Pro football talk hates Buffalo - CBA and stadium funding

[The 9 Isles]

 

 

 

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/07/02/issue-of-stadium-credits-hovers-over-cba-talks/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Spinning it forward to cities that currently have stadium issues, the NFLPA would/should/could have influence over the stadium solution in Buffalo. What if, collectively, the NFL’s workforce deems it prudent to have its own money spent in a different market? A market where the return on the investment could be greater? A market where more NFL players would prefer to live and to work?”

[RoyBatty is alive]

Trying to create a issue where there is none.

 

NFLPA and the players would be crazy to get involved, especially with any of their own $ on deciding stadium issues. Players want to go from team to team to get the best deals, why get locked into one city with a stadium issue.    Let the owners and the municipalities deal with the funding of stadiums and all the associated headaches that accompany the process.

 

And the issue of players wanting to prefer to live and work would not be good for high tax rust belt cold northern cities like Buffalo.

[wagon127]

Are they suggesting that the NFL would force the Pegula's to move, if a substantial investment is not made in improving the Bills Stadium, (Renovate or Rebuild)? I feel its just an article, to scare fans and to get the tax payers to open their pockets.

[nucci]

25 minutes ago, wagon127 said:

Are they suggesting that the NFL would force the Pegula's to move, if a substantial investment is not made in improving the Bills Stadium, (Renovate or Rebuild)? I feel its just an article, to scare fans and to get the tax payers to open their pockets.

and it's the offseason......

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Is PFT like PFF?

 

PFF says Bills still suck

 

[wagon127]

7 minutes ago, nucci said:

and it's the offseason......

I miss the good old days, where the big news every July, was whether Brett Favre would come out of retirement.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

on a related note 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/27102750/cba-talks-ramp-nfl-nflpa

 

The current CBA expires after the 2020 season, but talks about a new one have already begun. Sources say there have been three direct owner/player negotiation sessions so far .

 

The situation is far different than it was at the tail end of the previous CBA. In May 2008, owners voted to opt out of that agreement following the 2010 season -- a move that signaled their intention to lock out the players in order to secure more favorable terms in the next agreement. Lock them out they did, in 2011, though the two sides were able to reach an agreement in time to hold abbreviated training camps and a full 2011 season.

 

[Mark80]

1 hour ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

Trying to create a issue where there is none.

 

NFLPA and the players would be crazy to get involved, especially with any of their own $ on deciding stadium issues. Players want to go from team to team to get the best deals, why get locked into one city with a stadium issue.    Let the owners and the municipalities deal with the funding of stadiums and all the associated headaches that accompany the process.

 

And the issue of players wanting to prefer to live and work would not be good for high tax rust belt cold northern cities like Buffalo.

 

I think you are missing the point here.  The point is that their money is already going to be taken in that the pool of revenue in which the players are allocated a certain percentage, will be lower because money will be taken from it and placed into stadium projects.  He is saying since they are essentially paying for some it because of this this now reduced pool of revenue, they should have some say in how its spent.  Simple example with incorrect numbers.  Total Revenue $1B, players get 50% share.  Players get $500M.  In this scenario it may be this.  Total Revenue $1B, Amount dedicated to stadiums $100M.  New Revenue left $900M, players still get 50% share.  Players only get $450M.  So, they actually "paid" for $50M of the stadium improvements.

Edited July 2, 2019 by Mark80

[HOUSE]

[RoyBatty is alive]

6 minutes ago, Mark80 said:

 

I think you are missing the point here.  The point is that their money is already going to be taken in that the pool of revenue in which the players are allocated a certain percentage, will be lower because money will be taken from it and placed into stadium projects.  He is saying since they are essentially paying for some it through because of this this now reduced pool of revenue, they should have some say in how its spent.  Simple example with incorrect numbers.  Total Revenue $1B, players get 50% share.  Players get $500M.  In this scenario it may be this.  Total Revenue $1B, Amount dedicated to stadiums $100M.  New Revenue left $900M, players still get 50% share.  Players only get $450M.  So, they actually "paid" for $50M of the stadium improvements.

 

Thanks for the clarification but my main issue remains why do they players or for the matter want the NFLPA to get involved in a political/financial headache?  So lets say the NFLPA trys to get the Pegula's to move from buffalo since they donjt have the revenue maximizing stadium, do the players want to insert themselves in that mess and end up being one of the "bad guys". Those are and should be owners decision imo, at one point do the players cease to be :"players" and start to be player/owners?

