NFL 2018-19 2.0

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Except the NFL isn't a "firm." It is a collection of firms, who if they collude to not hire Kaepernick, are potentially in violation of labor law.

[mu03eng]

Question, does the existence of the AAF hurt Kapernick's case? Christian Hackenburg is a starting QB in that league, if Kapernick "just wants to play football" wouldn't he be playing in that league? Could he play in the AAF while continuing his lawsuit against the NFL?

[Cheeks]

Ray Lewis would have been a better example.

An example, not sure a better example.  I don’t think he has been put on the pedestal in any way close to the same way the other example was.  Night and day

[Pakuni]

Sorry gang, the NFL has a product to market. Its goal is to make money and somewhere some genius figured out that Colin Kapernick is poison to the NFL's demographic because of his political statements.

Any argument that begins with an assumption that the NFL is run by geniuses is a very bad argument.

[StillAWarrior]

Any argument that begins with an assumption that the NFL is run by geniuses is a very bad argument.

The NFL is run by people who are very fortunate to have found their way into an industry where even idiots can make a lot of money.

[forgetful]

The NFL is run by people who are very fortunate to have found their way into an industry where even idiots can make a lot of money.

Isn't that most industries? Where often who you know is more important than what you know.

[Pakuni]

Question, does the existence of the AAF hurt Kapernick's case? Christian Hackenburg is a starting QB in that league, if Kapernick "just wants to play football" wouldn't he be playing in that league? Could he play in the AAF while continuing his lawsuit against the NFL?

Well, did the existence of HBUCs hurt the cases of black students who'd been denied entrance to the universities of Alabama and Mississippi? I mean, if those kids "just wanted to get a college education" wouldn't they have just attended Grambling or Southern?

No, the existence of an inferior alternative would not justify any unlawful actions to keep Kaepernick out the NFL (if collusion existed ... I have no idea).
And the notion that Kaepernick somehow doesn't really want to play because he's not in the AAF (or CFL, for that matter) is just as dumb as saying James Meredith didn't really want to go to college because he chose to fight for entrance to Ole Miss rather than attend an HBUC.

[Pakuni]

Isn't that most industries? Where often who you know is more important than what you know.

Shhhhh ... don't want to let the wealthy in this nation think they didn't all really just pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

[StillAWarrior]

Isn't that most industries?

I don't think so.  At all.  I think the people running most industries are (and have to be) extremely intelligent to succeed.  They need to innovate, develop new products, fend of competitors, etc.

The NFL has essentially, a single product - although they package it multiple ways.  The product was developed developed decades ago, and has remained fairly consistent over all those years.  The product is extraordinarily popular and amazingly resistant to diminution of that popularity.  The barriers to entry for competitors is extremely high.  It's a classic industry where the primary requirement is simply to avoid screwing it up.

That said, I'm sure there are a lot of very smart people running the NFL.  Notwithstanding my eagerness to rip on them.

[MU82]

Nike stock is at an all-time high. I guess Kaepernick wasn't Kryptonite for that enterprise.

Not sure what Ted Kennedy would say about that, though.

[Cheeks]

I don't think so.  At all.  I think the people running most industries are (and have to be) extremely intelligent to succeed.  They need to innovate, develop new products, fend of competitors, etc.

The NFL has essentially, a single product - although they package it multiple ways.  The product was developed developed decades ago, and has remained fairly consistent over all those years.  The product is extraordinarily popular and amazingly resistant to diminution of that popularity.  The barriers to entry for competitors is extremely high.  It's a classic industry where the primary requirement is simply to avoid screwing it up.

That said, I'm sure there are a lot of very smart people running the NFL.  Notwithstanding my eagerness to rip on them.

Yup.

Most of the NFL guys I deal with are from the investment banking or similar background.  Ivy League, very smart people.  Most did not come from a sports background.  A number from strong legal backgrounds, but the league pulls from top people from various industries.

The Who you know stuff certainly matters in some industries, but over simplification as far as I’m concerned.

[Cheeks]

Nike stock is at an all-time high. I guess Kaepernick wasn't Kryptonite for that enterprise.

Not sure what Ted Kennedy would say about that, though.

Nike is a global brand that moves up or down for a lot of reasons....also a company with sweatshop kids making their stuff at times....surprised CK would want to be associated with that.  But different folks get in bed with all kinds I guess.

Pretty sure Ted is dead and doesn’t think about anything.

[StillAWarrior]

Pretty sure Ted is dead and doesn’t think about anything.

“Uh...do whatever you want, I’m super dead.”

[Jockey]

Sorry gang, the NFL has a product to market. Its goal is to make money and somewhere some genius figured out that Colin Kapernick is poison to the NFL's demographic because of his political statements.

It is just their opinion (mostly rooted in fear) - not some truth that they figured out.

[🏀]

Sorry gang, the NFL has a product to market. Its goal is to make money and somewhere some genius figured out that Colin Kapernick is poison to the NFL's demographic because of his political statements.

Now think about something. Suppose an employee used his or her position with your firm to advocate a position that was detrimental to your market position and profitability. I don't care what your politics are, it's a matter of using the corporate forum to advocate a position at odds with what the corporation does or stands for.

We had that happen in one of our offices recently where a staff member reportedly ridiculed the President of the United States. What he did in his off-hours is his own business, including campaigning for anyone he wants. But in an office where we have people of many different political persuasions and have to keep them all happy, his criticism was detrimental to our firm's corporate efforts. He was severely reprimanded and, if it happens again, he likely would be seeking alternative employment.

As a rule, corporations don't care what you do in your off-hours as long as you do it as an individual. Mr. Kapernick, God love him, used the NFL's product as a means of communicating displeasure with the government, which is at odds with a view held by a very sizeable number of NFL customers.

At day's end, Mr. Kapernick does what anyone in a free society can do. Find another job or, in the absence of another job, find another career.

#bestfansinbaseball

[dgies9156]

#bestfansinbaseball

Damn straight. Glad you know!!!!   

[Cheeks]

It is just their opinion (mostly rooted in fear) - not some truth that they figured out.

Reems of data, surveys and focus groups.  Not one person’s opinion, but how their customers feel.  That is the truth they figured out, whether one agrees or disagrees with it, that is the belief of their customers.  There is a reason why things dampened down considerably in the last year, the player agents, the league and the players are smart folks and they were alienating the people who pay the money to make the league exist, or watch the games, but the products that support it.  Reems of data.

[mu03eng]

Well, did the existence of HBUCs hurt the cases of black students who'd been denied entrance to the universities of Alabama and Mississippi? I mean, if those kids "just wanted to get a college education" wouldn't they have just attended Grambling or Southern?

No, the existence of an inferior alternative would not justify any unlawful actions to keep Kaepernick out the NFL (if collusion existed ... I have no idea).
And the notion that Kaepernick somehow doesn't really want to play because he's not in the AAF (or CFL, for that matter) is just as dumb as saying James Meredith didn't really want to go to college because he chose to fight for entrance to Ole Miss rather than attend an HBUC.

That's government institutions versus private employers, I doubt the same standards apply but I could be wrong

[dgies9156]

Except the NFL isn't a "firm." It is a collection of firms, who if they collude to not hire Kaepernick, are potentially in violation of labor law.

Excuse me? That's like saying McDonald's is a collection of firms. The NFL is a multi-billion business with franchisees, just like McDonald's or Yum Brands. The League exerts control over the franchisees, who agree to the League's bylaws and regulation as a condition of their franchise agreement.

Secondly, how do you know there is collusion? On what basis? Perhaps they think alike or fear the contagion of Kapernick using the NFL for a political forum.

I get people do not like the NFL. It's big business and its primary product brings out some of the worst aspects of human behavior. But the owners who bought in paid hundreds of millions of dollars (unless you're the Halases or gave money to the Green Bay Packers) and their goal is to make billions.

And for those of you who don't think the NFL is genius, what's the most popular sports league in the world? Probably the NFL.

[Pakuni]

Excuse me? That's like saying McDonald's is a collection of firms. The NFL is a multi-billion business with franchisees, just like McDonald's or Yum Brands. The League exerts control over the franchisees, who agree to the League's bylaws and regulation as a condition of their franchise agreement.

This is not correct. The NFL relationship with its teams is not at all like McDonald's with its franchises.  Simply preposterous and indicative of total ignorance of how the league operates.

[Cheeks]

This is not correct. The NFL relationship with its teams is not at all like McDonald's with its franchises.  Simply preposterous and indicative of total ignorance of how the league operates.

Somewhere in the middle.  Dgies is not wrong about the bylaws and ultimately falling under the SHIELD that is the NFL.  Steelers can’t decide to have a payroll above the cap while the Jaguars have to stay at the cap, as an example.  The NFL administers punishment, collects most of the revenue and distributes it equally amongst the franchises.  An owner can be stripped of his / her franchise for certain conduct.

I wouldn’t say it is like McDonald’s necessary, but there are qualities to their setup that are similar.

[Pakuni]

Somewhere in the middle.  Dgies is not wrong about the bylaws and ultimately falling under the SHIELD that is the NFL.  Steelers can’t decide to have a payroll above the cap while the Jaguars have to stay at the cap, as an example.  The NFL administers punishment, collects most of the revenue and distributes it equally amongst the franchises.  An owner can be stripped of his / her franchise for certain conduct.

I wouldn’t say it is like McDonald’s necessary, but there are qualities to their setup that are similar.

No, he's 100 percent wrong.
And you're heading that way.
The league doesn't decide a salary cap. The owners do. The league doesn't administer punishment on its own. It does so only under the authority granted to it by the owners and with the owners' blessing. Roger Goddell and his administration can't strip an owner of his/her franchise. Only the other owners, collectively, can do that.  The owners don't take direction from the league. The league takes direction from the owners.
It is not at all like the McDonald's setup. In fact, it's the exact opposite. With McDonald's, the franchise owners must act in accordance to what the corporation dictates. In the NFL, the corporation acts in accordance with what the franchise owners dictate. At McDonald's, corporate sets the rules for the franchises to enact. In the NFL, the franchises set the rules for corporate to enact. And last I checked, McDonald's franchise owners don't get to fire the CEO, nor does the CEO answer to their whims.

[Cheeks]

You say he is 100% wrong and yet several of your statements are incorrect.  Funny stuff.

[dgies9156]

Brother Pakuni:

I'm not intimate with the charter and bylaws of the NFL. I have better things to do with my time. But to suggest the NFL is not a for profit business that grants franchises and regulates franchise behavior is, well, something out there!

The difference between the ownership structure of McDonalds and that of the NFL, I'll grant you, is significant. Franchisees of the NFL own it, which means they can regulate behavior. But, in both cases, you live with bylaws and renegade franchisees, like it or not, have a very small voice in change at either place. Push things too far in either case (put Pepsi in a McDonalds or, say, move the Raiders without League approval) and you will end up in court. No ifs, ands or buts.

But back to the original point, if a McDonalds franchisee flew an American flag upside down, he or she would get slapped around so fast the franchisee would not know what hit 'em. Ditto for a McDonalds franchisee's employees whose used their McDonald's status to advocate vegetarianism. The NFL is no different.

[Cheeks]

For starters, the owners do not decide the salary cap.  That is an AGREED upon result of the collective bargaining agreement....note...COLLECTIVE...not owners only, but COLLECTIVE.   Similar to the NBA, the players association in the NFL (NFLPA, I deal with them every time we sign a player to an endorsement) actually dictates the exact amount of the salary cap....not the owners.
This was a collectively bargained for right the NFLPA won.  The pools of money include TV revenues, tickets, merchandise, etc, etc that are split evenly between the 32 teams for the salary cap number.

No question the Commissioner reports to the owners, and the owners wield massive control, which I assume was Pakuni's point.  But isn't 100% on the owners side and there are components of it like a franchise the way SOME decisions are made.