Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is the NFL communist?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
George_Bonanza Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 09:15 PM
Original message
Is the NFL communist?
I mean revenue sharing, salary caps... That's sort of like the real world equivalent of taxes to cut down the discrepencies in the haves and have nots of society. This is why tiny markets like Green Bay are perenially contenders while rich teams like NY aren't guaranteed the best free agents, a la the NHL or MLB, the filthy capitalist-gone-wrong leagues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 09:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. In a way, yes.
And I love it. Makes for a much more competitive league. Plenty of surprises every year, rather than the same teams, year after year, being basically the only ones competing for a title.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fight_n_back Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. Its not a salary cap
it is a talent cap. Why not a revenue cap? If the owners make over a certain amount they have to start having free games or something.

There are no great teams now and sports is about acheiving greatness.

the revenue sharing makes sense because the NY Giants don't make any money if no one comes to play them. Having revenue sharing AND a talent cap AND a college draft is NOT socialist but good old fashioned capitalist labor exploitation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
3. it gets boring after a while, I prefer a league with dynasties
rather than a league with mostly 8-8 teams and 2 different teams in the super bowl each year. It's like every year there are 2 designated "surprise teams" after a while it's not surprising or the least bit interesting.

Football peaked in 1994, since the cap it's been all downhill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VermontDem2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-14-03 03:29 AM
Response to Reply #3
14. Suprising teams?
I wasn't the least bit surprise when Tampa and Oakland played in the Super Bowl last year, the year before that I expected a St. Louis-Oakland Super Bowl but New England beat Oakland due to a bad call in which later lead to a St. Louis-New England Super Bowl. BTW, there was only 3 8-8 teams last year. 3 out of 32 does not constitute as "mostly". Plus the salary cap has nothing to do with it, the players comming out of college or so much talented and so great which later led to this. The talent level is almost so even among most of the teams, Arizona had a playoff team last year but unfortanetly after their hot start 12 starters and 6 replacement starters were diagnosed with season ending injuries. If you are going to critize the NFL atleast be informed while doing so. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynndew2 Donating Member (401 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
4. Not Communist cause if it were
then all the touchdowns would belong to all the teams in the league and they would end the season in a 32 way tie...lol:P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Nah. My Bengals would still go 3-13. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynndew2 Donating Member (401 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. LOL that throws the whole commie thing off
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
5. Doesn't bother me
Especially when some players' salaries are so ludicrously high.

And yet they want taxpayers to pay the bill for new stadiums.

They charge $50 for a single crap seat, then they can pay for a new stadium.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HuckleB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
6. Hmm.
Weak union = communist? Nope. An oligarchy of the owners, perhaps, spunging off taxpayer subsidies (like all sports), while keeping the workers under wraps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
George_Bonanza Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. The flip side: Strong unions
That's the problem in the NHL. The NHLPA is too greedy and will not budge. I side with the owners on this issue. Hockey is not that popular throughout America and has miniscule TV deals compared to the almighty NFL, yet the average salary in the NHL exceeds that of a football player? Something's wrong here. Player salaries should be relative to the state of the league. And the fact is that the NHL's teams are rapidly losing a lot of money due to excessive player salaries which in turn drives away customers because it makes seats expensive. The NHL is a gate revenue dependent league, and high player salaries kill that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yavin4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 10:20 PM
Response to Original message
8. Don't Forget The NFL Draft
which awards weak teams with the first picks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
George_Bonanza Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Sort of like a welfare system to help the downtrodden get back up, huh?
Or is it a bad analogy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 10:38 PM
Response to Original message
10. Democratic Socialism works!
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trigz Donating Member (679 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-14-03 02:17 AM
Response to Original message
13. Communist with wages of $X zillion a year? Hardly. (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 15th 2024, 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC