2013 NFC North/NFL Thread

[martyconlonontherun]

Exactly. "Starting from scratch" was the key phrase (though maybe "have a do-over" might support my statements more). 50 teams would be doable with smaller stadiums. Just look at college football. In 2012, there were 60 teams that averaged at least 40k per game. The average home attendance for a Big East team was nearly 35k. Sun Belt teams averaged over 20k/game. If there was an established pro team in Little Rock or Louisville or Hartford, they could draw 40k/game.

There's a weird sense of loyalty with college sports. People like it cause it's more "pure" and alumni want their degree to have more shine. I don't think that happens as much in pro sports.

Packers have that pureness to them but it's mostly due to their history and uniqueness. I think having that many teams would cause ratings similar to the Bucks.

[mu03eng]

This is well said, and I meant in an earlier post to point out the taxpayer funded stadiums, huge point there. That is why the league will freak out though. Taxpayer funded stadiums that don't sell out in the playoffs and said taxpayer then can not watch the game is a big problem. Especially when the league wants to keep leveraging taxpayer dollars for new stadiums down the road.

That's why I don't understand the blackout rule.  I'm not going to the game because it might be blacked out.  It's as if the NFL is creating it's own tiger pit to fall into.

[mu03eng]

There's a weird sense of loyalty with college sports. People like it cause it's more "pure" and alumni want their degree to have more shine. I don't think that happens as much in pro sports.

Packers have that pureness to them but it's mostly due to their history and uniqueness. I think having that many teams would cause ratings similar to the Bucks.

I agree with this, but look at the EPL, there are small city teams with rabid followers and a loyal fan base.  If you "localized" an NFL team that had it's own traditions you could generate that same look at feel.  Hell, look at the Seattle and Portland franchises in MLS, they sell out every game and is a great atmosphere, you could recreate that with "smaller" franchises.  You think Omaha wouldn't be crazy fanatical about having an NFL franchise and stadium that seats 40,000?

[Dish]

That's why I don't understand the blackout rule.  I'm not going to the game because it might be blacked out.  It's as if the NFL is creating it's own tiger pit to fall into.

You're right, fair debate and point.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

This is well said, and I meant in an earlier post to point out the taxpayer funded stadiums, huge point there. That is why the league will freak out though. Taxpayer funded stadiums that don't sell out in the playoffs and said taxpayer then can not watch the game is a big problem. Especially when the league wants to keep leveraging taxpayer dollars for new stadiums down the road.

Right. From a PR perspective, the league cares.

But, from a "OMG, it's not a sell-out!" perspective (which is what people are acting like in some sections of the media), the league doesn't care.

Also, I'm surprised the league even has blackout rules at this point.

[jsglow]

NFL just extended the deadline until tomorrow.  3000 more to sell.

[GGGG]

Another complicating factor in this is the Packers' ownership structure.  I'm sure a lot of "owners" are going to be pissed that their team didn't buy back its tickets so they could watch the game.

[🏀]

Is anyone seriously worried that it will be blacked out though?

[Dish]

Another complicating factor in this is the Packers' ownership structure.  I'm sure a lot of "owners" are going to be pissed that their team didn't buy back its tickets so they could watch the game.

This is a very solid point.

[martyconlonontherun]

This is a very solid point.

I don't know. It's not like the owners actually own the team. I own a share and I don't feel I have any say on how the organization to spend its money. I would be more upset if a greedy owner was pocketing money.

So the NFL has rules that it can't discount prices or are they just afraid to piss off previous buyers? I mean the NFL is probably the only sport not constantly having ticket price reductions.

[MUBurrow]

The Packers should have bought the remaining tickets and donated them to Boys &Girls club, etc, the second they remained on the market long enough for this to become an issue. So much of the Packers value and prestige is tied up in the (sometimes overwrought) small town, historical prestige that it was foolish to allow a couple thousand dollars to tarnish that from a PR perspective. The sense of overwhelming demand drives demand better than anything, and it's not like this would be common occurrence. Season tix are sold out forever and you probably won't have a playoff season with this little excitement/advance notice ever again.

[jsglow]

The Packers should have bought the remaining tickets and donated them to Boys &Girls club, etc, the second they remained on the market long enough for this to become an issue. So much of the Packers value and prestige is tied up in the (sometimes overwrought) small town, historical prestige that it was foolish to allow a couple thousand dollars to tarnish that from a PR perspective. The sense of overwhelming demand drives demand better than anything, and it's not like this would be common occurrence. Season tix are sold out forever and you probably won't have a playoff season with this little excitement/advance notice ever again.

I suspect that's exactly what'll happen tomorrow afternoon if there are still 1000 left.  More likely be a combination of local sponsors.

[GGGG]

I don't know. It's not like the owners actually own the team. I own a share and I don't feel I have any say on how the organization to spend its money. I would be more upset if a greedy owner was pocketing money.

That's not quite what I mean. I mean that the Packers feel that they have a responsibility to its "owners" that the game be televised. An owner who pockets money has profit motive at least. The Packers while needing to be fiscally responsible, have acted to benefit its fans before and a lot of people would feel it should now.

[brandx]

The Packers should have bought the remaining tickets and donated them to Boys &Girls club, etc, the second they remained on the market long enough for this to become an issue. So much of the Packers value and prestige is tied up in the (sometimes overwrought) small town, historical prestige that it was foolish to allow a couple thousand dollars to tarnish that from a PR perspective. The sense of overwhelming demand drives demand better than anything, and it's not like this would be common occurrence. Season tix are sold out forever and you probably won't have a playoff season with this little excitement/advance notice ever again.

