Skip to content

Super Bowl lawsuit raises interesting questions regarding revenue sharing

Jerry Jones

The NFL and the Cowboys and owner Jerry Jones have been sued as a result of last Sunday’s Super Bowl seating fiasco.  And with the league standing up to assume responsibility, even though the Cowboys’ fingerprints are all over the temporary seating situation, other teams are paying close attention to the manner in which the legal expenses and ultimate settlement/judgments will be handled.

Expenses incurred by the league currently are shared equally by the 32 teams.  With the league claiming responsibility for something that may have been the actual responsibility of the Cowboys, every franchise ultimately will share equally in the financial costs of cleaning up the Cowboys’ mess.

It’s ironic, to say the least, that a potentially significant expense incurred by the Cowboys will be spread equally among all teams, given that Jones widely is believed to be the loudest voice against true revenue sharing.

“Right now, we are subsidizing this market,” Jones said in August 2009 regarding the Vikings and the place they currently call home.  “It’s unthinkable to think that you’ve got the market you got here — 3 ½ million people — and have teams like Kansas City and Green Bay subsidizing the market.  That will stop. . . .  That’s going to stop.  That’s on its way out.”

So Jones doesn’t want his team to subsidize other teams by sharing revenues, but other teams will potentially be subsidizing the Cowboys by sharing in the expenses arising from his ultimately failed effort to cram 103,986-plus bodies into his new stadium for Super Bowl XLV.

If Jones hopes to have any real credibility when arguing against expanded revenue sharing, he needs to make it known to his partners sooner rather than later that he’ll bear full financial responsibility for the Super Bowl seating debacle.

Permalink 43 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Dallas Cowboys, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
43 Responses to “Super Bowl lawsuit raises interesting questions regarding revenue sharing”
  1. jc1958cool says: Feb 13, 2011 4:49 PM

    i said it first, jerry jones wants to be the george stienbrenner of football !! he’s too f#c&ing stupid to draft a winning team, so he wants to buy one!!!

  2. jroneputt says: Feb 13, 2011 4:49 PM

    The NFl and Jones should not be out any money. I dont know many businesses that don’t have liability insurance, which means it will be the insurance company paying the piper.

    But, if they dont have insurance then they deserve anything that happens to them.

  3. scytherius says: Feb 13, 2011 5:10 PM

    Jones has ZERO credibility. It is not on the way out. It will not change. The other owners (well, except for a few morons like Snyder) will never vote to abandon revenue sharing. That will KILL KILL KILL the NFL.

  4. jarrman46 says: Feb 13, 2011 5:14 PM

    Hey Jerry if you cant beat them on the field than take there money away right. The bad part is the two Super Bowl teams did it with all home grown talent. Jerry Jones needs to look at Minnesota and New York Jets and see that you cant buy no Super Bowl. Dallas Cowboys are a joke. One playoff win in what 16 years now.

  5. hosmachine says: Feb 13, 2011 5:19 PM

    Refering to the picture: Jerry looks like he’s saying “And I’ll tell you another thing the nfl loves me and the nfl needs me”. Poor Jerry finally ran into someone he could not buy, the Fire Marshall. I wonder how that feels. He wanted something for everyone to remember and the way this keeps dragging out we won’t get a chance to forget about it for a long time.

  6. bucforever says: Feb 13, 2011 5:21 PM

    I think most large corporations are self insured. If so they will still be out the money. My thought concerns the player’s attempt to get a larger share of the owner’s money. Shouldn’t they also be sharing some of these expenses too?

  7. goombar2 says: Feb 13, 2011 5:22 PM

    When are we gonna see some lawsuits against the Redskins and Snyder?

    Like unnecessarily sucking. Wasting money. Hiring Haynesworthless, claiming to be offended by antisemitism when the name of your club is a derogatory term for native Americans. And for just being an all around douche bag?

  8. pukey60 says: Feb 13, 2011 5:23 PM

    The guy should be selling snake oil. Oh wait, he already is

  9. lasher1650 says: Feb 13, 2011 5:26 PM

    I really dislike Jerry Jones for trying to ruin my NFL.

  10. justadude71 says: Feb 13, 2011 5:27 PM

    It’s so sad it makes me laugh. Football is called the ultimate team game. Jerry Jones is spitting on the game before he turns away from it to chase the dollar.

    Who seriously thinks Jones would stand up and take responsibility for the mess created by the Jerry Jones Ego Bowl? Attendance record… what a joke.

  11. gorilladunk says: Feb 13, 2011 5:32 PM

    So I guess Jerry should be able to keep all the revenue generated by the 101,000 people who had no seating problems? I’m sure that will be more than enough to cover any liabilities. If not the 101,000, maybe just the extra 20,000 or so seats that Cowboys Stadium holds in comparison to other SB venues.

  12. thompgk says: Feb 13, 2011 5:33 PM

    This whole lawsuit is a drop in the bucket for Jones.

    I don’t think he should provide welfare for Minnesota either. Imagine subsidizing a team that you play every year and put you out of the playoffs a few years ago.

    That has to drive him crazy.

  13. joemac1114 says: Feb 13, 2011 5:41 PM

    Jerry, without competition you have no league or no interest. I lost interest in baseball because the big money teams always win or are near the top. Basketball concentrating talent in Los Angeles and Miami is kind of sucking and making me appreciate the upcoming NCAA’s. Hockey still has a chance but we will see. So try to keep all the cash for yourself and soon you will have no cash to split.

  14. assnfootball says: Feb 13, 2011 5:48 PM

    Every Republican and Conservative should support Jerry Jones. If one truely believes in free markets, we should support Jerry Jones.

  15. luckywi says: Feb 13, 2011 5:50 PM

    The Super Bowl in Dallas: The gift that keeps on giving. JJ is so far into his ego, he probably STILL thinks it was a success.

  16. youboettcha says: Feb 13, 2011 6:01 PM

    Green Bay may be a small market, but you can’t tell me they’re not pulling their weight. Their sell-out streak is longer than Brett Favre’s.

  17. chapnastier says: Feb 13, 2011 6:03 PM

    Whats the story count on this up to now? 350 articles on how this website can twist and turn this to bash the Cowboys and Jerry Jones as much as possible. Keep it up chief.

  18. zenofobe says: Feb 13, 2011 6:11 PM

    I think every team should have the option to be run like the Green Bay Packers- completely shareholder owned. That way a board (elected by shareholders) would have a say in who subsidizes whom, stadium decisions, etc., and we wouldn’t have to hear and read about the flexing of massive egos such as possessed by tin pot dictators like Jones. Hell, I’d even buy shares in my sad-sack (but soon to be less so) Lions to get them out of Ford’s clutches.

  19. palinforpresidentofnorthkorea says: Feb 13, 2011 6:12 PM

    @ goombar2 says: Feb 13, 2011 5:22 PM

    When are we gonna see some lawsuits against the Redskins and Snyder?
    ~~~~

    Wait until Dan Snyder’s deposition in the Washington City Paper case.

    Mr. Snyder, when did you decide to add those seats without approval of the County Planning Commission?

    Mr. Snyder, is it true that every new employee has to sign away all rights to sue you as a condition of their employment?

    The list goes on and on and on……

  20. joseph4241 says: Feb 13, 2011 6:22 PM

    Hey Mike, you forgot to mention that over the past 5 years Jerry has paid over 100 million into revenue sharing. If the other teams want to return that money, I’m sure Jerry will be more than hhappy to cover this lawsuit.

  21. sllib12 says: Feb 13, 2011 6:28 PM

    jj still wishes he was dating jimy johnson. he is nothing with out him. they made a cute couple.