[Doc]

16 minutes ago, Mark80 said:

I think you are missing the point here.  The point is that their money is already going to be taken in that the pool of revenue in which the players are allocated a certain percentage, will be lower because money will be taken from it and placed into stadium projects.  He is saying since they are essentially paying for some it through because of this this now reduced pool of revenue, they should have some say in how its spent.  Simple example with incorrect numbers.  Total Revenue $1B, players get 50% share.  Players get $500M.  In this scenario it may be this.  Total Revenue $1B, Amount dedicated to stadiums $100M.  New Revenue left $900M, players still get 50% share.  Players only get $450M.  So, they actually "paid" for $50M of the stadium improvements.

 

It will be sold to them as a matter of better stadiums mean more money coming in for them to share, beyond what they're losing theoretically helping to finance them.

[wagon127]

19 minutes ago, Mark80 said:

 

I think you are missing the point here.  The point is that their money is already going to be taken in that the pool of revenue in which the players are allocated a certain percentage, will be lower because money will be taken from it and placed into stadium projects.  He is saying since they are essentially paying for some it through because of this this now reduced pool of revenue, they should have some say in how its spent.  Simple example with incorrect numbers.  Total Revenue $1B, players get 50% share.  Players get $500M.  In this scenario it may be this.  Total Revenue $1B, Amount dedicated to stadiums $100M.  New Revenue left $900M, players still get 50% share.  Players only get $450M.  So, they actually "paid" for $50M of the stadium improvements.

How is this different then when my office is remodeled? Essentially that's money that the company earned, that they could have afforded to distribute to me and the rest of my colleagues. However, I know that them remodeling my office is better for the company overall, which leads to being better for my employment situation. If the bills spend money on a new stadium, that will lead to more revenue for the Bills, and for the rest of the league. So the players get more revenue as well. All I get is a better feeling of job security.

Edited July 2, 2019 by wagon127

[ddaryl]

9 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

 

Thanks for the clarification but my main issue remains why do they players or for the matter want the NFLPA to get involved in a political/financial headache?  So lets say the NFLPA trys to get the Pegula's to move from buffalo since they donjt have the revenue maximizing stadium, do the players want to insert themselves in that mess and end up being one of the "bad guys". Those are and should be owners decision imo, at one point do the players cease to be :"players" and start to be player/owners?

 

 

Money talks, and low revenue walks... Not many people vote to decrease their wallet size. In the end the NFLPA and the NFL would be in agreement because the goal is to increase revenues, something the recent CBA made sure the players were a part of. I don't think any players are truly loyal to any city.. In the end their love for any one city would be trumped by there desire for larger revenues and bigger paychecks. This is the world we created.  

 

I don't worry about this because I think Buffalo will bounce back on the revenue scale given the present upgrading of the city / surrounding areas and the fact we are coming out of a very long losing tradition. Winning will increase revenues a solid chuck.. While a new modest stadium will catapult us upward towards the half way mark. We are never going to compete with the top 10 biggest teams, but neither will most other franchises

[ddaryl]

8 minutes ago, wagon127 said:

rHow is this different then when my office is remodeled? Essentially that's money that the company earned, that they could have afforded to distribute to me and the rest of my colleagues. However, I know that them remodeling my office is better for the company overall, which leads to being better for my employment situation. If the bills spend money on a new stadium, that will lead to more revenue for the Bills, and for the rest of the league. So the players get more revenue as well. All I get is a better feeling of job security.

 

 

I think the point is if we do not do a good job at maximizing revenue, (short arming a new stadium)  and more revenue can be made elsewhere then the push to move to a larger revenue generating area might start to take form.. 

More than likely we are going to get a new stadium that will satisfy the area and the NFL so not worried.. But if we do decide to go cheap or force a cheap stadium fix then yes I can see the push to get the Bills out of Buffalo gaining LOTS OF STEAM. This is why it is important to get the right stadium in the right area for the right cost and a good ROI

[Jpsredemption]

Mike Florio has been stirring that pot for years. He doesn’t even make mention that the Pegulas own the other major sports team in town. 

[JoPar_v2]

It is a frankly asinine suggestion by Florio. Again, he’s engaging in wild conjecture to mine some clicks. Trust me, PFT is acutely aware of how sensitive Buffalo fans are about the mere suggestion of relocation.

 

The owners would never, ever EVER give that level of managerial control to players. 

[SoTier]

3 hours ago, wagon127 said:

Are they suggesting that the NFL would force the Pegula's to move, if a substantial investment is not made in improving the Bills Stadium, (Renovate or Rebuild)? I feel its just an article, to scare fans and to get the tax payers to open their pockets.

 

I agree.  The reality is that the NFL and/or the NFLPA getting involved in stadium issues opens that nasty can of worms called "violation of anti-trust statutes".  Unlike MLB, the other professional sports teams aren't protected from anti-trust scrutiny by the federal government.  If an individual team wants to threaten relocation to pressure local or state taxpayers to ante up for a new stadium,  that's an "individual action".  If the league or the NFLPA tries to do the same, the federal courts could very well consider that an action "in furtherance of a monopoly".  Congress could hold hearings and possibly compel NFL teams to open their books to public scrutiny (which as privately held businesses they aren't currently forced to do).  It could get nasty.

[JoeF]

Just curious, but a related question, how much of a PSL fee would the season ticket holders on the board be willing to pay?  How much of a PSL fee will the WNY market support? 

Just doing some math...a $5,000 per seat PSL fee for 50000 seats generates $250M in upfront cash.  Remember a PSL is a right to buy seasons -- the season fee is in addition. 

 

Is that enough of a "local contribution" to match the Pegula contribution; the NFL financing and a State of NY contribution?  The $5000 per seat is really low compared to other markets....I know its one of the questions on the stadium survey and I believe that the board likely represents a higher economic status than the average of the fan base, but I am just interested.

 

I am sure the "Internet Content Should be Free" crowd will weigh in at "0" PSL fee (just kidding guys and gals) ?

[RiotAct]

8 minutes ago, JoeF said:

Just curious, but a related question, how much of a PSL fee would the season ticket holders on the board be willing to pay? 

IANASTH, but if I was... $150/seat, tops.

[Punching Bag]

3 hours ago, wagon127 said:

How is this different then when my office is remodeled? Essentially that's money that the company earned, that they could have afforded to distribute to me and the rest of my colleagues. However, I know that them remodeling my office is better for the company overall, which leads to being better for my employment situation. If the bills spend money on a new stadium, that will lead to more revenue for the Bills, and for the rest of the league. So the players get more revenue as well. All I get is a better feeling of job security.

 

It depends on what the company remodels.  One of my companies did that at told the employees that this would increase ability to get contracts, add revenue, etc.  It ends up that 90% of the money went into corporate officers perks - new private parking lot, private gym and cafeteria, etc.  If that remodeling was better for your employment situation you work in remodeling.  It is the same thing for players - increased money spent on bringing in high class restaurants, wine lists, etc do nothing for players.

3 hours ago, JoPar_v2 said:

It is a frankly asinine suggestion by Florio. Again, he’s engaging in wild conjecture to mine some clicks. Trust me, PFT is acutely aware of how sensitive Buffalo fans are about the mere suggestion of relocation.

 

The owners would never, ever EVER give that level of managerial control to players. 

 

Well since sports fans and players generate the money to pay for PFT lets try giving control to them about who works there.

[BillnutinHouston]

24 minutes ago, JoeF said:

Just curious, but a related question, how much of a PSL fee would the season ticket holders on the board be willing to pay?  How much of a PSL fee will the WNY market support? 

 

 

Can't answer that without further info.  I'd pay $5k a seat for 2 seats, IF the seats were between the 30s, in a location comparable to the current lower level, and no more than $1500 a year each.  I think this is basically what I said in response to their survey. 

 

For me it's about location, location, location.

 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2019 by BillnutinHouston

[dave mcbride]

4 hours ago, wagon127 said:

Are they suggesting that the NFL would force the Pegula's to move, if a substantial investment is not made in improving the Bills Stadium, (Renovate or Rebuild)? I feel its just an article, to scare fans and to get the tax payers to open their pockets.

No, it's not suggesting that at all.It's a hypothetical scenario in which the NFLPA decides it wants a say in this issue because the money involved is pretty huge and - if this were to happen - would not be available to them even though it's technically league revenue. Florio does not have any animus toward Buffalo, but since Buffalo's stadium situation has been in the news lately AND since they have one of the league's oldest stadiums (Arrowhead is a year older) not counting Alamada Colosseum and the LA Colosseum (both Soldier Field and Lambeau were basically completely rebuilt), the Bills are an obvious hypothetical example. Plus the team has been bad for a long time and stadium-based revenue generation is meager compared to the rest of the league. People are aware that the Bills rank dead last in terms of franchise value, right? https://www.forbes.com/nfl-valuations/list/#tab:overall 

[KollegeStudnet]

The article is written by Florio. His job is to give a side, then poop on it and call it “logic”.

[JoeF]

1 minute ago, BillnutinHouston said:

 

Can't answer that without further info.  I'd pay $5k a seat for 2 seats, IF the seats were between the 30s, in a location comparable to the current lower level, and no more than $1500 a year each.  I think this is basically what I said in response to their survey. 

 

 

 

Thanks BNIH....I am about where you are...its also location dependent.  I am outside the 30's in the lower bowl -- would probably be okay with $5K per seat maybe even a little more.  I think we will find out what "Season Ticket Holder Investment" is required to make this a go in the next few months when we have a plan from the Pegulas and their consultants.

[LSHMEAB]

6 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

No, it's not suggesting that at all.It's a hypothetical scenario in which the NFLPA decides it wants a say in this issue because the money involved is pretty huge and - if this were to happen - would not be available to them even though it's technically league revenue. Florio does not have any animus toward Buffalo, but since Buffalo's stadium situation has been in the news lately AND since they have one of the league's oldest stadiums (Arrowhead is a year older) not counting Alamada Colosseum and the LA Colosseum (both Soldier Field and Lambeau were basically completely rebuilt), the Bills are an obvious hypothetical example. Plus the team has been bad for a long time and stadium-based revenue generation is meager compared to the rest of the league. People are aware that the Bills rank dead last in terms of franchise value, right? https://www.forbes.com/nfl-valuations/list/#tab:overall 

Good post. Depressing, but accurate. The suggestion is not that the NFLPA could mandate a team relocation. The "proposal" does lead one to the idea that the decision the players make could force the owner's hand for financial viability.

 

Let's hope it's all junk that never comes to pass.

[17years&waiting]

5 hours ago, ddaryl said:

 

 

Money talks, and low revenue walks... Not many people vote to decrease their wallet size. In the end the NFLPA and the NFL would be in agreement because the goal is to increase revenues, something the recent CBA made sure the players were a part of. I don't think any players are truly loyal to any city.. In the end their love for any one city would be trumped by there desire for larger revenues and bigger paychecks. This is the world we created.  

  

I don't worry about this because I think Buffalo will bounce back on the revenue scale given the present upgrading of the city / surrounding areas and the fact we are coming out of a very long losing tradition. Winning will increase revenues a solid chuck.. While a new modest stadium will catapult us upward towards the half way mark. We are never going to compete with the top 10 biggest teams, but neither will most other franchises

 

Unfortunately, I don't see much evidence of this.  The metro has lost approximately 5,000 people over the course of this decade (if you look at census estimates for similar sized cities, they have grown substantially).  Buffalo has very little corporations to buy luxury suites and clubs seats.  And the same lack of corporations means that there aren't huge amounts of high-paying jobs.  

 

Turning decrepit factories into lofts does not equal a true upgrading, and it doesn't sustain an NFL team in the long run.  Buffalo doesn't have the ability to generate huge amounts of new revenue compared to other cities that have NFL teams.  

 

Like many of us who have left Upstate New York, typically for areas with real job, wage, and population growth, you very quickly realize the "upgrading" in Rochester and Buffalo is really just self-serving politicans who are glorifying lipstick on a pig to save their jobs.

 

I want the Buffalo Bills to be in Buffalo.  For many of us, including me, it helps to tie us back to our Upstate NY roots.  But to bury our heads in the sand and say the Bills don't have a revenue problem, that isn't easily solved, is not true.  I hope I'm wrong.

Edited July 3, 2019 by 17years&waiting

[TigerJ]

Maybe Mike Florio should ask some Buffalo players what they think about playing in Buffalo.

[Ronin]

7 hours ago, Mark80 said:

I think you are missing the point here.  The point is that their money is already going to be taken in that the pool of revenue in which the players are allocated a certain percentage, will be lower because money will be taken from it and placed into stadium projects.  He is saying since they are essentially paying for some it because of this this now reduced pool of revenue, they should have some say in how its spent.  Simple example with incorrect numbers.  Total Revenue $1B, players get 50% share.  Players get $500M.  In this scenario it may be this.  Total Revenue $1B, Amount dedicated to stadiums $100M.  New Revenue left $900M, players still get 50% share.  Players only get $450M.  So, they actually "paid" for $50M of the stadium improvements.

 

Indeed, but what Florio adds is that if the players are contributing, whether it be directly or indirectly as may be the case, then they should have a say in how their money is spent.  Kind of like shareholders that want to maximize their investments.  So too, why wouldn't the players, in that case, want to see the money spent where it will yield the greatest returns where it will impact their bottom lines.  Obviously they would.  To them, as with the owners, this is pure business.  

 

 

7 hours ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

 

Thanks for the clarification but my main issue remains why do they players or for the matter want the NFLPA to get involved in a political/financial headache?  So lets say the NFLPA trys to get the Pegula's to move from buffalo since they donjt have the revenue maximizing stadium, do the players want to insert themselves in that mess and end up being one of the "bad guys". Those are and should be owners decision imo, at one point do the players cease to be :"players" and start to be player/owners?

 

That's essentially what Florio's implying, they don't want that.  Why would they if they can simply have the money instead.  Maybe I read that wrong, but it seems as if it may be forced on them.  

 

 

7 hours ago, JoPar_v2 said:

It is a frankly asinine suggestion by Florio. Again, he’s engaging in wild conjecture to mine some clicks. Trust me, PFT is acutely aware of how sensitive Buffalo fans are about the mere suggestion of relocation.

 

The owners would never, ever EVER give that level of managerial control to players. 

 

It reads to me as if Florio is merely repeating what he's been told by someone involved in the process.  

[Ronin]

1 hour ago, 17years&waiting said:

Unfortunately, I don't see much evidence of this.  The metro has lost approximately 5,000 people over the course of this decade (if you look at census estimates for similar sized cities, they have grown substantially).  Buffalo has very little corporations to buy luxury suites and clubs seats.  And the same lack of corporations means that there aren't huge amounts of high-paying jobs.  

 

Turning decrepit factories into lofts does not equal a true upgrading, and it doesn't sustain an NFL team in the long run.  Buffalo doesn't have the ability to generate huge amounts of new revenue compared to other cities that have NFL teams.  

 

Like many of us who have left Upstate New York, typically for areas with real job, wage, and population growth, you very quickly realize the "upgrading" in Rochester and Buffalo is really just self-serving politicans who are glorifying lipstick on a pig to save their jobs.

 

I want the Buffalo Bills to be in Buffalo.  For many of us, including me, it helps to tie us back to our Upstate NY roots.  But to bury our heads in the sand and say the Bills don't have a revenue problem, that isn't easily solved, is not true.  I hope I'm wrong.

 

Agreed.  

 

One of the "dirty little secrets" that the politicians in NY don't talk about is how immigrants are the big reason for a mitigation of diminishing population.  That's not a positive development.  

[Orlando Tim]

4 hours ago, JoeF said:

Just curious, but a related question, how much of a PSL fee would the season ticket holders on the board be willing to pay?  How much of a PSL fee will the WNY market support? 

Just doing some math...a $5,000 per seat PSL fee for 50000 seats generates $250M in upfront cash.  Remember a PSL is a right to buy seasons -- the season fee is in addition. 

 

Is that enough of a "local contribution" to match the Pegula contribution; the NFL financing and a State of NY contribution?  The $5000 per seat is really low compared to other markets....I know its one of the questions on the stadium survey and I believe that the board likely represents a higher economic status than the average of the fan base, but I am just interested.

 

I am sure the "Internet Content Should be Free" crowd will weigh in at "0" PSL fee (just kidding guys and gals) ?

i am curious myself because it is a hard sell for a team to force a long term commitment on a fanbase that has has one playoff birth in the last 20 years.

