One's man's opinion of the NFL business structure. Controversial but interesting and he has some valid points. It's worth a look.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_yl...y_style_031711
Printable View
One's man's opinion of the NFL business structure. Controversial but interesting and he has some valid points. It's worth a look.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_yl...y_style_031711
I wonder how much the NFLPA paid him to write that?
pretty dumb.
hey soul , if the NFl was really a communst ecomnomy of the "workers" all being the same, wouldn't mot of the players need to take really big cuts? I mean isnt that the basis of it? how come he doesn't talk about manning brady being paid the same as garrett wolfe as "all workers in this together"??.. funny how THAT SIDE is missing.. and how no player wants player "communism"
and wrong likes "For one thing, franchise values continue to rise astronomically".. which isn't true and hasn't been since 2007, irk me to no end
Like many others he stretches facts to meet his own viewpoint, or at least the one he puts forward here. Some of his analysis is pretty fair but I think his choice of the word "Communism" is a poor one. There are certain "socialistic" factors involved in the way that the NFL is run those being linked primarily to the revenue sharing that goes on between teams but by in large they are capitalists.Quote:
Originally Posted by dabears54
While franchise values may not be skyrocketing anymore they cannot deny that their is still some growth and that the sale of their broadcast rights alone pretty much guarantees a profit for every team. Small market and large market teams alike. What I think is the important point in this is much of the reason for this decline in growth rate can be laid directly at the feet of the owners who have had it so good for so long that inefficient management wasn't penalized. Despite all the rhetoric I think he's just trying to point out that the owners have made their own bed in this matter but expect the players to lie in it with them.
Like I said, it's a controversial article and I don't buy into all of it either but it presents an interesting point of view. Maybe he should have chosen a different title and way to point some of these things out but that doesn't mean that all of it is wrong. Besides, the articles title was bound to assure that it got read. That may have been his editors idea though, LOL.
Probably no more than the NFL pays for others to write in a light most favorable to them. The NFL owners were the first ones to plead their case to the public through their PR machine and the press, not the NFLPA.Quote:
Originally Posted by loki520
The problem with it is the use of the word "Communism". It gets the article the attention he was looking for but many people will immediately discard it as being ridiculous without thoroughly reading it and accepting the fact that some of his points are valid
Well the other side would be to be pure capitalism and have the league run like Baseball; and no football fan really wants that outside of the NY area. I agree it's not really communism, but that is what happens when you have unions, every employee is on the same scale....if anyone is to blame it's the employees for unionizing.
I never claimed that he was writing anything but a onesided piece. The other side has had writers who have done much the same. I said it was controversial and that I didn't agree with the use of the word "Communism" nor do I think that they're communists as we think of them. However, the NFL does have it's own sort of "socialistic slant" in certain ways and that's not deniable even by them.Quote:
Originally Posted by dabears54
On the other point. All workers are not paid the same in a "communistic/socialistic society" either. Some things in Great Britain are very socialistic but they have their fair share of billionaire capitalists as well. Why is it necessary for anything to be 100% one way or the other?
The right to unionize is as old as the great American republic itself. In fact, this right is guaranteed in the Constitution. What this guy is saying is bogus if he is really equating the owners' economic scale to that of Marxist/Leninist/Maoist ideologies.
DB54, you are absolutely right. The league is not set up where punters, place kickers, scrubs, and practice squad members make the same as superstars like Peyton Manning and Tom Brady make. This guy's choice of diction was poor and even so in taste.
Hold the damn phone... where in the hell is the right to UNIONIZE in the Constitution?
Oh, I am so waiting to hear this....
I'm with Loki on this one Dags. The right to unionize would not be found in The Bill of Rights nor in any other Consitutional Ammendment that followed those first ten.Quote:
Originally Posted by loki520
Here's a quick link for you to go to. It shows the preamble and then has separate sections for The Bill of Rights and the other Constitutional Ammendments 11-27.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/cha...stitution.html