buffaloaggie Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Supreme Court ruling against the NFL I'm thinking teams will celebrate the individual marketing deals. Jerry Jones' dream has come true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hossage Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 This is a tough decision, because although an incentive exists for cooperation, it is hard to prove they would be cooperating instead on pursuing their individual interests if they had the chance to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Why would the Bills be happy? This is bad for them. They're hardly a top earner in the apparel department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Why would the Bills be happy? This is bad for them. They're hardly a top earner in the apparel department. But they aren't the bottom either. In fact the Bills do reasonably well in merch sales considering their market size and recent lack of success. There is a significant Bills Nation out there. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 This is awful for the owners. If they were considered one entity, then it would be impossible for the union to claim collusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Why would the Bills be happy? This is bad for them. They're hardly a top earner in the apparel department. lol!, that is their own fault!, the current uni's are a laughingstock.. go back to tradition, it sells!, just ask green bay, dallas, giants, teams with the classic look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveRalph Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 This ruling is great news for sports in general. Giving sports leagues above-the-law treatment from anti-trust legislation would be bad, bad news for players, and ultimately fans. It's a complex issue with many layers, but I believe the decision was correct. Unanimous, 9-0 from the Supreme Court, by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yungmack Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Apropos of very little, Chief Justice Roberts was born in Buffalo, lived in Hamburg and remains a Bills fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lv-Bills Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 But they aren't the bottom either. In fact the Bills do reasonably well in merch sales considering their market size and recent lack of success. There is a significant Bills Nation out there. PTR Link? I can't imagine the Bills aren't in the bottom five in merchandise. Market size has nothing to do with it. And if it wasn't for TO, I bet we would have been dead last a year ago. We have zero marketable players that any NFL fan would want outside of being a Bills fan. Hell, most of us don't even know who to buy if we feel like purchasing one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Figure it's probably bad news for the Chinese knock-off makers. Today they have to copy 1 base RBK for style, tags, and packaging, then customize per team/player. Now they may have to make base styles, tags, and packaging for RBK/Nike etc. So my $200 item from the Bills store may now cost me $25 instead of $20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Apropos of very little, Chief Justice Roberts was born in Buffalo, lived in Hamburg and remains a Bills fan. that can only help, goodell being from the jamestown area originally, that is two , HUGE, actual power brokers with WNY roots. i think it may help in preventing a quick grab of the bills and relocating them .i do not care about ethics,rules , etc, I WANT THE BILLS TO REMAIN IN THE BUFFALO AREA , and having these two on our side helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Apropos of very little, Chief Justice Roberts was born in Buffalo, lived in Hamburg and remains a Bills fan. Can we appeal SB 25? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Link? I can't imagine the Bills aren't in the bottom five in merchandise. Market size has nothing to do with it. And if it wasn't for TO, I bet we would have been dead last a year ago. We have zero marketable players that any NFL fan would want outside of being a Bills fan. Hell, most of us don't even know who to buy if we feel like purchasing one. The NFL only releases the top 10 teams in terms of jersey sales so it would be very difficult to find an definitive source. Reebok's Vice President Dan White has quoted the Bills as placing specifically in 15th in 2006 and I'd imagine that's about where they stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Wait, I thought the owners had this victory "sewn" up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Wait, I thought the owners had this victory "sewn" up? Check must have bounced... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lv-Bills Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 The NFL only releases the top 10 teams in terms of jersey sales so it would be very difficult to find an definitive source. Reebok's Vice President Dan White has quoted the Bills as placing specifically in 15th in 2006 and I'd imagine that's about where they stay. I would bet anything there's no way the Bills get out of the bottom five. I've been looking all over and can't find anything other than the top 10 either. Owens did do very well last year though, consistently in the top 15 in sales with his Bills jersey. With him gone, and the Bills not really having anyone else of interest, and no uniform changes this year, there's no way they aren't near or at the bottom this year. I bet we don't have a top 50 outside of Owens. Maybe 100. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 I would bet anything there's no way the Bills get out of the bottom five. I've been looking all over and can't find anything other than the top 10 either. Owens did do very well last year though, consistently in the top 15 in sales with his Bills jersey. With him gone, and the Bills not really having anyone else of interest, and no uniform changes this year, there's no way they aren't near or at the bottom this year. I bet we don't have a top 50 outside of Owens. Maybe 100. There was a surprising showing of Bills' fans here in Memphis Tn. Something like 25k fans showed up for the Titans/Buffalo game. The majority were Buffalo fans. Of course that was years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 This is very bad news for small market teams. While the players may aplaud the short term victory, long trem they will end up being suckers. If this ruling leads to the follow on effect (which it will) of the larger market owners striking their own lucrative deals, they will squeeze out the smaller markets from free agency and you will turn NFL into MLB. Although NFL owners will still be doing ok with the giant TV contract, the divide between the owners will widen and the league will be less competitive. The players are idiot sif they think this is good for them. This decision is good for the stars. It stinks for the average Joes, who make up the majority of the roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Gun Special Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 This is very bad news for small market teams. While the players may aplaud the short term victory, long trem they will end up being suckers. If this ruling leads to the follow on effect (which it will) of the larger market owners striking their own lucrative deals, they will squeeze out the smaller markets from free agency and you will turn NFL into MLB. Although NFL owners will still be doing ok with the giant TV contract, the divide between the owners will widen and the league will be less competitive. The players are idiot sif they think this is good for them. This decision is good for the stars. It stinks for the average Joes, who make up the majority of the roster. Why? they would still be subject to the salary cap. Teams keep $$ from merchandise sales at their home stadium as it is now. Nothing in the ruling says apparel bought on NFL.com or otherwise cant be shared by the league as it is now. This isnt going to have a huge affect from the merchandise side of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Why? they would still be subject to the salary cap. Teams keep $$ from merchandise sales at their home stadium as it is now. Nothing in the ruling says apparel bought on NFL.com or otherwise cant be shared by the league as it is now. This isnt going to have a huge affect from the merchandise side of things. Probably because the merchandise companies will court teams like the Cowboys much more than the Bills. For example, do you think that Brandon will be able to strike the same deal with Reebok that Jones will be able to get for the Cowboys? Now not only do the big market teams get to sell more stuff, they will get that stuff at a lower cost as well. Plus I suspect it opens the door to no profit sharing which is what Jones has been pushing for as well. I can think of no good that can come from this for small market teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Probably because the merchandise companies will court teams like the Cowboys much more than the Bills.For example, do you think that Brandon will be able to strike the same deal with Reebok that Jones will be able to get for the Cowboys? Now not only do the big market teams get to sell more stuff, they will get that stuff at a lower cost as well. Plus I suspect it opens the door to no profit sharing which is what Jones has been pushing for as well. I can think of no good that can come from this for small market teams. Yup. It will simply mean a lot more money for the big market teams. So even with a salary cap in place, by having more cash available to pay players, the big teams will always be in a position to sign marquee players. Doesn't mean they'll be consistent winner, but they'll be in a better position than the poorer teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 IMO, this doesn't stop NFL teams from sharing the revenue from the sales just that each team can negotiate their own contracts. The new CBA will address this issue, I'm sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Yup. It will simply mean a lot more money for the big market teams. So even with a salary cap in place, by having more cash available to pay players, the big teams will always be in a position to sign marquee players. Doesn't mean they'll be consistent winner, but they'll be in a better position than the poorer teams. That is what I am taking from it. This is not good news for the players or the fans of small market teams. With more money available for the big market teams, they will be able to sustain a consistent and high percentage of profit and be able to make moves in free agency. Lord knows what this will do to the CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveRalph Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Yup. It will simply mean a lot more money for the big market teams. So even with a salary cap in place, by having more cash available to pay players, the big teams will always be in a position to sign marquee players. Doesn't mean they'll be consistent winner, but they'll be in a better position than the poorer teams. So basically, it will be exactly as it is now? The Redskins and Cowboys and Giants can offer the largest signing bonuses to free agents, today, because of their extensive cash flow. Like you said, it still doesn't guarantee anything. There is NO WAY this is a bad decision. You think that allowing the NFL free reign to determine player salaries, free agency, ticket prices, jersey prices, etc. etc. etc. and on and on, with no threat of anti-trust legislation, is a good thing? You think basically rendering the Players Union powerless is a good thing? The NFL is a dirty greed machine. Leaving them with unchecked power would be bad news. And it would set precedent for every other sports league. They would be money whores and commercialized to an extent that would make today's sporting events seem pure. Trust me, I have read extensively on this issue, and while it may be good news for Jerry Jones, it's also good news for Bills fans who don't want to pay $200 per ticket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 You wonder when the majority of owners will tell Jones, Snyder, and Kraft to go fig themselves after their debacles with the last CBA and now this. I seriously hope they're not letting these chumps negotiate the next CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 This ruling is great news for sports in general. Giving sports leagues above-the-law treatment from anti-trust legislation would be bad, bad news for players, and ultimately fans. It's a complex issue with many layers, but I believe the decision was correct. Unanimous, 9-0 from the Supreme Court, by the way. Exactly! Awesome ruling! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 BTW, does anyone know where that thread talking about this (at the time upcoming) case from several months went? I searched for it but couldn't find it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 So basically, it will be exactly as it is now? The Redskins and Cowboys and Giants can offer the largest signing bonuses to free agents, today, because of their extensive cash flow. Like you said, it still doesn't guarantee anything. There is NO WAY this is a bad decision. You think that allowing the NFL free reign to determine player salaries, free agency, ticket prices, jersey prices, etc. etc. etc. and on and on, with no threat of anti-trust legislation, is a good thing? You think basically rendering the Players Union powerless is a good thing? The NFL is a dirty greed machine. Leaving them with unchecked power would be bad news. And it would set precedent for every other sports league. They would be money whores and commercialized to an extent that would make today's sporting events seem pure. Trust me, I have read extensively on this issue, and while it may be good news for Jerry Jones, it's also good news for Bills fans who don't want to pay $200 per ticket. Way to understand the underlying factors in this one. Riddle me this Batman, do you think that a team in Buffalo is going to be a able to compete in a league where each team gets the power to freely negotiate with players, without a constraint imposed by the league? At least you recognize that it's good news for Jerry Jones. It's also great news for Snyder, NYC team owners and anyone who bought into the league recently. But don't worry, you won't have to shell out $200 to watch an inferior product, because Bills will not survive that environment. Maybe you can also explain how over the last 40 years the greedy, unchecked NFL (as a unified league) has been able to destroy every other professional sport in popularity, attendance, ratings, merchandising in a way that has benefited owners, players & fans alike? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 BTW, does anyone know where that thread talking about this (at the time upcoming) case from several months went? I searched for it but couldn't find it. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?...l=supreme+court Or did you mean this one? http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?...l=supreme+court Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Linky Contracts Hang In Balance As NFL Case Kicks Off by Nina Totenberg January 13, 2010 None of the gamegoers NPR interviewed knew about Reebok's exclusive deal with the NFL, but everyone in the sports business knows. While few experts expect a broad ruling in favor of the NFL, if the league is declared a single entity, that could allow it to set higher prices for tickets, concessions, parking at games and even fees to join fantasy football leagues. Linky Saints' quarterback Drew Brees weighs in on NFL's Supreme Court case By Drew Brees Sunday, January 10, 2010 At the moment, the NFL Players Association and team owners are negotiating over a new collective bargaining agreement, and the threat of a lockout looms over the 2011 season. Historically, players have made significant gains, such as free agency, by challenging the NFL on antitrust grounds. If the Supreme Court rules that the league's 32 organizations constitute a single entity that is exempt from antitrust laws, players will lose this important leverage. Well there ya go. That is probably the underlying reason the NFL has been dragging it's feet on the new CBA. Now that the Supremes have ruled against them some significant progress may be made on the CBA front, hopefully. BTW, does anyone know how many cases in SC history have been decided 9-0? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 The NFL is a dirty greed machine. Leaving them with unchecked power would be bad news justice stevens, in his opinion, wrote that the NFL consists of 32 profit maximizing enterprises, not a single enterprise. As you note, this has implications for free agency, tv contracts, merchandising and possibly salary caps but I can't see how these bode well for small market teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveRalph Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Way to understand the underlying factors in this one. Riddle me this Batman, do you think that a team in Buffalo is going to be a able to compete in a league where each team gets the power to freely negotiate with players, without a constraint imposed by the league? At least you recognize that it's good news for Jerry Jones. It's also great news for Snyder, NYC team owners and anyone who bought into the league recently. But don't worry, you won't have to shell out $200 to watch an inferior product, because Bills will not survive that environment. Maybe you can also explain how over the last 40 years the greedy, unchecked NFL (as a unified league) has been able to destroy every other professional sport in popularity, attendance, ratings, merchandising in a way that has benefited owners, players & fans alike? The NFL is a perfect television sport, and television has exploded over the last 40 years. That's how the league has been able to destroy every other professional sport in popularity. Plus it's BY FAR the shortest schedule so each game means more. That's why ratings