[Ronin]

6 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

i am curious myself because it is a hard sell for a team to force a long term commitment on a fanbase that has has one playoff birth in the last 20 years.

 

Myself as well. 

 

The only certainty is that money trumps everything amongst players and owners.  

 

As to Bills fans, I don't think we're normal.  LOL  By that I mean I don't think that most of us care about the "modern amenities" like most fans around the country do.  I could be off, but it seems to me that the biggest concern, by a country mile, is having the ability to tailgate and do it "properly."  That's why IMO a downtown stadium relying on parking garages and the like would be a drastic mistake in Buffalo.  Again, perhaps I'm off, but if the tailgating situation changes, I see fans becoming far more connected to the performance of the team in terms of attending games, and if that ends up happening, meaning a new downtown stadium, if things don't straighten out soon it wouldn't be good as such.  

 

At the end of the day, and since we don't know the figures, I have a difficult time believing that we are anything but near the bottom in terms of our contribution to revenue sharing.  

 

[Malazan]

pft is tmz for the nfl. THey constantly make stuff up just to rile people up and people continually fall for it and then run to their respective forum to post it

[H2o]

Florio walking into work every morning....

[JoPar_v2]

7 hours ago, Ronin said:

 

It reads to me as if Florio is merely repeating what he's been told by someone involved in the process.  

 

Lol no...it doesn’t read like that, unless you: 1) aren’t familiar with Florio or PFT at all, or 2) are the most naive person on earth. Seriously if you are familiar with his site at all you should know by now he engages in wild conjecture, almost exclusively. Florio did not “hear” anything from ANYONE “involved in the process.” For you to even come close to believing that **** is, frankly, laughable. He runs a aggregator site bro. And infuses it with his speculation. That’s it. Goddamn mate.

 

That’s just amazing to me that you even came to that take. 

Edited July 3, 2019 by JoPar_v2

[US Egg]

Only one thing near on par with being loved.....that is being hated or loathed.

 

It usually means you're doing something right if they're paying so much attention to you.

 

The Bills are here to stay and there's nothing anyone can do about It as long as we support them.

Edited July 3, 2019 by I am the egg man

[JoPar_v2]

5 minutes ago, I am the egg man said:

Only one thing near on par with being loved.....that is being hated.

 

It usually means you're doing something right if they're paying that much attention.

 

The Bills are here to stay and there's nothing anyone can do about It as long as we support them.

 

Of course they are staying. And yes, let the national media talk - they dont know f*** all about the actual local situation. It just makes me laugh that people around here, of all places, give any sort of credence to what they say. 

[Doc]

Florio just likes too hear himself talk. The Bills aren’t leaving Buffalo.  Don’t click on the bait. 

[stevewin]

17 hours ago, The 9 Isles said:

“Spinning it forward to cities that currently have stadium issues, the NFLPA would/should/could have influence over the stadium solution in Buffalo. What if, collectively, the NFL’s workforce deems it prudent to have its own money spent in a different market? A market where the return on the investment could be greater? A market where more NFL players would prefer to live and to work?”

This might be one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read

[Mr. WEO]

17 hours ago, Mark80 said:

 

I think you are missing the point here.  The point is that their money is already going to be taken in that the pool of revenue in which the players are allocated a certain percentage, will be lower because money will be taken from it and placed into stadium projects.  He is saying since they are essentially paying for some it because of this this now reduced pool of revenue, they should have some say in how its spent.  Simple example with incorrect numbers.  Total Revenue $1B, players get 50% share.  Players get $500M.  In this scenario it may be this.  Total Revenue $1B, Amount dedicated to stadiums $100M.  New Revenue left $900M, players still get 50% share.  Players only get $450M.  So, they actually "paid" for $50M of the stadium improvements.

 

Currently, players get a percentage of “all revenue”, without “reductions for expenses”.

 

https://nfllabor.wordpress.com/2011/07/21/nfl-clubs-approve-comprehensive-agreement/

[Mark80]

3 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Currently, players get a percentage of “all revenue”, without “reductions for expenses”.

 

https://nfllabor.wordpress.com/2011/07/21/nfl-clubs-approve-comprehensive-agreement/

 

Yes, but I believe the negotiating point brought up is to change that for the Stadium fund, sort of like a write-off in the tax world.  At least that's how it read to me.

Edited July 3, 2019 by Mark80