End of Revenue Sharing?

[generalmills]

http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/story/?id=301354

"The National Football League has informed the players' union that they will end the revenue-sharing program starting this coming March, reports ESPN.

The $100-million program is used to subsidized teams with lower revenues.

According to ESPN, the players' union is expected to challenge on the grounds no move can be made without their approval, as their current agreement does not expire until 2011. The NFL is expected to counter by arguing only seasons with a salary-cap and 2010 will not have a cap.

"Revenue sharing helps maintain the 'any-given Sunday' dynamic in the NFL," NFLPA spokesman George Atallah told ESPN.

"The amount of money some owners propose to pull out of the system in 2011 could mean the difference between playoffs and blackouts for many teams."

[generalmills]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4718965

[Ingtar33]

and this is the first step toward an end of the NFL as the national sport.

Adios to competitive football in Buffalo, Green Bay, Kansas City, Cincinnati, Jacksonville, Minnesota, Arizona, Cleveland... Welcome to permanent Pittsburgh Pirates or Kansas City Royals status.

[YardRat]

1-They are talking a very small portion of the total program, 100mil out of 6.5bil.

2-Hopefully it's just a negotiating ploy to get a cap in place.

[X-Era]

Not sure it matter that much for the Bills specifically... or should I say that the impact of an uncapped year is a much bigger issue.

These numbers are old, but the trends shown at the bottom, and the dollar figure associated with revenue sharing ought to make the point.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/30/biz_07nfl_Buffalo-Bills_301765.html

[X-Era]

and this is the first step toward an end of the NFL as the national sport.

Adios to competitive football in Buffalo, Green Bay, Kansas City, Cincinnati, Jacksonville, Minnesota, Arizona, Cleveland... Welcome to permanent Pittsburgh Pirates or Kansas City Royals status.
Check my response, Im not so sure.

We went to 4 straight SB's without a salary cap.

[Ingtar33]

Check my response, Im not so sure.

We went to 4 straight SB's without a salary cap.


that was before true free-agency

when true free-agency was added the nfl added the cap the same year.



And it's not a "true" uncapped year... there are some strange rules to it that make it more like a "semi capped" year. Furthermore, the "quasi" cap is more in effect for good teams... so teams like Dallas who look like playoff teams this year.. will be more restricted by the "uncapped" year then the Bills will be.

[X-Era]

that was before true free-agency

when true free-agency was added the nfl added the cap the same year.

OK, and?

[Ingtar33]

OK, and?


free-agency + no rev sharing + no cap = uncompetitive football.

The bills would never have been able to build those superbowl teams if there was true FA and no salary cap back in those days.

[X-Era]

free-agency + no rev sharing + no cap = uncompetitive football.

The bills would never have been able to build those superbowl teams if there was true FA and no salary cap back in those days.
Who knows.

We wont ever go back to those days. Nor will the NFLPA or even the NFL allow no salary cap as a long term solution. Revenue sharing may or may not be a part of the equation, but with how small an amount it is, it isnt that critical. I think free agency may be modified to actually restrict the ability of players to hit the open market... something more like the rule for the uncapped year.

It will be interesting to see how much players actually cash in in the uncapped year... Im thinking it may be less than anyone would have thought it would be.

Id agree that it may be uncompetitive, but teams that draft well had all the leverage before the cap too.

[Michael82]

Looks like many of us were right....The Jerry Jones', Bob Krafts and Danny Snyders will kill the NFL, especially the die hard small market teams. :ill:

[X-Era]

Looks like many of us were right....The Jerry Jones', Bob Krafts and Danny Snyders will kill the NFL, especially the die hard small market teams. :ill:

Fine, split the leagues up again.

All big market teams can be in one, and the small market teams can be in the other.

I know which one Im watching.

It wont ever happen. The league knows it needs small market teams... it wont stay long without revenue sharing of some kind.

[MikeInRoch]

The teams that will benefit from this do not have the best interest of the league in mind - just the best interest of their team.

[Mr. Pink]

Maybe without revenue sharing it will cause smaller market owners to do everything possible to increase their profit margins instead of just relying on, basically, public welfare.

The Bills owner comes to mind on this. Lowest ticket prices in the league and having an ego so large he won't sell stadium naming rights.

