Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by RollTide, Mar 25, 2008.
That is a possibility, but that would also suck pretty bad.
It might benefit the game too.
Untested value? It isn't just forbe's educated guess as to franchise value much like any real estate appraisal; we can look at actual revenues, assets and operating income and in all three the titans are at least in the middle of the pack.
I don't see an nfl without revenue sharing. The nfl tv contracts are all national it isn't like MLB where the games are broadcast locally and teams can get big cable deals for themselves. Why change a system that has worked so well? I doubt it..
Sort of like the tax man's estimate of my home's value. It is based on a lot of things like similar houses that sold recently in my particular area.
I for one think that just about the stupidest thing the NFL could do would be to do away with revenue sharing system, I don't want to see the NFL repeat the bad decisions of baseball.
Still yet, those numbers are not only old, but they don't represent a number you could just walk in, and buy the franchise for. All it represents is the revenues and assets for 2005. The Jets, for example, don't even have a stadium. Them, as well as the Giants are lower tier teams. Their value would skyrocket if the CBA were done away with.
As for your opinion on revenue sharing, that's fine; that's your opinion, but the point of the original thread was that it could be done away with. :bonk2: AGAIN, I think teams are making moves based on the assumption that there will be no more CBA soon, AND in essence, NO salary cap, and NO revenue sharing.
A lot of teams don't like the current revenue sharing, not because it's a bad concept, just that it's application is flawed. For example, teams don't have to share luxury seat sales, or merchandise sales. In the same way teams found ways to circumvent salary cap room through signing bonuses at the beginning of the salary cap era, teams are finding ways to beat revenue sharing as well. It also hurts some teams because the salary cap is based off the same revenue. Basically, teams like the Cowboys feel like they are a marketing powerhouse, and they're getting the shaft because they feel like they are towing the line for the rest of the league, while teams like the steelers feel like the Cowboys make more profits solely because of geographic location, and them building a new stadium will only further swell the salary cap.
Just because there could be no cap for a year doesn't mean that there won't be revenue sharing.
That just goes to prove my point...
As long as the CBA is in force, there is revenue sharing. Without any CBA in force, there is no NFL football at all. The uncapped years would take place before the CBA expires.
Not up on current events???
The league doesn't necessarily need the CBA, but it would be a good idea to keep it around for the sake of competitiveness.
Here's a pretty good article on this subject...
Beware NFL Fans: If the owners opt out of the current CBA there will be major changes in the current salary cap and that's BAD!
Separate names with a comma.