What To Make Of Our WR No-Shows

Poppa San

Levelheaded
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
10,407
Reaction score
1,082
Location
Brown County Wisconsin
Nailed it. The league has existed long enough to become a worldwide brand and that is how it will survive no matter the players or franchises. Just look at Apple, Cadillac, Rolex...even when their products suck and/or are overpriced, people pay because of the brand.
Just look at Pan-Am, Polaroid, Texaco, Southern Pacific, Toys 'R Us.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
Just look at Pan-Am, Polaroid, Texaco, Southern Pacific, Toys 'R Us.
Yup. Poor business decisions, declining markets, lawsuits, etc. sank these companies. The NFL isn't immune from the same thing happening someday to them.

The thing that the NFL has going for it, if individual owners make bad decisions, probably only that one team suffers and the NFL goes on. However, if the league itself makes bad decisions, that could snowball. Or if fans lose interest, same result. While individual players like Rodgers area part of the draw, they can be quickly replaced by the next fan favorite.
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
3,782
Reaction score
222
The NFL absolutely doesn't need owners. You say this as a Packer fan, unironically too. The fan base that takes pride in... not having an owner.

Also, the fans exist because of the players. Not the other way around. Do you think fans would show up to cheer an empty field?
I would love to see some way for the players to BE the owners. It'd be really interesting, then, to see how the teams and league are run.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
I would love to see some way for the players to BE the owners. It'd be really interesting, then, to see how the teams and league are run.

That is a novel thought actually. Aaron Rodgers seems like the perfect candidate to start his own team. He has ownership experience (Bucks), he's a great player and fans love(d) him.

I think he would quickly discover that 53 owners, each with more than just an ownership stake in the team, would get pretty chaotic.

As much as Packer fans want to believe that the Packers are owned by fans/stock holders, I would be interested to know what and when was the last actual decision of any importance that those "owners" made.

The NFL has evolved into a billion dollar business for many reasons, but Aaron Rodgers or any other individual player isn't one of them.
 

Poppa San

Levelheaded
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
10,407
Reaction score
1,082
Location
Brown County Wisconsin
I would love to see some way for the players to BE the owners. It'd be really interesting, then, to see how the teams and league are run.
They would hire some type of management team that would need to make the unpopular decisions and to give continuity. It would be the same as a one political party state IMO.
 

Pintsizedbox9

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
410
Reaction score
14
Nailed it. The league has existed long enough to become a worldwide brand and that is how it will survive no matter the players or franchises. Just look at Apple, Cadillac, Rolex...even when their products suck and/or are overpriced, people pay because of the brand.

If NFL certainly isn't worldwide LOL, and if the players were substituted by
lesser players the league would be in shambles. College football would become King (if it isn't already honestly).
 

G0P4ckG0

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 1, 2015
Messages
540
Reaction score
63
If NFL certainly isn't worldwide LOL, and if the players were substituted by
lesser players the league would be in shambles. College football would become King (if it isn't already honestly).
The Super Bowl is the most watched event in the world, plus there are football leagues in other countries.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
If NFL certainly isn't worldwide LOL, and if the players were substituted by
lesser players the league would be in shambles. College football would become King (if it isn't already honestly).
The NFL has a steady influx of old talent and new talent, as does college football. The parts (players, coaches, owners, GM's, refs, etc.) are all interchangeable and fans will continue to follow both leagues because of what the NFL (and NCAA) has been built up to as a Product, not because of individual players. The NFL could keep every player that they have now and announce that instead of tackle football, they are switching to flag football. How long do you think all these players that you say "make the NFL what is is" would keep it going?

Your whole point of trying to prove that without Rodgers the Packers would be less is really off to be honest. Had the Packers not drafted Aaron Rodgers in 2005, they would still be thriving. Would they have been as successful in the Win column? Probably not, but I am pretty sure the money would still have been about the same.
 

Nick Karbula

Krabs
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
137
Reaction score
15
Nailed it. The league has existed long enough to become a worldwide brand and that is how it will survive no matter the players or franchises. Just look at Apple, Cadillac, Rolex...even when their products suck and/or are overpriced, people pay because of the brand.
I don't understand Cadillacs. I have zero interest in that brand and don't know anyone that does. However, I understand your point.
 

Pintsizedbox9

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
410
Reaction score
14
The NFL has a steady influx of old talent and new talent, as does college football. The parts (players, coaches, owners, GM's, refs, etc.) are all interchangeable and fans will continue to follow both leagues because of what the NFL (and NCAA) has been built up to as a Product, not because of individual players. The NFL could keep every player that they have now and announce that instead of tackle football, they are switching to flag football. How long do you think all these players that you say "make the NFL what is is" would keep it going?

Your whole point of trying to prove that without Rodgers the Packers would be less is really off to be honest. Had the Packers not drafted Aaron Rodgers in 2005, they would still be thriving. Would they have been as successful in the Win column? Probably not, but I am pretty sure the money would still have been about the same.

What on earth? And yes, if the league decided to become flag football the players would still be the driving force of the sport. The fans however would be in an uproar and the league would immediately cave like they did with the replacement ref debacle.

What a poor attempt at a gotcha.

And yes, Rodgers is the main reason the Packers have been relevant for the last decade. The Packers would undoubtedly be worse off without him.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
And yes, Rodgers is the main reason the Packers have been relevant for the last decade. The Packers would undoubtedly be worse off without him.
Describe "worse off". I already agreed that they would most likely have fewer wins, but that is just speculation, maybe they have more, along with a few more Lombardi's?

You can't be talking about ticket sales? Revenues? I am going to guess they would have spent the same on payroll, but instead of AR getting the Lions share at times, that would have been distributed.

My point has stayed consistent, the Packers are what they are not because of one single player. They are who they are because of a collection of lots of parts. Parts that include, players, coaches, location, fans, history, etc.

How long do you think an NFL football team would survive in todays market if they were in Davenport, Iowa?

The moment you start making business decisions revolve around 1 player, is the moment that you forgot that this was a team sport.
 

G0P4ckG0

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 1, 2015
Messages
540
Reaction score
63
Just totally false. Have you ever heard of Soccer?
My mistake...for whatever reason I was thinking the Super Bowl received over 500 million viewers worldwide, but the real number is around 100 million. 500 million for World Cup finals and some Olympic and Cricket events garner more than the Super Bowl too.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
My mistake...for whatever reason I was thinking the Super Bowl received over 500 million viewers worldwide, but the real number is around 100 million. 500 million for World Cup finals and some Olympic and Cricket events garner more than the Super Bowl too.

The O.J. Simpson Car Chase had 95 million viewers and the OJ Simpson verdict I believe was the most watched American TV event in history with 142 Million views. So yes....us Americans love their Football! ;)
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
4,588
Reaction score
221
Describe "worse off". I already agreed that they would most likely have fewer wins, but that is just speculation, maybe they have more, along with a few more Lombardi's?

You can't be talking about ticket sales? Revenues? I am going to guess they would have spent the same on payroll, but instead of AR getting the Lions share at times, that would have been distributed.

My point has stayed consistent, the Packers are what they are not because of one single player. They are who they are because of a collection of lots of parts. Parts that include, players, coaches, location, fans, history, etc.

How long do you think an NFL football team would survive in todays market if they were in Davenport, Iowa?

The moment you start making business decisions revolve around 1 player, is the moment that you forgot that this was a team sport.

Your argument seems to lean towards "winning doesn't matter" and I have trouble believing that. Making decisions about winning is how teams stay relevant. If winning means giving special players special treatment, then you do it. This is common practice in sports. Superstars are like the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, they get treated FAR differently from the other employees, and rightfully so.
 

ARPackFan

GREAT SCOTT HUNTER!!! IT'S BACK TO THE 70s, MARTY!
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
462
Reaction score
66
Location
Arkansas
I would love to see some way for the players to BE the owners. It'd be really interesting, then, to see how the teams and league are run.

Watch ESPN's 30 for 30 "BROKE" if you want an idea how the league would fare. Outside of 5 years the league would be owned by assorted strippers, baby mamas, and loan sharks.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
2,741
Reaction score
149
Watch ESPN's 30 for 30 "BROKE" if you want an idea how the league would fare. Outside of 5 years the league would be owned by assorted strippers, baby mamas, and loan sharks.
kinda fun to watch but they never threw the ball.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
4,588
Reaction score
221
Watch ESPN's 30 for 30 "BROKE" if you want an idea how the league would fare. Outside of 5 years the league would be owned by assorted strippers, baby mamas, and loan sharks.
Wow. You must be one of those people that thinks the owners are super smart because they’re rich
 

David Ciembronowicz

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 25, 2020
Messages
18
Reaction score
3
Location
iron river
So you understand blowing them off, unless it means a financial sacrifice to the individual player? I can't quite put my finger on it, but that sounds like messed up team player logic and more like individual greed? Weren't you the one accusing owners of being selfish, greedy tax evaders? ;)
Latest now is that Adams and Bhaktiara (sp?) have "Rodgers back". Wonderful, you should have his back on the field, even off of it, now when you go on the air and say you support the guy who basically could care less about the Packers- that is a problem. Wonder what the Packers could get for trading Adams, Bhaktiari and Rodgers????? Might be worth it to get a load of no. 1's, 2's and mid-round.
 

G0P4ckG0

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 1, 2015
Messages
540
Reaction score
63
Latest now is that Adams and Bhaktiara (sp?) have "Rodgers back". Wonderful, you should have his back on the field, even off of it, now when you go on the air and say you support the guy who basically could care less about the Packers- that is a problem. Wonder what the Packers could get for trading Adams, Bhaktiari and Rodgers????? Might be worth it to get a load of no. 1's, 2's and mid-round.
It would be worth it just to dump a large portion of their salaries. Draft picks are a bonus
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
12,525
Reaction score
1,152
I haven't really been paying attention beyond anything said on this board, but all I saw BakhT say was, he's not interjecting himself into anything between Rodgers and the team.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top