Report: NFL to end revenue sharing

[flip]

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

Not sure if this was discussed in the NFL thread but I didn't see it.


Am I the only one that thinks this is a huge deal? I'm not intimately familiar with the finances/CBA in the NFL but don't teams like Jacksonville rely really, really heavily on revenue sharing to stay competitive.

Perhaps someone with more familiarity could elaborate, but I think this is major news. Maybe I'm way off base though.


I don't have anything against the NFL product (ie the actual football) but I would love to see a lockout or strike come about because of this because I hate the hype machine that is the NFL.

[Sylvanfan]

The revenue that would be shared is the difference between what the Giants or Cowboys make selling their own tickets, concessions, parking, and earning at the gate and what the Jaguars do. It would hurt smaller market teams a bit, but all it would do is make more money for the owners of the wealthy teams and increase the value of those franchises. The NFL's TV money is all National so it's not like Baseball where the local TV money has a huge effect.

It would put some strain on a few smaller markets, but so long as they kept a cap, than it would still keep the league competitive. Hell even if they scrapped the cap, put a limit on guaranteed money for draft picks and made free agency 6 years instead of the current 4, it probably helps the small market teams be more competitive even without the revenue sharing.

[burn_baby_burn]

I guess I don't really understand what revenue sharing is in the NFL. That article was pretty vague, but I have never heard of this $100 million fund. I always thought that teams spit tv revenue 32 ways. Team apparel sales 32 ways. Ticket sales are 60% for the home team, 40% for the visiting team. It would be a shame if the league scrapped the current system. Lamar Hunt was one of the big proponents for revenue sharing back in the AFL NFL merger days 45 years ago.

[d_phaneuf]

It might also only be for one year though, because it was tied to the salary cap

and next year is more than likely going to be an uncapped year

[arloiginla]

Having next year uncapped is going to be a disaster. Can't wait to see what the Redskins will try in free agency this time

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by arloiginla

Having next year uncapped is going to be a disaster. Can't wait to see what the Redskins will try in free agency this time

Thats a bit of a myth. The free agency rules will change quite a bit and the free agency crop will get a lot worse. A few teams might be ablet to get out of some bad guaranteed contracts without the old cap penalties (sorry Jamarcus but tribe has spoken). But in terms of players to sign, teams would just end up putting themselves in a bad long term spot over paying for players who's best years are long gone.

Realistically if an owner is willing to spend a few dollars a few teams who've made multiple bad draft picks and put themselves in a bad place with too much guaranteed money might be able to clear the deck here. One uncapped year followed up with new CBA with a cap and limits on guaranteed money for draft picks would probably make the league more competitive than ever.

[burn_baby_burn]

I found an article explaining this a little better from the Mercury News.
http://www.mercurynews.com/columns/c...nclick_check=1

Since 2007, the NFL has maintained a revenue pool through which wealthy teams pay not-so-wealthy teams to compensate for disparities in stadium-related revenue. And by disparities we refer to the spectrum that features the Dallas Cowboys' new $1 billion cash cow at one end, and the 20th-century relics that house our two lovable locals at the other.

The compensation fund redistributes a mere $100 million annually, from the top 15 teams to a dozen or so needier franchises. Even so, and even though this program has been in place only since 2007, those checks (typically between $5 million and $10 million) would be missed if they went away.

[Pagal4321]

Annnnd this might just seal the deal for a team to move to Los Angeles....and I'd bet it will be the Vikings.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Thats a bit of a myth. The free agency rules will change quite a bit and the free agency crop will get a lot worse. A few teams might be ablet to get out of some bad guaranteed contracts without the old cap penalties (sorry Jamarcus but tribe has spoken). But in terms of players to sign, teams would just end up putting themselves in a bad long term spot over paying for players who's best years are long gone.

Realistically if an owner is willing to spend a few dollars a few teams who've made multiple bad draft picks and put themselves in a bad place with too much guaranteed money might be able to clear the deck here. One uncapped year followed up with new CBA with a cap and limits on guaranteed money for draft picks would probably make the league more competitive than ever.

So Al Davis will be opening up the checkbook I guess

[DJ_NAV]

I don't think this a good move.. the downturn will not help either.

[rubecube]

It'll be interesting so see what the owners and playes do over the next year. I think not having a salary cap ends up hurting the players more than the owners, especially since the NFL doesn't have guaranteed salaries like the other major sports leagues.

[flamesflames444]

This will probably result in some moving of franchises

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by flamesflames444

This will probably result in some moving of franchises

There are also a few teams trying to get new stadiums too, so this could be a tactic to force a few municiple and state governments to move too. It's not exactly a good time for teams to ask for public money to build fancy new sports stadiums.

I think the Jaguars are likely going to end up in LA. Franchise doesn't have much history and it's not the most afluent area of the country, and the NFL is a bit of a misfit toy in an area where college football is such a huge deal. I'd think the NFL will want to keep teams in markets like St.Louis and the Twin Cities. The Buffalo Bills are another team who could end up moving once they go up for sale after father time takes Ralph Wilson.

It is something to keep an eye on.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

I think the Jaguars are likely going to end up in LA. Franchise doesn't have much history and it's not the most afluent area of the country, and the NFL is a bit of a misfit toy in an area where college football is such a huge deal.

I think it was rubecube who pasted a good article in the NFL thread about Jacksonville. From that article it seemed the big problem with that area is the lack of population. At the time Tagliabue figured that that area would be one of the fastest growing area's of the country. It just hasn't happened and the article basically stated that Tagliabue will be kept out of the Hall of Fame because of that poor judgment.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

I think it was rubecube who pasted a good article in the NFL thread about Jacksonville. From that article it seemed the big problem with that area is the lack of population. At the time Tagliabue figured that that area would be one of the fastest growing area's of the country. It just hasn't happened and the article basically stated that Tagliabue will be kept out of the Hall of Fame because of that poor judgment.

That's not the only thing keep Tagliabue out. He was a pretty poor commissioner when all was said and done. But yeah, Jacksonville will be the final nail in that coffin. It was viewed as a pretty mind-boggling choice at the time and never really picked up any steam after that. I guess much of Jacksonville's growth was attributed to the number of construction and development projects in the city during 90s, but those slowed down in the 00s and the local economy has actually been pretty poor as of late.