NFL  > General NFL  > Diddy wants to own an NFL team
October 25, 2013, 10:02 AM
Sticking with football for one more topic. Sean John Combs a.k.a. Diddy wants to own an NFL team. Take that, take that, take that. Diddy is a winner. He???s won in the music game. He???s won in the clothing game with Sean John. He???s won in the liquor game with Ciroc, and even though his music television station Revolt just kicked off he???ll win there too. Of course I???m biased. He brought the world one of the greatest rappers of all time: The Notorious B.I.G. and I can???t hate on the man that brought the world the man that makes me proud to be from Brooklyn. I can???t stop, I won???t stop. This week Mr. Combs declared that he wants to own an NFL team. Now, this isn???t new. He made a similar announcement three years ago. I applaud the fact that Diddy wants to become the first African-American majority owner of an NFL team but as crazy as this sounds, he doesn???t have the money.

MORE:
http://tinyurl.com/mhcgv7r
October 25, 2013  10:26 AM ET

It's bad enough there are owners who have no clue right now, we don't need to add to the pile.

October 25, 2013  11:21 AM ET

Well, good for Diddy. I want 5 million $$ and never to pay taxes again. Whatcha got for me?

October 25, 2013  11:47 AM ET
QUOTE(#2):

Whatcha got for me?

do you do windows? lol!

October 25, 2013  12:21 PM ET
QUOTE(#3):

do you do windows? lol!

I would do anything for YOU!!! ;)

October 25, 2013  12:31 PM ET
QUOTE(#4):

I would do anything for YOU!!! ;)

I'll work up my 'list'. ;-)

October 25, 2013  01:12 PM ET

Except "that?" :)

October 25, 2013  01:42 PM ET
QUOTE(#1):

It's bad enough there are owners who have no clue right now, we don't need to add to the pile.

isn't there a rapper who is part owner of a NY Basketball team? How's that going? Liking sports and knowing sports are two different things. Just 'cause I like chocolate ice cream doesn't make me the next Ben n Jerry's (not that I'd want to be them of course)

October 25, 2013  02:08 PM ET
QUOTE(#7):

isn't there a rapper who is part owner of a NY Basketball team? How's that going? Liking sports and knowing sports are two different things. Just 'cause I like chocolate ice cream doesn't make me the next Ben n Jerry's (not that I'd want to be them of course)

Jay Z, but I believe he relinquished his interest in the Nets so he could be an agent for some players.

October 25, 2013  02:09 PM ET
QUOTE(#7):

isn't there a rapper who is part owner of a NY Basketball team? How's that going? Liking sports and knowing sports are two different things. Just 'cause I like chocolate ice cream doesn't make me the next Ben n Jerry's (not that I'd want to be them of course)

btw...Ben & Jerry's Americone Dream is awesome. Try it!!

October 25, 2013  05:17 PM ET
QUOTE(#1):

It's bad enough there are owners who have no clue right now, we don't need to add to the pile.

Boom. Right there.

Although I think there needs to be some kind of incentive clause for owners to put a quality team on the field.

I propose:

After X amount of consecutive years of losing seasons, the league can seek out a new owner and force a buy-out. The financial catch (to make it work) is that the new owner would have to put up - at minimum - as much money as the current owner paid for the franchise. That money would be used to pay off the current owner.

The underlying premise would be:
- Your neglect to improve your franchise or put a quality team on the field is hurting the overall quality and reputation of the league. Here's your money back; now get lost.

October 25, 2013  05:21 PM ET
QUOTE(#10):

Boom. Right there.Although I think there needs to be some kind of incentive clause for owners to put a quality team on the field.I propose:After X amount of consecutive years of losing seasons, the league can seek out a new owner and force a buy-out. The financial catch (to make it work) is that the new owner would have to put up - at minimum - as much money as the current owner paid for the franchise. That money would be used to pay off the current owner.The underlying premise would be:- Your neglect to improve your franchise or put a quality team on the field is hurting the overall quality and reputation of the league. Here's your money back; now get lost.

Owners such as the Fords (Detroit Lions) don't deserve to be a part of the league. They're either too incompetent or just don't care.

Problem is that in order to pass such an incentive clause you'd need to get the current 32 owners to vote on it - which they would never agree to (especially the owners who most deserve that kick out of the league).

At best I think the league could grandfather in the current owners. And make it part of the ownership contracts signed by all future owners.

October 25, 2013  05:21 PM ET
QUOTE(#10):

Boom. Right there.Although I think there needs to be some kind of incentive clause for owners to put a quality team on the field.I propose:After X amount of consecutive years of losing seasons, the league can seek out a new owner and force a buy-out. The financial catch (to make it work) is that the new owner would have to put up - at minimum - as much money as the current owner paid for the franchise. That money would be used to pay off the current owner.The underlying premise would be:- Your neglect to improve your franchise or put a quality team on the field is hurting the overall quality and reputation of the league. Here's your money back; now get lost.

There it is.

Which teams are the most vulnerable.

October 25, 2013  05:35 PM ET
QUOTE(#12):

There it is.Which teams are the most vulnerable.

Chargers could be on that list. Spanos gets a lot of criticism, much of it deserved. But I do like their new coaching staff. Detroit, Jacksonville, and probably some others.

October 25, 2013  05:39 PM ET
QUOTE(#13):

Chargers could be on that list. Spanos gets a lot of criticism, much of it deserved. . . .

Might be hard to force him out under that proposed rule, though, given that he's had one losing season (7-9) out of the last nine. But if you could force a sale based on failure to meet expectations, the Bolts would be first on the auction block.

October 25, 2013  05:41 PM ET

Heck, under a "failure to meet expectations" standard, JJ might lose his team as well. :)

October 25, 2013  07:55 PM ET
QUOTE(#10):

Boom. Right there.Although I think there needs to be some kind of incentive clause for owners to put a quality team on the field.I propose:After X amount of consecutive years of losing seasons, the league can seek out a new owner and force a buy-out. The financial catch (to make it work) is that the new owner would have to put up - at minimum - as much money as the current owner paid for the franchise. That money would be used to pay off the current owner.The underlying premise would be:- Your neglect to improve your franchise or put a quality team on the field is hurting the overall quality and reputation of the league. Here's your money back; now get lost.

Would Al Davis fall into this category? I don't have the interest in looking up the Raiders "consecutive years of losing season" but suspect that Al would have fallen prey to this clause. I don't Al lacked the interest or energy; he was just making bad decisions at this point.

October 25, 2013  09:26 PM ET
QUOTE(#16):

Would Al Davis fall into this category? I don't have the interest in looking up the Raiders "consecutive years of losing season" but suspect that Al would have fallen prey to this clause. I don't Al lacked the interest or energy; he was just making bad decisions at this point.

Impossible to say. I never defined X. Then you just get into a debate of which arbitrary number is better.

But I would expect this kind of clause would be handled on a case-by-case basis.

Dan Snyder has had more than his fair share of poor decisions and ugly seasons, but his franchise also routinely ranks among the NFL's most valuable. Even if he met the "impeachment" criteria I can't see the other owners wanting to replace him.

Although I guess to answer your question... Al Davis never built up much goodwill with the other owners, so I'm sure they'd have been happy to remove him.

October 25, 2013  10:18 PM ET
QUOTE(#17):

Impossible to say. I never defined X. Then you just get into a debate of which arbitrary number is better.But I would expect this kind of clause would be handled on a case-by-case basis.Dan Snyder has had more than his fair share of poor decisions and ugly seasons, but his franchise also routinely ranks among the NFL's most valuable. Even if he met the "impeachment" criteria I can't see the other owners wanting to replace him.Although I guess to answer your question... Al Davis never built up much goodwill with the other owners, so I'm sure they'd have been happy to remove him.

Good point about Snyder; boy it's not from a lack of trying on his part, he desperately wants to win. And you're right Al had few markers to call in at the end from the other owners except maybe my favorite "Jerrah".

Comment #19 has been removed
 
Comment #20 has been removed

Comment

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


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    'Melo wants to be wooed (like, Howard wooed)
    Views
    1816
    Comments
    1351
  2. 2
    Farrell defends Fenway's 'sleep room'
    Views
    1708
    Comments
    480
  3. 3
    Youthful Red Wings are rattled
    Views
    1833
    Comments
    291
  4. 4
    Bishop's severe injury
    Views
    2380
    Comments
    65
  5. 5
    Texans may take Clowney ... for someone else
    Views
    22457
    Comments
    64

SI.com

SI Photos