and attendance are high. It doesn't mean the NFL isn't greedy. You're criticizing me for not understanding the underlying issues. I think you are being quite short-sighted here. How is an all-controlling sports league a good thing (outside of the MLS?) What would stop the NFL from moving Buffalo to LA for "profit maximization?" What would stop the NFL from steering marquee free agents to it's marquee teams (a la MLS sending Landon Donovan and David Beckham to Los Angeles?) What would stop the NFL from looking at stubhub and seeing that some tickets to games are going for $500, and just setting the prices there, or opening their own auction website? What would stop the NFL from raising the prices of jerseys and t-shirts? What would stop the NFL from setting player salaries lower and lower, again for profit maximization? How could any issue ever get voted on, or appealed? Decisions would be made in an NFL board room, with no explanation or recourse. And what would stop every other sports league from following suit? I realize you're looking at this issue from the angle of a Bills fan. It does benefit the big market teams. But I think you're missing an important chunk of the data if you think that it hurts the Bills. The majority of the league (say 24 out of 32 teams) are already at a competitive disadvantage when compared to the 6 or 8 mega-rich teams and stadiums. The league seems to be working out pretty well. Just assuming that the NFL with total control would bring those mega-profit teams back to the pack is crazy and naive. justice stevens, in his opinion, wrote that the NFL consists of 32 profit maximizing enterprises, not a single enterprise. As you note, this has implications for free agency, tv contracts, merchandising and possibly salary caps but I can't see how these bode well for small market teams. It will still be a salary cap league (I'm assuming.) The Bills will not reap the profits that teams like Dallas and Washington will, but they don't now, and neither do Seattle, Oakland, Tampa, KC, and 80% of the rest of the league. And they will have every chance to remain competitive on the field. And they will still make a profit. Just not $200 million profit. They haven't sucked because they're small market. They've sucked because of personell decisions. Are Indianapolis and New Orleans reaping their big market competetive advantage??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?...l=supreme+court Yeah, that's the one. Thanks. Or did you mean this one? http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?...l=supreme+court Nice try, sucka! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Why? they would still be subject to the salary cap. Teams keep $$ from merchandise sales at their home stadium as it is now. Nothing in the ruling says apparel bought on NFL.com or otherwise cant be shared by the league as it is now. This isnt going to have a huge affect from the merchandise side of things. This is a somewhat of a blow to the League. If they would have won, there would never again have been a need for a CBA. But nothing else has changed----the union is still at a disadvantage. What's to prevent JJ or anyone else from using this decision to decide who his "official Cowboys merchandiser" for gear, unis, soda, beer, etc will be? And why should he now share with the league anything he gets from a non-NFL offcial sponsor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 You wonder when the majority of owners will tell Jones, Snyder, and Kraft to go fig themselves after their debacles with the last CBA and now this. I seriously hope they're not letting these chumps negotiate the next CBA. Jones and Snyder didn't "negotiate" the last CBA. Jones was actually a holdout who had to be convinced by several other owners to approve.You really should go back and read about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Jones and Snyder didn't "negotiate" the last CBA. Jones was actually a holdout who had to be convinced by several other owners to approve.You really should go back and read about it. Give me a link. Sorry if I don't trust your word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan72 Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 The NFL is a perfect television sport, and television has exploded over the last 40 years. That's how the league has been able to destroy every other professional sport in popularity. Plus it's BY FAR the shortest schedule so each game means more. That's why ratings and attendance are high. It doesn't mean the NFL isn't greedy. Are we sure this ruling won't, sooner or later, lead to teams getting their own TV contracts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Are we sure this ruling won't, sooner or later, lead to teams getting their own TV contracts? it's conceivable that someone like comcast could sue to negotiate with individual teams to broadcast games outside of the nfl agreement with direct tv. I'm no lawyer, but it seems reasonable that statements such as justice steven's would support this argument. so, no I don't think were sure at all. if the supreme court had gone the other way, we would be sure that it wouldn't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Are we sure this ruling won't, sooner or later, lead to teams getting their own TV contracts? That really wouldn't make much sense. However I can see people like Jones asking for a bigger slice of that pie than the small market teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Give me a link. Sorry if I don't trust your word. Really? Couldn't find anything on the 2006 CBA? It was in a lot of the newspapers and on a lot of the sports shows. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2360258 http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nf...-08-labor_x.htm http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/stor...&id=2359623 Surprised you didn't come across it when you found the reference for the "extra hundreds of billions of dollars" the owners spent as a result of that CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts