Why the NFL is Better than Other Major Pro Sports Leagues
This editorial is one man's opinion. It is not meant to appear dogmatic; to the contrary, I welcome and respect opposing viewpoints. Here are my thoughts.
Football is America's sport. At one time baseball truly was America's pastime, but the keepers of the game, both owners and players, let that banner slip away. While the popularity of the National Football League has grown steadily and rapidly through the years, baseball could not keep pace. You can check any ratings, any market surveys or any data you can get your hands on, and the conclusion reamins the same: football is king in the United States. NFL preseason games outdraw regular-season games in other sports. NFL regular-season games trump postseason events of other sports, and nothing comes close to the Super Bowl. Even the NFL Draft, which puts all other drafts to shame, frequently rates higher (3.4 rating in 2008) than what other sports often put on the field or court.
The reason for this is both simple and profound. The owners and players of the NFL have always realized that equality breeds strength and that "less is more." If you make certain that the game is played fairly on a level playing field, and presented in just the right dosage to the marketplace, the financial results will follow.
According to Forbes financial data from 2007, the average NFL franchise is now valued at $957 million. This demolishes the competition. You would have to own an average Major League Baseball team, an average NBA team and an average NHL franchise just to barely surpass the value of an average football team.
| Average NFL Team (Millions $) | $957 |
| Highest (Dallas Cowboys) | $1,500 |
| Lowest (Minnesota Vikings) | $782 |
| Pittsburgh Steelers (16th of 32) | $929 |
| Average MLB Team (Millions $) | $472 |
| Highest (New York Yankees) | $1,306 |
| Lowest (Florida Marlins) | $256 |
| Pittsburgh Pirates (28th of 32) | $292 |
| Average NBA Team (Millions $) | $372 |
| Highest (New York Knicks) | $608 |
| Lowest (Portland Trailblazers) | $253 |
| No Pittsburgh NBA franchise | - |
| Average NHL Team (Millions $) | $180 |
| Highest (Toronto Maple Leafs) | $332 |
| Lowest (Washington Capitals) | $127 |
| Pittsburgh Penguins (28th of 32) | $133 |
Looking at incoming revenue, again from Forbes 2007 financial compilations, the NFL is the king despite its massive disadvantage (get to that soon):
| Total NFL Annual Revenue (Millions $) | $6,539 |
| Average Per Team | $205 |
| Highest (Washington Redskins) | $312 |
| Lowest (Minnesota Vikings) | $182 |
| Pittsburgh Steelers (13th) | $198 |
| Total MLB Annual Revenue (Millions $) | $5,489 |
| Average Per Team | $183 |
| Highest (New York Yankees) | $327 |
| Lowest (Florida Marlins) | $128 |
| Pittsburgh Pirates (27th) | $139 |
Total NBA Annual Revenue (Millions $)
$3.573
Average Per Team
$119
Highest (New York Knicks)
$196
Lowest (Seattle/OK City? Sonics)
$81
| Total NBA Annual Revenue (Millions $) | $2,267 |
| Average Per Team | $76 |
| Highest (Toronto Maple Leafs) | $119 |
| Lowest (Nashville Predator) | $61 |
| Pittsburgh Penguins (28th) | $63 |
Upon first blush, it appears like major League Baseball is giving the NFL a run for its money in total revenue, trailing by a relatively marginal amount, $6.5 billion to $5.5 billion (what's a measly billion amongst friends). However, baseball gets 2,430 events (regular season games only) to sell tickets, beer, hot dogs, parking spaces and television opportunities. Football has roughly one-tenth the opportunities (256 annual contests). Basketball and hockey get 1,230 events and they aren't even in the picture. How can an entity with one-tenth or one-fifth the inventory out-revenue the opposition with that earlier-mentioned massive advantage? Here are my speculations.
1) Payroll Disparity
The NFL has no New York Yankees and Florida Marlins, whose payroll disparity is so unfairly ridiculous that such a system could not possibly grow in popularity. The Yankees, with their payroll of $207 million, have two players (Alex Rodriguez and Jason Giambi) who will make more money this season than the entire Florida Marlins roster ($22 million). The caretakers of baseball should be ashamed of themselves. The players and their leadership care about two things and two things only, maximum compensation and maximum flexibility. The large-market owners who have inherent geographic and financial advantages agree with the players who think the system is just peachy keen. The small-market teams, who should be in an uproar, are not because they pocket the modest revenue sharing that does exist without any mandate to spend on player salaries.
The NFL does have the New York Giants and Miami Dolphins. Regardless of market, each team has equal chance to compete within the system. There are no inherent advantages. If a team is not experiencing success it is not because the system designs it to fail. The math just works out that way. The beauty though, for NFL fans, is that no matter how bad your team is this year, there is hope around the corner. You will get high draft choices and you will be able to spend roughly the same amount on players as all the other teams. Using the equal distribution doctrine as its flagship, the NFL guarantees hope for everyone.
The Pirates used to be the pride of Pittsburgh, but no longer. Sure, they can possibly catch lightning in a bottle and make a run in a given year. The stars could be aligned just right so that all their young players (they can't afford any high-priced veterans) get hot all in the same year; they could stay healthy and get a few bounces. Pirates' fans had better not hold their breath though. The sad truth is, once the Penguins' season is over, sports fans in Pittsburgh wait until football training camp opens. Occasionally they will go to beautiful PNC Park on a warm summer night to take in a ballgame, but they don't go there with any aspirations of a championship or much passion for the most part.
On this matter I will give the NBA and NHL credit. They also have salary caps. The NHL cap is about $50 and the league worked very hard about four years ago to get this done. They paid the heavy price of a lost season, but at least they sacrificed for a bigger gain in the long run. The NBA's cap is a bit creative with some "soft money" allowances. Each franchise can re-sign their biggest star, no matter the cap overage, for 175 percent of his salary just to keep franchise stable (the Larry Bird Rule).
2) Regular Season Length
Another arrow in the NFL's quiver is the fact that the season is the ideal length. A four-month regular season followed by the playoffs is perfect. Baseball, basketball and hockey just don't get it. They are so hell-bent on maximizing ticket and television potential that they stretch their season beyond what the fans really want and what is really good for the game. A six-month season might give you more opportunities to sell tickets and hot dogs, but compared to the revenue that a more attractive television package could bring if the game weren't oversaturated, in my opinion those sports are penny wise and pound foolish.
Baseball begins and ends its season in horrible baseball weather in the northern half of the country and Toronto. This can be especially damaging to the most important part of the season, the playoffs. Just when baseball needs decent weather the most, it gets it the least. Basketball and hockey don't have weather issues, but they begin their seasons with general sports fans saying, "Already?" They end their seasons with the same fans saying, "It's about time."
Sports fans rarely if ever say either of those two things about football. You never want your product to be oversaturated. Value plummets when supply exceeds demand. You want to give the marketplace just the right amount of product, perhaps even a tad less, to keep the public's appetite healthy.
3) Postseason
Along those same lines, the NFL's playoff system is second to none. Each game is terminal and thus provides maximum drama. All those seven-game series' hurt basketball and hockey in my opinion. Game one, game two, game three, game four, alright already! When is this playoff series finally going to be on the line? I can give baseball an exception here because of pitching. There is a huge variance in starting pitchers and a series is the proper way to go about things. But basketball and hockey have no excuse. The same people play games against the same people over and over again.
I realize you shouldn't have single terminal playoff games in basketball and hockey, but what I would do is set up a triple elimination tournament. There would be a winners' bracket, a one-time loser's bracket and a two-time loser's bracket. Teams would play different teams all the time. I believe the nation would embrace this kind of excitement and that TV ratings would skyrocket. There would be fewer games played (28 total) than the current 105-game playoff fiasco, but if the NFL can rake in $4 billion of media revenue using an 11-game playoff system, doesn't it again prove that less is more?
The NFL is the model system in all of professional sports. Good Lord, let's hope it doesn't change with the new bargaining talks. If other sports were smart they would follow suit as much as possible and realize that gluttony, whether it be payroll disparity or just too many darn games, is not the best solution.
