Jump to content

An honest debate about the salary cap


paul-mac

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

That's not really how it works...A $40million annual profit on a $770million purchase is a 5.2% return on investment.

GB had profits of $75 and $65 million in '16 and '17 as well, which would represent 9.7% and 8.4% returns. This does not capital gains either in increased real estate value, and increased value of the team either.

Owners aren't getting the real estate or value back unless they sell the team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lancerman said:

If all the players left tomorrow they'd be replaced by college kids and CFL guys and in a couple of years most fans wouldn't be able to tell the difference. If they owners all left there wouldn't be a league. The players are not getting paid less than than most employees at other companies. If anything the lowest player still makes well over what the average employee at many companies that are worth more than the NFL makes. 

There's a fundamental lack of business economics here 

If the owners left? There would be 31 new owners to purchase the teams. The league wouldn't just dissolve if they decided to not show up anymore. The lowest NFL player has a harder to find skillset than the average employee. This isn't 1920 where the league just started and they are scrapping by year to year trying to find a fanbase and wondering if this football thing will take off. It is 2017. The owners are contributing very little to the growth of the league. They don't even pay for their own stadiums for christ's sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Malik said:

If the owners left? There would be 31 new owners to purchase the teams. The league wouldn't just dissolve if they decided to not show up anymore. The lowest NFL player has a harder to find skillset than the average employee. This isn't 1920 where the league just started and they are scrapping by year to year trying to find a fanbase and wondering if this football thing will take off. It is 2017. The owners are contributing very little to the growth of the league. They don't even pay for their own stadiums for christ's sake.

If all the owners left it actually means the league is no longer viable and those other 31 owners would need to make significant 

The owners pay the players, they pay to maintain the stadium, they pay to make the merchandise, they pay travel expenses, they pay for equipment ever year. 

Please tell me what the players contribute that a bunch of college players couldn't? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lancerman said:

If all the owners left it actually means the league is no longer viable and those other 31 owners would need to make significant 

The owners pay the players, they pay to maintain the stadium, they pay to make the merchandise, they pay travel expenses, they pay for equipment ever year. 

Please tell me what the players contribute that a bunch of college players couldn't? 

They play the game that we watch. They are the reason the league is worth billions of dollars. They are the product. They create the content to sell the product. I never said the players aren't replaceable because obviously almost the entirety of NFL players come from the college game. Also owners don't even necessarily do any of those things. Virginia Halas owns the Bears, do you think she does any of that day-to-day? The current Jets owner is Woody Johnson who is currently serving as an ambassador.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Malik said:

They play the game that we watch. They are the reason the league is worth billions of dollars. They are the product. They create the content to sell the product. I never said the players aren't replaceable because obviously almost the entirety of NFL players come from the college game. Also owners don't even necessarily do any of those things. Virginia Halas owns the Bears, do you think she does any of that day-to-day? The current Jets owner is Woody Johnson who is currently serving as an ambassador.

90% of fans aren't savvy enough to know the difference between kids who just came out of college and the NFL. 

The owners build the brand, promote the brand, pay to make merchandise for the brand, pay to make and maintain a location for the team to play in, pay for the players to be there in the first place, pay for all the other employees to work there,  pat for the equipment, pay for the training locations, etc. 

The product is the league and the teams. It doesn't really matter a whole lot which players are on which teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lancerman said:

90% of fans aren't savvy enough to know the difference between kids who just came out of college and the NFL. 

The owners build the brand, promote the brand, pay to make merchandise for the brand, pay to make and maintain a location for the team to play in, pay for the players to be there in the first place, pay for all the other employees to work there,  pat for the equipment, pay for the training locations, etc. 

The product is the league and the teams. It doesn't really matter a whole lot which players are on which teams. 

The owners do not promote the league or build the brand. Those are contracted advertising agencies. You think owners are sitting around deciding how and what to advertise? They pay the bills to keep the lights on. That's it. Very few of them are involve with any of the day-to-day actual coming and goings of the league. They are easily replaced by just having a fund to draw from. You are confusing the owners paying people to do things with the owners actually doing things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Malik said:

The owners do not promote the league or build the brand. Those are contracted advertising agencies. You think owners are sitting around deciding how and what to advertise? They pay the bills to keep the lights on. That's it. Very few of them are involve with any of the day-to-day actual coming and goings of the league. They are easily replaced by just having a fund to draw from. You are confusing the owners paying people to do things with the owners actually doing things.

If the owners are PAYING people to do things, THEY are making the investment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...