1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Congress Might Snuff Out The Green Bay Packers

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by XPack, Oct 2, 2014.

  1. XPack

    XPack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2014
    Messages:
    445
    Ratings:
    +182
    Not sure I've seen a thread on this.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2014/10/01/congress-might-snuff-out-the-green-bay-packers/

    Opinions?

    Still too early for panic, imo. I don't hink this will ever come to fruition, but who knows?
     
  2. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    2,766
    Ratings:
    +1,909
    If the NFL knows what is good for it, the Packers will never be forced out.
     
  3. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,590
    Ratings:
    +4,273
    you think the nfl would seriously jeopardize competitive balance? Not happening
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
  4. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,456
    congress only works like 80 days per year, they have much bigger fish to fry than to mess with a team like the packers or much less mess with the massive money maker NFL. Never happen
     
  5. red4tribe

    red4tribe Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    Messages:
    943
    Ratings:
    +435
    The Packers are not the Jaguars, they are incredibly popular. I'm not worried.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. thisisnate

    thisisnate Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Messages:
    830
    Ratings:
    +504
    I don't see how this would hurt us exactly. I must be missing something. Explain?

    I mean salary cap will never go anywhere. We don't sign free agents really. Guys might go to bigger markets for more expose to improve their brand, but they already do that... and that would only apply to like 10 guys in the league that even get commercial attention.

    I dunno. Don't see how this is a problem if it does happen. But then again, anything in Forbes is probably well over my head.
     
  7. TJV

    TJV Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    5,389
    Ratings:
    +4,176
    thisisnate, the idea is it would hurt small market teams because the revenue flow for teams like the Cowboys would be 10X greater than that of a team like the Bills. I don’t think it will happen either but not because congress has ‘bigger fish to fry’ as that implies congress is reasonable, logical and has its priorities in order. Whenever I wonder about motivation for politicians I think of money and power (can’t have one without the other): Getting reelected seems to be the overriding priority of the vast majority. So why would congress be loath to mess with the NFL? Because it’s the most popular sport in the country any member of congress voting to screw it up would have that rubbed in their face ad nauseam every election cycle until they were defeated.

    If by some chance it did happen, IMO Forbes fails to recognize an important distinction between the Packers and other small market teams: The Packers are among the top 3-5 most popular teams in the league. It’s no longer 1965 where (except for the exemption) teams would only negotiate with “local” broadcast networks. NFL network, Direct TV and ESPN are broadcast nationally so are Thursday, Sunday, and Monday night games by the networks. Without the exemption, the Packers would individually contract with them as well as the broadcast networks to show its games as “secondary” games (games shown before or after their local team’s games) on Sundays. Such a ruling would open up the bidding to show NFL games so nothing would prevent a cable network like TNT, TBS, Foxsports, NBCsports etc. from making a deal with the most popular teams. Initially IMO the Packers would be one of the “have” (as opposed to “have not”) teams. The problem would be maintaining that popularity.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2014
    • Agree Agree x 2
  8. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,518
    Ratings:
    +1,990
    According to the Packer's most recent financial report, they brought in $324 million of revenue, of which $187.7 million (58%) was from national revenue. National revenue is mainly the NFL's television and apparel contracts. I don't know the breakdown but assume that the tv deals are the majority. Ironically, player costs were $171 million which is pretty close to the $187 million of nat'l revenue. For arguments sake, one could say that roughly the tv money pays for the player costs. Losing that would have a significant impact on the Packers. They had $25.3 of net income so there wouldn't be enough to cover the loss of national television revenue. Of course, it would be offset by local and regional television contracts but likely not anywhere close to the amount they currently receive.

    As a side note, the team's corporate reserve fund increased to $284 million. The guiding principal for the fund was to put aside enough money to operate for a year. It's never quite reached that goal since the cost of operations increases each year. This fund wouldn't cover the loss of national tv revenue for very long - if needed.
     
  9. thisisnate

    thisisnate Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Messages:
    830
    Ratings:
    +504
    But with a salary cap, increased revenue wouldn't go to the players, would it? Why would they care if a team made more money if none of it was to go in t heir pockets? Or is the fact that we even have a cap somehow tied to the way revenue sharing works right now?
     
  10. TJV

    TJV Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    5,389
    Ratings:
    +4,176
    That could be El Guapo, but just a change in how broadcast rights are paid for wouldn't affect how popular the NFL is, at least initially. Right now the Packers receive 1/32nd of the national revenue. If each team had the right to negotiate separately IMO the Packers would be one of the teams that would get a bigger slice of that pie because they are one of the most popular teams. (And I don't believe the money broadcasters are willing to pay would decline.) It's not just local TV revenues anymore. Because of cable and the internet, IMO Packers fans worldwide would be more willing to pay to see their games than the average NFL fan. IMO this is a moot point anyway because of what I posted about congress - how many votes are they willing to lose to screw up the NFL vs. how many would they believe they'd gain?
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Forget Favre

    Forget Favre Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    8,154
    Ratings:
    +2,791
    Would congress really want to take the chance to make 10s of thousands of owners really mad?
    Cheeseheads will take over DC if they even think of putting the Packers out of business.
     
