Mark Cuban: NFL 10 Years from Implosion

[cmnelson87]

How is taking away what is believed to be the best Sunday matchups and playing them on a shorter week helping the product? The Thursday games are typically shit. Not to mention, how often do the "best teams" from the year prior continue that the following year with all the roster turnover and injuries that happen in a typical season.



What offseason events are really popular now that weren't 10 years ago? The draft has always been big for football fans.. free agency during the salary cap era has been exciting to follow for football fans..

The scouting combine though? The schedule release? Yeah.. I guess it gets some pop, but the large percentage of NFL fans probably don't care too much.

The NFL right now is almost at a point where it cannot really go further up the mountain anymore, and now when you begin to oversaturate your own market, you start taking away from that amazing amount of interest that it has.



You say this now, just wait until Goodell decrees every team will be playing a game in London during the year.

The draft has been popular for a while, but not like it is now. Free agency has become much more popular because of NFL Network. Same with the combine. Everyone talks about those pointless 40 times.


The NFL isn't going to schedule games every night of the week. It simply wouldn't go through for the reasons many are stating. They are pushing safety to much to undo it by making such short weeks. But they have smart people formulating these schedules, and they could easily add more prime time games while balancing things so teams aren't playing a bunch of short weeks. Not saying I like it, but it wouldn't stop me from watching.

And maybe he does put 16 games in England. But it will be the teams with poor attendance losing the home games. Teams constantly selling out aren't going to lose their home games.

 

[cmnelson87]

The London thing is what gets me. As it stands right now, some teams require you to pay a license fee for season tickets that doesn't even factor into the price per game. I only know what the Redskins do, but I imagine most other teams do it, but when you purchase season tickets, you also HAVE to buy the pre-season tickets in your package as well.

So, if you are requiring those extra purchases, how are you going to explain to season-ticket holders that you are going to take a game away from them?

NFL is discussing changes to that in Orlando this week. Apparently the hope is to have it implemented by 2015, so you aren't paying full price fr preseason games.

As far as teams playing in London, I would assume it is factored in to the season ticket price. These contracts are typically signed prior to anything done with season tickets (Just like Buffalos contract with Toronto). Or, like in Green Bay, we have a separate package (1 preseason, 2 regular season games) for fans that were season ticket holders in Milwaukee when we played games there each year, so the regular season ticket holders aren't paying for a full home season.

 

[ThomasTomasz]

NFL is discussing changes to that in Orlando this week. Apparently the hope is to have it implemented by 2015, so you aren't paying full price fr preseason games.

As far as teams playing in London, I would assume it is factored in to the season ticket price. These contracts are typically signed prior to anything done with season tickets (Just like Buffalos contract with Toronto). Or, like in Green Bay, we have a separate package (1 preseason, 2 regular season games) for fans that were season ticket holders in Milwaukee when we played games there each year, so the regular season ticket holders aren't paying for a full home season.

I would hope that they would adjust those prices, because most people give them away or sell them for cheap just to make something back on them. If MLB can do different prices for "prime" games, then NFL teams can do different prices for pre-season games.

My second point isn't paying for a game that isn't there. I'm saying that people are paying all of this money before you even get to regular season games, and you are just going to take one away. You don't pay for it, but you should be getting the right to go to 8 games, not 6 or 7.

 

[cmnelson87]

Just to clarify, I'm with you guys about not wanting it to expand. I don't like the Thursday night games myself. I liked Sunday and Monday, with special occasions other days (ie: thanksgiving). But, I don't think anything the nfl will actually do will hurt them. I won't like changing the games, but I will still watch and buy tickets and apparel.

 

[cmnelson87]

I would hope that they would adjust those prices, because most people give them away or sell them for cheap just to make something back on them. If MLB can do different prices for "prime" games, then NFL teams can do different prices for pre-season games.

My second point isn't paying for a game that isn't there. I'm saying that people are paying all of this money before you even get to regular season games, and you are just going to take one away. You don't pay for it, but you should be getting the right to go to 8 games, not 6 or 7.

I get what you're saying with the second part now (misread it the first time). But, the counter to that is go to the games and it won't get taken away. The only teams losing home games are the teams that have poor attendance. While it sucks for the fans that actually go, it's the fan base as a whole that brought it on.

 

[spursup]

The teams losing the home games can't get fans there to start with. That's why they are doing it. What is going to cost you more fans: keeping the game in your city and forcing fans to either go or not see the game (blackout), or moving the game to England and allow the game to be shown on tv? If it was hurting teams, they wouldn't be happy to get those games.

The Rams obviously weren't happy to get those games.

 

[cmnelson87]

The Rams obviously weren't happy to get those games.

Oh really?

http://m.stltoday.com/sports/footba...11e1-aa72-001a4bcf6878.html?mobile_touch=true

The Rams wanted those games. They had to back out for reasons other than not wanting them.

 

[spursup]

Oh really?

http://m.stltoday.com/sports/footba...11e1-aa72-001a4bcf6878.html?mobile_touch=true

The Rams wanted those games. They had to back out for reasons other than not wanting them.

That article is from before they backed out of the deal, and in fact from before they even played a London game. So if you think there were other reasons for them backing out, go ahead and post them.

 

[cmnelson87]

That article is from before they backed out of the deal, and in fact from before they even played a London game. So if you think there were other reasons for them backing out, go ahead and post them.

Ask and you shall receive:

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/aug/14/st-louis-rams-nfl-london

 

[spursup]

Ask and you shall receive:

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/aug/14/st-louis-rams-nfl-london

"and ease fan discontent"...London was alienating the Rams and their fanbase which was my point to begin with.

 

[cmnelson87]

"and ease fan discontent"...London was alienating the Rams and their fanbase which was my point to begin with.

Yes, the fans weren't happy about it. Simple solution: go to the games then!! But the Rams wanted it. Which your original statement was that they didn't.

 

[spursup]

Yes, the fans weren't happy about it. Simple solution: go to the games then!! But the Rams wanted it. Which your original statement was that they didn't.

Your original statement was that all teams wanted it. The Rams played there once, saw the effect it had on their fan relations, didn't wanna do it anymore. Teams aren't jumping for joy at the opportunity to play in London.

 

[cmnelson87]

Your original statement was that all teams wanted it. The Rams played there once, saw the effect it had on their fan relations, didn't wanna do it anymore. Teams aren't jumping for joy at the opportunity to play in London.

Did you read those articles, or did you stop when you saw half a sentence that favored your argument? The bigger concern for St. Louis was getting things all set with the Edward Jones Dome. They were excited to play in London, and disappointed when they had to back out. They even said it was something they would like to try doing again in the future.

You have to understand that teams are looking to make money first and foremost. Playing to half empty stadiums is costing money. They enjoy having one less game to struggle to fill seats.

 

[ram29jackson]

Did you read those articles, or did you stop when you saw half a sentence that favored your argument? The bigger concern for St. Louis was getting things all set with the Edward Jones Dome. They were excited to play in London, and disappointed when they had to back out. They even said it was something they would like to try doing again in the future.

You have to understand that teams are looking to make money first and foremost. Playing to half empty stadiums is costing money. They enjoy having one less game to struggle to fill seats.

absolutely none of the players want to do it = end of story. No one gives a damn about the happy PR spin.

 

[cmnelson87]

absolutely none of the players want to do it = end of story. No one gives a damn about the happy PR spin.

Is that why you always see players posting pictures on social media of them taking in some of the tourist spots while they are over there?

And players don't want to get cut, they still do. All that matter is if management wants it, and they did.

 

[FedEx227]

This thread is going about as anyone could've predicted on VSN.

For one, there is precedent here. UFC while never at the same level as the NFL is now suffered from over-saturation. Suddenly, every weekend had a PPV and what happens is you don't become appointment television. Now, you can skip shows, pick and choose what the watch. If the NFL expands into every weekday you'll get the same thing, most people can't devote every day to watch it so they'll start skipping games. That's when it starts to hurt. If you know all you have to do is watch on Sunday, that's easy. When you can just as easily skip Tuesday-Thursday games, then you're getting into over-saturation and it does become an issue. Less is sometimes more.

