Revenue Sharing

[Cbus cardsfan]

Looks like Jerry JOnes was right that the NFL is going to do away with revenue sharing. At least they are going to try. The union is going to fight it. I don't know if this will help or hurt the Cards. I know before the stadium and the Cards turnaround, it would have hurt them badly. It will definitley create an uneven playing field for the owners. Dallas will be awash in money while a team like Jacksonville will likely struggle to compete. I can't see how this could be a good thing for the NFL. You would think the established teams, like the Bears and Packers would have a decided advantage over the newer NFL teams, like Houston and Carolina. They have had so much longer to create their fanbases that they,in theory, would have the upper hand when it comes to jersey sales and all the otehr items that add to the revenue streams. On the other hand , it would make the owners/franchises of the lower rung teams step up their efforts to compete with the have's. In the end, i think it will all get worked out but i think this is a step in the wrong direction.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Definitely hurt us. We're a family run organization without corporate backing.

 

[Totally_Red]

The demise of revenue sharing would hurt the NFL IMO.

Hey, I'm a capitalist like most Americans, but revenue sharing is what makes the NFL unique among the major team professional sports. I hope the owners (and players) don't screw this up. The games are exciting every week, and Sunday Ticket is a treasure that lets me enjoy them.

 

[CardLogic]

Some times people just don't realize when they have it good. I'm talking about the NFL owners. Greed and owners like Jones and Snyder could ruin the immense popularity the NFL now enjoys.

It will be sad to have to watch it happen...

 

[joeshmo]

There will always be revenue sharing. The current talk is just the usual posturing that everyone does during a new CBA negotiation. It has been the same posturing that has been done the last two times the CBA was renegotiated. Remember it isnt just the Union versus the Owners that posture against each other its also Owner v. Owner.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

The demise of revenue sharing would hurt the NFL IMO.

Hey, I'm a capitalist like most Americans, but revenue sharing is what makes the NFL unique among the major team professional sports. I hope the owners (and players) don't screw this up. The games are exciting every week, and Sunday Ticket is a treasure that lets me enjoy them.

Capatilism = Competition

because

Competition = Innovation.

You will get none of the above once the salary cap is dis-banded. This would be a far cry from capatilism......more like an astocracy. The rich helping the rich.

This will be HORRIBLE for the NFL, but great for Hockey since it will be the only real competitive sport in the US left.

It is kind of sad really. It will be the end of the Cardinals competitive run. There is no way they will be able to compete with other teams for their home grown talent, when it comes time to pay for a UDFA.

Our team will go away peice by peice, and we will be left with a bunch of young players, and table scraps.

I cannot believe the NFL is going to kill the golden goose for no other reason that to pad the pockets of a select few.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

This will kill the sport IMO...If it aint broke, dont fix it...

 

[RugbyMuffin]

It will be sad to have to watch it happen...

I won't watch it happen. If this current Cardinals team gets split up over this labor dispute I will stop watching the NFL, and will not use my money to watch Dallas vs. NYG in every Superbowl for the next 50 years.

 

[40yearfan]

Let's not sell the Cardinals short. I read in an article not too long ago that Cardinal gear was the top seller in the NFL this year. Every game has been a sell out since we opened the new stadium and the CAP has been handled in a manner consistant with good financial responsibility. The Cards might actually be one of the teams who could make it without the help of revenue sharing.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

Some times people just don't realize when they have it good. I'm talking about the NFL owners. Greed and owners like Jones and Snyder could ruin the immense popularity the NFL now enjoys.

It will be sad to have to watch it happen...

if you get a chance, watch the 30 on 30 short movie on ESPN about the USFL. I thought it was very good and the league may have made it until Trump and his greed bought and ruined it.

 

[Buckybird]

I won't watch it happen. If this current Cardinals team gets split up over this labor dispute I will stop watching the NFL, and will not use my money to watch Dallas vs. NYG in every Superbowl for the next 50 years.

Right on Rugby. It will be the death of the NFL's popularity because many teams will not be able to compete & will never have hope of a turnaround. If this happens, people like Rozelle, Texas Schram, Wellington Mara & the men who made the NFL what it is today will roll over in their graves.

You dont fix what isn't broke!!! Greedy bastards like Jerry Jones & Daniel Snyder will ruin this league given the chance. This could have a big impact on our Redbirds because this is basically their only means of $$$.

 

[Tyler]

I won't watch it happen. If this current Cardinals team gets split up over this labor dispute I will stop watching the NFL, and will not use my money to watch Dallas vs. NYG in every Superbowl for the next 50 years.

Luckily this will never happen as they both play in the NFC lEast. I dont see this happening honestly, too many of the small market owners will vote it down. Hell the entire town of Green Bay would vote it down. Im not worried about the Redbirds tho. If we continue to win, our gear sells, our tickets sell, we get more money. Pretty simple concept.

 

[ajcardfan]

I expect that the amount shared will be reduced, at the very least. However, if a cap is kept, then the competitive impacts will be reduced. You could also do things like delay full free agency for a longer time, etc. The thing that makes the NFL great is that you always feel your team has a chance every year, no matter how bad they were the year before. There are ample examples every season of worst to first. i guess I'll give these guys the benefit of the doubt that they won't want to screw that up by being overly greedy and stupid.

 

[SuperSpck]

There will always be revenue sharing. The current talk is just the usual posturing that everyone does during a new CBA negotiation. It has been the same posturing that has been done the last two times the CBA was renegotiated. Remember it isnt just the Union versus the Owners that posture against each other its also Owner v. Owner.

This just needed to get more play.
It's the truth and needs to be seen.

