Skip to content

Blank's Super Bowl week comments created a stir

nfl_ap_blank_275.jpgWith so much happening during Super Bowl week, several intriguing developments were overlooked.

One league source told us that Friday, February 5 comments from Falcons owner Arthur Blank created a buzz during the ownership meeting conducted on Saturday, February 6.

Per the source, the televised comments from Blank focused on the expected spending habits of owners during the uncapped year.  Blank, in the opinion of the source and others with whom the source communicated, danced dangerously close to the collusion line by suggesting that teams will behave responsible with their financial expenditures when the cap disappears.

Though the comments in question were televised (we’ve yet to track them down), Blank also was interviewed on Friday, February 5 by Orlando Alzugaray of WQAM in Miami, prompting this tweet from NFLPA assistant executive director for external affairs George Attalah:   “I expect the owners will be financially responsible next year.”  

We’ve obtained the audio, and Blank’s comments weren’t quite that general.  He spoke of responsibility in relation to the fan base, not the bank account, and we heard nothing that made us think that Blank had danced too close to the line.

“I think that ownership in my opinion will be responsible to their fan base to make they have competitive teams on the field,” Blank said.  “I think there will be appropriate amount of financial resources made available to make sure that happens.  I don’t see, although you never know with other owners, anybody going wild. . . .

“I think it’ll be pretty much business is usual. . . .  Fans will expect each owner to make sure that they’re being financially responsible, because on the other hand if they overinvest and go nuts if you will, sooner or later that’s reflected in the prices fans have to pay for tickets. . . .  I think that owners in my opinion will be very thoughtful about their investments they way they usually are.”

Blank was careful to confine his comments to his own opinions, and he allowed for the possibility that some owners will go “wild” or “nuts” when it comes to spending on free agents.

It makes us think that the source was referring to some other interview of Blank from Friday, February 5, because whatever Blank said became a hot topic the next day at the Ritz-Carlton in Fort Lauderdale.
    

Permalink 17 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Atlanta Falcons, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
17 Responses to “Blank's Super Bowl week comments created a stir”
  1. superbowl says: Feb 19, 2010 4:24 PM

    Mr Florio,
    The revenue generated by TV contracts far outweighs the revenue stream from ticket sales.
    if the fans really wanted to have an impact on a franchise’s future; they should simply TURN OFF THE TV and not watch the games.
    Redskin fans should boycott all TV for the next 3 years and maybe DARK HEART SNYDER will get it – it is about WINNING not PR

  2. Ravensatron says: Feb 19, 2010 4:24 PM

    So basically he said he doesn’t think anyone is gonna try and run a franchise with a 40mil salary expenditure, or one with a 400mil expenditure.
    What’s the story here?
    If you want an example of what happens when there are no rules in place, take a look at the Premier League over here in England. Absolute financial disaster with 80% of games almost unwatchable due to appalling standards of play

  3. ILuvOldLadyPorn says: Feb 19, 2010 4:25 PM

    You’re correct Florio. There was another interview. One where Blank admitted he was once at one of Vick’s dogfights and won a COOL 2 G’s.

  4. Chapnasty2 says: Feb 19, 2010 4:26 PM

    Nothing Blank said was bad. I dont get how everytime someone speaks it is either tampering or now collusion. Mike, you need a vacation or a Philly thug getting pat down in a Dallas airport wearing a MACnabb jersey.

  5. texasPHINSfan says: Feb 19, 2010 4:27 PM

    i hope the owners collude on making a pretend salary cap. it really is hard to feel sorry for the athlete millionaires crying about teams colluding to agree to spend less.
    sorry, but if you want to see what the real world is like, come make $30k/year like the rest of us.
    my employer colludes to only pay all of us at a certain position a certain amount. where’s the ACLU on that one? :rolleyes: /sarcasm

  6. birdmancometh says: Feb 19, 2010 4:44 PM

    How can it be collusion if the NFL is one entity?

  7. texasPHINSfan says: Feb 19, 2010 4:45 PM

    “Ravensatron says:
    February 19, 2010 4:24 PM
    So basically he said he doesn’t think anyone is gonna try and run a franchise with a 40mil salary expenditure, or one with a 400mil expenditure.
    What’s the story here?
    If you want an example of what happens when there are no rules in place, take a look at the Premier League over here in England. Absolute financial disaster with 80% of games almost unwatchable due to appalling standards of play”
    you had me with you until the 80% of EPL games being unwatchable. Are we talking about the same league here? EPL games are some of the most entertaining in the entire world. One thing they cannot get right is balancing the books properly, which you alluded to.
    RIDICULOUS overspending in the EPL, that’s for sure. the NFL owners would be wise to look to the EPL and NOT copy them. :thumbup:

  8. SaintsBucsPanthersSUKK 2.0OH! says: Feb 19, 2010 4:47 PM

    Arthur Blank: the epitome of class.

  9. iusedtobeteddybayer says: Feb 19, 2010 4:47 PM

    So did he or didn’t he? Only midget Florio knows for sure.

  10. EG says: Feb 19, 2010 4:59 PM

    superbowl says:
    February 19, 2010 4:24 PM
    Mr Florio,
    The revenue generated by TV contracts far outweighs the revenue stream from ticket sales.
    if the fans really wanted to have an impact on a franchise’s future; they should simply TURN OFF THE TV and not watch the games.
    Redskin fans should boycott all TV for the next 3 years and maybe DARK HEART SNYDER will get it – it is about WINNING not PR
    _________________________________
    have you ever heard of a TV blackout???? google it

  11. DeepSeaHawks says: Feb 19, 2010 5:00 PM

    Its amazing that if an owner of a company says that he is going to be fiscially responsible and that the competors probably will be too, that it is considered collussion. Isnt that the point of owning a business, to make money and keep it going from year to year? How better to do that then to limit your spending to your budget. No way some outside orginazation should be able to dictitate what HAS to be spent, they have zero at risk. If the owners want to put together a team for 40 million, then so be it. I sure they will find someone who would fill out the positions. If the union is worried about that then make sure you get the cap back in place.

  12. snnyjcbs says: Feb 19, 2010 5:03 PM

    I thought you were a Lawyer, he could dance all over the line and good luck proving anything to have it stick. And why am I not suprised that you left the Law to become a Blogger.

  13. brian91388 says: Feb 19, 2010 5:06 PM

    Lol, why do lawyers always bring up collusion when they know how hard it is to prove? Even if none of the owners spend big money this offseason and make comments about financial responsibility, there would still be no proof. The owners can always say they don’t know what the new CBA rules will be, and don’t want to get stuck with bad contracts going foward under yet to be determined rules. This would be a completely legit reason for not spending. The players can’t force the owners to spend big, and if the owners did on their own, it would be completely absurd. There’s a reason why so few cases of tampering ever get proven…collusion, in this case, is ten times harder. Still, every time a sporting league’s CBA is set to expire, every person who thinks they know the law suggests collusion, like a music fan suggests The Beatles, in an attempt to look like they are informed.

  14. DukeBunswalker says: Feb 19, 2010 5:50 PM

    The Falcons will be in the Super Bowl next year.

  15. phillyeagleschamps says: Feb 19, 2010 6:00 PM

    Blank, the fakiest name in history.
    Arthur “John Doe” Blank is the NFL’S most generic owner.

  16. HarrisonHits says: Feb 19, 2010 6:08 PM

    Don’t possibly see how suggesting that the teams will behave responsibly as businesses and not destroy their financial futures is collusion.

  17. phillyeagleschamps says: Feb 19, 2010 6:39 PM

    Bubba Bean next Head Coach for the Falcons.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!