Free Agency is the Key to Labor Unrest in the NFL

However, other than greed I would like to see what the owners are putting forward as the reason they feel the need to change something that has worked well for so long. If they never put up compelling evidence that there is a problem with the current way things are going then I would have to say shame on them. However, I simply don’t know enough as of yet to make a call on this.

However, the scarcity of information coming from the owners about this issue is a tell tale sign that not all is well with their motivations. Personally, I don’t mind it as it stands, seems to me every one is pretty much working through things as they should be, and the league has pretty much taken over as the dominant American sport in part because of it.

Also, in terms of working through a recession, if it was affecting the NFL’s bottom line then it would also affect the players bottom line, basically the percentage takes care of market fluctuations.

This is an excellent post.

You are better than professional journalists.

Great post, LLV, thank you.

While motivations are always difficult to be certain of, I suspect the NFL’s treatment of the William’s Wall is at least in part aimed at being able to intimidate the NFLPA and force better terms at the bargaining table. The interest at support that the NFL is receiving from the NBA, the MLB, and the Olympics Committee, strongly suggests that these issues and concerns go far beyond the situation of the Minnesota Vikings.

I was thinking that the Viking’s stadium issue is really just an extension of the root cause; greed on the part of the NFL. The other NFL owners want the Vikings to get a bigger stadium because the Vikings’ revenues aren’t on a par with the average of the other franchises’ revenues. Fair enough and understandable, it’s a business and they’re in it to make money.

Their business depends entirely on the support of the fans who buy the tickets, who clamor for broadcast coverage, who support their teams. In this bid to make more money, they’re willing to sacrifice an entire fanbase that’s been well established for almost 50 years, in order to possibly make a few more bucks in a venue which they’re well aware has a lifespan of only a decade or so of profitability. They expect that, after being screwed over, in a few years they can extort that fanbase for a new stadium because then the people will be starved for their own team and be willing to pay any price to get a new one. Granted, this is conjecture, but it seems to fit the pattern of the NFL’s behavior in the last few decades.

On the other side of the coin, you have a group of very vocal state citizens who feel that paying anything to support an NFL team is too much, even when it means that they’ll create building jobs, maintanance and vendor jobs, be able to host major state events and bring in huge regional, national, and international events for the next 20+ years. Despite the boost to their own economy, their state’s brand, and the inestimable value of civic pride (for those who remember what that is), they will still quibble over the almost negligible cost building the new venue.

In the middle, the ones who get hurt the most by all of this are the sports fans. We’re the ones who make the positive impact possible, we’re the drivers of the prosperity that the NFL, it’s players, AND the non-fan citizens of the state will be able to enjoy for future decades.

I think the important part to remember is that the owners don’t share the stadium proceeds from luxury boxes and non-football events with the players. Since they save 60% they want all the stadium revenue they can get. I understand that and its fine. The players have no problem. I certainly understand why some taxpayers object to making a Stadium owner more wealthy. Your points as to the value being more than just a Stadium are well spoken.

But as to moving a franchise. Let’s say I owned ten McDonald franchises. When McDonald’s has now started putting in McCaffe’s for more profit. But I decide not to upgrade my franchises to a McCafe. Its my right to do so. But it hurts McDonalds since they get a percentage of my gross as a franchise fee. McDonalds will be doing everything they can to upgrade me or get a better Franchise owner in there. To me those are only good business decisions. The NFL would rather add new franchises to the league and never move an old one. The owners get to split the new franchise fee ( 1 Billion dollars) between themselves. They get very little when a team moves.

As a Viking fan it seems we are getting picked on but sometimes there is a cost to being a small market team. I think we will figure it out.

Hardly anyone in California cares about how many McCafe’s there are in Minnesota.

Anyone in Minnesota thinking NFL teams do not move is already on the highway to hell.

Ask people who were living in Cleveland in 1995 and then later watched the “Ravens” win the Super Bowl about whether NFL teams actually move and what was being said in 1995 before a thing called reality cruelly interrupted the public opinion polls. I heard countless fools tell me the Browns would never leave or Art Model has too much invested in Cleveland, blah, blah, blah… Then they woke up and read the news today, oh boy…

There were no Browns from 1996 to 1998, and there have been only two years with winning seasons for them since. Building a new football stadium was not any cheaper after the horse had left the barn. That crappy coach the fans had whined over (Bill Belichick) never looked back and said, “Gee, I really miss Cleveland.”

You get what you pay for.

Minnesotans didn’t invest in a football stadium enhancement when Ventura was refunding the state surplus, and are not inclined to do anything in that regard now.

The rocket is on the launch pad and the countdown continues.

If you snooze, you loose. People currently buying Packer jerseys in Minnesota have a better plan for the future than most Minnesotans do.

When they tear the Metrodome down, the sign outside should say, “Your tax dollars are being buried here.”