 

[Unsterblich856]

If Revenue sharing ends, it would kill small market teams. The Cardinals would be safe because, let's be honest, Arizona is a bandwagoning state and will provide plenty of revenue as long as the team is winning. However, teams like the Jags would be dead.

 

[PoolBoy]

stupid. this sport is going to turn into MLB in a sport where the best players will win wayyy more often than in baseball. stupid stupid stupid.

 

[lauraw]

All this talk is over my head but very scary!!!

 

[BACH]

We need to keep thinks in perspective. This is not the end of all sharing between NFL teams. TV rights, mechandise etc. would still be included if I'm not mistaken.

 

[joeshmo]

We need to keep thinks in perspective. This is not the end of all sharing between NFL teams. TV rights, mechandise etc. would still be included if I'm not mistaken.

You are correct. Time to add some new info that has come out about this talk.

Just like there are many forms of free agents, many different types of items that are included in the term "gauranteed money", there are many forms of revenue sharing. What is being discussed is not the end of sharing TV contracts, or the other 95% of the leagues revenue streams. What is ending for the uncapped year is the top 8 and bottom 8 revenue sharing program. In that program the top 8 revenue teams have to pay the bottom 8 revenue teams a total of 100 million dollars out of their own pocket, you pay or get different percentages based on where you rank. The league shares Billions of dollars every year so we are only talking about a drop in the bucket here. We are also talking about a program that the Cards are not even involved in because they are neither top 8 or bottom 8.

Now that the facts are clear I completely agree with the Jones and Snyders of the league. I didnt agree with this top 8 revenue program when it first came out either, which was the last CBA. Why should the top 8 teams that run their "business" (marketing, closing deals and so on) have to pay the bottom 8 teams who suck at running their business. Why should the #1 revenue team have to pay the #32 revenue team 20 million dollars? Its like telling the Lakers they have to give the Clippers 20 mill. every year. Sorry thats just dumb.

 

[LarryStalling]

By nuturing the small market clubs, the Redskins and Boys will finally have figured out a way that they can win.

 

[CardLogic]

Time to add some new info that has come out about this talk...

...the top 8 revenue teams have to pay the bottom 8 revenue teams a total of 100 million dollars out of their own pocket, you pay or get different percentages based on where you rank.

Back in the early days of the NFL teams would cease operations sometimes in the middle of the season.

Isn't the revenue sharing designed to prevent the "poorer" teams from going under and eventually closing up? It is not in the best interest of the league and it's member teams for any of the other teams to cease existence.

 

[Doug]

I predict the whole deal is gonna cost the league really bigtime.I think they will even miss a whole YEAR of NFL Football and that will get their arses back to making somekind of a deal everyone will agree on.

I'm afraid its the only way a deal will EVER get done this time.Almost like what happened to baseball.I think we need a rookie cap and many other things to make this league work right.Jerry Jones can get 100 Thousand fans a game to pay stupid money due to the fanhood of the cowboys and teams like the Jags have to blackout every game.

There are teams like the rams who are probably gonna end up in Los Angeles again and not make the commish happy about leaving the St.Louis people very angry AGAIN.

Its time for Goodell to become one of the greatest leaders he was meant to be.Roselle,Tagliabue both had to face the hardest times.Now its time for Goodell to show if he's cut from the same cloth.

I hate scab games.

 

[joeshmo]

Back in the early days of the NFL teams would cease operations sometimes in the middle of the season.

Isn't the revenue sharing designed to prevent the "poorer" teams from going under and eventually closing up? It is not in the best interest of the league and it's member teams for any of the other teams to cease existence.

First of all do not confusing revenue sharing with all of revenue sharing. There are multiple programs that encompass the revenue sharing program. If you add up what each team gets in totality of all the revenue programs this top 8 and bottom 8 program only consists of less then 2% of the total revenue sharing amount.

If a team has to go under because they didnt get their 1 to 20 mill. from another team then they are horribly run and should go under or have the league step in. This isnt the 50's anymore when teams were still giving tickets away for free and didnt have TV revenue coming in.

Why should the top 8 teams have to take money out of their pockets that they earned by running their business well to the bottom 8 teams who ran their business poorly. Here is what makes it even more dumb these Bottom 8 teams are already making a profit from the other 98% of the revenue sharing program even before this extra money is given to them from the top 8 teams.

For example lets say Team #1 made 200 mill in profit and team #32 made 40 mill in profit. All teams made a profit why should team #1 give 20 mill to Team #32? Why should team 1 give money to another team that made a profit. If teams werent making a profit at the bottom of the league or teams were operating in the red I can see the point of this program but that isnt the case.

 

[joeshmo]

teams like the Jags have to blackout every game.

The Jags never black out because they picked a dump of a place to put their football team. That decision to put them in Jax was doomed from day one. Plus they have to compete with the hugely beloved Florida Gators. Its why a pro football team would never work in Alabama, 75% of football fans money will go to the college team instead, a team that has over 50 years of tradition just cant be beat in terms of what people will spend their money on.

 

[CardLogic]

First of all do not confusing revenue sharing with all of revenue sharing.

I got that point the first time, thanks.

My point is that if the 'haves" need to part with some of their profits, in order to insure the security of the "have nots" in the league, and therefore the integrity of the league itself, then it benefits not only the "have nots" but the "haves" also.

Isn't the amount of the players salary cap set near the amount of televisions contracts? In addition to a maximum salary cap there is a minimum also. Granted, its a gap of several tens of millions of dollars, so a poorer team does have some leeway there. But there are huge costs associated with operating a team in addition to players salaries. Obviously, I don't know the profit status of each NFL teams (nor any ) but I find it easy to imagine that there may be some that do not profit year after year, without the subsidy from the "haves".

I have to say, I never thought Jacksonville should have gotten a franchise in the first place.