Ugh - WSJ reporting Steelers being secretly shopped.

Yes, last I knew. Can't own a team in a different league unless it's in the same city -- Buffalo Sabres owner Tom Golisano could buy the Bills, but Jeremy Jacobs would have to sell the Boston Bruins to do the same.

 

But, obviously, that only applies to North America teams since NFL owners also control EPL squads.

 

Actually, it applies only to teams in other NFL markets. Sorry, I should have clarified that earlier. Here's the rule:

"No person who owns a majority interest in, or has direct or indirect operating control of an NFL member club, may own or acquire any interest in a club in another major team sport (baseball, basketball, hockey), except for a club located in: a.) his/her NFL club's home city, or b.) a non-NFL city that is not a potential NFL city."

 

I'll admit I haven't read much about this, don't know much about Drunkenmiller, and generally, don't give a rat's ass about the Steelers, but is it possible the Rooney's are getting out because they fear the NFL labor strife and possible capless years to come?

Seems to me owners that fit the profile the Rooney family has might be wanting to sell given how the financial landscape might change.

 

Bubbler, the reason for the move is basically because the Steelers needed to comply with NFL gambling rules:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08191/895718-66.stm

 

Interesting.

It still begs the question ... how many NFL owners will be able to hack it if the NFL financial system is turned on its head? Who are the have's and have not's?

 

Honestly, I think they all have.

The amount of money generated by an NFL team is staggering. The player salaries could top $150 mil a year per team, and I do not think they would flinch.

If a team is worth 1 billion, it has to be generating revenue close to 200 mil a year. There is some formula when figuring out the value of a franchise (food place, lawn company, etc...) and it is all based on revenue.

Of course I am guessing.

 

Which is pretty funny given the origins of the franchise.

Bubbler, I really don't think the Rooneys would bail just yet over financial concerns, at least not as long as Dan Rooney is still around. I just can't see them giving up without even waiting to see how the potential labor strife is going to work out, especially given the league's successful history in past disagreements.

And as 93Devil pointed out, I don't think any of the NFL franchises are hurting. This isn't baseball. The NFL's revenue-sharing system does a hell of a lot more for the smaller markets than MLB's does.

 

OOP, walk away from the baseball thing.

I disagree that revenue-sharing is an end-all, be-all. There are a handful of owners, in the current financial system, that struggle just to pay signing bonuses for players. When they have to start competing against the Joneses and Snyder's without a cap just to sign players, they're fucked.

My point is that it would be unchartered waters. The NFL has never had free agency as it currently exists (forget that Plan B shit) without a cap.

I seem to recall much knashing of teeth in the early 90s when it was touch-and-go whether the cap would be put into place from teams like the Bengals, Packers, Colts, Steelers, etc., who felt they'd be priced into irrelevence. Remember too that owners like Jones were NOT in favor of the cap at the time for just that reason. The ownership power base that got the cap pushed through back then (Mara in particular) is gone.

Revenue-sharing helps, but it doesn't help THAT much when it comes to paying 60-odd salaries. I think a lot of teams would be hurting in a totally open system.

 

If an NFL player played at a high level when they were 31-34 then free agency would hurt.

But by their 30s, most players have started sliding fast.

How many free agents have the Steelers let go that were worth the money someone else paid for them? Joey Porter anyone?

 

How do you know that's how the system will work? No one knows.

In a capless, open free agency system, I can totally see agents negotiating short-term deals out of the draft (if it exists, remember, the draft itself is in danger of being wiped out) to maximize a player's free agent value during his peak years.

And if there's no draft? The alleged small-big market divide in baseball will be laughable in comparison.

 

There will always be a draft. Because if there isn't one, Mel Kiper's hair will cease to exist.