TNF - the race for second place

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

Dxmissile

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
4,526
@jrry32 maybe you will take the time to read this.

The National Football League distributed a record $7.8 billion to its 32 teams in 2016, a jump of almost 10 percent that reflects the league’s increasingly rich TV deals, according to a financial disclosure by the Green Bay Packers.

Each NFL team receives an equal share of the league’s “national revenue” -- primarily money from television deals, but also league-wide sponsorships, licensing and merchandise sales. The Packers, the only publicly owned franchise in major U.S. sports, reported Wednesday that they got $244 million, up from $222.6 million last year.

Green Bay’s annual financial release has become the only regular glimpse into the business of the NFL since the league dropped its tax-exempt status in 2015 and no longer has to release financial information like Commissioner Roger Goodell’s annual salary.

The teams’ bigger payout is mostly a reflection of a new Thursday night TV deal with NBC and CBS, which agreed to pay $450 million, up from $300 million the previous cycle. As for the players, they can’t renegotiate their share of league revenue until 2020.

“We’re very fortunate that we’ve seen the kind of growth that we have, and I feel very confident that we’ll continue to see it, at least through the rest of this collective bargaining agreement,” Packers President Mark Murphy said on a conference call with reporters.

The $7.8 billion is just one piece of the league’s overall revenue, which is estimated at $14 billion for 2017. Goodell has stated he’d like the league to reach $25 billion by 2027. That growth will depend largely on the NFL’s ability to navigate a media marketplace that is rapidly evolving, as younger generations abandon traditional cable packages and streaming becomes more important.

Green Bay’s local revenue, which the team generates and keeps for itself, was a franchise-record $197.4 million, bringing the team’s total to $441.4 million. The Packers’ operating profit, which fluctuates due to stadium renovation expenses and the cyclical nature of player salaries, was $65.4 million.

The Packers’ numbers also reflect the recent string of franchise relocations -- three in the past 18 months. The Rams and Chargers agreed to pay a reported $650 million to the other 30 franchises when they moved to Los Angeles. The Raiders will pay $350 million to move to Las Vegas. Those payments, to be made over a 10-year period starting December 31, 2019, have a present value of about $27 million per team, according to the Packers.

So when they say revenue they are talking profit they then take some of that and give it to the teams the cowboys made over 850 million last year alone then you subtract their payroll and you have the teams profit but the nfl 14 billion is their profits
 

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
ROD Credit | 2022 TOP Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
38,395
So when they say revenue they are talking profit they then take some of that and give it to the teams the cowboys made over 850 million last year alone then you subtract their payroll and you have the teams profit but the nfl 14 billion is their profits

According to Forbes the NFL's revenue was $13.3 billion in 2016 that's the last complete figure. Profits are less and they shared $6.4 billion with the players union in salaries and other benefits.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
14 billion is in revenue and in this case when you’re dealing with big money any time a company puts out their revenue it’s understood that it’s profits.

It's pretty clear that you are conflating revenue with profit.(no, when a big company puts out revenues, that does not stand for profits) They are two separate concepts. Revenue is the total amount of money the NFL brings in. Profit is the amount of money the NFL has when it subtracts expenses from revenue. The $14 billion is GROSS REVENUE, it is NOT profit. See:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/revenue.asp
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/profit.asp

Also see:
Each NFL team receives an equal share of the league’s “national revenue” -- primarily money from television deals, but also league-wide sponsorships, licensing and merchandise sales. The Packers, the only publicly owned franchise in major U.S. sports, reported Wednesday that they got $244 million, up from $222.6 million last year.

Green Bay’s local revenue, which the team generates and keeps for itself, was a franchise-record $197.4 million, bringing the team’s total to $441.4 million. The Packers’ operating profit, which fluctuates due to stadium renovation expenses and the cyclical nature of player salaries, was $65.4 million.

And the reason why the NFL distributes "national revenue" is because it's a non-profit entity. The NFL League Office subtracts its total expenses from its total revenues (this does NOT include player salaries; it only includes the costs of running the NFL as an entity, none of the team and player costs are factored in - except possibly the money and benefits going to retired players [I'm not sure if the teams or League Office pay that]) and distributes the remainder to the teams. The teams take the "national revenue" and combine it with their "local revenue" then subtract all of the expenses (including player salaries, player benefits, etc.) which gives them their "operating profit."

The "national revenue" figure is basically the NFL League Office's profit, but that's a different situation due to the NFL's tax-exempt status.

And with that, I've said my part. I'm moving on.
 

Dxmissile

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
4,526
" is because it's a non-profit entity. T

That’s why they don’t use the word profit in any of their spreadsheets. They get the revenue and then based off a percentage of that revenue they pay the owners and do whatever else they do with it. It’s a continuous cycle. Like the 7 billion they payed out to the owners still left the Nfl with about another 7 billion and in 2016 after they gave the owners their share they had about another 5 billion left. All salaries are payed out before they as in the owners get their cut from the league revenues which mean the players only get the a predetermined piece of the pie. Which the owners almost make up in ticket sales merchandise parking and concessions. That’s why in 2016 on average all 32 teams had a Profit of over 300 million
 

Dxmissile

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
4,526
According to Forbes the NFL's revenue was $13.3 billion in 2016 that's the last complete figure. Profits are less and they shared $6.4 billion with the players union in salaries and other benefits.
The 7 billion gets paid out to the owners not the players the players only see what ever they get in their contracts. I’m sure the players union gets something but it’s a whole lot less than what the owners make. The owners pay the contracts not the players union. Which like any union I assume there are fees that the players pay and the nfl to keep it going.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
That’s why they don’t use the word profit in any of their spreadsheets. They get the revenue and then based off a percentage of that revenue they pay the owners and do whatever else they do with it. It’s a continuous cycle. Like the 7 billion they payed out to the owners still left the Nfl with about another 7 billion and in 2016 after they gave the owners their share they had about another 5 billion left. All salaries are payed out before they as in the owners get their cut from the league revenues which mean the players only get the a predetermined piece of the pie. Which the owners almost make up in ticket sales merchandise parking and concessions. That’s why in 2016 on average all 32 teams had a Profit of over 300 million

Everything you're saying here is not correct. Your own article doesn't even support it:
Green Bay’s local revenue, which the team generates and keeps for itself, was a franchise-record $197.4 million, bringing the team’s total to $441.4 million. The Packers’ operating profit, which fluctuates due to stadium renovation expenses and the cyclical nature of player salaries, was $65.4 million.

The teams pay the player salaries (along with their other expenses) from their local revenue and their cut of national revenue. Check page 20 of the below link:
http://shareholder.broadridge.com/pdf/gbp/green-bay-packers-2017-annual-report.pdf

It shows you the income statement for the Packers in 2015 and 2016.
 
Last edited:

Dxmissile

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
4,526
Everything you're saying here is not correct. Your own article doesn't even support it:


The teams pay the player salaries (along with their other expenses) from their local revenue and their cut of national revenue. Please, stop arguing here. You're misunderstanding this. Check page 20 of the below link:
http://shareholder.broadridge.com/pdf/gbp/green-bay-packers-2017-annual-report.pdf

It shows you the income statement for the Packers in 2015 and 2016.
No what I said was Nfl revenue the NfL don’t use the term profits. The only reason why we know how much the teams make is because the Packers are a public.

So now we go from talking NFl to local teams lol.

So when they say revenue they are talking profit they then take some of that and give it to the teams the cowboys made over 850 million last year alone then you subtract their payroll and you have the teams profit but the nfl 14 billion is their profits

. That’s why in 2016 on average all 32 teams had a Profit of over 300 million

These statements clearly show I understand how the TEAMS get their profits but I’m still waiting on you to show me anything that says NFl profits instead of saying revenue

I already made that statement about how that money is allocated to the teams and how the teams indicate their profits not the profits of the nfl. Because the entire 14 billion isn’t split to all the teams.

I’m just trying to figure out how this turned into revenue and profits when this entire conversation was about how much the players are getting?? It seems that you like to pick and choose points without looking at the big picture because a lot of what you’re saying I already said when it comes to profits of the nfl team. And my article supports exactly what i said about revenue and how the team get their money.

The entire point of why I responded to the questions was because someone said that the players get 55 percent of the 550 million and that they should be happy with that. I was just pointing out that the owners are making way more money then the players and if they was so concerned about player safety then they should take away the Thursday games .

So maybe that’s where the disconnect is coming from because I’m talking about the original question while you came in talking about benefits
 

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
ROD Credit | 2022 TOP Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
38,395
The 7 billion gets paid out to the owners not the players the players only see what ever they get in their contracts. I’m sure the players union gets something but it’s a whole lot less than what the owners make. The owners pay the contracts not the players union. Which like any union I assume there are fees that the players pay and the nfl to keep it going.
Last number I saw was 55% to the players and union which went up from the 48% it was before.
 

Dxmissile

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
4,526
Last number I saw was 55% to the players and union which went up from the 48% it was before.
Yeah that’s correct that’s from last year the revenue is expected to big bigger than last year. The percentages represent how the cap get set because you have to multiply 167million by 32 that’s the money that’s allocated to the teams. The teams have to spend 85 percent of the cap and the nfl as a whole had to spend 95%of the cap if they don’t the extra goes directly to the players.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
The entire point of why I responded to the questions was because someone said that the players get 55 percent of the 550 million and that they should be happy with that.

So maybe that’s where the disconnect is coming from because I’m talking about the original question while you came in talking about benefits

The disconnect is because you keep making wrong statements and stubbornly arguing that you're not wrong when confronted with it.

You were already proven wrong on the original point you referenced here. The players get 55% of the TNF TV deal. @OldSchool already corrected himself that it's $450 million per year, not $550 million per year, but here's your proof of that:
http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/01/media/thursday-night-football-nbc-cbs-deal/index.html

Here's your proof that the players get 55% of that:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...fl-2017-167-million-free-agency-cba/98577346/
Under the 2011 collective bargaining agreement, players are guaranteed 47% of “total revenue” over the life of the deal, drawing from three streams: TV deals (55%), league properties (45%) and local revenue (40%).

You then doubled-down on some weird argument where you mistook the NFL's gross revenues for its profits and have refused to budge despite being completely wrong. At this point, I'm just not interested in arguing more with you. I figured if I explained to you why you were mistaken and cited sources, you'd just own it. But it's clear that's not going to happen.

I was just pointing out that the owners are making way more money then the players and if they was so concerned about player safety then they should take away the Thursday games .

If that happens, the players lose 55% of that $450 million TV deal that goes away with the TNF games. That's what @OldSchool told you. If that was explained to the players, I bet they'd reconsider getting rid of those games.

And I apologize if this post comes off as harsh or dickish, but I'm frustrated at this point. I'm just not getting anywhere here on an issue that isn't opinion despite providing the facts.
 

Dxmissile

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
4,526
When did I make a statement and say that the players don’t. What I said was I didn’t know where he got his numbers from then he corrected himself. If you do 167 million x32 it comes out to a lot more than 450 million.

The TNF football deal is apart of that 14 billion in revenue. And the reason why I used revenue instead of profits is because it’s what the nfl uses they don’t use the term profit only the teams do not the NFl.

And without the players there is no league so like I said it goes both ways if the owners wanted to protect the players they would give up theirs 45 % share of that deal too. Like I said the NFl is the employers the employees has to work the schedule they are given so why should it be on the players to negotiate anything away that was my original point.

And no I’m not wrong you haven’t shown anything or proven anything to me. Everything I have shown supports my arguments about the use of Revenue when it comes to the Nfl or any non profit organization. You have YET to show me anything where the NFl uses the term Profit other the the teams which I already pointed out

You then go to try to school me on how the teams get their profits after I already made statements to that twice. Continue thinking you know everything
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
The NFL is a NON-PROFIT organization (which gives it tax-exempt status). It has members, which are the teams. The NFL distributes its NET REVENUES to the teams, who then use those net revenues ("National Revenue") along with their revenues ("Local Revenues") to pay their expenses to determine their profits. The teams then pay taxes on their profits. The NFL, by definition, does not have profits. That is why they don't use the word profit.

The $14 billion figure is GROSS REVENUE for the entire league. How did they calculate it? They used the Packers' income statement, combined NATIONAL REVENUE AND LOCAL REVENUE, and multiplied that number by 32. That gave them an estimation of the GROSS REVENUE for the entire NFL combined. That number does not represent profits. The approximately $7.8 billion that the NFL distributed to the teams is also NOT PROFIT. The owners do not keep that money. They use it for the expenses.

The Packers had an operating profit of approximately $65 million based on their most recent financial report. That number represent profits. Please, trust me on this.

As for the $450 million, if that TV deal goes away, it means the salary cap drops and the players make less money. That's why the players may change their stance on getting rid of TNF if they understand the financial implications of it all.

With that, I am out. Have a nice evening.
 

Prime Time

PT
Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
20,922
Name
Peter
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...oncussion-protocol-what-will-nfl-do-about-it/

Seahawks clearly violated concussion protocol; what will NFL do about it?
Posted by Mike Florio on November 12, 2017

873041112-e1510490620776.jpg

Getty Images

It’s obvious that the Seahawks violated the concussion protocol when allowing quarterback Russell Wilson to return to Thursday night’s game without a concussion evaluation. The question is whether the NFL will do anything about it.

Adam Schefter of ESPN report that the Seahawks “are expected to face consequences” for the failure. Even if they do, what will they be?

Previously, every situation involving a player who did not receive a concussion evaluation when he apparently should have did not result in discipline for anyone. Instead, the league would find a reason to excuse the irregularity by finding some obscure loophole in the rules and issuing a “don’t do that again” admonition.

The difference in this case is that, unlike prior cases, the concussion protocol was activated when the referee sent Wilson to the sideline. At that point, the Seahawks had no choice but to give Wilson an evaluation. And they didn’t.

So what will the “consequences” be? As noted on Friday, a revised policy unveiled in 2016 provides that, for a first offense, the team faces a maximum fine of $150,000. Which means it can be less than that.

Elsewhere in the policy appears an explanation that, if the league and the NFL Players Association agree that aggravating circumstances exist, the fine will be at least $50,000. Which implies that there’s a chance the outcome will be that Wilson innocently slipped through the fingers of team doctors and trainers, and that the fine could be what amounts to, for a franchise owned by one of the richest men in the world, the fine for taking a book back a day late to the library. (Google it, kids.)

To summarize, while the Seahawks may indeed face “consequences” for what occurred on Thursday night, the “consequences” for their behavior may be sufficiently minimal to prompt owner Paul Allen to shrug and say, “Consequences, shmonsequences as long as I’m really, really, really rich.”