Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

Roger Goodell Made $24.49 Million Dollars in 2011


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#1 knucklecup


  • hi, I'm a cuckold


  • 4225 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 02:57 PM

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>BREAKING NEWS:NFL paid Roger Goodell $29.49 million in 2011, nearly tripling his pay, according to tax return to be filed later today...</p>&mdash; daniel kaplan (@dkaplanSBJ) <a href="

https://twitter.com/dkaplanSBJ/status/302509084626780161
link to tweet">February 15, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

According to Forbes, the highest paid played in 2012 was Dwight Freeney at $19.035 million dollars.  In 2011, per David Kaplan, Roger Goodell made $24.49 million dollars.

 

I understand that he's essentially a CEO of a huge company and "deserves" $5 million or so but that seems like an absurdly high figure when you compare it to what the players who play the game make.

 

Am I wrong with this assessment?



#2 jose melendez


  • Earl of Acie


  • 12848 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:02 PM

He's the CEO of a huge non-profit technically.

 

It's absurd.  They couldn't find someone awesome for half that?



#3 soxhop411


  • SoSH Member


  • 10140 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:07 PM

. RT “@SportsTaxMan: Some commissioners salaries#MLBBud Selig $22M #NFL Roger Goodell $29.49M up from $11.46 in 2010 #SportsBiz

 

 

not that abnormal for a commissioner



#4 Scoops Bolling

  • 2869 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:27 PM

I believe Stern makes about $20 million as well. He runs a multi billion dollar industry; I don't think his compensation is unreasonable.



#5 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10121 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:36 PM

He runs a multi billion dollar industry; I don't think his compensation is unreasonable.

 

No he doesn't.  His firm makes $9.5 billion in revenues in a multibillion industry.  The distinction there makes a difference.



#6 dcmissle


  • SoSH Member


  • 12414 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:44 PM

I think the salary is reasonable by reference to what Selig made. IMO, running MLB is easier than running the NFL right now, perhaps substantially easier.

Also, who pays him? Modern day robber barons. NFL owners have given every indication of fighting to the death over a nickel. The preposterous set to with the NFL officials this year is but one example. So unless Goodell has a dossier on these guys chronicling sexual and criminal misdeeds, the owners obviously believe Goodell is worth what he is paid. That's all that matters.

Edited by dcmissle, 16 February 2013 - 03:45 PM.


#7 jose melendez


  • Earl of Acie


  • 12848 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 04:21 PM

Presumably they do, but I can't help but think it's weird.  Given that it's a prestigious job that people like to have on the face of it, you'd think you could get someone awesome for way less money.

 

Let's say they did a broad interview process and offered any present or former fortune 100 CEO etc to apply and the pay would be $5 million a year, they could  get someone at least as good.

 

The owners may believe Goodell is worth it, they probably do, but they're fucking morons for thinking it.



#8 Mystic Merlin


  • SoSH Member


  • 21582 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 04:24 PM

The fact Goodell lives and breathes for the NFL and football is not insignificant.  Why hire a mercenary?



#9 Morgan's Magic Snowplow


  • SoSH Member


  • 9001 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 04:31 PM

The owners also like Goodell because he has always worked for the league and understands who is really in charge. The last thing the owners want is an independent David Stern type or some imported CEO used to being the boss.

#10 radsoxfan


  • SoSH Member


  • 7696 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 05:11 PM

Should we change the title of the thread to reflect his actual salary? Seems to be 5M off.

 

I admit to being pretty surprised when I saw his salary.  I guess its relatively in-line with other commissioners, but they all seem overpaid to me. What a job...


Edited by radsoxfan, 16 February 2013 - 05:12 PM.


#11 bowiac


  • I've been living a lie.


  • 9577 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 05:21 PM

It's funny to me that people think that just because he's in charge of a multi-billion dollar industry, he deserves high compensation. As if high qualified people wouldn't be falling all over themselves for that job without the money. It doesn't much matter to me, since it's the owners money, but it's probably not great management on their part.

 

But I also think Goodell's skills are pretty fungible, and he wouldn't really have nearly as much earnings potential outside the NFL. If you think Goodell actually brings a peculiar skillset to the table, and that he would walk away if they offered him "only $5M (or less!), then you can disagree.