0 recs |
34
comments
Comments
You can't compare an individual NFL game to other sports..
They play a maximum of 20 a year. Baseball seasons can run close to 200 games a year. Basketball and hockey around 100. Financially, the NFL is king, but that is more the result of television revenue than gate receipts, I would think.
Little doubt that it is king in America at the moment, but “World Football” rules the rest of the planet. I can foresee soccer making major inroads in North America as well. David Beckham aside, the sport will take off because the country’s population growth is almost entirely due to new immigrants. Those immigrants largely grew up in a culture where soccer was the dominant sport, and I don’t know that a lot of them will make the switch to American football.
Soccer is a more democratic sport for participants, as well. The professionals are normal sized adults without having freakish speed or strength, so pretty much every kid growing up can aspire to the highest level. It is really cheap to equip and doesn’t require a specific number of players or a large area to play in. Similar to basketball, where some of the best players grow up playing on parking lots.
I suppose it’s a bit heretical to be touting soccer on a football site, but I like both games for different reasons. I think the biggest competitor to the NFL for American sporting dollars will come from the MLS, or some equivalent league in the future.
by robert ethan on Jun 18, 2008 1:07 AM EDT 0 recs
response
I think you have some good thoughts robert, and I’d like to think about them more, but one response to your comment that many of America’s recent immigrants won’t make switch to American football:
Wrong.
I don’t know where you’re located, but where I’m at, in Austin, Texas, I can’t tell you how many Hispanic Cowboys fans there are. 1st generation paisanos. 2nd generation kids of migrants. All across the board. The LOVE football. Part of it is it fits nicely in to their work schedules. Games on Sundays, a typical day off across socio economic spectrums, is conducive to fan involvement, where as soccer matchess across the globe could take place at any given hour on any day.
Anyway, that’s not to disparage soccer, and I think that you are generally correct, that soccer should make some headway as our population makeup shifts. But, there’s many other things to consider about the psyche of immigrants. Part retains what he/she loves from backhome. Part graps for accesible things to latch on to that signify an arrival or transformation in one’s new setting. American football is an easy and rewarding outlet. The growth isn’t going to be leveling off anytime soon in my opinion.
by Blitzburgh on
Jun 18, 2008 2:50 AM EDT
up
0 recs
no way
The MLS is more likely to fold than ever challenge the NFL.
by cgolden on
Jun 18, 2008 8:27 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Probably immigrants from other parts of North America
..are a lot more open to American football. They would get a lot of exposure through television and proximity to the border states. Mind you those are the immigrants who constitute the largest percentage, so you may be right.
by robert ethan on Jun 18, 2008 3:02 AM EDT 0 recs
Soccer is indeed king of the world
Except for the USA and Canada, and it was a point worth adding, but to make any infusion of soccer growth into our country is not valid. I’ve been hearing the same thing for 30 years now but the truth is, soccer is no more advanced now than what the NASL was in 1978. It will always be poplular on the youth level since it is easy to play and safe.
Americans just are not going to buy into a game where the score always ends 1-0 or 2-1. We’re too impatient for that and our culture won’t change. Our impatience also doesn’t allow for us to spend 90 minutes watching a contests where nothing notable has happened. We can enjoy a 1-0 baseball game because it is a rare treat, but if every baseball game was 1-0 that too would fall by the wayside.
David Beckham, other than his grand entrance of great looks appealing to women momentarily, will not help the sport in America in the long run.
by maryrose on Jun 18, 2008 8:15 AM EDT 0 recs
great point rose
I played soccer as a kid and I’ve never watched a game either live or on TV and have never had any desire to do so.
Immigrants may never truly abandon the game that they grew up on, but how hard is it to find a soccer game on TV on a Sunday afternoon? Unless you have ESPN Deportes you’re probably out of luck.
by cgolden on
Jun 18, 2008 8:24 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Sometimes a particular sport can blossom or face..
....really quickly in terms of public appeal, though. I think both the NFL and the NBA trudged along for years in the shadow of Baseball, and at different points in time, both made a big surge. Even though soccer has been languishing in the country for the past 30 years as you mentioned, it doesn’t preclude rapid growth.
