drew4008

"...Tuesday's owner meetings in Dallas between low- and high-revenue clubs. Sources told Mortensen that New England Patriots owner Bob Kraft has emerged as the most vocal high-revenue franchise that is a strong dissenter to a new revenue sharing model."

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Pats726

No details as to why??? It isn't like the Patriots use cash over cap as much as other clubs...so??? One wonders what is bad about this model?? My thinking is the Patriots get the shaft again....

drew4008

A related article:

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/30/Income_1.html

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

sarge

Considering the lower revenue teams want a percentage of Krafts local revenue calculated before Kraft deducts his debt payment for the stadium he personally financed without tax payer dollars, it's a wonder he hasn't started going postal!

Aldogg

Curran's article in yesterday's ProJo probably is the best explaination. Basically, when Kraft brought the team, we were 28th in revenue (out of 28 teams at the time) and Kraft went out, paid for his own stadium, made moves like getting Bledsoe and Parcells when he came into ownership to give the Pats some credibility and did other things to make the team the #2 revenue maker in the league behind the Redskins, and he feels other owners should get off thier asses and instead of looking for a hand out, should go out and earn thier keep by using everything in thier markets to make money.

Bill's Girl

I hate that people are making Bob Kraft out to be the bad guy here! If not for him we would not have a football team! Someone said over the weekend that these low revenue need to get of their lazy a$$es and EARN thier own money!!! I agree with that wholeheartedly!

__________________
As we like to say in New England, it's not collecting talent, it's building a team. -Bill Belichick

PATSNUTme

Well I just finished listening to NEST on this. They seem to give the impression that Kraft is holding up the whole thing.

Also, the a-hole Gresh thinks that Kraft should fold and give the players whatever they want.

Willie55

It can't be all Kraft. All they need is 24 votes for the thing to pass. It's not like it has to be unanimous for the agreement to go through.

__________________
Great teams aren't always great. They are just great when they have to be. - NFL Films Narrator


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Weishuhn

No surprise from Gresh, he's a wannabe player who wasn't good enough, so he always sides with them. I support Kraft. Without special set-asides or provisions for owners who built their own stadiums, didn't fatten up on PSL's, etc, he's going to get raped.

As an example, why should he have to share his naming rights revenue when he risked his own finances to build the stadium, when teams like Cincinnatti won't be kicking in because the government that built the stadium retains the naming rights. In this example, the Bengals get the taxpayers to build them a stadium, and then get to skim off the Patriots naming rights money.

I understand that the players just want their cut, leave the details to the owners to work out amongst themselves, but it is too complicated to include all revenue because some teams control those revenues and some don't. Also, those who claim that market size and geography shouldn't create inequities in revenue streams fail to recognize one simple fact, the cost of acquiring a franchise varies along these factors. If they want to level the field revenue-wise, they should figure out the average value of all franchises and reimburse those who are above the average, and dock those below the average that amount from the revenue sharing. Unless Tagliabue fashions himself as the next Lenin, he can't expect the more valuable franchises to accept the same profits as the less valuable ones.

MoLewisrocks

Oddly there is no new revenue sharing model incorporated in this deal - just a cap on cash over a cap already too high for any of the have nots to vote for it. Nor according to the NFL has revenue sharing been discussed in any of the meetings in the last week.

I really think two totally divergent thoughts Mort cobbled into one statement have resulted in Kraft somehow being responsible if the have nots vote against a deal essentially the same as the one all 32 of them voted against in 57 minutes last week.

Kraft is opposed to a new revenue sharing model that shares all of TGR equally amongst 32 NFL franchises without regard for expenses or debt service or effort. Duh....he's been saying that for a year now. I guess somebody finally heard him. He's also said that there is no need for the owners to settle their differences prior to signing an agreement with the union - but I guess that presumed the union would offer a rational proposal for determining their percentage share of a far bigger pie.