Robert Kraft joins the NFL and asks federal court to dismiss Pats Fans lawsuit over lost draft pick

mosi's man said:

I get that. Everything you say is true. It doesn't change the reality that, in my opinion, it sucks when the goal of maximizing profit becomes the sole driving force for business decisions either in or out of sport. The city of St. Louis, by reasonable estimates, supported the Rams to the tune of about 500 million tax payer dollars from 1992 to the present. The fan base (considered the best in baseball with the Cardinals the among the most lucrative teams in baseball) was excellent. The value of the franchise, as noted above, doubled in five years above and beyond the yearly profits garnered. Yet that still wasn't enough. When I hear the NFL talk about "family" nevermind "community" I want to vomit.

Click to expand...

It sucks when teams move, no doubt.

But to use the "value " of the franchise as a reason they should have stayed, is a number without context (Or any use for the owner). The value has two major components the current revenue stream (profits=revenue-costs) and the POTENTIAL revenue stream. And the potential has two different numbers one in StL and one in LA. And if the franchise were Dallas, that potential in another city would be negligible. But a team in StL, i bet you that potential revenue calculation already had LA or London, or somewhere other than misery factored into it. If he wanted to sell, the primary motivation for any buyer offering a higher # would be to move the team.

And the value goes up based on all league values or what all the teams are doing and not necessarily what the rams are doing. Value may even go up in SPITE of Rams actions.

Plus the owner only gets that $s from the value IF HE SELLS. if he doesnt want to, hi value sounds nice but does nothing for him to meet operating expenses.

Anyway, not saying its best/righteous, but i understand the economics of why it is what it is.

Kraft doesn't want the draft picks back. He knows that the Pats are too strong for the rest of the NFL and he has the same goal as his bum chum Fraudger... parity.

I view this a lot like I view players that leave for better contracts.

When it's someone like Shawn Jefferson who left NE to get a better deal and owned it and said "hey, they just gave me a better offer and I had to take it" I have zero problems.

When it's someone like Clemens who tells everyone he wants to leave the Sox to play for a winning team and then signs for big money with a crappy team, different story.

For me, the problem isn't owners trying to maximize their income/franchise values. It's when they are lying hypocritical weasels about it ("family", "we love the fans", etc.)

Gumby said:

It sucks when teams move, no doubt.

But to use the "value " of the franchise as a reason they should have stayed, is a number without context (Or any use for the owner). The value has two major components the current revenue stream (profits=revenue-costs) and the POTENTIAL revenue stream. And the potential has two different numbers one in StL and one in LA. And if the franchise were Dallas, that potential in another city would be negligible. But a team in StL, i bet you that potential revenue calculation already had LA or London, or somewhere other than misery factored into it. If he wanted to sell, the primary motivation for any buyer offering a higher # would be to move the team.

And the value goes up based on all league values or what all the teams are doing and not necessarily what the rams are doing. Value may even go up in SPITE of Rams actions.

Plus the owner only gets that $s from the value IF HE SELLS. if he doesnt want to, hi value sounds nice but does nothing for him to meet operating expenses.

Anyway, not saying its best/righteous, but i understand the economics of why it is what it is.

Click to expand...

Again, everything you say is true. But let's not suggest that the Rams had any difficulty whatsoever meeting operating expenses or expenses in general. They garnered a profit every year in St. Louis and had the opportunity to get a new stadium built (with over 300 million of public money) with the chance of even greater profits had they stayed. Would those profits be equal to the profits earned by moving to L.A.? No, but let's not suggest that they weren't going to do exceedingly well. They were. Again, this was about a billionaire maximizing profit on an asset, not trying to stay afloat. Kroenke bought the land in L.A. in 2014. By 2016 he was long gone. This was about money and nothing else. If, as a Pats fan, I don't think of my "community" as including other football fans like those rooting for the Rams, then no one should cry for us if/when our team gets screwed. See the Saints/Bountygate. Why should they feel any communal feelings for the Pats now that we were screwed?

robertweathers said:

I'm looking at it from a net income pov

Click to expand...

Oh....ok

Good thing you cleared that up

IllegalContact said:

Oh....ok

Good thing you cleared that up

Click to expand...

A good thing?? Lol. You kill me.

QuantumMechanic said:

I view this a lot like I view players that leave for better contracts.

When it's someone like Shawn Jefferson who left NE to get a better deal and owned it and said "hey, they just gave me a better offer and I had to take it" I have zero problems.

When it's someone like Clemens who tells everyone he wants to leave the Sox to play for a winning team and then signs for big money with a crappy team, different story.

For me, the problem isn't owners trying to maximize their income/franchise values. It's when they are lying hypocritical weasels about it ("family", "we love the fans", etc.)

Click to expand...

Yeah, I'll never begrudge a player maximizing his earning potential while he can. If he says he needed that extra $5M to 'feed his family', though... yeah, that'll leave a bad impression.

mosi's man said:

...When I hear the NFL talk about "family" nevermind "community" I want to vomit.

Click to expand...

QuantumMechanic said:

...It's when they are lying hypocritical weasels about it ("family", "we love the fans", etc.)

Click to expand...

You guys aren't being fair. The NFL is all about family.

The Kraft family
The Jones family
The Mara family
The Rooney family
etc...

Guys, let's be honest with ourselves here and cut the crap. Those of us who actually go to the stadium to support the players know it's wayyyyyy too expensive.

$179 for end zone seats???

$12 beers??

$50 parking??

Really Bob???

Eff you, you greedy little Jerk!

If you continue like this mosi's man, I won't have any posting history at all here, just an ongoing series of "I agree"s, "Like"s and "Winners"s.

I know I'm not an American and have been living in the developing world for a long time so have a different viewpoint that some might find uncomfortably close to socialist, but does anyone there ever ask the question "how much is enough?" when it comes to money? Why does someone who has more money than he could ever possibly spend need to maximize his franchise value? So he can have even more money that he could never spend? And are small numbers of people accumulating increasing amounts of wealth that is hoarded a good thing for society economically (I think we know it's not so good socially, right?)? Why does the NFL get all these special dispensations like being allowed to draft players that other businesses don't get and yet still have the freedom to screw over their captive fans whenever they feel like it? Is this "the American Way" that's supposed to be something great? Sorry for being somewhat political, I just don't get it. And don't get me wrong, I love the USA and have greatly enjoyed my time there. I just see it as being more advanced than other countries in terms of political oligarchy when it was kind of founded on the opposite premise.

I was so ready to join the Kraft hatewagon based on the original thread premise but that's now not really valid. But my dislike of the NFL is so rapidly approaching my tolerance levels I will be facing some serious internal contradictions soon. Not easy for us Marxist football fans.

SEA_Pat said:

If you continue like this mosi's man, I won't have any posting history at all here, just an ongoing series of "I agree"s, "Like"s and "Winners"s.

I know I'm not an American and have been living in the developing world for a long time so have a different viewpoint that some might find uncomfortably close to socialist, but does anyone there ever ask the question "how much is enough?" when it comes to money?....I was so ready to join the Kraft hatewagon based on the original thread premise but that's now not really valid. But my dislike of the NFL is so rapidly approaching my tolerance levels I will be facing some serious internal contradictions soon. Not easy for us Marxist football fans.

Click to expand...

The hypocrisy, excesses, and elitism of the NFL ownership affects people across the entire political spectrum in a similar manner. We come up with different rationalizations for remaining fans, but disgust is pretty universal.

I'm frustrated with my own relationship with the NFL and the Pats. Would love to give it up, but apparently love hanging around with it more.

the best analogy:



The Pats are my sausage.....

SEA_Pat said:

Why does the NFL get all these special dispensations like being allowed to draft players that other businesses don't get

Click to expand...

All the major pro sports leagues in the US have drafts.

And each league has a draft because each league has negotiated with the relevant players' union and the players' union agreed to the draft. Absent that agreement, the draft would be illegal.

QuantumMechanic said:

All the major pro sports leagues in the US have drafts.

And each league has a draft because each league has negotiated with the relevant players' union and the players' union agreed to the draft. Absent that agreement, the draft would be illegal.

Click to expand...

Interesting. If Brady can show in the courts that he committed no offense, and the NFL* has punished the Pats unfairly, then shouldn't it be an offense against the CBA to deprive the Pats of draft picks?

Such a cringe fest in this thread

Almost as bad as fans trying to sue the NFL

CRINGE

QuantumMechanic said:

All the major pro sports leagues in the US have drafts.

And each league has a draft because each league has negotiated with the relevant players' union and the players' union agreed to the draft. Absent that agreement, the draft would be illegal.

Click to expand...

Doesn't it have also have to do with the anti trust exemption?

mosi's man said:

the best analogy:



The Pats are my sausage.....

Click to expand...

One of my favorite John Oliver episodes ever - laughed so hard I almost passed out -

I've been trying to get him to look at the NFL for quite awhile now

The FBI of course got involved because we're the country least hooked into the FIFA feeding trough

My one hope about games in London is that Scotland Yard might choose to look into whether he games there are effectively being fixed

Tuck said:

Doesn't it have also have to do with the anti trust exemption?

Click to expand...

The CBA itself is the relevant anti-trust exemption with respect to the draft and salary cap. That's why they would be illegal if the union hadn't agreed to them.

Basically, many things that would be anti-trust violations are allowed if management and the union agree to allow them.

IllegalContact said:

this is such a stupid statement

Click to expand...

hmm, the lap dogs lap dog speaks.

reflexblue said:

hmm, the lap dogs lap dog speaks.

Click to expand...

only to be eclipsed by something even more stupid brought to you by FOTM