Beckham has the stars out, not only himself. He is good buddies with the likes of Tom Cruise, Snoop Dogg, Steve Nash, Kobe Bryant, etc. They come to his matches, he goes to theirs, and it attracts a lot of attention to the game. If some other high profile world soccer stars follow him to America that sort of thing would be duplicated in other cities.
Beckham’s appeal is not really towards women, he is getting on a bit now and has lost the heartthrob look. But he has style, and I think a lot of younger kids are drawn to that. Beckham being at least as “cool” as any NBA, NFL, or MLB player of the moment gives the sport a lot more credibility with the younger fans.
by robert ethan on
Jun 18, 2008 4:35 PM EDT
up
0 recs
i hear ya
But personally, I sure hope my kids (if i am lucky enough to have some one day) love football and baseball and hoops, not X-Games, trendy soccer players, etc. That’s just me though.
BTW though: do you notice anything about the athletes you mentioned – Nash, Bryant, Beckham. Ahem, ahem: endorsed by Adidas? Ah, makes more sense now. That is after all, why we see Tiger Woods in the stands cheering for Federer against Roddick in the US Open, no?
Those guys may like soccer just fine (particularly Nash obviously), but let’s not think that theyre not being paid to be at the matches.
by Blitzburgh on
Jun 18, 2008 4:41 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Never thought of the commercial ties..
..but that doesn’t explain Snoop. Even though he probably does more to promote track clothing that all the athletes combined.
by robert ethan on
Jun 18, 2008 5:00 PM EDT
up
0 recs
now let's be nice :)
based on pictures I’ve seen, it appears Snoop is a Steelers fan, and I believe the youth team he manages is the ‘Compton Steelers’ or something like that. The man has taste, and knows how to enjoy a game…
"It was an attrition football game and you know we like that."
by showtime on
Jun 19, 2008 1:38 PM EDT
up
0 recs
snoop
I dont know if you read the site when I did this story, but this is about Snoops Youth team, which you’re corrrect, is the Steelers. I mentioned that since its his league, he surely got first choice of team name and he chose Steelers! Nice.
by Blitzburgh on
Jun 19, 2008 2:58 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Very True
Snoop is no doubt a Steelers fan, but I don’t think he’d be upset with someone calling him a smoker. :-)
If you’re out there reading this Snoop, I got nothing but love for you. Create an account and join the fray.
by cgolden on
Jun 19, 2008 3:30 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Non-American Football
It took me moving to Edinburgh for a year to even be able to watch a game, even in the Euro’s right now only maybe the games are watchable for me, and I used to play soccer. Unless you have a home team to live and die for, soccer is only really good to watch at the highest levels, and then it is pretty amazing sometimes. I think the major obstacle to soccer in the States is established clubs or at least a solid international squad. That said, around Scotland there are rumors of other formerly great, still good players goin to the US toward the end of their career, a la Becks. Would international star power vault soccer to the top? Doubtful. NFL has a stranglehold on the US market for now. And the NBA is quickly expanding into China, as well as an ever stronger European basketball movement. The NFL is gonna come up against some major competition in a decade or so.
by tkired on Jun 18, 2008 9:23 AM EDT 0 recs
I think the NFL is making some pretty significant movements to gain a market share on a world-wide level. They have committed to a handful of international games and are moving a world-wide direction.
by cgolden on
Jun 18, 2008 11:47 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Oh definitely
But they have learned a team/league can not be supported overseas right now.
by tkired on
Jun 18, 2008 12:09 PM EDT
up
0 recs
anecdote
Not sure what this means, but there’s a number of very regular readers from some very far off remote places here on ‘Curtain.
Budapest, Bangkok, Mexico and Canada(not so far off), Dubai, Bahamas, Australia are all places I know for fact regular readers hail from. I think the game will continue to make huge inroads internationally. Not sure exactly what finding games on TV is like in other countries though.
by Blitzburgh on
Jun 18, 2008 12:14 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Depends on the country. In almost all you’d have to have a specialized network to watch it, except maybe the super bowl and maybe just the sports network for the playoffs/SB. For what it’s worth, I saw the game at a bar in nicaragua this year on some special channel or another that had lots of gun commercials. The locals in the bar were all former previously living in the US and friends they dragged.
by steelguy99 on
Jun 18, 2008 2:43 PM EDT
up
0 recs
interesting. thanks.
That’s what I thought – avaiable, but only in commercial places. Perhaps as broadband spreads out over the world people will have access in their homes to games. That’d help.
Also, was the game televised in spanish in Nicaragua or was it a feed of American telecast?
by Blitzburgh on
Jun 18, 2008 2:54 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Surprisingly it was in Spanish (clearly the NFL is looking to expand). They’d also frequently talk to their correspondent in AZ and have him Q&A to the hispanic fans. Being a loud bar I couldn’t really hear what was being said – I would have liked to know if the announcers spent a lot of time explaining rules or not.
by steelguy99 on
Jun 18, 2008 3:19 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Saw a Game broadcast in Spanish
On my honeymoon last year when I was in Playa Del Carmen I watched the replay of the Monday Night Game between the Giants and Eagles (I think). The game was in spanish but it was being broadcast on one of their local channels on Tuesday morning.
by cgolden on
Jun 19, 2008 10:44 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Satellite TV!!!
in many countries, this is fairly cheap, as someone will sell hacks for the channels cheaply, i’ve seen dirt poor people in Morocco riding a donkey, but they gots satellite tv, and a couple thousand channels including espn, etc. Not that anybody watches much american football there anyway, but its available.
by tkired on
Jun 20, 2008 6:29 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Bottom Line
To me what makes NFL football and the NBA kings of the court is that they are fair. Small market teams can compete with large market teams due to revenue sharing. In the NBA a team from San Antonio or Sacramento can win a title. In NFL teams from Green Bay and Pittsburgh can win a title.
In MLB it is very rare that the contenders are not from NY, LA, Boston, Chicago or other large markets. Teams fielded from Pittsburgh, KC and other smaller markets are no more than AAA squads for the July trading dead line. I was a baseball player growing up through HS and it was always my first love…until 1994. Cancel the WS? “Expletive” you Selig. You’re canceled.
When You Run The Ball Good Things Happen
by 5020 on Jun 18, 2008 9:45 AM EDT 0 recs
Good post
maryrose, this was a good post, and I agree with most everything that you said. The fact that the NFL has it’s own network now is further evidence that the NFL is more popular than ever. And, the NFL Network was the fastest growing network in the country last year (not sure about this year).
I don’t see soccer surpassing the NFL anytime soon. MLS is barely on the radar screen right now, probably because the players aren’t as good as those in other countries.
I don’t really agree that the playoffs of the NHL and NBA should be shortened. One of the great things about it is the animosity that builds between the two teams over a long series, particularly in hockey. I would certainly like to see the regular season of the MLB and NBA shortened. The NHL probably should, too, for the reasons that you gave, but in particular, I wish there were less baseball and basketball. Just a personal preference. :)
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jun 18, 2008 10:04 AM EDT 0 recs
NBA and MLB playoffs
I’m fine with the 7 games series but what I can’t stand is all the off days between games. There’s no reason that there should be two days between games, especially when the teams don’t even travel.
By the way what’s wrong with games on back to back days in the finals? It seems like to me that would keep up the momentum of the series instead of a every other day off and a two day layoff throw in there.
by cgolden on
Jun 18, 2008 11:29 AM EDT
up
0 recs
series
I think best of 5 is plenty long for all rounds except maybe the Finals.
Day’s off are for hype I’d guess. Certainly they need a few days off in a series. Certainly in basketball, perhaps not as much in baseball, but IIRC, there’s not always days off in the baseball series.
by Blitzburgh on
Jun 18, 2008 11:32 AM EDT
up
0 recs
NBA
Agreed, the NBA prolongs their series too long. I believe that the NHL will shorten the playoffs, if, for example the two teams that are to play in the next round are already done. The NBA will wait over a week sometimes for the next round.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on
Jun 18, 2008 11:41 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Having a day off in the NHL is almost mandatory for physical reasons. I’m not sure about basketball, it is certainly more demanding than baseball (sans pitchers).
by steelguy99 on
Jun 18, 2008 2:46 PM EDT
up
0 recs
solid post
The first round of the nba playoffs lasts longer than the olympics, which is craziness to me, though I am not much of a basketball fan,
I also want to add that the disparity in baseball is partially the large differences in profits/payroll, but a good chunk of it is the same as in other sports- poor management, terrible front office and bad drafting. The Pirates- and they look to be turning it around this year- suffered from dreadfull drafts, a terrible gm and clueless management/skipper- giving David Littlefield $100 million to play with won’t win a championship, he would just get another Matt Morris.
And going forward, I think one of the biggest forces that will make the nfl even more popular than it’s rivals is fantasy football- which lends itself to the game even more than to baseball. Fantasy football can grab casual fans, both men and women, and creates another level of enjoyment as well as a deeper understanding to how complex the game really is.
by vherub on Jun 18, 2008 10:52 AM EDT 0 recs
hmm
Good post first of all. Interesting ideas about the playoffs for other teams. Triple elimination tournament might be interesting. Kind of like the College World Series.
I may not be as enarmored with the current NFL playoff system. I think few too many teams get in. I don’t like 16 getting in (read Atlanta Hawks with losing record), but I feel 12 is perhaps two few. Because the league’s set up for competitive equality, the difference between seeds #3-8 in each conference can be very, very slim.
by Blitzburgh on Jun 18, 2008 11:30 AM EDT 0 recs
another problem with too many games for other sports
is the expenses for having so many games. It might bring in more revenue, but it costs more too. Seeing the net income for each franchise would be interesting to me.
In my opinion, I can’t stand seeing a baseball game being played in the middle of the afternoon on a Wednesday with totally empty stands. What’s the point? There are WAY too many baseball games. None are important. When are there any must wins? Like the last month of the season? So many pointless, boring games.
"It was an attrition football game and you know we like that."
by showtime on Jun 19, 2008 1:45 PM EDT 0 recs
Baseball
Besides the (way the hell too many) pointless games, another huge thing that bugs me about baseball is this:
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/standings/index.jsp
Ah, the standings. The cubs have the highest standing in the league with a .625 win average. In case anyone is curious, that translates to a 10-6 record in football. The lowest (by far) is .347, which is about 5.5 games won. Most of the pack is in the 4.5-5.5 range. Each game affects these averages so minimally it’s just pointless to watch. Oh, and it’s boring. duck
by steelguy99 on
Jun 19, 2008 5:10 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Agree
Nothing to add, I just had to agree wholeheartedly. Baseball is boring. I was really hoping that the strike back in the 90s would keep going.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on
Jun 20, 2008 11:22 AM EDT
up
0 recs
A few comments
1. Soccer making major inroads in the US? I’ll believe it when I see it. I know that’s not very erudite commentary, but that’s how silly I think that notion is.
2. I used to enjoy baseball and basketball back in the day. Not so much anymore. Part of the reason is surely that I don’t have the free time now that I had in my youth, but it’s more than that. I agree that the playoffs in the NBA are way too long, both in the number of games and the off days in between. I also agree that the regular seasons in MLB and the NBA are way too long and too many teams in the NBA make the playoffs.
3. I think that the NFL doesn’t saturate us with more games has more to do with the inherent physical demands of the sport than any wisdom in the powers that be. Football players can’t play more than once a week because that would lead to an incredible physical toll. The same goes for the length of a season. I can’t believe that the NFL is considering extending the length of the season to 17 games. If anything, they should go back to a 14 game schedule. It’s already pretty well documented that a rb can only withstand so many carries in a season before it affects him negatively in subsequent seasons, either from an effectiveness standpoint or an injury probablility. We’ve also seen how disabled many ex-players become relatively soon after their playing days are over. There’s a reason why coaches don’t play starters very much during the preseason, why training camps have become shorter and less rigorous, why more teams are implementing a two rb system and in general are rotating/substituting players more, etc.
by steeler1275 on Jun 19, 2008 4:45 PM EDT 0 recs









