It is currently Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:23 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: CBA Conflict
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:29 pm 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 10:44 pm
Posts: 431
Location: Woodstock, Ga
What exactly does it mean? Is it going to make salary cap's like baseball?...Would that be good or bad for us, because Blank would be willing to spend a lot of money on us..like Steinbrenner and the Yankees....

_________________
"It's a privilege to wear this winged helmet," English says. "It's about Michigan today. Show everyone why this is the best program in the country!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 7:19 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 2:32 pm
Posts: 625
Location: South Jersey
I have no clue....I do know that the Seahawks owner Mr.Allen(first name excapes me) is the richest owner in the NFL, hell, he's one of the richest people in America.

I wonder if Blank is #2.....isint Jerry Jones loaded on oil money? Then theres Bob Kraft....

_________________
Yep


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:16 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25856
Location: North Carolina
I don't think Blank is that quite loaded. According to Forbes, the Falcons are one of the lowest valued teams. But what helps them in part is because Blank's willingness to spend and being in a large market like Atlanta, but frankly speaking, I don't believe Blank has seen a sizeable return on his $550 (or so) million investment when he bought the team. According to Forbes, the Falcons are 28th in revenue.

And to answer the question, if the CBA is not extended before March 1, 2007, then yes, the NFL will go the way of Major League Baseball and not have a salary cap. There will be little to no control on how much a team can spend, no consequences on whether a team spends $63 million or $163 million on player salaries.

The teams that would benefit the most by this situation are the high revenue teams that can be like the Yankees & Red Sox and afford high salaries because they make it back. According to Forbes list, the 5 teams that would probably be able to take advantage of this the most are:

Washington, Dallas, New England, Denver, and Philadelphia.

You can see the Forbes list here.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/30/Value_1.html

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:21 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 2:32 pm
Posts: 625
Location: South Jersey
I don't think Blank is that quite loaded.

Blank = Billionaire, Billionaire = Loaded, but hey, thats just me.

I don't believe Blank has seen a sizeable return on his $550 (or so) million investment

Thats because they way the league is set up Owners dont make a hug profit untill they sell the team. Look at Snyder with the Redskins. The Redskins are worth over 1 billion and Snyder is still is the red. He wont make money untill he sells it.

If we go the route of MLB then owners can make money because there would be no revenue sharing.

If Blank sold the team now his investment would give him over 100 million dollars in profit.

And Pude Im not folowing why Philly is on your list? They were below the league average in revenues last year.....We had a bigger revenue then the Eagles did.

_________________
Yep


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:56 pm 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 10:44 pm
Posts: 431
Location: Woodstock, Ga
Pudge wrote:
I don't think Blank is that quite loaded. According to Forbes, the Falcons are one of the lowest valued teams. But what helps them in part is because Blank's willingness to spend and being in a large market like Atlanta, but frankly speaking, I don't believe Blank has seen a sizeable return on his $550 (or so) million investment when he bought the team. According to Forbes, the Falcons are 28th in revenue.

And to answer the question, if the CBA is not extended before March 1, 2007, then yes, the NFL will go the way of Major League Baseball and not have a salary cap. There will be little to no control on how much a team can spend, no consequences on whether a team spends $63 million or $163 million on player salaries.

The teams that would benefit the most by this situation are the high revenue teams that can be like the Yankees & Red Sox and afford high salaries because they make it back. According to Forbes list, the 5 teams that would probably be able to take advantage of this the most are:

Washington, Dallas, New England, Denver, and Philadelphia.

You can see the Forbes list here.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/30/Value_1.html


See, Forbes is all the TOTAL Revenue...Washington has a big stadium, a ton of Skin Faithful's, and they sell a lot of gear. ATL just isnt a football city Powerhouse so to speak. I have always thought that it didnt matter how much revenue you had, it was the amt. of $$ the owner was willing to spend

_________________
"It's a privilege to wear this winged helmet," English says. "It's about Michigan today. Show everyone why this is the best program in the country!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:15 pm 
Offline
Cap Guru
Cap Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:28 am
Posts: 2077
Location: Macon, GA
Anything BUT extending the CBA will be very bad and would probably lead to a strike/lockout...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 2:11 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25856
Location: North Carolina
Truth be told vickis, Blank's total net worth is one of the highest among NFL owners, just at about $1.1 billion from the most recent figures I've seen. Allen is about $22 million. Jerry Jones, William Clay Ford, Bob McNair, Wayne Huizenga are all valued at about $1 billion as well.