  12. Forget Favre

    Forget Favre Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    8,154
    Ratings:
    +2,791
    President I'll-Bomb-Ya is a Bears fan.
    I'm sure he will support this.
    :D
     
  13. Raptorman

    Raptorman Vikings fan since 1966.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,590
    Ratings:
    +1,004
    Believe me, Congress is not worried about the 10's of thousands Packers owners.
     
  14. Forget Favre

    Forget Favre Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    8,154
    Ratings:
    +2,791
    They should be worried about angering what could total more than a million fans of all those suggested teams combined.
    Taking away or shutting down football teams when it looks like it isn't necessary is sacrilegious.
     
  15. Forget Favre

    Forget Favre Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    8,154
    Ratings:
    +2,791
    I don't get it why this is even suggested.
    If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    So what does clowngress think is broken?
     
  16. TJV

    TJV Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    5,389
    Ratings:
    +4,176
    Just to be clear, this would affect all teams, not just the Packers. And if they did this, IMO it would screw up the competitive balance of the league at some point. IMO the only question would be how it would affect the Packers.
     
  17. Raptorman

    Raptorman Vikings fan since 1966.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,590
    Ratings:
    +1,004
    I can tell you why this is even and issue. The Washington Redskins. Anytime the NFL has something going on that Congress doesn't like they make this threat.
     
  18. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,518
    Ratings:
    +1,990
    I get that this is all theoretical. So is half the stuff we talk about here!

    The Packers are a popular team for sure, but they would still struggle to have the negotiating power that the entire NFL yields right now. So that 1/32nd share of the rights is a pretty sweet deal. Who really knows how it would end up if Russ Ball was turned loose on the networks.
     
  19. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,754
    Ratings:
    +3,695
    If NFL teams had to negotiate their media deals independently, which I believe will never happen, the result would be a Major League Baseball-like balkanized landscape.

    Just as the Yankees and Dodgers have more revenue than small market teams by several factors because of local media deals, so too would be the case with the NFL. Even with MLB's partial revenue sharing and "taxes" on high payrolls being distributed to poorer teams, there are teams with $250 million payrolls and others with $40 million payrolls.

    I'm sure there are some NFL owners who would welcome this development. Just as the big market MLB teams have been stingy in their revenue sharing programs, offering the minimum amount to maintain some kind of competitive balance, so too might the likes of Jones and Snyder. First, they have not been able to win under the current salary cap system. Second, they could make more money for themselves without the sharing.

    The idea that the Packers would be paid handsomely to broadcast their games out-of-market is wishful thinking. Direct TV pays $1 billion per year for all out-of-market broadcasting rights. Even if one assumes the Packers out-of-market broadcasts are worth twice as much as the average, once one divides $1 billion by 16 that's not a lot of coin in the great scheme of things.

    NFL antitrust exemptions were established by an act of Congress and it would take an act of Congress to strike them down. These guys could not agree on what to order for lunch and there's no signs that will change any time soon.

    That said, the recent FCC ruling opens a crack in the ediface. But I think it will take people marching in the streets over their tax dollars going to NFL stadiums while being blacked out at home for this to get any traction.

    Somebody wake me up when something actually happens.
     
  20. Zeck180

    Zeck180 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    471
    Ratings:
    +173
    that sounds so familiar, where did I hear that before...

     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  21. profile_removed

    profile_removed Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    Messages:
    608
    Ratings:
    +20
    Green Bay isn't in the position it was in in the late 60's and 70's. They've learned from their mistakes, they'll never end up that cornered again whether Congress passes this or not, it will not affect Green Bay.
     
  22. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,590
    Ratings:
    +4,273
    I am honestly not sure how many owners would support it, its obvious that the competitive balance the nfl has is a big reason why the league is so popular.
     
  23. Vrill

    Vrill Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2011
    Messages:
    1,782
    Ratings:
    +828
    Fear mongering propaganda. Nothing will ever come of this. At least not in our life times.
     
  24. JBlood

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,154
    Ratings:
    +1,312
    The league thinks nothing of avoiding taxes while charging the tax paying public an average of 70% of capital expenses for new stadiums. It's a multi-billion dollar business accepting welfare. Who knows, if the antitrust exemption were eliminated, it might result in a new league, which might charge less for games. That's what competition is all about. And I think Green Bay would do just fine.
     
  25. TJV

    TJV Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    5,389
    Ratings:
    +4,176
    It may have to as the disparity between the haves and have-nots expands. The league would be much less competitive and eventually prices would have to come down as the product becomes worse and worse. BTW, if the number of people on the Packers season ticket waiting list remains the same, the Packers could significantly increase ticket prices and still fill the stadium. There's a lot of unmet "competition" for season tickets.
     

Share This Page