mind that you could trade picks because of the whole reordering thing
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Zero, I think I preferred my offer: your 1st for my 15th rounder
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : Keep in mind, we do a draft reorder once all members locked in
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : You can have my 12th Rd for your 2nd round
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Hey i didn't know we could trade picks in fantasy
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : Update: Rock has tried a cheese curd, promises it's not his last
Zero2Cool (3-Aug) : watch it!! lol
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : you're right, we never did leave, the site just went down :P
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

8-Aug / Around The NFL / Zero2Cool

8-Aug / Fantasy Sports Talk / packerfanoutwest

8-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

7-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

5-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

4-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

3-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

3-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3-Aug / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

2-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

2-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

28-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.