Jump to content

Disturbing Quote


Recommended Posts

This is from Ralph Wilson:

 

"We're not trying to break the bank," said Wilson. "We have graphs that show the teams that make the most money are the teams that make the playoffs the most times. The teams that have the most revenue far exceed the other teams in making the playoffs. What we'd like to do is just have a compromise."

 

Apparently, over the years, larger-market teams (NE, Dallas, Washington) are more successful.

 

I thought the salary cap brought competitive balance to the NFL. Perhaps it does, but apparently, not as much as I thought. What are the Bills chances of continued success in such a lopsided league?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Washington? They have made the playoffs, once in the last 14 years basically. All that money hasn't helped them.

 

Yet Green Bay is smaller then Buffalo and has won SuperBowls, and pretty much make the playoffs yearly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is from Ralph Wilson:

 

"We're not trying to break the bank," said Wilson. "We have graphs that show the teams that make the most money are the teams that make the playoffs the most times. The teams that have the most revenue far exceed the other teams in making the playoffs. What we'd like to do is just have a compromise."

 

Apparently, over the years, larger-market teams (NE, Dallas, Washington) are more successful. 

 

I thought the salary cap brought competitive balance to the NFL.  Perhaps it does, but apparently, not as much as I thought.  What are the Bills chances of continued success in such a lopsided league?

345170[/snapback]

 

 

I think its more accurate to say that teams like Washington will be more succesful in the future when the cap grows at a much higher rate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Washington?  They have made the playoffs, once in the last 14 years basically.  All that money hasn't helped them.

 

Yet Green Bay is smaller then Buffalo and has won SuperBowls, and pretty much make the playoffs yearly.

345173[/snapback]

 

 

Yeah, i'd like to see that graph as well. Seems like plenty of "small/medium market" teams have had success like Indy, KC, Carolina, San Diego, Pittsburgh, GB, Baltimore, Tenn (Nashville), etc...

 

Meanwhile... big city teams like Chicago, Washington and SF have all sucked

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i don't view the quote as disturbing...ralph's doing what he needs to do, posturing on behalf of the small market teams. nothing more. a deal will be struck between the owners that permits the small market teams to compete as the cap grows. count on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The teams must come to an equitible revenue sharing agreement before they can begin negotiating with the union for the next CBA. If they don't 2007 becomes an uncapped year. If that happens, all hell will break loose.

 

All of these articles mention Jones and Snyder, the two most visible owners (self-promoters) as leading the 'bloc' of big-revenue teams. I don't think that the other large market owners are necessarily aligning themselves with these guys. Bob McNair in Houston makes a good point about the debt service obligations that he has. For the most part, these are smart business men that realize that what is good for the league is good for them. They see the big picture.

 

I have faith that Tagliabue will get this hammered out. That cat knows what he's doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks do need to recognize that there is a difference between initial negotiating "truth" and the achieved "truth" at the end of negotitians. The initial offer is presented as though it is some sort of objective truth, but it really is not as it is merely one view of th truth from an advocates position.

 

Whether it be the assertions of the small market or the big market teams, or alternately the assertions of conservatives about judges or liberals about judges, advocacy positions are presented as dead-lock certain truth when in reality we are going to end up with a compromise solution that completely satisfies no one, but everyone can live with.

 

Are Ralph's assertions about small market teams untrue? Sure.

 

Does is matter that they are untrue? No, because in the end we should get to an aggreement of achieved truth that will not at all be the principled initial stand, but will be something that all parties can live with.

 

The NFL situation is one that is relatively easy compared to the stickt wickets that dominate today's political warblings. The NFL question is one not of beteern choosing who will be rich and who will be poor, but is merely a choice between who will be rich (players) and who will be richer (NFL owners).

 

Unless the NFL owners insist on adherence to THEIR principles, a deal may be difficult to bring off (unfortunately people are involved), but actually easy to conceive of something that everyone can live with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks do need to recognize that there is a difference between initial negotiating "truth" and the achieved "truth" at the end of negotitians. The initial offer is presented as though it is some sort of objective truth, but it really is not as it is merely one view of th truth from an advocates position.

 

Whether it be the assertions of the small market or the big market teams, or alternately the assertions of conservatives about judges or liberals about judges, advocacy positions are presented as dead-lock certain truth when in reality we are going to end up with a compromise solution that completely satisfies no one, but everyone can live with.

 

Are Ralph's assertions about small market teams untrue? Sure.

 

Does is matter that they are untrue? No, because in the end we should get to an aggreement of achieved truth that will not at all be the principled initial stand, but will be something that all parties can live with.

 

The NFL situation is one that is relatively easy compared to the stickt wickets that dominate today's political warblings. The NFL question is one not of beteern choosing who will be rich and who will be poor, but is merely a choice between who will be rich (players) and who will be richer (NFL owners).

 

Unless the NFL owners insist on adherence to THEIR principles, a deal may be difficult to bring off (unfortunately people are involved), but actually easy to conceive of something that everyone can live with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ralph's just lobbying for some of Jerry Jones' and Danny Snyder's off-the-field concession and luxury suite revenue.

 

And the funny part is, he and the other small market owners will probably end up getting some, based on the reports that Tagleabue's brokering some kind of compromise deal.

 

Good for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...