Send the kiddies out in -10 weather

[ZiggysFryBoy]

That's not quite what I mean. I mean that the Packers feel that they have a responsibility to its "owners" that the game be televised. An owner who pockets money has profit motive at least. The Packers while needing to be fiscally responsible, have acted to benefit its fans before and a lot of people would feel it should now.

don't forget all of the "assistant coaches" out there too.

[Dish]

I wish Tom Coughlin was coaching in this game.

[Sir Lawrence]

I wish Tom Coughlin was coaching in this game.

Because of the beet face?

[hairy worthen]

I wish Tom Coughlin was coaching in this game.

First thing I thought of was his puffy red face at the end of that NFC championship game.  This game will be worse. New forecast has negative 5 as a freaking high temp.

[MUBurrow]

Send the kiddies out in -10 weather

Uffda. Yeah, that's a good point.  Give to corporate sponsors maybe? Point being, team shouldn't have allowed the "packers fans are the best, all tix sold out for forever" narrative to be challenged.

[Dish]

Because of the beet face?

Yes sir, wasn't sure skin could turn that color.

[Dish]

Cutler's final contract numbers are interesting. Each side can certainly consider it a win.

There is no signing bonus, Cutler will get one time payments each March. $22.5 million this year, $15.5 next year, $16 in 2016. With no bonus, those will be his yearly cap hits as well. All that is guaranteed, so cutting Cutler in March 2016 would be $16 mil of dead money that season.

I had heard the hometown discount he took was 10%, which now I understand, as if he was franchised the next 3 years, his cap hit would be almost right at $60 mil.

Interesting part of the deal are the remaining years. There are small workout bonuses, but $0 guaranteed money. In 2017, Cutler would be due $12.5 mil. $13.5 in 2018, escalating to $17.5 and $19.2 in final two years. He'll never see the last two years, but be interesting in 2017/2018, where Bears would have a bargain (assuming no re-negotiation).

[brandx]

Cutler's final contract numbers are interesting. Each side can certainly consider it a win.

There is no signing bonus, Cutler will get one time payments each March. $22.5 million this year, $15.5 next year, $16 in 2016. With no bonus, those will be his yearly cap hits as well. All that is guaranteed, so cutting Cutler in March 2016 would be $16 mil of dead money that season.

I had heard the hometown discount he took was 10%, which now I understand, as if he was franchised the next 3 years, his cap hit would be almost right at $60 mil.

Interesting part of the deal are the remaining years. There are small workout bonuses, but $0 guaranteed money. In 2017, Cutler would be due $12.5 mil. $13.5 in 2018, escalating to $17.5 and $19.2 in final two years. He'll never see the last two years, but be interesting in 2017/2018, where Bears would have a bargain (assuming no re-negotiation).

Most interesting is the cap hit they take next year - a year where they certainly need to re-build the defense. I figured the reason they signed him rather than franchising the next 2 years was so that they could delay any big cap hit for a couple years.

[Dish]

Most interesting is the cap hit they take next year - a year where they certainly need to re-build the defense. I figured the reason they signed him rather than franchising the next 2 years was so that they could delay any big cap hit for a couple years.

What these numbers in year one tell me are that they have some plan in place. Based on the comments by Emery today, Peppers seems to be done. He would be $8 mil of dead money, but he would have been $16-$18 mil if not cut. I have to believe Tillman isn't back and I believe Bush will get cut. After Peppers gets cut, I believe they'd have $50 mil in cap space, minus 22 mil now with Cutler and whatever the Slauson/Jennings deals are. Figure they have about $25 mil left, but still 20 something roster spots left.

[brandx]

What these numbers in year one tell me are that they have some plan in place. Based on the comments by Emery today, Peppers seems to be done. He would be $8 mil of dead money, but he would have been $16-$18 mil if not cut. I have to believe Tillman isn't back and I believe Bush will get cut. After Peppers gets cut, I believe they'd have $50 mil in cap space, minus 22 mil now with Cutler and whatever the Slauson/Jennings deals are. Figure they have about $25 mil left, but still 20 something roster spots left.

Well, as a GB fan, I have to admit that it looks like Emery has a plan - something I never saw with Angelo. He did a masterful job with the offensive line (though Mills really doesn't impress). I guess this year we'll see what he can do on the other side of the ball. They don't need a top 5 defense anymore, but something in the 10-15 range would certainly make getting to the playoffs and possibly advancing seem like a good possibility.

[🏀]

Cutler's final contract numbers are interesting. Each side can certainly consider it a win.

There is no signing bonus, Cutler will get one time payments each March. $22.5 million this year, $15.5 next year, $16 in 2016. With no bonus, those will be his yearly cap hits as well. All that is guaranteed, so cutting Cutler in March 2016 would be $16 mil of dead money that season.

I had heard the hometown discount he took was 10%, which now I understand, as if he was franchised the next 3 years, his cap hit would be almost right at $60 mil.

Interesting part of the deal are the remaining years. There are small workout bonuses, but $0 guaranteed money. In 2017, Cutler would be due $12.5 mil. $13.5 in 2018, escalating to $17.5 and $19.2 in final two years. He'll never see the last two years, but be interesting in 2017/2018, where Bears would have a bargain (assuming no re-negotiation).

That's good structure for the Bears. Looks like 15 is the season for then to bring out all together.