In 2009, the Packers reported a $20.1 million profit, despite a $4.2 million (4%) drop in ‘local revenue’ and a $6.5 (13%) million drop in ‘marketing, pro shop, and atrium revenue’. (way to go, loyal Packer fans….) In 2008, the profit was $21.4 million.

Packers records show a $53 million increase in network, licensing, merchandising, and other national revenue from 2005 to 2010. Did the salary cap increase $53 million in the last 5 years? Hmmmm……..

Let’s leave aside the idea of reporting profit margins for a non-profit entity….. Let me know when the “franchise preservation fund” dips below $100 million.

Also, don’t get caught up in the “percentages”…. Let me explain….. A 10% increase $250 million in revenue is $25 million. A 20% increase on $125 million in player costs is $25 million. Therefore, the case can be made that player costs increase at twice the rate of revenue, while the actual change in non-player cost committed revenue doesn’t change at all. In the Packers case, the claim could be that revenue rose 18% and player costs 45%, when the actual change was $40 million in revenue and $50 million in player costs. (again, take into account the $160 million that are on the Packers financial books for the 2010 fiscal year, a figure that will drop dramatically in the 2011 fiscal year)

George Attallah said it right when he said “nobody gives you 1/32 of the information you need to make a business decision.” Particularly when the information given is that of an aberration in professional sports business. The Packers still turned a profit, despite committing 65% of total revenue to player costs.

Holding up the Packers 2010 financial report means next to nothing. If anything, it makes a case for continuing the expired CBA format.

You had the great good fortune to play on the same D-line as the Williams wall + Jared Allen and still managed to be mediocre.

Most Viking fans think your backup (Brian Robison) is the better player anyways.

I’m a Giants fan, so I guess I get to see elite DE’s play regularly – Osi as a pure pass rusher, Tuck as the complete package.

That being said, Ray Edwards is average as hell.

As a viking fan I couldn’t agree more. He was our 4th best Dlineman for the last 2 years.

He had one monster game against the cowboys in the playoffs in 09 and suddenly people started thinking he could be elite.

He saw singleteams every single play due to truly elite guys like Jared Allen and Kevin Williams needing constant double teams. Yet he still was never really an impact player. I would be elated if some team was dumb enough to give the vikings a 1st rounder for him.

Wanted to see him be great, but after 3+ years at starter, playing alongside truly great players that made his job easier, he has shown us what his ceiling is. Average at best.

Don’t let the facts get in the way of your biased opinion

The Green Bay Packers will never be confused with the Dallas Cowboys or Washington Redskins when it comes to shopping for free agents. But in a year in which there are no limitations on how much an NFL team can spend, the Packers signed three players to deals worth a combined $75 million in one week’s time.

That $31.5 million of it will be paid this year shows how serious the Packers are about keeping their 2009 team together.

On Friday, the club used its annual Fan Fest held at the Lambeau Field Atrium to announce it had signed safety Nick Collins and defensive tackle Ryan Pickett to long-term deals. The signings came six days after left tackle Chad Clifton signed a three-year, $19.4 million free-agent deal to remain with the team.

The Packers were under no obligation to spend a minimum amount once the salary cap was suspended due to a disagreement between owners and the players union. But it appears they valued their own players more than others and decided to devote a large amount of cash to the 2010 season in hopes of putting themselves in good shape if the salary cap returns.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/87525917.html

I am pro-player because I have played the sport, although not at the professional level and know 1st hand the toll it takes on your body.
I have (2) ACL’s and bum shoulder due to my 6 yrs of organized football. I have one leg longer than the other and cant throw the pigskin farther than 20yds.
I am thankful for the camraderie and life lessons learned. However I realize the sacrifices made to play the sport

Here are some stats to peruse

Average NFL player salary: $1.9 million
Median NFL player salary: $770,000
Average NFL career length: 3.5 years
Number of players on injured reserve in 2010: 352
Average NFL player age: 27

The league employed approx 2000 players in 2010 with about 15% on injured reserve. Compared to any other sport this is almost 3x the norm.
Yet of the 4 major sports it is the only one without guaranteed contracts. The average NFL player plays only 3 years. He stands to make $770,000 a year,
bringing the average career earnings of an NFL player to $2,310,000 – a mere 12% of the MLB player and 11% of an NBA player.

Google Dave Duerson, William Perry, Chris Henry, Terry Long, Mike Webster, Justin Strelcyzk and tell me the money is worth it.

I am not against the owners making a profit but not at the cost of their greatest asset. Players are experiencing medical problems left and right, yet the
owners want to increase the number of regular season games to 18. I love my steelers but it rips my heart to read some of the ex-players medical stories.
I am appalled that the owners are taking the fans for granted and squeezing the players in the name of the almighty $$$$$$$$.

I have no sympathy for Albert Haynesworth…….however for every Fat Albert there are 10 Mark Herzlichs. Keep that in mind when you make form your opinion.

The owners have no interest in negotiating? Really? Weren’t the owners sitting at the negotiating table waiting for a response from the players to a counter offer and an extension to the deadline when the players walked out and de-certified.
_______________________________

OK, I see… You’re not really familiar with the circumstances of what happened in March. I’ll explain. There was a deadline of when the players could de-certify. It was 5:00pm on March 11th. The owners, after having TWO FULL YEARS to submit a reasonable offer, chose to wait until the afternoon of March 11th. Had the players chosen to prolong the negotiations, they could no longer de-certify past that date. It was a complete non-offer.

And maybe you’re right about the players finally cracking once they lose some game checks. You know when that would be? AT SOME POINT INTO THE SEASON, WHEN FOOTBALL WOULD BE LOST!!! So getting back to the initial point of the courts forcing the owners to open the doors, yeah, it’s in the best interests of the fans for that to happen.

Less than 1% profit is not acceptable. ”

Thank you for a great post. As a Packer fan, a franchise without a billionaire owner with pockets so deep that it might be irrelevant as to the financial performance of the franchise, I want a CBA that allows the Packers to achieve the same level of PROFITABILITY that the franchise achieved before the most recent CBA was put into place.

That level of profitability was 35.8 million dollars, which is pretty darn close to the 5% figure that you site. However, for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010, the Packers achieved less than a 1% return as their net profit figure was 5.2 million dollars. Mark Murphy told the shareholders of the team two years ago that the CBA was unsustainable for the Packers. And it is just that. The Packers must fund all operations from football related revenue; signing bonuses, stadium maintenance, health care for all the players, to say nothing of player salaries and legal fees. If the financial trends continue this way, the Packers will first be unable to field a competitive team, and eventually, they will become insolvent.

To give all of you a little perspective on the matter, if there is a 2011 season, 11 players currently on the Packers roster will EACH make more than the Packers franchise made in fiscal 2010. Not collectively, but each of the 11 will make more than the team.

Can anybody see the trend here? How about you, Fortune 500 accountant? See any looming problems here for the Packers? If you cannot, I guess we will all know why you are no longer a accountant for a Fortune 500 company.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Using a publicly owned company as an example is truly disingenous by the owners. This is akin to using a non-profit organization as an example of corporate profitability.

12 of the 32 teams made in excess 36.9 million profit you quote with the Cowboys & Redskins at >$100 million not including revenue sharing and the pro-rated portion of the additional $1 billion off the top.
Only 5 teams reported less than the $9 million used for the GB Packers for 2009.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_Green-Bay-Packers_302814.html

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not necessarily pro-owner but don’t paint the players as victims here.

Sure the players are content with the previous CBA because it was an awesome deal for the players. So, sure the owners want to change it. The 10% reference comes from the fact that the players think they have the right to tell the owners what to do with their revenue … revenue, not profit. The players think they have the right to demand more of the revenue and I don’t blame anyone … owner, employer, etc. for not wanting to do that.

And, if you really think the players aren’t going to crack anytime soon, then you’re the one in Cupcake Valley. If players are already needing to dip into their lockout fund … when they haven’t missed a game check yet … or have a splinter group want separate representation, then they are in big trouble. Once those game checks disappear, so will player resolve.

“If the owners want to be truly transparent……open the books. But they have refused. They have taken a BILLION off the top, want another BILLION…………..without a shred of evidence and you want to question my stupidity.

Chile please!”

The “books” of the Green Bay franchise are “open” and always have been, as they are a publicly held company. The books are also audited and heavily scrutinized owing to the status of the Packer corporation. But seeing that you were once an accountant for a “Fortune 500 Company”, I’m sure you know that.

Just as sure I am that you have taken the time to review those public documents before makking your half-witted rant.

Right. And by the way, I don’t question your stupidity; of that I’m absolutely certain.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Have a good read with public documents!

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_Green-Bay-Packers_302814.html

The players are willing to open up their brains for research………why don’t the owners open their books for scrutiny?

“Prejudices are what fools use for reason”
Voltaire

I’m not sure where the personal assistant reference is coming from, since the players aren’t “demanding” anything. As far as I’m aware, they were perfectly content with the previous CBA. But I don’t want to get into a whole thing there.

Anyway, in Cupcake Valley on Lollipop Lane the owners and players would sit down and hammer out a deal. But that’s not going to happen. We all saw how that played out in February and March. The owners have no intent of negotiating. They can just wait the players out until they crack, and I just don’t see the players cracking anytime soon. This nonsense about”getting back to the table” is a pipe dream.

Less than 1% profit is not acceptable. ”

Thank you for a great post. As a Packer fan, a franchise without a billionaire owner with pockets so deep that it might be irrelevant as to the financial performance of the franchise, I want a CBA that allows the Packers to achieve the same level of PROFITABILITY that the franchise achieved before the most recent CBA was put into place.

That level of profitability was 35.8 million dollars, which is pretty darn close to the 5% figure that you site. However, for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010, the Packers achieved less than a 1% return as their net profit figure was 5.2 million dollars. Mark Murphy told the shareholders of the team two years ago that the CBA was unsustainable for the Packers. And it is just that. The Packers must fund all operations from football related revenue; signing bonuses, stadium maintenance, health care for all the players, to say nothing of player salaries and legal fees. If the financial trends continue this way, the Packers will first be unable to field a competitive team, and eventually, they will become insolvent.

To give all of you a little perspective on the matter, if there is a 2011 season, 11 players currently on the Packers roster will EACH make more than the Packers franchise made in fiscal 2010. Not collectively, but each of the 11 will make more than the team.

Can anybody see the trend here? How about you, Fortune 500 accountant? See any looming problems here for the Packers? If you cannot, I guess we will all know why you are no longer a accountant for a Fortune 500 company.

As for Rosenthal; please, stop sniffing the players jocks and get a firm grasp on reality. 2.8 mil for ANY job, especially in the current economic climate, is far from a raw deal. Even if it is less than your backup.

Players win = There will be football. Either under a new CBA or whatever rules the owners choose to implement with no CBA.

Owners win = Players are forced to accept the owners’ ultimatums or there will be no football this year.

Now if you think the owners’ stance is so important to the league that it’s worth giving up a year of football for it. Fine. But don’t pretend that you aren’t choosing to give away the upcoming season.

The owners think they do deserve more of the money.

As a fan and season ticket holder, here is what I think:

If I were an average NFL player like Ray Edwards, I would feel very lucky to make 2.8 million a year. In fact, with half of that I’d still feel lucky.

If I were an average NFL owner of a $738 million (avg nfl franchise value) dollar asset, I would be happy with a 5% return on my investment. That would be 36.9 million in profit.

Less than 1% profit is not acceptable.

Neither is holding cities hostage for tax payer funded stadiums and other tax breaks.

Nor is overpaying players and then crying foul about profit margins.

Nor is charging $10 dollars for a beer, $40 for parking, when you already pay $80 for a ticket, and forcing fans to sit through 20 tv time-outs a game.

Honestly, the NFL has been screwing me for so long now, my ass can use the break. Go ahead, skip the season. Owners and players – you are both are making me sick.

I’m unable to understand the morons who call a guy greedy for wanting to be paid in reasonable proportion to their skills but would bitch and cry if they were paid half of someone of lesser skill and value in their organization.

Chile please!”

The “books” of the Green Bay franchise are “open” and always have been, as they are a publicly held company. The books are also audited and heavily scrutinized owing to the status of the Packer corporation. But seeing that you were once an accountant for a “Fortune 500 Company”, I’m sure you know that.

Just as sure I am that you have taken the time to review those public documents before makking your half-witted rant.

Right. And by the way, I don’t question your stupidity; of that I’m absolutely certain.

Seriously, the vikes are a joke. How many Super Bowls have you won again? I’ll tell you, ZERO. And that number ain’t changing anytime soon.
_____________________

Thanks for your usual clever contribution, Carl. How many brain cells do you have left? I’ll tell you, ZERO.

Also to all the commentators saying they would play the game for that amount of money well guess what? No one is going to pay you that amount because you can’t do the job.

_________

According to the “Ray Edwards Sack Tracker” Ray Edwards is a valuable member of your organziation.

Seriously, the vikes are a joke. How many Super Bowls have you won again? I’ll tell you, ZERO. And that number ain’t changing anytime soon.

“if the owners are making record profits and ask me to take a pay cut, you better believe we are going to court.”

Is there a union exclusively for the ignorant? If so, you must be a founding member.

Record profits? Really? Do you know the difference between profits and revenues? I don’t think so.

Here’s a lesson for you Einstein: The NFL over the period of the last CBA experienced record revenues, meaning higher ticket prices and higher television dollars. In 2006, the Packers achieved a NET PROFIT of 35.8 million dollars. For the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010, the Packers achieved a NET PROFIT of $5.2 million dollars, despite during that same year, achieving RECORD REVENUES.

Can your little union mind grasp the difference yet? The NET PROFIT for the Packers has gone over the cliff because player salaries and other player related costs are increasing at an average rate of 15% per year.

So, before you and your union throw a whole lot of forced union dues down the toilet on lawyers going to court, you might want to take a high school accounting class.

Is the line, “I’m in a union and dumb as hell” printed on your forehead?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
For your information idiot I worked with a Fortune 500 Co. as an accountant for 5 yrs and know the difference between profit and revenue. I am certainly cognizant of how companies manipulate figures to show profit/loss. An income statement or balance sheet is not a true indication of a company’s economic standing. Does Enron, Worldcom, Tyco ring a bell?

If the owners want to be truly transparent……open the books. But they have refused. They have taken a BILLION off the top, want another BILLION…………..without a shred of evidence and you want to question my stupidity.

Chile please!