Richard Sherman; Billionaire owners should build their own stadiums

[CGI_Ram]

I'm sure the owners love Sherman right now. Lol.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...om&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial

Seattle Seahawks superstar cornerback Richard Shermanstated this week that one of his top priorities if he were running for president would be eliminating the use of public money to build new stadiums.

Eric Mandel of MyNorthwest.com passed along the outspoken defender's comments that he made during a radio appearance with John Clayton on 710 ESPN Seattle. Sherman believes wealthy team owners should be the ones footing the bill.

"I'd get us out of this deficit," Sherman said. "I'd stop spending billions of taxpayer dollars on stadiums and probably get us out of debt and maybe make the billionaires who actually benefit from the stadiums pay for them. That kind of seems like a system that would work for me."

He made those comments Monday. On the same day, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell was in the Buffalo area, talking about how the Bills could use a new home field in order to "stay up" with other facilities around the league, per Tyler Dunne of the Buffalo News.

"Stadiums are important, just to making sure that the team can continue to compete, not only throughout the NFL but also compete in this environment," Goodell said. "Because we've got great facilities here now and the Bills have to stay up with that."

Last year, Jeffrey Dorfman of Forbes concluded the public funding of stadiums is a losing proposition for taxpayers. "Since most events held at a stadium will rely heavily on the local fanbase, they will never generate enough tax revenue to pay back taxpayers for the cost of the stadium," he wrote.

Sherman, who jokingly suggested wide receiver Tyler Lockett could be his running mate and fellow wideout Doug Baldwin would be the Secretary of Defense since he's an "angry guy," also talked about making the game less favorable to offenses.

"I'd make defensive players able to at least have the ability to go out there and play," he said, per Mandel. "Instead of pass interference being a potential 999-yard play, it could only be 10 yards, just like offensive pass interference, which only seems fair."

That's a comment that should earn him a few extra favorably points from his constituents, which in this case are other NFL defenders.

It's not the first time he's discussed the political realm. Eliot Shorr-Parks of NJ Advance Media noted before last year's Super Bowl that Sherman wouldn't rule out a future in politics. "There are some things out there that need to be changed, and some things where I think I may be an asset," the cornerback said.

Add in Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, who also wouldn't rule out a future in politics during an interview with British GQ last week, and the race for the White House one day could suddenly get a lot more charismatic.

 

[DaveFan'51]

I'm sure the owners love Sherman right now. Lol.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...om&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial

Seattle Seahawks superstar cornerback Richard Shermanstated this week that one of his top priorities if he were running for president would be eliminating the use of public money to build new stadiums.

Eric Mandel of MyNorthwest.com passed along the outspoken defender's comments that he made during a radio appearance with John Clayton on 710 ESPN Seattle. Sherman believes wealthy team owners should be the ones footing the bill.

"I'd get us out of this deficit," Sherman said. "I'd stop spending billions of taxpayer dollars on stadiums and probably get us out of debt and maybe make the billionaires who actually benefit from the stadiums pay for them. That kind of seems like a system that would work for me."

He made those comments Monday. On the same day, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell was in the Buffalo area, talking about how the Bills could use a new home field in order to "stay up" with other facilities around the league, per Tyler Dunne of the Buffalo News.

"Stadiums are important, just to making sure that the team can continue to compete, not only throughout the NFL but also compete in this environment," Goodell said. "Because we've got great facilities here now and the Bills have to stay up with that."

Last year, Jeffrey Dorfman of Forbes concluded the public funding of stadiums is a losing proposition for taxpayers. "Since most events held at a stadium will rely heavily on the local fanbase, they will never generate enough tax revenue to pay back taxpayers for the cost of the stadium," he wrote.

Sherman, who jokingly suggested wide receiver Tyler Lockett could be his running mate and fellow wideout Doug Baldwin would be the Secretary of Defense since he's an "angry guy," also talked about making the game less favorable to offenses.

"I'd make defensive players able to at least have the ability to go out there and play," he said, per Mandel. "Instead of pass interference being a potential 999-yard play, it could only be 10 yards, just like offensive pass interference, which only seems fair."

That's a comment that should earn him a few extra favorably points from his constituents, which in this case are other NFL defenders.

It's not the first time he's discussed the political realm. Eliot Shorr-Parks of NJ Advance Media noted before last year's Super Bowl that Sherman wouldn't rule out a future in politics. "There are some things out there that need to be changed, and some things where I think I may be an asset," the cornerback said.

Add in Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, who also wouldn't rule out a future in politics during an interview with British GQ last week, and the race for the White House one day could suddenly get a lot more charismatic.

For once, and ONLY once, I completely agree with Sherman!! HE'S RIGHT ON THIS ONE!!

 

[Legatron4]

I mean he's not wrong. Owners are greedy and will continue to be. The NFL could have its own country with all the money they have.

 

[OldSchool]

I totally agree with him on this subject.

 

[yrba1]

Never really disliked Sherman to begin with. The fact that he says this makes me actually like him more.
As owners/CEOs fatten their pockets, they have a tendency to cut corners to maintain upkeep, it comes at the expense of the employees'/management's well-being. For the NFL's case, looks like they want to address the concussion issue by convoluting the rulebook and take advantage of taxpayer's money to fund stadiums

 

[Roman Snow]

"I'd get us out of this deficit," Sherman said. "I'd stop spending billions of taxpayer dollars on stadiums and probably get us out of debt and maybe make the billionaires who actually benefit from the stadiums pay for them. That kind of seems like a system that would work for me."

I know there is a bit of hyperbole with this statement. But some truth, as well.

The taxpayers subsidize arenas, and stadiums, however, and there is at least SOME return to the community, with jobs, restaurants, hotels, etc. I am against public financing of stadiums...and health care...and education...and world programs...

I wonder how Mr. Sherman, (and others) feel about other drains to the tax-payer, and (especially in California) to small business owners, that actually are detrimental to jobs, safety and our economy. He is a smart Stanford grad. Hope he is consistent in his thinking.