Maybe he'll be forced to raise ticket prices across the board; he should and maybe he'll sell the naming rights; also should.

Those are just two examples based on the situation here.

The NFL will still remain competitive because the salary cap isn't going away. Every team has the same amount they can spend based on the TV contracts, which will continue to rise.

[X-Era]

The teams that will benefit from this do not have the best interest of the league in mind - just the best interest of their team.

It really doesnt matter.

It wont stand for long and wont have a huge impact on 2010 for us anyways.

[X-Era]

Maybe without revenue sharing it will cause smaller market owners to do everything possible to increase their profit margins instead of just relying on, basically, public welfare.

The Bills owner comes to mind on this. Lowest ticket prices in the league and having an ego so large he won't sell stadium naming rights.

Maybe he'll be forced to raise ticket prices across the board; he should and maybe he'll sell the naming rights; also should.

Those are just two examples based on the situation here.

The NFL will still remain competitive because the salary cap isn't going away. Every team has the same amount they can spend based on the TV contracts, which will continue to rise.
I'm surprised we haven't already raised ticket prices considering we sell out every game.

We wont sell suites because the team isn't that competitive... put a good product on the field and the situation will drastically improve.

Also, I dont know the details, but I like the version where the public gets to own a share of the team. I know it got banned after GB,... unban it.

[Michael82]

The teams that will benefit from this do not have the best interest of the league in mind - just the best interest of their team.
Good post! :hi5:

[Mr. Pink]

I'm surprised we haven't already raised ticket prices considering we sell out every game.

We wont sell suites because the team isn't that competitive... put a good product on the field and the situation will drastically improve.


I don't know why prices haven't been somewhat seriously raised either. We're well below league average on ticket prices and even if they raised prices 10% people would still buy them.

Section 112, lower deck, 50 yard line. 630 a year for tickets. Even if those were 693 a season, people would still buy them.

And having seats that are only 324 a season is an outright joke.

The corporate environment here isn't good to say the least which plays into the suite sales as well. However I agree with you if the product was better more suites would sell.

[X-Era]

Raise ticket prices across the board by 10 bucks a ticket.

10 * 73,000 = 730,000 per game more
730,000 * 7 games = 5.11 mill per year which almost cover the 7 mill we supposedly are losing in revenue sharing.

Problem solved.

[Novacane]

Put a competitive team on the field and people would pay those higher prices. I stopped paying the current prices 3 years ago. I don't care how cheap the tickets are when the product is garbage.

[Oaf]

We need to show that we deserve any pity parties. And I say "we", I mean the Bills team ONLY.

[YardRat]

Maybe without revenue sharing it will cause smaller market owners to do everything possible to increase their profit margins instead of just relying on, basically, public welfare.

The Bills owner comes to mind on this.

You would think somebody who was business-savvy could come up with an idea that would add 10's of millions of dollars to their revenue, like maybe even selling one game per year to a nearby metropolitan area.

Oh...wait a second...

Ticket prices make up a pittance of actual revenue, and that gets split with the visiting team anyway. Besides that, they are pretty difficult to raise if you haven't won in a decade. The 'new' NFL revolves around PSL's (which ain't happening in Buffalo like it does in Dallas even if they do get a new stadium) and suite sales (which the area doesn't have the corporate presence to sustain or cash in on).

'Public welfare', NFL-style, is the reason the sport achieved and maintained it's status and if not for the revenue-sharing policy douchebags like Jones, Kraft, Snyder, etc may not have ever had the opportunity to buy into in the first place.

Guys like Jones need to be eliminated from ownership completely before the NFL goes the way of major league baseball. They create a vicious cycle of 'spend,spend, spend', then need to do whatever possible to raise revenue to cover their expenses, then spend some more.

Why does Dallas need a new stadium? So they can make more revenue to cover signing bonuses. How do they make more money? By charging 30k for the new seats and loading up on luxury boxes. How do they sell tickets for such high prices? Spend more money on marquee players to sell tickets. How do they get the revenue for that? Keep fighting the revenue sharing policy. What do they do when the new expenses are no longer covered by new revenue? Build more luxury suites. How do they pay for the new suites? Raise tickets prices. How do they sell higher-priced tickets? Spend even more money on marquee players or coaches...and on and on it will go, until the NFL becomes the Dallas Cowboys, New England Patriots, Washington Redskins, and 28 (more likely less) other wannabe's.

[Mr. Pink]

Because Washington and Dallas have done so well using that model?

Hell, Pittsburgh is no different market wise or economic wise than us, Indianapolis is no different than us.

How do they even compete?

Ending "corporate welfare" will do nothing to "kill" the sport. Honestly, I think ending it will make the sport better because you won't have the have not franchises whining and crying that they cannot compete, they'll do everything they can to compete and get more profits. Instead of the norm of making sure they remain impoverished so the bigger franchises can give them handouts.

I know this is a small market, but they competed before revenue sharing existed.

Plenty of teams in "small markets" compete, year in and year out, hell look at what New Orleans is doing now. They're undefeated and still in economic chaos as a city from Katrina.

People crying "we're poor so we cannot possibly compete" are using it as a crutch to dissolve their franchises cheap skate owner from any responsibility in the state of the franchises poor play.

[X-Era]

Because Washington and Dallas have done so well using that model?

Hell, Pittsburgh is no different market wise or economic wise than us, Indianapolis is no different than us.

How do they even compete?

Ending "corporate welfare" will do nothing to "kill" the sport. Honestly, I think ending it will make the sport better because you won't have the have not franchises whining and crying that they cannot compete, they'll do everything they can to compete and get more profits. Instead of the norm of making sure they remain impoverished so the bigger franchises can give them handouts.

I know this is a small market, but they competed before revenue sharing existed.

Plenty of teams in "small markets" compete, year in and year out, hell look at what New Orleans is doing now. They're undefeated and still in economic chaos as a city from Katrina.

People crying "we're poor so we cannot possibly compete" are using it as a crutch to dissolve their franchises cheap skate owner from any responsibility in the state of the franchises poor play.
Id change a lot of things that will never pass.

Id cap salaries by position in addition to total team salary cap.

Id look at changing the rules for restructuring such that teams cant do it to prevent the big cap hits in the late years of a monstrous contract.

And Id institute caps on signing bonuses where the bonus can never be greater than x % of the new contract. That prevents teams from converting contracts to up front cash in the form of bonuses.

Id also repeal franchise tags. Its used way to often now.

Id like more of the good players to become available and at price that everyone can pay. Teams that can draft well will be the successful teams not the ones with the most money. Teams that draft well can kjeep there players because the player can only earn what everyone is able to pay which includes that team. Or, teams can keep there best players by using the franchise player exception (cap) but must forfeit a pick.

Id also make restricted free agency last an additional year on rookie contracts. 4 and gone is ridiculous.

Id cap rookie contracts.

And finally, I would allow for salary cap exceptions if the team forfeits a draft pick or two. Teams like Indy could go over the cap for one player but must forfeit a pick (based on how far over they are) for every year that the player is on the roster).

[YardRat]

Where do think New Orleans would be right now without revenue sharing? San Antonio? Los Angeles?

Nobody that I know of is pointing any fingers at the current revenue-sharing policy and blaming that for the Bill's 10-year playoff drought...I think it's 100% positive that I've never seen a poster whining for a bigger cut so the team can be more competitive on any message board, ever.

The only people looking for a bigger piece of the pie at the expense of the others is the Jerry Jones' of the league. What they have isn't good enough, and they want MORE.

I hope Jones fate with the Cowboys is the same as Joe Robbie's family and the Dolphins...he deserves it.

[IAG]

Poor Bills are in trouble, I am afraid.

[BlackMetalNinja]

Looks like many of us were right....The Jerry Jones', Bob Krafts and Danny Snyders will kill the NFL, especially the die hard small market teams. :ill:So it's alright when it's baseball and the Yankees because you like them, but it's going to ruin football right?

[HHURRICANE]

Put a competitive team on the field and people would pay those higher prices. I stopped paying the current prices 3 years ago. I don't care how cheap the tickets are when the product is garbage.

Correct. I have plenty of friends that don't care what the ticket prices are in Buffalo but they dropped their season tickets because they were tired of wasting their Sundays. My father-in-law is thinking about dumping his tickets after 50 years!!!

How sad is that?

Ralph can't charge higher prices because he won't abandon "cash to cap" to put a winner on the field.

You need to spend money to make money.

[Mr. Pink]

Where do think New Orleans would be right now without revenue sharing? San Antonio? Los Angeles?

Nobody that I know of is pointing any fingers at the current revenue-sharing policy and blaming that for the Bill's 10-year playoff drought...I think it's 100% positive that I've never seen a poster whining for a bigger cut so the team can be more competitive on any message board, ever.

The only people looking for a bigger piece of the pie at the expense of the others is the Jerry Jones' of the league. What they have isn't good enough, and they want MORE.

I hope Jones fate with the Cowboys is the same as Joe Robbie's family and the Dolphins...he deserves it.


Exactly where they are at now. Their owner is committed to put a winning, exciting product on the field. Plus a scouting department that has a clue what they're doing to build that team.

Jerry Jones shouldn't be forced to give money to the "lesser teams." He makes his own maneuvers and shrewd business decisions to get where he is today, why should he be basically penalized for it because other owners either a. don't know what they're doing or b. don't care?

This isn't limited to Buffalo on cheap owners who don't do everything they can to gain the most on their own. But Ralph Wilson is definitely included in that mix.

"Corporate welfare" encourages the bottom feeders to stay on the bottom. Why do all you can to maximize your own gains when you can just accept handouts to get there? Why work for it? The league is just gonna hand it to you.

Ralph Wilson and Mike Brown, as two examples, are what's wrong with this league not Jerry Jones or Robert Kraft. Actually Kraft should be praised for turning what was a dismal wreck under Viktor Kaiam <sp> into a top franchise in the NFL.

The problem isn't the small market cities, it's their owners. Indianapolis, Minnesota, New Orleans, Pittsburgh are all small markets who have success year after year. Why? They have smart owners who make savvy decisions on and off the field.

I'd give some credence to the argument many are trying to convey if the Washingtons and Dallases of the league won year after year after year. But they don't.

Every team is on a level playing field with what they can spend for players, the owner just has to go out and pick the right football minded people to get those players. Even us, the lowly Buffalo Bills in economic terms, drafted Peyton Manning or Tom Brady would be able to keep him year after year because of this.

[X-Era]

Correct. I have plenty of friends that don't care what the ticket prices are in Buffalo but they dropped their season tickets because they were tired of wasting their Sundays. My father-in-law is thinking about dumping his tickets after 50 years!!!

How sad is that?

Ralph can't charge higher prices because he won't abandon "cash to cap" to put a winner on the field.

You need to spend money to make money.

Part of me wonders if cash to cap was instituted to start to cut way back on salary because we didnt believe we were in a position to make a real charge at the SB.

Maybe we purposely put the team in a strong financial position, with lots of cap for the day when we would make a big move forward.

Maybe we wanted to be in this position to bring the right guy in to significantly add to the team when we had the FO people and HC in place to make a serious run. Maybe this want to a significant upgrade of the brass wasnt all of the sudden but planned for years.

[HHURRICANE]

Part of me wonders if cash to cap was instituted to start to cut way back on salary because we didnt believe we were in a position to make a real charge at the SB.

Maybe we purposely put the team in a strong financial position, with lots of cap for the day when we would make a big move forward.

Maybe we wanted to be in this position to bring the right guy in to significantly add to the team when we had the FO people and HC in place to make a serious run. Maybe this want to a significant upgrade of the brass wasnt all of the sudden but planned for years.

I would love this but I don't believe it. I think Ralph felt burned by Donohoe and decided to keep his money.

Ralph is the same guy who wouldn't honor the rest of Wade Phillips contract and lost in court because there was absolutely no reason not to honor it.

Ralph is a cheap bastard until proven otherwise.

[Night Train]

and this is the first step toward an end of the NFL as the national sport.

Adios to competitive football in Buffalo, Green Bay, Kansas City, Cincinnati, Jacksonville, Minnesota, Arizona, Cleveland... Welcome to permanent Pittsburgh Pirates or Kansas City Royals status.

I'd rather be in the UFL than be a consistent 4 game winner (farm team) in the NFL.

Incredible that these guys would actually cook the golden goose. Did they not read the charter, concerning the "good of all" franchises ? Wellington Mara would turn over in his grave.

[WeAreArthurMoates]

Luckily Football is no where close to baseball. Sorry, you can't buy championships. Good teams win superbowl by drafting players to mold them your way.