  22. jutts says: Feb 13, 2011 6:38 PM

    I’ll bet the dudes from the Visa commercial got to see the game. No , I mean Really See It… just saying. It’s All About The Cash.

  23. snnyjcbs says: Feb 13, 2011 6:42 PM

    It is all about the buck with this Dallas Clown. The NFL should make the Super Bowl mess right and then ALL costs should be charged to Jones for his negligence in the seating matter knowing all along that there was a problem with the seats per the County.

  24. skeletaldrawing says: Feb 13, 2011 7:10 PM

    What a Grade A arseclown. Ending revenue sharing would be about the worst thing the NFL could do for its future (even worse then missing games this season). The TV revenues are based on what a huge number of people watch across the country, and it’s the “any given sunday” mantra that drives this.

    Wake up Jerry, baseball sucks for a reason, don’t try to replicate it!

  25. ftball53 says: Feb 13, 2011 7:11 PM

    Revenue sharing is a big deal because the salary cap is based on how much the teams make right? So instead of taking all the teams why not make the salary cap based on the 16 lowest revenue producing teams? Jerry wouldn’t be happy because the cap wouldn’t be as high but he’d have his money and isn’t that all he cares about?

  26. jvw1982 says: Feb 13, 2011 7:17 PM

    Jerry is playing by the rules in place right now, which means all teams share in the liability, until that changes he’s playing by the rules…..nothing wrong with that….There are many things to bash JJ about, this isn’t one of them….

  27. thetooloftools says: Feb 13, 2011 7:25 PM

    It’s all about the money.
    That is what is turning me off to the NFL.
    I used to NEVER miss a NASCAR race on tv…
    and they went $ and now the races suck because they don’t want to tear up cars and control overhead so they just ride around instead of race.
    NFL players don’t go all out because they don’t want to get hurt and lose $.

  28. crazimitch says: Feb 13, 2011 7:25 PM

    Every time you say Jerry jones I drink!

    Beer, Beer, Beer!

  29. ErikW65 says: Feb 13, 2011 7:26 PM

    And revenue-sharing is really at the heart of the labor issue also, it turns out.

    I just got through reading the story about Jay Feely and Jerry Richardson. In the comments, Superfbfan said, “Just because ratings are up doesn’t mean revenue has increased for the owners… players are going to have to take a cut…simple as that.” and linked to this Forbes.com article:  http://www.forbes.com/2010/08/25/most-valuable-nfl-teams-business-sports-football-valuations-10_land.html

    But the article reveals that “The real problem is that the National Football League is evolving into a tiered league, with the upper one-third defined by entrepreneurial owners whose teams typically play in big markets and stadiums that generate insane amounts of cash. Most of the remaining teams are run by cautious owners who play in small markets with low-revenue stadiums.”

    And though it’s technically true that “NFL team values fell 2% last season to an average of $1.02 billion”, that average is misleading because, “The most valuable NFL team… (the Dallas Cowboys) value increased a league high 9%, to $1.8 billion”, while there were “only two teams to lose money last season on an operating basis (the Lions lost $2.9 million, the Miami Dolphins lost $7.7 million).”

    Finally, since the Forbes article also reveals that…
    1) “Owner Jerry Jones netted an additional $12 million last year over what it makes on the Cowboys, thanks to events like the NBA All-Star game, boxing and concerts. The team’s overall operating income hit $143 million, a record for a U.S. sports franchise.”

    2) “Snyder… has been able to more than double nonbroadcasting revenue to $202 million since taking the helm by selling the stadium’s naming rights to FedEx.”

    3) “The New England Patriots, worth $1.37 billion, are third. They have developed the real estate near Gillette Stadium… also own an MLS team, the Revolution, to help keep a steady inventory of events at the stadium.”
    … Superfbfan’s statement that revenue hasn’t increased for the owners is blatantly false. For the wealthiest, it certainly has. The problem is simply that despite that fact, some of them still just don’t want to share it with teams that aren’t as profitable, that’s all!

