Could the Current Economy Save the Packers?
By coreyb
After posting the Lynn Dickey video on Favre we thought we'd return the discussion to where it truly Matters and also to what no one is really talking about: The future viability of the franchise.
Yes..Aaron and I truly feel that if there is ONE thing that CHTV can do for the Green Bay Packers - it is to help alleviate the burden that comes from being in the SMALLEST market in sports the NFL through our dedication to Packer Fans worldwide. Maybe one day that will happen and the world will rise up and support the Packers with the strength of a Major Metropolitan Area. While we await the promise of the future - the very future of the Packers rests in two minor details of the current NFL. 1. Revenue Sharing and 2. The Salary Cap and one is due to expire in 2011..as we say in the podcast - let's hear what President Mark Murphy has to say about that.
| Packer Video Community | Cheesehead TV on Youtube |
Comments (14)
March 18, 2009 at 09:17 am
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. Yes, GB is the smallest market team in the NFL but our fan base is enormous. In fact, we are generally in the top 5 among NFL teams. I'd call that kind of support extremely strong. I have to belief that will work toward our benefit in 2011. Now that I think about it, this "small market/big market" stuff has to go. Teams should not be judged in any way by how many people live in the surrounding area. This may have been applicable years ago (before the internet and satellite TV) because it's a whole new entertainment game today. The only people that this seems to matter to is a player like T.O. who needs the limelight/spotlight/nightlife of a metro area. Go Pack!
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/rumors/post/Dallas-most-popular-NFL-team-Jag...
cheese5
March 18, 2009 at 09:43 am
I agree with almost everything you said except you can't get rid of the small market/big market conundrum. Not when you are talking about Green Bay.
To say it doesn't matter because of the very valid reasons you gave is like not shoring up the beach BEFORE the erosion.
If Revenue Sharing and/or Salary Cap are removed from the equation and the BIG media markets get their share - you will be having the very discussion of what I am talking about happen. Listen to Mark Murphy - don't take my word for it :)
It matters. It's great to be the Top 5 in merchandising(while we had Favre- I would like to see last years numbers) - its great to make killer local revenue off of a Die-hard fan base and events like Fan Fest. But the Yankees outspend their opponents by 100's of millions of dollars on PAYROLL. You don't think that makes a difference?
I am saying WE MUST BE DILIGENT and CONSTANTLY Fight a War as fans and not take for granted the fact that History somehow secures our place in the future.
cheese5
March 18, 2009 at 09:51 am
and one other reason your argument about small and big having to go makes no sense-
Satellite and Internet are Amplifiers.
While there are a lot of Transplants (like myself) there are a lot of Die-Hard transplants for other teams as well.
When you live in a place. Like me I was Born in Green Bay so I Uniquely identify with a LOCATION. Well in Green Bay there are 100,353, Appleton has 70,217 - so thats over 200,000(including area around)
In 2007 the population of New york City alone was 8,274,527
Seriously? Are you seriously making that argument that small market / big market dont matter?
You could include Milwaukee which has 2,003,218 but then I would add at least that many with CT, NJ, and larger NYC metro area.
March 18, 2009 at 11:57 am
In terms of people's accessibility to their favorite teams, then yes, I believe a small market team like GB is on equal playing field with NY - that is my point there. Also, I'm not sure I completely agree that a major market automatically guarantees a major payroll. The Brewers have a larger payroll than San Fran, San Diego, Texas and many more, for instance. Basically, a rich owner can live anywhere. I think you lay it out better in your first response: "I am saying WE MUST BE DILIGENT and CONSTANTLY Fight a War as fans and not take for granted the fact that History somehow secures our place in the future." That is a powerful statement, which I agree with, and I appreciate the enthusiam! It will definitely be interesting to see what happens.
cheese5
March 18, 2009 at 12:32 pm
I think you are severely discounting the revenue that a MAJOR media market generates.
You should probably get some data before you philosophize. :)
Also- my MAIN point is that (and my Grandpa Behnke would agree because he espoused it himself) Take Revenue Sharing or Salary Cap away. Bye Bye Green bay Packers being any type of contender (because really this is what it's about- oh- really when's the last time the Milwaukee Brewers won a World Series?. Green Bay cannot support a Viable team without those. It's really a matter of Numbers and Data and less about some idea.
PackerAaron
March 18, 2009 at 12:57 pm
While I fear the Yankee-Boston-always-trying-to-buy-a-Championship model coming to bear in the NFL if the Salary Cap goes away, Florio made a pretty compelling argument today why just the opposite might happen:
http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/03/18/smith-echoes-upshaw-once-cap-i...
cheese5
March 18, 2009 at 01:49 pm
Dont know that I would call anything in that article "compelling"
"And if it doesn’t ultimately spawn Yankees-Red Sox-style dominance in pro football, it could be the union, not the owners, that is trying to force the spending formula back into the sport."
Thats a MIGHTY BIG IF.
March 18, 2009 at 01:51 pm
The only way the Packers survive in a world without revenue sharing is to drop out of all TV contracts and start negotiating their own deal.
March 18, 2009 at 02:23 pm
Q: With a huge media market and a matching payroll. How the hell do the Cubs not win?
A: Cubs suck, much like the Bears.
How much of the Yankees-Red Sox income comes from selling out 80 home games a year vs. selling their TV rights/merchandise? I guess I don't have the data.
I'm guessing NFL team revenues are more merchandise/TV rights based rather than attendence based since they only have 8 home games. Again, I have no data, but just philosophizing.
Then, does not having a billionaire owner hurt us because we can only spend what we make?
I even confused myself here.
March 18, 2009 at 02:25 pm
I should "get data" before I philosophize? Isn't that statement kind of an oxymoron - especially on a blog? Isn't this entire post a giant hypothetical? BTW: Arizona 2001,
Florida Marlins 2003, St Louis 2005,
Philadelphia 2008 = all World Series champs in the last decade; all with payrolls less than $100 million. That was also a very cheap shot at the Brewers. Cheers.
cheese5
March 18, 2009 at 02:41 pm
And every single one of those teams you just mentioned has a population 4-5 times (at least- most have much more) the size of green bay. :(
Oh how easily people forget the teams of the late 70's - 80's and I wasnt even born for the first half.
sheesh- seriously you guys?
you are really going to argue that the Salary Cap and Revenue Sharing don't matter? There is a burden in being in a small market... Even if today that burden is very light, it's especially in Green Bay's interest to make sure that two years out the burden does not get much much greater.. if that happens then we will need another Reggie White miracle :)
March 18, 2009 at 03:55 pm
62% of all GB revenue is "National" in origin, the highest % in the league. That number alone supports your point, Corey. No Cap -- No Revenue Sharing -- No GB Packers.
Comparing baseball to football is a real Strawman. The reason some smaller market teams can suceed occasionally is they have, by necessity, invested in their farm systems. Every once in awhile they can pull off the surprise. Take a look at the Yankee lineup this coming year and say that the Twins will win the Amercian League this year. Not likely! To the Yankees, the rest of baseball is their farm system. Over time I will guarentee that the Yankees win more championships than any other team in baseball. The only team in baseball able to pay the so-called luxury tax, baseball's effort at capping salaries, is the Yankees. Watch what happens over the next few years.
March 18, 2009 at 05:11 pm
Corey the last time the Packers were in New York to play the Giants did you go to that game? If you did, how many Packer fans were there at that game? It had to be well over 17,000 right? Giants fans were coming up to me asking if this was a Packers home game.
March 19, 2009 at 10:39 am
Clarify: "National" in origin
The draft is the Packers farm system, I think we invest pretty heavily in that.
Oh, and The Twins will win the American League.