<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.7" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Question about the NFL&#8217;s economics</title>
	<link>http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/question-about-the-nfls-economics/</link>
	<description>People don't think it be like it is, but it do.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 09:02:37 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Cliffy</title>
		<link>http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/question-about-the-nfls-economics/#comment-1838</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:00:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/question-about-the-nfls-economics/#comment-1838</guid>
					<description>I disagree - to an extent.  Now, I do agree with part (b) - as my understanding is those revenues are outside the purview of the CBA's revenue-sharing formula.  However, I don't see why or how the owners cries of poverty (due to stadia investment) would impact CBA discussions - as I would hope the players would focus on the revenues, regardless of the debt obligations of individual owners/franchises.  Indeed, if the players (or more accurately, their reps) are smart, they will insist (or have insisted) that the owners start including those "incremental" revenues in the "formula".

As we've discussed separately, I'm in the camp that firmly believes we have two battles being waged in the current "CBA unrest" situation in the NFL.  The first is obvious, and ubiquitous: owners vs. players.  The second may be less obvious, but is quite prevalent: owners vs. owners.  Regardless of how you look at it, on whole or take the two dynamics separately, you have billionaires arguing with millionaires (or other billionaires)... and it's annoying, as a fan.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I disagree - to an extent.  Now, I do agree with part (b) - as my understanding is those revenues are outside the purview of the CBA&#8217;s revenue-sharing formula.  However, I don&#8217;t see why or how the owners cries of poverty (due to stadia investment) would impact CBA discussions - as I would hope the players would focus on the revenues, regardless of the debt obligations of individual owners/franchises.  Indeed, if the players (or more accurately, their reps) are smart, they will insist (or have insisted) that the owners start including those &#8220;incremental&#8221; revenues in the &#8220;formula&#8221;.</p>
<p>As we&#8217;ve discussed separately, I&#8217;m in the camp that firmly believes we have two battles being waged in the current &#8220;CBA unrest&#8221; situation in the NFL.  The first is obvious, and ubiquitous: owners vs. players.  The second may be less obvious, but is quite prevalent: owners vs. owners.  Regardless of how you look at it, on whole or take the two dynamics separately, you have billionaires arguing with millionaires (or other billionaires)&#8230; and it&#8217;s annoying, as a fan.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
