Jump to content

NFL has no approval process for owners who transfer their team to family members


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, ET80 said:

Are there other teams outside the US that do a better job? Legit curious. I always figured these teams were owned by conglomerates and/or the very wealthy. GB was unique to everyone in the world, right?

Barcelona is actually owned by its members. They hold elections to select the Team President and Board who are kind of GM role.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Starless said:

Sorry, I was talking about City of Liverpool FC, which I guess is different than Liverpool FC...? I have no idea how this stuff works.

Ah right. There are a couple of clubs like that in England that were basically started by fans protesting the commercialization of EPL clubs - FC United of Manchester (started by Man United fans) is another one, and are meant to be grassroots and community-run.  But they also basically play in amateur or semi-pro leagues right now. At the highest levels of the English pyramid most of the clubs are owned privately and run like American franchises at this point. 

Edited by SalvadorsDeli
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Starless said:

Sorry, I was talking about City of Liverpool FC, which I guess is different than Liverpool FC...? I have no idea how this stuff works.

Think of Liverpool FC as the New York Giants, and City of Liverpool FC as a bunch of random dudes who play in an amateur league in New York in front of a handful of fans.

There are more publicly owned teams in European pro sports (specifically soccer) than in the US, but at the top level it’s still very much a closed shop of wealthy businessmen with no attachment to the clubs who own them. Very, very few top tier pro teams have close to what the Packers have.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, animaltested said:

Well considering NFL owners run their org's like little fiefdoms, make's sense the line of succession is basically primogeniture.

Ooooh, somebody went to fancy learning school...

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Kael said:

Barcelona is actually owned by its members. They hold elections to select the Team President and Board who are kind of GM role.

Interesting - who are the "members"? Players, fans? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ET80 said:

Interesting - who are the "members"? Players, fans? 

Fans/supporters mostly.

Becoming a member isn't quite as easy as filling out a form however. If you don't have a close family member who is already a member, there are some hoops to jump through before one can apply to become a member. At least that is my understanding.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Nightmare said:

 

There are more publicly owned teams in European pro sports (specifically soccer) than in the US, but at the top level it’s still very much a closed shop of wealthy businessmen with no attachment to the clubs who own them. Very, very few top tier pro teams have close to what the Packers have.

And the biggest difference between eu pro sports and nfl is that there is no equal revenue sharing or salary cap. In addition to actual relegation.

If your team sucks you're not talking about getting #1 draft spot, but you'll be relegated to the cfl (in football terms). And still have high salaried players under contract but dont get the tv money.

Add in that players are not traded but actually bought for $.

 

All this combined actually means that if your management/ownership fails you have  pretty good odds that your team will end up in a 3rd division or go banktrupt.

The way the Raiders and Browns were managed earlier in this century would have resulted in those teams probably not existing anymore if done in eu pro team style

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2021 at 9:03 AM, ET80 said:

Are there other teams outside the US that do a better job? Legit curious. I always figured these teams were owned by conglomerates and/or the very wealthy. GB was unique to everyone in the world, right?

I tend to find that outside of the United States (and Canada) pro sports are run just like any other business, in that they're regulated just by regular old laws instead of the rules they choose to impose on themselves as a league. 

For instance, if a player signs a contract with a team, that contract is binding for both parties. A team cannot just tear it up or ship it away without the players' consent like what happens all the time in the US. Similarly, leagues can't have arbitrary restrictions for young players based on when they graduated secondary school; the ability for 14-17 year olds to play professionally is regulated almost entirely by child labor laws.

All these points essentially mean that owners just have much less power in sports outside of the US. Outside, owners and players are fighting the same labor vs management battle that everyone else is, whereas in the US the owners have complete control of almost every aspect of the battlefield.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2021 at 4:41 PM, Nightmare said:

Think of Liverpool FC as the New York Giants, and City of Liverpool FC as a bunch of random dudes who play in an amateur league in New York in front of a handful of fans.

You could have just said the Jets...

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2021 at 5:16 AM, Pugger said:

Besides being community owned (of course many us do not live in WI now) the only way the team will ever leave that town is if the majority of the shareholders approve.  I always feel bad for cities like Oakland and St. Louis when their teams are ripped away.

But not for LA or Houston or Baltimore and Cleveland? No teams should move or have been moved the NFL continually fails it's fans. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NVRamsFan said:

But not for LA or Houston or Baltimore and Cleveland? No teams should move or have been moved the NFL continually fails it's fans. 

I just mentioned Oakland and St. Louis as examples.   Of course the cities you mentioned still have a team, even if it isn't the original one.  The 2 examples I spoke of have no NFL team presently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The estate tax thing... why couldn't an owner of an NFL team just transfer ownership to a living trust, and then have their spouse/children/whoever the heirs are become the beneficiaries and trustee?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...