Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is the NFL socialist or communist?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-05-05 08:05 PM
Original message
Is the NFL socialist or communist?
Okay, yes, you have some bright spots (players) that draw large paychecks.

But you look at it this way.

Salary caps. Each team is allotted X dollars. You can spend between Y and X on players' salaries. There is a minimum, and there is a maximum.

Television revenue sharing.

Except for the late game on Sunday, (and even then, telecast in the local stations of the playing teams' cities,) the games are on the local CBS or Fox stations. Monday Night Football, originally to be on ESPN this year, plays on ABC. PUBLIC AIRWAVES. (Baseball is now carried on cable).

You do have a minimum salary for players (because of the unions).

You have a strict, level playing field. Each playing area is a specific length and width. Each area is marked exactly as according to rules. (Unlike baseball, where only the bases have the specific dimensions. The outfield can be damn near any size).

Football has had strict steroid policies for years. Also (usually) strict drug abuse policies, too.

Other points are there, but does this seem like a communist/socialist concept?

Oh, and by the way, some other points about Baseball vs. Football. Baseball is all about capitalism. No revenue sharing between all the teams. The New York Yankees can spend as much as they want. (That doesn't guarantee a World Series win, though). And the ratings for Football are probably way better than that for Baseball.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-05-05 08:11 PM
Original message
Over-Priced useless merchandise and trash? Preys on Lower Class + Poor.
Oh yeah, and the Ignorant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-05-05 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. Ooooops.
Edited on Sat Nov-05-05 08:11 PM by patrice
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RobertSeattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-05-05 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. Socialist most definintely
Billionaires love socialism and controlled markets - it's a great way to stay rich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freesqueeze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-05-05 08:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Interesting Point
Edited on Sat Nov-05-05 08:16 PM by freesqueeze
But I would answer, neither. The NFL does all the things that you mention but they also have complete control over all the franchises. The franchise owners "own" a certain number of players (humans.) The players are not allowed, unless permission is granted by their owner, to go and work for a different franchise.

I would call it more of a feudal system, but these guys are making too much money to complain.

AAARRRRGGGGHHHH!

When will the multi-millionaire players stand up to the tyranny of the multi-billionaire owners?

A pox on your 4 or 5 houses each.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kevsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-05-05 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. You're right to call it feudal.
But the reason the players make so much is because they're not the proles, they're the warrior class, like samurai. The proles are in the stands and on their couches.

Politically, it's an oligarchy, but the economics are purely feudal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demgrrrll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-05-05 09:53 PM
Response to Original message
5. Say what you will about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least
it was an ethos......Sorry just could not resist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-06-05 06:45 AM
Response to Original message
6. More socialist aspects of American football
Edited on Sun Nov-06-05 06:48 AM by muriel_volestrangler
It's a fixed league of teams. If a team does really badly, it isn't chucked out of the league - and the revenue sharing means it will probably be able to continue financially.

Compare it with soccer in Europe - specifically England. The top league of 20 teams demotes 3 each year to a lower league, where they get less money from TV rights. The best 3 from that league are promoted. There's a total of 4 leagues doing that - and it's possible to get demoted from the bottom league too (that depends on another team being financially strong enough to be able to play in the leagues - roughly, these leagues use full time professionals, while the lower leagues have part timers who also have 'real' jobs).

So, American football franchises (a term you don't hear in football - because you aren't 'granted' a team, you build one by making it better, and winning in the leagues) have a cozy 'job for life', no matter how badly they perform. British football teams fall into obscurity, and sometimes bankruptcy, if they fail. They also have no salary cap; currently the leading English team is owned by a Russian billionaire (friend of Putin, not yet arrested on fraud, unlike most) who has poured millions into the salaries, and also the transfer fees (players on contracts are bought and sold between clubs for millions; they are assets). They are now streets ahead of all the other teams in the league - commentators said that it looked like a foregone conclusion they would win the title again this year, only 2 months into a 9 month season.

Soccer also has the equivalent of 'outsourcing'. A team in the English top league might field, on average, 4 Englishmen in a team of 11 - the rest being from the rest of Europe, Africa, South America, and the occasional American and Asian. The top teams also compete against European sides - who are in the same market for players. Only the best teams in each national league each year get to play in the pan-European league - if they fail to finish in the top 4 of the English league, they miss out on the lucrative 'Champions League' competition.

But the most socialist aspect of American football is the draft. If a team does badly one year, it gets the best new players. The winners get last choice. "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs". The draft is welfare for the franchises.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueManDude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-06-05 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. great post
some of the most exciting and passionate soccer matches i've seen have been between two teams vying to avoid relegation. actually it's quite ingenious in that it provides fans with a real reason to care long after their team has been eliminated from title contention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueManDude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-06-05 08:02 AM
Response to Original message
7. Funny how ultra-capitalist owners (and fans)
Edited on Sun Nov-06-05 08:03 AM by BlueManDude
all of a sudden become collectivists when it come to sports.

salary caps have ruined both the nfl and the nba and will soon come to mlb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
win_in_06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-06-05 08:07 AM
Response to Original message
9. Capatilistic. There are haves and have-nots (relatively speaking)
Some teams fare much better than others when it comes to marketing apparel. Usually linked to their recent performance.

The better or more popular players make big cash through endorsements, TV-radio deals, etc.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueManDude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-06-05 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. the broadcast money is divvied up equally
the worst team gets as much as the best. no incentive to become better. salaries are capped cutting labor costs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Sep 18th 2014, 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC