NHL to Lock Out Players on Thursday: Enuf Already The fans need to strike back!

Thats interesting - I read in forbes sometime about a month ago that the Dallas Cowboys had overtaken them in total value.

Regardless, an NFL team is the most valued sports franchise in the world by far. They are literally forced to make money because of how the CBA with the players is set up.

Forbes

BTW - gongrats on getting Rooney - he's gunna be a good one. Personally, I've always been partial to Real Madrid, but seeing them get shut out by Leverksun (spl?) kind of ticked me off, especially since Owen didn't play.

Originally posted by American Mad Man
It's kind of tough for him to get excited about the NFL these days - he's a 9ers fan

That is so true. I wish I knew how to make the crybaby smiley, it would fit right in here.

Originally posted by American Mad Man
As far as school sports go, we already have them, and they are marked according to demand. The problem is that after these athletes are done playing, where do they turn if they wish to continue playing?

And if pro sports were to go the way of the dinosaur, then the demand for college level sports would sky rocket. Pro sports and the people involved in them serve no beneficial purpose for society. And they serve no purpose that cannot be replaced by college level sports.

In the plan I presented, college athletes would have to be limited to playing for a school only as long as it takes to get a degree in their chosen field of study. They would have to be monitored, academically, very closely - even more so than today. After their time in college, they would go on to be productive members of society. As opposed to today where they have too much money than most know what to do with and choose to do the worst things. Also, knowing they couldn't play games for the rest of their lives might encourage some of these people not to squander the free ride they are given to college (I know not all of them do, but unfortunately the vast majority are in this group).

The additional income generated by sporting events for the colleges should go to helping educate EVERYONE in the surrounding communities and beyond. The income generated in pro sports is insane and the proceeds (for the most part) only end up lining the pockets of people who don't appreciate what they have. My system could actually subsidize education for everyone and every grade level in the entire country!! And think of the tax savings that would create.

Too bad the vast majority of people are too stupid to agree with this (which is amazing when you consider the way the fans are treated by the players & teams they support) and the people making money in pro sports are too greedy to ever let it go.

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Regardless, an NFL team is the most valued sports franchise in the world by far. They are literally forced to make money because of how the CBA with the players is set up.

Manchester United Football Club, of the English Premier League is more valuable than any NFL team (over one billion dollars estimated) and has higher revenues.

Source
Manchester United: English Premier League Soccer: Revenue - $225million: Value - $1000m (2002)
N.Y. Yankees: Baseball/MLB: Revenue - $223million: Value - $850m (2002)
Redskins: NFL/Football: Revenue - $204million: Value - $845m (2001)
source: Washington Post, official accounts & Forbes Magazine

Source.

Originally posted by Mr No One

Originally posted by American Mad Man
As far as school sports go, we already have them, and they are marked according to demand. The problem is that after these athletes are done playing, where do they turn if they wish to continue playing?

And if pro sports were to go the way of the dinosaur, then the demand for college level sports would sky rocket. Pro sports and the people involved in them serve no beneficial purpose for society. And they serve no purpose that cannot be replaced by college level sports.

Yes, the demand would skyrocket. But it would be an inferior game. And when you say there is no beneficial purpose for society you are forgetting millions of fans of the pro games (which are much) different then college). Pro games are much more strategic - especially in football and basketball. In college games, the team that has the best player usually wins, where as in the pros the best team wins.

Plus your idea completely negates every basic law of our economy. So I don't think it is a valid arguement.

Originally posted by Mirthful Me

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Regardless, an NFL team is the most valued sports franchise in the world by far. They are literally forced to make money because of how the CBA with the players is set up.

Manchester United Football Club, of the English Premier League is more valuable than any NFL team (over one billion dollars estimated) and has higher revenues.

Source
Manchester United: English Premier League Soccer: Revenue - $225million: Value - $1000m (2002)
N.Y. Yankees: Baseball/MLB: Revenue - $223million: Value - $850m (2002)
Redskins: NFL/Football: Revenue - $204million: Value - $845m (2001)
source: Washington Post, official accounts & Forbes Magazine

Source.

Your source is old. And as I said, it may be more valuable then any other franchise, but how do the rest of your teams hold up outside of say the red devils, the gunners ect?

In the NFL, all 32 teams are very close in total value. It is by far the most well managed and profitable league in the world, as evidence by the fact they have the largest TV deals and sponserships. The difference is that in Soccer, each team is more or less on it's own, thus powers like Man U keep all of their profits for themselves. In the NFL, there is revenue sharing, and thus ALL teams make more or less the same amount of money. If they adopted the soccer system, a lot of NFL teams would be worth more then Man U such as the Cowboys, Redskins, and Giants to name a few.

Anyways, getting back on topic, I've got bad news for hockey fans. During the last strike the owners didn't own most of the venues they played at, putting the onus on them to get a deal done. Today most of the teams own their venues, thus they can sit back and fill 41 dates with concerts or conventions, whatever. This is going to be a long strike if the players won't budge on the salary cap.

The players need to relise that the owners are not in a comprimse situation at all.

The owners can comprimise with certain aspects of their contact negotiations, but they cannot budge at all on the loss of money (300mil in 2003). It is not a comprimise to say 'ok we will comprimse with a 100mil loss'... they need 0 loss, and a quarentee. Hence the salary cap.

The players dont want to hear that, they just want more money, which the owners want... but the owners are in a situation where they will hold off untill they can legaly make new rules within the league, and maybe hire new players... Of couse all of this if the players dont take a .5mill $ pay cut (to an average of 1.3mil/year, from 1.8mill/year).

The players are the only one that are in a situation the give anything, they made solid pay raises each year for 10 years, and are only being stupid if they think that they can have them at the same rate or higher then they are now and still have the same leauge to play in.

O CANADA!

if i dont see the red wing whip up on some lesser team this year im gonna go ballistic!

First of all, its would be Vancouver... And second, THERE IS NO HOCKEY, so bring out you semi-autos

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Your source is old. And as I said, it may be more valuable then any other franchise, but how do the rest of your teams hold up outside of say the red devils, the gunners ect?

In the NFL, all 32 teams are very close in total value. It is by far the most well managed and profitable league in the world, as evidence by the fact they have the largest TV deals and sponserships. The difference is that in Soccer, each team is more or less on it's own, thus powers like Man U keep all of their profits for themselves. In the NFL, there is revenue sharing, and thus ALL teams make more or less the same amount of money. If they adopted the soccer system, a lot of NFL teams would be worth more then Man U such as the Cowboys, Redskins, and Giants to name a few.

If you check you will see that your source and mine are the same, both for the 2002 revenue year. The relative team value from top to bottom is 50% (Redskins to Cardinals), hardly th same I would think.

The players need a huge reality check. They need to remember that the fans ultimately pay their salaries. The players need to have more respect for the people that make their lives possible.

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Yes, the demand would skyrocket. But it would be an inferior game. And when you say there is no beneficial purpose for society you are forgetting millions of fans of the pro games (which are much) different then college). Pro games are much more strategic - especially in football and basketball. In college games, the team that has the best player usually wins, where as in the pros the best team wins.

Plus your idea completely negates every basic law of our economy. So I don't think it is a valid arguement.

Are you kidding me? Pro sports are more about the individual stars than the team. Look at the Lakers. They basically traded away their team to make Kobe (the rapist) happy. Most college coaches are happy to bench players that turn into primadonnas to teach them a lesson. As for the differences in the games they are minor rule changes. In most cases, the college games are more competitive and more likely to spawn underdog winners.

As for negating every basic law of our economy, I agree. With the complete and total worthlessness of pro-sports, negating economic laws doesn't matter. Bettering the country on a whole does (and if it means the general neanderthal pro sport fan has to demean themselves by watching college sports - so be it).

Isn't the NHL broke? I remember reading on ESPN.com that the NHL is seriously in debt, and that many of its teams (even a few of the recent expansion teams) have filed for bankruptcy.

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Basically what it comes down to is this. Football (American) games have a very high demand with a very low supply of games and tickets (16 games a season plus playoffs for 12 teams out of 32). Thus, in a capitalist society, they can charge 250-1000 bucks a ticket and people will pay for it (I am willing to pay up to 300 for bad seats to see the Eagles play...)

Hockey [and baseball, and basketball] on the other hand has 82 regular season games plus 7 game playoff series for 16 teams out of (i believe) 26. But it doesn't have nearly the intrest that football does, so when they charge 100 bucks a ticket there is a much larger suply with a much lower demand. Add to that the fact that the best hockey players make MUCH more then the best football players and you have a problem. It becomes even more comounded when you realise that the NFL has a multi BILLION dollar TV contract with FOX and NBC. Hockeys money comes from ESPN2 TV deals worth not nearly as much.

You hit the nail on the head! (American) Football has been the most popular sport in the U.S., by far, since about 1970. (Once the Super Bowls began, football took the title of "America's Pasttime" from baseball and never looked back.) Basketball and hockey have always been at the low end of the totem pole.

While U.S. colleges play many sports, none come even close to college football in popularity. In most college sports programs, the football team is the jewel in their crown. And, the above reasons show how and why the NFL dominates the other three major leagues in the U.S. (the NBA, MLB, and NHL) and will continue to do so in the forseeable future. If the U.S. does have a "national sport", it's (American) football.

However, outside of the U.S., I have no doubt that soccer teams ('soccer' to us in the U.S.; 'football' to everyone else ) like Manchester United make more money than any NFL team. The NFL, after all, is limited to the U.S., but a popular soccer team is global. The U.S. and Australia (rugby) have their own versions of football, but in the other 189 countries on Earth, soccer is the sport. So, if there is a "global sport", it's soccer.

Originally posted by Mr No One
Are you kidding me? Pro sports are more about the individual stars than the team. Look at the Lakers...

It depends on the sport. In basketball, certainly, the fans' loyalty is much more for individual players than the teams themselves (like Michael Jordan, for example). But in other sports -- (American) football in particular, and based on my limited observations, soccer as well -- fans' loyalty is more for the team than any player. Players will always come and go, but it's the team, with its traditions, and its role as part of the community, that strikes a chord in many fans' hearts...


[edit on 9/16/2004 by ThunderCloud]