New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com

New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com (http://blackandgold.com/community/)
-   Saints (http://blackandgold.com/saints/)
-   -   NFl Owners argue over revenue sharing (http://blackandgold.com/saints/9229-nfl-owners-argue-over-revenue-sharing.html)

saintswhodi 06-10-2005 05:43 PM

NFl Owners argue over revenue sharing
 
Quote:

NFL owners still arguing over revenue sharing
Story Tools: Print Email XML
John Czarnecki / FOXSports.com
Posted: 21 minutes ago



For months now, several of the big-moneyed NFL owners have been balking at the many different revenue-sharing plans brought up.

Imagine Patriots owner Robert Kraft being asked to write a separate check for $25 million while an owner at the bottom of the local revenue-income barrel like Bill Bidwill writing one for a measly $3 million — and you get the idea of how difficult it has been to reach any agreement.


But the NFL Players Association won't settle with the NFL and sign a collective bargaining extension without a slice of what every team earns locally — revenue currently not shared like the television and ticket income — with the players.

However, influential Steelers owner Dan Rooney and Jacksonville owner Wayne Weaver have proposed a plan in which every team would contribute 34 percent of their local revenues that would be dumped into a pool and then distributed equally among the 32 teams and from there onto the players.

Consequently, if the Washington Redskins are earning close to $100 million in local revenue, owner Daniel Snyder would have to write a check for $34 million. Well, right now he is choking on that number. Ditto for Kraft and Jerry Jones of the Cowboys and Bob McNair of the Houston Texans.

Snyder claims he needs every local penny to pay for the debt service on his loan to purchase the Redskins and also on money borrowed to improve his stadium.

Currently, a majority of owners are in favor of cutting owners like Snyder who have improved their stadiums some form of a rebate. However, there hasn't been much sympathy for any owner — like McNair — earning a rebate for the debt service he incurred toward purchasing the expansion Texans. The players association reportedly is in favor of helping owners who spent millions toward improved or new stadiums, but are unwilling to budge on the purchase price of the franchise.

Consequently, fans can understand this is a very complicated business battle being waged by the 32 teams. The richest teams are never going to like a high number — 34 percent — being paid to the players when some teams like the Bengals, Cardinals and Chargers simply don't generate a lot of local revenue.

However, the revenue stream will change in Arizona with the completion of a new stadium. The Chargers are hopeful of a new stadium, too, but way down the road.

Of course, it's unlikely that the Bengals and Mike Brown will ever market their franchise like Jones does in Dallas. This upsets Jones, but there's little he or the league can do about owners who are making a comfortable living as it is off of their football franchise.

But of the dozens of proposals made in the last few months on meetings, the Rooney-Weaver plan seems to have caught some steam. The clubs are meeting again next week in Detroit on money matters and eventually some local-revenue income deal is going to be brokered.


Notes and thoughts

There are four teams still talking trade with Buffalo for running back Travis Henry and none of them are the Houston Texans, a team that I incorrectly mentioned in the past.


Former USC DT Manuel Wright figures to be a third- or fourth-round selection in the July 14 supplemental draft.

There remains a good possibility that Terrell Owens will be a no-show for the first few weeks of training camp because the Eagles don't seem inclined to renegotiate his contract.


It will be interesting to see where Troy Brown lines up in New England minicamps. Cornerback or receiver?


Dolphins coach Nick Saban made a very good hire in ex-Saints GM Randy Mueller as Miami's general manager. Owner Wayne Huizenga needed a PR-face for the team, too, with the retirement of Eddie Jones. Mueller can handle that role as well.
With this kind of revenue sharing Benson could actually make more than he puts into the pot. How will that play out? Does the Gov realize this? With this kind of revenue sharing, can he still cry broke? Will he spend some of it on the team? For a new stadium?

