Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Potential revenue loss 2020


Recommended Posts

Have been reading that the potential loss in revenue per team is anywhere from 70 to 100 million per team due to the virus. This would lower the salary cap for 2021 for the first time. Seems that this must be realistically accounted for going forward with any current negotiations. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Behle said:

Have been reading that the potential loss in revenue per team is anywhere from 70 to 100 million per team due to the virus. This would lower the salary cap for 2021 for the first time. Seems that this must be realistically accounted for going forward with any current negotiations. 

 

An article I read said that the potential loss for the NFL is $5.5 billion. That would put the average loss per team at around $170 million.  It makes me wonder about teams that are/will be close to the cap number, will they have to cut players in a salary dump in order to get under a future cap number that is potentially much lower?

 

Here is a link to the article I mentioned.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2020/05/18/the-stadium-revenue-each-nfl-team-will-lose-if-games-are-played-without-fans/#1f1258d7691a

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how their TV contracts are written.    Does the NFL get compensated in any way when ratings are higher?   I assume the games will have higher ratings than we have seen in a long time.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, FortheWin said:

This will effectively kill the Chiefs dynasty before it even began ... Mahomes if he was smart would be asking for his mega contract right now.

I don't think he has anything to worry about. He's a 24 year old with an MVP and Super Bowl championship under his belt. If the Chiefs don't/can't pay him $35-40 mil a year, some other team will. Regardless, he's going to get paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

I don't think he has anything to worry about. He's a 24 year old with an MVP and Super Bowl championship under his belt. If the Chiefs don't/can't pay him $35-40 mil a year, some other team will. Regardless, he's going to get paid.

He is not getting 35-40 if the cap goes down 40 percent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

I don't think he has anything to worry about. He's a 24 year old with an MVP and Super Bowl championship under his belt. If the Chiefs don't/can't pay him $35-40 mil a year, some other team will. Regardless, he's going to get paid.

Agreed someone will pay him

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, FortheWin said:

He is not getting 35-40 if the cap goes down 40 percent.

40% would be a really big cut. Teams would have to cut half their players. I did read though that some contract extensions are being put off because of the uncertainty of the cap.   I think the nfl would come up with a solution before players would start getting dumped. Hopefully we get to have at least season ticket holders at the games. Someone mentioned also groups of people like families wouldn’t have to be socially distanced at a game. 

 

I also think if their is no fans ratings will be big for awhile but eventually I think fans would lose interest fast.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chloe6124 said:

40% would be a really big cut. Teams would have to cut half their players. I did read though that some contract extensions are being put off because of the uncertainty of the cap.   I think the nfl would come up with a solution before players would start getting dumped.

 

I also think if their is no fans ratings will be big for awhile but eventually I think fans would lose interest fast.

They could push money to future caps but that is a dangerous game to play as no one knows where pro sports will be next season. I agree that they probably don't let it go down as far as 40 percent but not sure they really have a choice. High end contracts especially QB contracts will come down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder about the effects of fan alienation for the sport. I haven't watched a baseball game on TV (and only attended one I was asked to go to live) since the 1981 strike. I totally gave up on a sport I loved.

 

Hey, there is always soccer and lacrosse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully it does reduce the cap. Would love to see all these players cry about not getting that huge contract! Contracts are ridiculous now. Can only imagine how some of these players would react lol

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, tweezy32 said:

Hopefully it does reduce the cap. Would love to see all these players cry about not getting that huge contract! Contracts are ridiculous now. Can only imagine how some of these players would react lol

Contracts are what the system will sustain. The best players get paid accordingly. You want to see the players cry just for %s and giggles? 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the thought of this will make the owners second guess these long term contracts. NO WAY do I give Dak 35-40 million a year, no matter what. But if the cap might fall down 20 million, he'll be a cap causality anyway..

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2020 at 9:48 AM, CoachLite said:

Hey, there is always soccer and lacrosse.

 

You shut your dirty mouth!

 

If there's no football on TV, I'll go watch grass grow.  Or watch grass die, since it will be fall-going-into-winter... I'll watch the leaves change color... yeah... that would be more exciting than soccer!  haha

 

giphy.gif

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2020 at 10:37 PM, tweezy32 said:

Hopefully it does reduce the cap. Would love to see all these players cry about not getting that huge contract! Contracts are ridiculous now. Can only imagine how some of these players would react lol

I just threw up in my mouth.   What an embarrassingly bad take.   Hey, it’s your opinion, you’re entitled you it.   As am I to mine.    How sad. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • FWIW I thought this from last weeks mail bag was funny because it seems to support what both you and I are saying.  If what I understand your point being is the dline including Buckner played similarly well both games and my belief that 3techs don’t need to record sacks and tfls to be dominant. : “I can understand why fans who watched last Sunday's opener against the Jaguars, and then checked out the box score afterwards, might come away with the conclusion that DeForest Buckner didn't have much of an impact on the game. After all, the Colts traded away their 13th-overall pick in this year's NFL Draft to acquire Buckner, and then immediately handed him a huge contract extension, so expectations are high. I get that. But looking back at the film, I think what's evident is Buckner deserves a little bit more credit beyond his stat-sheet line of six tackles (one for a loss). As the defensive line started to gel in the second half — that's when it limited Jacksonville to six combined rushing yards and had three of its four sacks — you began to feel Buckner much more consistently, and the attention placed on him allowed for others (I thought linebacker Bobby Okereke was fantastic in the second half) to make plays. Buckner also had the eighth-best week among all NFL interior defensive linemen in run stop win rate in Week 1, according to ESPN. Now, moving forward, of course you want to see more of those impact-type plays out of Buckner — sacks, big run stuffs, forced fumbles, defensive touchdowns, etc. But I think it's also important to to remember there are other ways for the three-tech to impact the game, and Buckner did a pretty good job of that last Sunday.”  
    • I’m a little surprised you don’t see a difference in dline play between  the two games.  I don’t have access to any of the services but I would suspect that The grades are significantly higher for the dline in Sunday compared to the Jax game.   but Sunday was even more dominant than i thought, and I thought it was dominant.  Between the opening drive during which MN gained 75 and scored a FG and their last meaningless drive for 75 yds and a TD, the Colts gave up a total of 25 other yds.    against Jax, we gave up around 60 yds rushing in the 1st half and the dline looked less than dominant then imo.  Jax had 5 of 8 drives during which they scored if you throw out the kneel downs at the end of each half.   Percentage of  tackles and sacks for linemen were very similar in both games.  You said that colts had more pressures during the mn game and I said probably a function of Jax short passing attack.   buckner had 6 tackles v Jax and 3 v mn.  He had no sacks v Jax but 1.5 tfl.  He had 1.5 sacks v mn but no other tfl.  Statistically counting sacks, tackles, and tfl he was “better” V Jax.  But you probably don’t think He was better Iwould suspect.   i would be shocked if the dline didn’t grade out higher v. Mn than Jax even though the tackles, tfl, and sacks were very similar over all.   im sure teams keep advanced stats that show a clearer pic of when a d lineman wins or loses on each Play that doesn’t necessarily match easier to see stats like tackles, etc.   do you have access to the grades?  I’d really be interested in the units grades in the two games.   i agree there can be other factors like obviously opponent strength and the play of LBs and dbs.  And mn looks like they might suck pretty bad surprisingly to me.  I think the main problem with lasts weeks game imo is the LBs are weak in coverage and Indy is as a result susceptible to short passing attacks.     that being said, rarely do dlines dominate the LOs like the colts did.   i maintain that a guy like Buckner and dts in general could have nit recorded a sack, had only a couple of tackles and be more dominant than In a game where he recorded a few tackles and a couple of sacks.    
    • Let's hire an exorcist!  
    • Didn't Nick Bosa get hurt this week too?
    • This might be helpful.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...