 

I'll just point out the president makes $400,000 and he's the head of state of a multi-trillion dollar government.



#12 dcmissle


  • SoSH Member


  • 12414 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 05:35 PM

Fungible?

Let's see. Goodell, in an industry that was flourishing financially, terminated early the contract with the NFLPA and achieved give backs from the union. That's unprecedented. Not only did he spearhead the strategy, but also he took the bulk of the heat forit . Sure, there were some other "bad guys" like Jerry Richardson, but Goodell was villain #1 -- then yielded in the public eye to "good guy" Bob Kraft as the deal was closed. Lot's of this work took place in 2011.

EDIT. I say this with no joy. I think the players, given what they do to their bodies, deserve every penny they get, and Tagliabue forced through for them a fair deal. But the days of a strong Commissioner in this sport appear over, just as they ended in MLB when Selig got the job. Goodell has an interesting arrangement with these owners. He apparently has no say at all in financial stuff other than to be the point of the owners' spear -- If he did, Goodell would not have let the ridiculous situation with the officials last as long as it did. But in non-financial areas, Goodell has near dictatorial authority.

Edited by dcmissle, 16 February 2013 - 05:53 PM.


#13 McBride11

  • 2933 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 06:16 PM

It's funny to me that people think that just because he's in charge of a multi-billion dollar industry, he deserves high compensation. As if high qualified people wouldn't be falling all over themselves for that job without the money. It doesn't much matter to me, since it's the owners money, but it's probably not great management on their part.

 

But I also think Goodell's skills are pretty fungible, and he wouldn't really have nearly as much earnings potential outside the NFL. If you think Goodell actually brings a peculiar skillset to the table, and that he would walk away if they offered him "only $5M (or less!), then you can disagree.

 

I'll just point out the president makes $400,000 and he's the head of state of a multi-trillion dollar government.

Ya, but Goodell's business turns a profit. Obama should get more out of those CSPAN contracts.



#14 DLew On Roids


  • guilty of being sex


  • 12080 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 09:28 PM

Great, glad to see politics entering into it.  That's always illuminating.

 

As a consumer of NFL products, I find Goodell's pay insulting, since I don't think the NFL's product has improved a whit under his leadership.  If anything, he owes the NFL something for where and how he's led.  Nevertheless, using the current standards of CEO pay, it's not unusual for a comp package.  Goodell can't get paid in equity, the way most CEOs are.  So if you assume that he's leading a major corporate entity, they have to compensate him competitively, even if the NFL is technically a non-profit.  So he makes up the options or grants that he'd get at another business with pay.



#15 lars10

  • 1953 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 10:04 PM

I'll just point out the president makes $400,000 and he's the head of state of a multi-trillion dollar government.

OT what does a presidents salary/US government have to do with the NFL/private organization? I've always felt the presidents salary is rely just a silly number to quote.. What does the president pay for while in office? And how much do they make after they're out for speaking and other engagements? Plus their pension is pretty generous? At the end of the day though what president has ever really done it for money?

At some point the zeroes really don't mean anything anyway.

#16 mpx42

  • 2528 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 10:20 PM

After getting the NFLPA to agree to the deal they did, he might even be underpaid.



#17 RGREELEY33

  • 1362 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 11:48 PM

I'm surprised that people are surprised by this. I think you have to discern the job from the perceived performance on the job. As stated, its a $9.5 billion enterprise, a private enterprise at that, and he cannot receive stock or other incentives that other corporate titans usually receive that somewhat masks their real compensation to the public.

I think people get caught up in their respective public personas and even their actions on certain issues at times (rightfully so), but its hard to argue from a business standpoint that all of these guys aren't worth what they make.

#18 twibnotes


  • SoSH Member


  • 8682 posts

Posted 17 February 2013 - 10:54 AM

OT what does a presidents salary/US government have to do with the NFL/private organization? I've always felt the presidents salary is rely just a silly number to quote.. What does the president pay for while in office? And how much do they make after they're out for speaking and other engagements? Plus their pension is pretty generous? At the end of the day though what president has ever really done it for money?
At some point the zeroes really don't mean anything anyway.