  30. thefiesty1 says: Feb 13, 2011 7:30 PM

    Cow babies! Nut said.

  31. Rhode Island Patriots Fan says: Feb 13, 2011 7:32 PM

    I’ve always supported revenue sharing and the salary cap to help foster competitive balance in the league which, I believe, accounts for football’s unmatched popularity. At the same time, I think teams like the Vikings, Raiders and Jaguars need to do a better job at imitating the business practices of the Cowboys, Redskins, and Patriots, who consistently rank at the top of the league in terms of team valuation, revenue, and operating income.

    Say what you will about Jerry Jones, Dan Snyder, and Bob Kraft. Those guys are among the very best at running the business side of their franchises. Of course, only one of those has produced a championship-caliber team as of late.

  32. odessabucs says: Feb 13, 2011 7:59 PM

    Dear Jerry Jones,

    The reason the Dallas Cowboys have been such a stranger to the playoffs and are almost going on an entire generation since your last Super Bowl is because of your EXTREME EGOMANIA and failure to understand you could not successfully general manage a flea circus.

    You are tarnishing the reputation and history of this great franchise by your personal selfishness.

    Give us a break please, and own up. If not, your legacy will be one bordering on that of Hugh Culverhouse and the long ago Buccaneers!

    Your friend,

    The Other Jerry

  33. PCa Survivor says: Feb 13, 2011 8:35 PM

    assnfootball says:
    Feb 13, 2011 5:48 PM

    “Every Republican and Conservative should support Jerry Jones. If one truely believes in free markets, we should support Jerry Jones.”
    ______________________
    Actually a$$ (mind if I shorten your name?), you shouldn’t be telling others what they should support. You should be telling us what you support.

    Regardless of my political beliefs, I don’t believe our sports leagues should be operated on true free-market principles. Leagues exists for entertainment and it’s not too entertaining to simply allow large market teams to buy the best players. Ultimately, in free markets, those that can’t compete go bankrupt. In the extreme, three or four teams could form an oligopoly or perhaps one team becomes a monopoly.

    A true market would know no draft. The best players could make their deals with the best teams. There would be no requirement of years of service to become a free agent. It is a FREE market after all and the players would have perfect free of moment. And so would the teams. Forget L.A., why not move the Vikings to New York? Jacksonville could move there too. New York can support one or two more teams.

    I have my own views on how our economy should operate. But regardless of whether I support bigger government or smaller government, I want my sport leagues to be entertainment first and business second. Unlike in business, the goal of an owner shouldn’t be to put his competition out of business.

    I do not support Jerry Jones. And I will refrain in telling you whether you should or shouldn’t support him.

  34. uwsptke says: Feb 13, 2011 9:17 PM

    “youboettcha says: Feb 13, 2011 6:01 PM

    Green Bay may be a small market, but you can’t tell me they’re not pulling their weight. Their sell-out streak is longer than Brett Favre’s.”

    It may be hard to believe, but under the current revenue sharing structure, Green Bay has been generating enough revenue to actually be paying into the system rather than being on the receiving end. I detest Jerry Jones, but he’s absolutely right that teams like Kansas City and Green Bay are actually subsidizing teams like the Minnesota Vikings.

  35. goldsteel says: Feb 13, 2011 10:12 PM

    A good point. I wonder if Mr. Jones wants the rest of the league to share in the costs of the lawsuit? Actually, the NFL stories are becoming more interesting in the off season. The drama continues.

  36. marcinhouston says: Feb 13, 2011 10:41 PM

    If he doesn’t like revenue sharing he should get out of football and buy a baseball team. He can’t win a championship without Jimmy and Troy so he wants to buy one. Pitiful. What a coward. Doesn’t that coward realize that the NFL is so popular just because every team has a real chance to compete.

  37. TxGrown says: Feb 13, 2011 10:58 PM

    “assnfootball says: Feb 13, 2011 5:48 PM

    Every Republican and Conservative should support Jerry Jones. If one truely believes in free markets, we should support Jerry Jones.”
    ———————————————
    OF COURSE EVERY LIBERAL WOULD OFFER A BETTER FINANCIAL SOLUTION…..BANKUPTCY.

  38. jpmelon says: Feb 13, 2011 11:01 PM

    @ youboettcha

    Green Bay and KC are small market teams that indeed pull their own weight. KC has a great attendance record as well. I wasn’t 100% sure if he was talking about Dallas or Minnesota having a 3.5 million population, but I’m pretty sure that JJ was saying it’s outrageous for small market teams to have to bail out a large market franchise that attracts crowds from Minneapolis and St. Paul.

    I agree with him in a sense, but I also think that Dallas, Green Bay, and KC all equally benefit from having 31 other franchises to play against. I’d hate to see an NFL without Minnesota, Buffalo, Miami, Cleveland, San Diego, Arizona, St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Jacksonville, Oakland, Houston, or Cincinnati.

    I guess JJ just wants less competition so he’ll have better odds at making the playoffs. Then he might have a larger role in the super bowl besides just messing up the seats.

  39. db105 says: Feb 14, 2011 1:43 AM

    Revenue sharing is necessary. NFL teams are partners off the field. But they are competitors on the field.

  40. ihateannouncers says: Feb 14, 2011 2:42 AM

    Thats one way to get your team to the Superbowl jerry. Turn the NFL into MLB and eventually buy your way in.. its got to work better than what your currently doing. Snyder and Jones may be great businessmen, but they are horrible owners and are going to ruin this league.

  41. joetoronto says: Feb 14, 2011 6:25 AM

    Rhode Island Patriots Fan says:
    Feb 13, 2011 7:32 PM

    I’ve always supported revenue sharing and the salary cap to help foster competitive balance in the league which, I believe, accounts for football’s unmatched popularity. At the same time, I think teams like the Vikings, Raiders and Jaguars need to do a better job at imitating the business practices of the Cowboys, Redskins, and Patriots, who consistently rank at the top of the league in terms of team valuation, revenue, and operating income.

    Say what you will about Jerry Jones, Dan Snyder, and Bob Kraft. Those guys are among the very best at running the business side of their franchises. Of course, only one of those has produced a championship-caliber team as of late.
    *******************************************************
    The Raiders don’t make money because Al Davis doesn’t put profit ahead of the actual football team.

    You can argue his recent lack of success and his methods, but you can’t argue his will to win.

    Another thing, Jones and Snyder don’t belong next to Kraft in ANY conversation.

    Kraft has managed to get it done while watching the bottom like, the other two spend like there’s no tomorrow, but have accomplished absolutely nothing.

  42. CKL says: Feb 14, 2011 1:49 PM

    Thank you joetoronto for not being a bitter “tuck rule” Raiders fan. :)

    Kraft built his stadium with HIS money AND has no PSLs. No other CURRENT majority owner can say they do or have done the same. His debt service is higher than any other owner’s I would wager.

  43. pravin68 says: Feb 14, 2011 5:19 PM

    I am a Steelers fan and I actually agree with Jerry on one thing – He is not advocating ending revenue sharing. He is talking about ending revenue sharing without any conditions. He seems fine with going along with letting GB share in the TV revenues because GB outperforms their TV market size and may be earning the NFL far disproportionate revenue to what a team from a city of that size normally would earn. Steelers are also another team from a smallish or medium market which earns the NFL big team dollars. What should be punished are teams like the Bengals whose owners are making a profit thanks to revenue sharing despite not doing enough to coax maximum fan loyalty from the Cinci market area. I am a Pirates fan, but I wish there was some metric owners can agree on to mandate that owners of perennially bad teams cannot make a dollar of profit from revenue sharing.

Leave a Reply

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