NFL  > General NFL  > The playing field is now even
March 2, 2011, 01:12 PM
With the owners losing their Four Billion slush fund in court, they no longer have revenue to wait the players out. They do not get the Four Billion loan, that would have been paid back when football season starts, and will have to survive just like the players, without income coming in.

I still think their will be a lockout, but the the pressure the resolve it sooner than later is now on the owners.
March 2, 2011  01:25 PM ET

Yay! Nothing will stop the Browns from going to the Super Bowl now!

But seriously, I hope that this creates a desperate need to get this deal finished.

March 2, 2011  02:04 PM ET

This is good news for the fans who just want to watch football

Comment #3 has been removed
Comment #4 has been removed
Comment #5 has been removed
Comment #6 has been removed
March 2, 2011  06:50 PM ET
QUOTE(#6):

BGD,That makes me smile about Mike Brown,losing money!!,The 'only'thing He understands is the bottom line...

Don't worry, the owners have more than enough money to out wait the players. I predict there will be a new CBA within the next two weeks!

March 3, 2011  02:31 AM ET
QUOTE(#7):

Don't worry, the owners have more than enough money to out wait the players. I predict there will be a new CBA within the next two weeks!

The owners will not give in until they get what they want. If federal judge David Doti remains on the side of the Players, the owners will wait for him to be replaced in late summer. Then you have to wait for a new judge to be appointed. The only way this would be resolved in 2 weeks is if the players give the owners what they are asking for.

March 3, 2011  10:26 AM ET
QUOTE(#8):

The only way this would be resolved in 2 weeks is if the players give the owners what they are asking for.

I don't know about that, judging from this article in the Globe it's clear the owners were backroom dealing and clearly NOT in the interest of the league and its' players as is supposed to be the case.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2011/03/though ts_on_imp.html

March 3, 2011  11:04 AM ET
QUOTE(#9):

I don't know about that, judging from this article in the Globe it's clear the owners were backroom dealing and clearly NOT in the interest of the league and its' players as is supposed to be the case.http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2011/03/t hough ts_on_imp.html

Who really cares if the Owners or Players make the most money in a new CBA. The average fan just wants to watch football and could care less which party makes more.

Comment #12 has been removed
Comment #14 has been removed
March 4, 2011  10:36 AM ET
QUOTE(#10):

Who really cares if the Owners or Players make the most money in a new CBA. The average fan just wants to watch football and could care less which party makes more.

Every team is not the Dallas Cowboys when it comes to money. For instance I'm not even sure how many teams sold out all their games? I know the Oakland Raiders don't do well in ticket sales, they may have sold out 2 games last season. The other 2 teams I understand that have problems with ticket sales are Jacksonville and Tampa Bay. Are the owners of these 3 teams really doing everything in their power to produce a winning teams and bring in fans, should they be given equal amounts of television revenue as the teams that sell out every game? They say that television revenue is what makes it impossible for any of the NFL teams to fail financially. Maybe if those teams were allowed to fail the owners would be forced into selling. One thing that does attract a crowd is a new stadium and I think that if the owners are given the $2 billion off the top there should be a provision that forces the owners to invest that money into a new stadiums. Make the $2 billion off the top available for 6 years and tell the owners If you don't build a new stadium your franchise rights will be taken away. It seems that the Cowboys have had more new stadiums than any other team. Like the infrastructure of this country many of the stadiums are outdated and on the verge of collapse ( example: Minnesota). This would force about 20-25 new stadiums to be built in the next 6 years without teams asking for local citizens to pay most of the bill. All that construction would be good for the economy. I know the 49ers are on the verge of trying to get a new stadium and that extra incentive money would help get the stadium built, one reason there has only been one Super Bowl in the Bay Area and that was played at Stanford. The 49ers have had only 2 stadiums Kezar and Candlestick. How many fans out there feel their team needs a new stadium?

Comment #18 has been removed
March 4, 2011  12:26 PM ET
QUOTE:

Whaaaaat???

In the last 40 years, sorry.
49ers Candlestick park originally built for the Giants in 1960 at a cost of $15 million dollars ($2 million for the real estate), Some QB's now make that per season. Some don't want to see it go because of the nostalgia, Beatles last concert 1966, famous Giants vs A's World Series with a earthquake interruption. Probably my saying that 20-25 teams need a new stadium was exaggerated. Probably about 6-8 new stadiums need to be built in the next 6 years or so if you include a new LA stadium for a franchise move.

 
March 4, 2011  12:32 PM ET

1971 Texas Stadium cost about $2,400 per seat to build and the 2010 Cowboy Stadium cost about $11,000 dollars per seat to build, that is if there truly is 100,000 seats?

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Irving: Fans don't deserve the Cavs
    Views
    17275
    Comments
    682
  2. 2
    Red Sox dodged two injury scares
    Views
    3269
    Comments
    503
  3. 3
    D'Antoni's newest 'blunder'
    Views
    788
    Comments
    260
  4. 4
    Baseball's top 2015 free agent
    Views
    949
    Comments
    149
  5. 5
    Trump taking a legit run at the Bills
    Views
    2614
    Comments
    109

SI.com

SI Photos