I realize that profit is not something a lot of owners see substantially from year to year, but I think Blank has been consistently in the red since taking over the team in 2002, while other owners see profit if not annually, every year or so. Usually those owners considered "cheapskate" profit on an annual basis.

I was basing my Philly comment off Forbes totals, and according to Forbes the Eagles bring in $50 million more in revenue. As mickvick said, a lot that probably has to do with the stadium, as the Falcons I believe are one of the few teams in the NFL that don't own their own facility.

Willingness to spend is important as I pointed out in my first post, but in today's NFL you would probably have to player salaries well over $100 million, probably in the range of $120-150 million to compete with the so-called Yankees of the NFL i.e. the Redskins. And I'm just stating a willingness to spend that much money just on players over hte course of several years is going to bankrupt a team like us that doesn't get huge revenue. Blank would essentially be spending out of his pocket money.

And I don't care how committed you are to being a winner, Blank is a businessman first and foremost and there comes a point after maybe 2, 5, or 10 years where your willingness to burn your own money wihtout the desired results is going to drop.

NOw this would probably be a moot argument if the Falcons played somewhere besides the GA Dome, or they won a Super Bowl in the first few years of not having a cap.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 3:24 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4475
Location: Vancouver, WA
Pudge wrote:
Allen is about $22 million.


Try about $22 billion for Paul Allen :). Allen is hands down the richest sports owner in any league and the 3rd richest person world wide as of 2004 (I'm guessing he is down a bit since then). Mr. Blank as you said is roughly $1.1 billion and is about the 471st richest person world wide. I am reminded daily of Mr. Allen's networth since he owns the Trail Blazers.

Pudge wrote:
And I don't care how committed you are to being a winner, Blank is a businessman first and foremost and there comes a point after maybe 2, 5, or 10 years where your willingness to burn your own money wihtout the desired results is going to drop.


Like you said it all depends on how committed you are to winning it all. Blank came in and stated he wouldn't be happy unless Atlanta has a championship in football. I wouldn't be surprised if Blank spent like Steinbrenner does with the Yankees. Mr. Steinbrenner's networth is rough $2.7 billion or just over double Mr. Blank's. Granted Steinbrenner also has the largest media market in the United States to fuel his spending but Atlanta isn't that far behind. But I do think in a capless NFL the Falcons would be equivilent to the Braves in regard to consistency. Regular playoff contender but not a regular league champion.

Especially in our division you have three teams in relatively small markets. An uncapped league would turn Atlanta's three divisional rivals into the MLB equivilant of the Brewers, Nationals, and Twins.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 9:08 am 
Offline
Cap Guru
Cap Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:28 am
Posts: 2077
Location: Macon, GA
If the CBA isn't extended then it's going to be chaos. I would almost bet there would be a work stoppage (strike/lockout) if it were to reach that level. However, I really think both sides know it's in the best interest of everybody to get this thing done and will do so in the very near future...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 11:03 am 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro

Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 11:36 pm
Posts: 830
Location: Middle Georgia
I read somewhere that they might delay FA until the beginning of April so they could get something worked out. Has anyone else heard that?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:11 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4475
Location: Vancouver, WA
Last i heard is that they don't expect to have anything done during the winter meetings meaning that the March FA could be a dull one. I think their deadline to come to something at least this off-season is the Draft.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 9:16 pm 
Offline
Cap Guru
Cap Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:28 am
Posts: 2077
Location: Macon, GA
starley657 wrote:
I read somewhere that they might delay FA until the beginning of April so they could get something worked out. Has anyone else heard that?


I've heard that one as well...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to: