NFP: So what are we fighting about again?

[bucky]

The New Yorker piece is, in fact, an opinion piece. You don't need to agree, but I don't think you can just write off the opinion of a financial journalist of Surowiecki's pedigree because he's not a "football guy."

Suffice it to say this is not one of his finest pieces. While his general premise - that owners are rich and make lots of money - is correct, all his examples and reasoning is very faulty.

Players not being able to "choose" where they live is a falsehood. In any industry, if you choose to pursue a career that can potentially make you set for life, you will probably have to move for a job.

The soccer comparison is also totally off base. Soccer's most profitable league - the English Premier league - makes the majority of their money from international TV revenue, leveraging the popularity of soccer all over the world and the fact that people in South America, Africa, and Asia want to see their national superstars playing in the best league in the word. However, the league has been dominated by 4 teams for many many years. And this model simply would not succeed in any US sport.

Finally, he fails to recognize that the NFL owners, through revenue sharing, lack of guaranteed contracts, and their marketing efforts, have managed to increase the revenue and popularity of the NFL to the point where everybody is much richer.

 

[Rob0729]

Suffice it to say this is not one of his finest pieces. While his general premise - that owners are rich and make lots of money - is correct, all his examples and reasoning is very faulty.

Players not being able to "choose" where they live is a falsehood. In any industry, if you choose to pursue a career that can potentially make you set for life, you will probably have to move for a job.

The soccer comparison is also totally off base. Soccer's most profitable league - the English Premier league - makes the majority of their money from international TV revenue, leveraging the popularity of soccer all over the world and the fact that people in South America, Africa, and Asia want to see their national superstars playing in the best league in the word. However, the league has been dominated by 4 teams for many many years. And this model simply would not succeed in any US sport.

Finally, he fails to recognize that the NFL owners, through revenue sharing, lack of guaranteed contracts, and their marketing efforts, have managed to increase the revenue and popularity of the NFL to the point where everybody is much richer.

I agree. Look at MLB. They are far closer to a free market system and that is why they went from the most popular sport in America just 15-20 years ago to a very regional sport. Every year, there are teams that know for a fact before opening day that they have no chance of making the playoffs. You have teams who's entire roster is less than the salary of the highest paid players in the league. Teams like the Sox and Yankees have massively unfair advantages because the league doesn't share all television revenues and teams like these make far more on their TV contracts than most of the teams in the league.

Eventhough MLB is not a pure free market system, they are the perfect rebuttle to this article why a free market system for the NFL does not benefit the owners or the players.