Packers aren't doing NFL any favors with financial strategy· Page 2

dfosterf
Veteran Member

15 years ago

It would be a strategy of limited effectiveness. People forget that not only is there a salary cap, there is also a salary floor. I think it's around 87% of the salary cap (I'm sure Sir Foster knows the exact figure). Plus I believe teams are limited to how much money they can actually stockpile, at least from this source. To some degree the salary cap is "use it or lose it."

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

87.6

lol

Edit---

And for 09--- there is no rollover with fake LTBE's, etc... because there is NO CAP for '10---

hence, use it or lose it in '09

Graffin
Registered

15 years ago

#12

Wasn't aware of the article, but after reading it, and more importantly Nonstop's response, feel a bit more educated. thanks

blank

dfosterf
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#13

I find it rather humorous that everyone assumes that the reason that the owners do not want to disclose financials is due to the negotiations between the owners and the players.

They have bigger fish to fry. The adversarial relationship between the owners and players is only two legs of the triad. The real fight is between large market and small market franchises.

The loss of automotive advertising revenue for the various networks, coupled with a significant drop in beer advertising revenue due to imbev purchasing budweiser has some of the NFL owners fearful about the future revenue stream that the TV coverage provides. They are crying wolf to any that will listen, and the large market teams would like nothing better than to eliminate and/or significantly reduce the shared revenue aspects of the business model. Their arguments are going to look far less persuasive to their fellow owners when those revenue disclosures are made.

They probably don't give a rat's ass if the NFLPA was made privy to the information, just as long as the Buffalo Bills, Cleveland Browns etc. of the NFL world cannot see it...Of course, that is impossible.

I suspect the Green Bay Packers would like nothing better than to have that information public, a very under-appreciated aspect...especially to some former football player turned writer that can see no further than the perceived advantage to his former fellow players.

Gravedigga
Registered

15 years ago

#14

I don't give a rats ass what their books say, not one of these owners are losing money consistently. Also, if the Cowboys are "reporting" a 10 million dollar revenues, you an bet it is much higher. That is what accountants are for. To manipulate the books to say what you want them to say. Don't be a sucker and buy into it. There is a reason it costs a billion dollars to buy one of these franchises.

--------------------------------------------

A wise man once said
---------------------------------------------
You are weak, pathetic and immature..............I would have d

dfosterf
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#15

You might be interested to know that the Green Bay Packers have been "blamed" for more than making a profit.

One famous example is that Vince Lombardi cut a player for having the audacity to secure the services of an agent.

I have another one. The Green Bay Packers are cited by the NFLPA itself as being responsible, at least in part, for the creation of the union.

The issue?

Dirty jocks, socks and uniforms.

No bullshit.

NFLPA Website story

The National Football League was organized in 1920, but the players had no representation until more than 35 years later. Free to do as they wished, the owners gave the players no benefits at all -- no health insurance, no life insurance, no pension, no minimum salary, no pay for pre-season games. Even worse--no protection for injured players.

The players started standing up for themselves in 1956. By one account, players for the Green Bay Packers asked the owners for clean jocks, socks and uniforms for two-a-day
workouts. The owners refused; the players organized

I think some of the players still have a grudge.

j/k

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member Topic Starter

15 years ago

#16

Foster hit the nail on the head, though he may have actually understated the issue at hand. There are at least two other legs to the stool he failed to mention: the dispute between current players and former players, and the dispute between owners and former players. And all of this is tied into the forthcoming CBA.

Next time I'm on campus, I'll take more notes on the study conducted by my university and I'll let you guys know what I find out.

As to all the kudos from RaiderPride and others, I want to say that I am humbled and appreciative, but I must reiterate that I am but a lowly Padawan at the feet of the Master Foster. 😉

dfosterf
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#17

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Very kind words, Non...

I just rehash other folks stuff. You bring the great gift of insight and fresh perspective.

R.P. had it right the first time. He would...He's a very smart fella, also.

Gravedigga
Registered

15 years ago

#18

"dfosterf" wrote:

I think some of the players still have a grudge.

j/k

wow, i didnt know Ted Thompson managed the packers back then

--------------------------------------------

A wise man once said
---------------------------------------------
You are weak, pathetic and immature..............I would have d

CaliforniaCheez
Member

15 years ago

#19

May I remind some of you that the Packers have been one of the better revenue teams since the remodel at Lambeau.

This SI guy calls the Packers small market but they have been in the upper half of teams in revenue.

As for Ted being a cheapskate
1) There were few quality free agents worth the money.
2) He has had to save money for the the 2006 draft class, Jennings, Spitz, Colledge, Hall, Jolly, etc.
3) Ted has always looked long term and has created a lot of competition for roster spots.

Another thing is return on investment. 20 million is not that much considering it is a billion dollar corporation. Investing 1 billion and making 20 million is only 2% on investment!!

If you invested a $1000 and only made $20 a year would you be happy?

The whole Packers organization's operating profit is only double Rodgers salary. After investment losses they only made 4 million or about what Brady Poppinga was paid last year.

Put it into perspective and it helps the owners points.

blank

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member Topic Starter

15 years ago

#20

I made this exact point in another thread, CaliforniaCheez. Thanks for providing your insight on this issue. I wish people would get beyond the raw numbers ($4 million) and look at the meaning beyond those numbers (paltry profit). Your relating this profit figure to player salaries was awesomely illuminating. Keep it up!

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (1h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (1h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (1h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (1h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (1h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (1h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (1h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (1h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (2h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (3h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (3h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (3h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (3h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (3h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (4h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (4h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (4h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (5h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (5h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (5h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (5h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (5h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (5h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (6h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (6h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (7h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (7h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (7h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (8h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (8h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (8h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (8h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (8h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (8h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (8h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (8h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (8h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (8h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (8h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (8h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (8h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (8h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (8h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (8h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (8h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (8h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (8h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (8h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (8h) : Packers will get in

beast (8h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS