Who stands to lose the money?

We know that NFL football will be a limited version this year, possibly up to complete cancellation of the season.

Regardless of what plays out, the revenues will be down significantly. So who will bear the brunt of the loss?

The owner of a business is typically responsible for economic downturn which then flows down to the employees via lay-offs and down sizing, and then the employees file for unemployment, but in professional sports, the owners can't really do that and the unemployment doesn't work for the players.

I doubt if the CBA has stipulations in it for a pandemic.

So who stands to eat more of the loss?

Will government bail out the team owners?

 

The fans will pay for it both through higher prices & any bailout.

 

We are seeing this play out right now in the MLB; where the owners and players are miles apart on what to do for Player salaries and reduced revenue.

I do not see how a small market team like the Pirates can survive this year without fan revenue.

It is still too early to tell about the NFL; but the NFL has pushed forward all this off season even though all the experts and even their own coaches tried to stop them. Will the NFL owners be asking the players to take a pay cut like the MLB is doing come September?

 

Cut Ben or the defense?

 

Both means we are screwed

 

I would not be for the Government bailing out
Billionaire owners. They have already raked over the taxpayers
with new Stadium deals thru out the years.

 

Such events in the CBA could have been avoided by the players had they stood their ground and asked for more incentives, the CBA would not look so haphazard and rushed. Then again, had that come to pass, Pittsburgh's Roster could potentially look different as well given the financial restraints the team was in at the time. Either way, a lose-lose situation due to semantics and haste.

 

Owners like Dan Snyder would love this. Not so much due to their State Governments bailing out the owners though. Such owners would not only have the cash to assist their bottom line but also use it as a basis for future ventures; Snyder's being a new Stadium..... again...

 

That would be about right but that’s very much a worst case scenario. 30-35% of league revenue is local revenue, ie tickets sales, merchandising etc and that would be the area decimated if there are no fans. 70m is roughly 35% of the cap. Advertising revenue and sponsorship could also take a hit if the economy goes in to a tailspin.

I think ultimately the owners will take the brunt of the hit and the league will agree to a cap freeze or small decrease, borrowing from future years rather than implementing a dramatic reduction. Players may be asked to take a pay reduction but nobody wants to see rosters decimated with high profile cuts in an effort to fit under the cap. The players would never stand for it and would likely hold out in solidarity with those that lose their jobs. Some owners will be better able to take the hit than others.

 

Absolutely, pay deferment might be an option for higher paid guys or even a % reduction for guys above a certain salary.

I just don’t see a situation where they can impose a large cap reduction. Even a 5% cap reduction would cause havoc as teams have based medium term roster plans around continual incremental cap increases. Bens cap hit is tipping $40m next year after the most recent restructure for example. If the cap goes down they’ll be in trouble. Mahomes is due a contract in KC, how on earth do you do that deal now?

I’m sure the owners have discussed the issue and discussed possible contingencies as well. There seems to be a reluctance to get deals done with players right now which is understandable. I think a safety net will need to be put in place.

Could we see the top guys like Mahomes sign deals that give them a set % of the cap annually rather than a set figure? This would be a good way to put a lid on the crazy QB contracts that we are seeing, Dak looking for $45m for example