Another thought, Manuel Wright for a 4th? Not so bad now that it may not be a second.

lynwood 06-10-2005 05:59 PM

RE: NFl Owners argue over revenue sharing
 
I wouldn't negotiate with Benson until after the revenue sharing agreement. It will impact his revenue and there is no need to negotiate until we see what he will start getting from the NFL. Plus it seems that getting in Debt for a new stadium isn't all that great. The NFL better figure out what they want more. Getting new stadiums or keeping the owners and teams out of debt.

Euphoria 06-10-2005 06:12 PM

RE: NFl Owners argue over revenue sharing
 
I think the way they are trying to do this is all wrong! What needs to happen is the NFL needs to say hey we are the corporation, they should handle all accounting ect. The owners are essetially managers and its profit sharing. So at some point in the year most profits from the Corporation are divided amoungst the owners and there you have it. The owner of the Cardnials gets the same as the owner of the Cowboys. Is it fair maybe not but for the NFL its the best thing so the smaller teams/cities can be competitive.

Euphoria 06-11-2005 11:44 AM

RE: NFl Owners argue over revenue sharing
 
they have a revenue sharing plan in place now... just that its time to renew the current agreement, should not affect the state-benson negociations are lack there of.

lynwood 06-11-2005 01:54 PM

RE: NFl Owners argue over revenue sharing
 
I think it would affect the negotiations if Benson gets to pay less out of his pocket hnd gets more from the NFL split.

quote-"However, influential Steelers owner Dan Rooney and Jacksonville owner Wayne Weaver have proposed a plan in which every team would contribute 34 percent of their local revenues that would be dumped into a pool and then distributed equally among the 32 teams and from there onto the players.

Consequently, if the Washington Redskins are earning close to $100 million in local revenue, owner Daniel Snyder would have to write a check for $34 million."

So if Benson made 10 million he'd write a check for 3.4 million. He'd get more from the distribution. The state would be wise to look at that and say now you are paying less into the pot and getting more back.

no_cloning 06-11-2005 05:31 PM

Re: RE: NFl Owners argue over revenue sharing
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Euphoria
I think the way they are trying to do this is all wrong! What needs to happen is the NFL needs to say hey we are the corporation, they should handle all accounting ect. The owners are essetially managers and its profit sharing. So at some point in the year most profits from the Corporation are divided amoungst the owners and there you have it. The owner of the Cardnials gets the same as the owner of the Cowboys. Is it fair maybe not but for the NFL its the best thing so the smaller teams/cities can be competitive.

I completely disagree.
Doing things your way, owners/managers could basically stop trying to generate local revenue. Hell, they could even stop caring if their stadium sells out - they only get 1/32 of those profits anyway.
Most if not all teams in the NFL make money. It's not like the NHL or MLB where some franchises have real problems and simply can't generate enough revenue to break even. So while this may be a good idea for the NHL, it's just not necessary for the NFL.
Smaller city teams are competitive because of the salary cap. Each team roughly spends the same amount of money each year. The Redskins may have spend more in recent years, but it'll come back to haunt them. We don't need revenue sharing to keep the league competitive.

I know it would help the Saints (well, Benson really), but more revenue sharing beyond the TV and ticket money doesn't sit right with my definition of "fair".

Euphoria 06-11-2005 09:23 PM

RE: Re: RE: NFl Owners argue over revenue sharing
 
revenue sharing is good. With it its far mare inviting for an owner to keep his team in a smaller market instead of high-tailing it to bigger markets for more money. Plus it helps keep smaller markets competitve with other teams... doesn't matter if Benson maks say 3 million a year profits, what hurts him and the Saints is when Redskins can generate 100 million and use that money on facilities and feeding the players steaks ect... when benson has to scap to get by. Saints are profitable team... one of the most profitable teams due to contracts and deals it has in place. They don't generate 100 million in local tv contracts ect due to the market. Wehn the Saints go to play in Washing DC should they desereve any of the money from that... sure they due for the fact they are an NFL francise


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:01 PM.


Copyright 1997 - 2014 - BlackandGold.com