Two, to rams point that nobody cares about safety, you're an idiot. Look at the numbers of youth football enrollment in recent years (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...rops-nfl-concussion-crisis-seen-causal-factor). It's way down. People are moving to less dangerous sports like lacrosse and soccer. The next logical step for high schools is to get out of brain damage business and stop offering football as a school sport but instead have football go the way of boxing and be a club-based sport. This will take a lot longer than 10 years but if lawsuits come down and it's no longer cost-effective to run football through the school, they'll make changes.

Basketballs hip-hop-rap-ghetto culture turns me off.

Drink bleach. Seriously. Or better yet, stop trying to run around what you really want to say — you aren't comfortable with a league where the stars are predominately black. This argument has no leg to stand on because nothing in the NBA's marketing or presence really says "hip-hop-rap-ghetto" those are just buzzwords 30+ year olds use to justify why they don't like the NBA anymore. Just say it, you don't like that all the stars are black. It's okay.

 

[ram29jackson]

Is that why you always see players posting pictures on social media of them taking in some of the tourist spots while they are over there?

And players don't want to get cut, they still do. All that matter is if management wants it, and they did.

so..while there they mess around but no one actually wants to have to do that for a long ass out of place road game.
taking advantage of a free moment doesn't have crap to do with actually wanting to be there for the purpose its for.

 

[cmnelson87]

so..while there they mess around but no one actually wants to have to do that for a long ass out of place road game.
taking advantage of a free moment doesn't have crap to do with actually wanting to be there for the purpose its for.

As I said, it really doesn't matter what the players want. They are concerned about getting their money. The teams are the ones trying to make their money to give to the players, and they are the ones that want to play in England (which is what I've been saying, but somehow you two keep changing the point).

But, just for arguments sake, please provide some support to your statements. I provided my support, while you've just made statements with nothing to support it.

 

[ram29jackson]

This thread is going about as anyone could've predicted on VSN.

For one, there is precedent here. UFC while never at the same level as the NFL is now suffered from over-saturation. Suddenly, every weekend had a PPV and what happens is you don't become appointment television. Now, you can skip shows, pick and choose what the watch. If the NFL expands into every weekday you'll get the same thing, most people can't devote every day to watch it so they'll start skipping games. That's when it starts to hurt. If you know all you have to do is watch on Sunday, that's easy. When you can just as easily skip Tuesday-Thursday games, then you're getting into over-saturation and it does become an issue. Less is sometimes more.

Two, to rams point that nobody cares about safety, you're an idiot. Look at the numbers of youth football enrollment in recent years (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...rops-nfl-concussion-crisis-seen-causal-factor). It's way down. People are moving to less dangerous sports like lacrosse and soccer. The next logical step for high schools is to get out of brain damage business and stop offering football as a school sport but instead have football go the way of boxing and be a club-based sport. This will take a lot longer than 10 years but if lawsuits come down and it's no longer cost-effective to run football through the school, they'll make changes.



Drink bleach. Seriously. Or better yet, stop trying to run around what you really want to say — you aren't comfortable with a league where the stars are predominately black. This argument has no leg to stand on because nothing in the NBA's marketing or presence really says "hip-hop-rap-ghetto" those are just buzzwords 30+ year olds use to justify why they don't like the NBA anymore. Just say it, you don't like that all the stars are black. It's okay.

wrong honey,..not liking the rap crap has nothing to do with racism. And I watched the all star game/weekend that was all about the " yo, whats up my nigga/ghetto/hip hop" theme. LOL at this argument has no leg to stand on. The NBA is all about the black culture. Doesn't mean I don't have black favorite players etc.

 

[FedEx227]

Care to show me an example of the "yo, whats up my nigga/ghetto/hip hop" stuff from All-Star Weekend, I missed it.

I'm assuming this is one of your examples:

YO NIGGA!

Look at all those ghetto nig-nogs in the back wearing their plaid.