The president also gets billions in free services (housing, security, food, an army of servants, a fleet of planes, cars, etc).

In any case, put me in the camp that says the NFL should be able to get a great executive for south of $20 million. The successful negotiation, if we are calling it that, had as much to do with guys like Kraft stepping in as it did Goodell's leadership or negotiating skills.

I know some will say it's Goodell's job to just serve the owners and balance their interests, but for $20+ million, he should be leading the league forward, driving negotiations, etc, not just getting out of the way for Kraft et al to save the day.

#19 Shelterdog


  • SoSH Member


  • 8805 posts

Posted 17 February 2013 - 10:56 AM

The president also gets billions in free services (housing, security, food, an army of servants, a fleet of planes, cars, etc).

In any case, put me in the camp that says the NFL should be able to get a great executive for south of $20 million. The successful negotiation, if we are calling it that, had as much to do with guys like Kraft stepping in as it did Goodell's leadership or negotiating skills.

I know some will say it's Goodell's job to just serve the owners and balance their interests, but for $20+ million, he should be leading the league forward, driving negotiations, etc, not just getting out of the way for Kraft et al to save the day.

 

Ever heard of good cop, bad cop? 



#20 twibnotes


  • SoSH Member


  • 8682 posts

Posted 17 February 2013 - 11:50 AM

 
Ever heard of good cop, bad cop? 


For $25 million, I'd want more than just a bad cop.

#21 dcmissle


  • SoSH Member


  • 12414 posts

Posted 17 February 2013 - 12:08 PM

The president also gets billions in free services (housing, security, food, an army of servants, a fleet of planes, cars, etc).

In any case, put me in the camp that says the NFL should be able to get a great executive for south of 20 million. The successful negotiation, if we are calling it that, had as much to do with guys like Kraft stepping in as it did Goodell's leadership or negotiating skills.

I know some will say it's Goodell's job to just serve the owners and balance their interests, but for 20+ million, he should be leading the league forward, driving negotiations, etc, not just getting out of the way for Kraft et al to save the day.



Don't forget that Goodell has taken the lead on player safety, which implicates the long term survival of the League and franchises that that worth anywhere from the hundreds of millions to almost $2 billion. That is a thankless and difficult job that once again casts Goodell as the villain. Left unchanged, there is a good chance the game will die at the professional level or at least be greatly diminished. Change it too much, they could end up in the same place.

Almost nobody approves of his efforts in this area (except the owners), which underscores the difficulty of this task

#22 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10121 posts

Posted 17 February 2013 - 12:10 PM

Don't forget that Goodell has taken the lead on player safety,

 

Has he?   Or was he pushed to the front reluctantly and still done nothing beyond the cosmetic?



#23 Average Reds


  • SoSH Member


  • 10316 posts

Posted 17 February 2013 - 01:27 PM

Has he?   Or was he pushed to the front reluctantly and still done nothing beyond the cosmetic?

 

IMO, Goodell has not taken the lead in player safety. 

 

As you say, he's been dragged, kicking and screaming to a place where he has been forced to address it.  And he is addressing it like the lawyer that he is - building a case to protect the interests of the league while doing damn near next to nothing about actually improving player safety.

 

I don't give a damn when he gets paid - that's between Goodell and the owners. but his salary is interesting, as it reflects how the owners value him relative to his success at protecting the value of their franchises.



#24 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28227 posts

Posted 17 February 2013 - 01:27 PM

As a consumer of NFL products, I find Goodell's pay insulting, since I don't think the NFL's product has improved a whit under his leadership.  

 

Well, the revenues that product has created seem to disagree. League revenues are ~10 billion annually, and much of his salary increase was due to hitting performance bonuses tied to revenue. 



#25 Shelterdog


  • SoSH Member


  • 8805 posts

Posted 17 February 2013 - 01:27 PM

EDIT: Delete


Edited by Shelterdog, 17 February 2013 - 01:28 PM.


#26 Shelterdog


  • SoSH Member


  • 8805 posts

Posted 17 February 2013 - 01:28 PM

Has he?   Or was he pushed to the front reluctantly and still done nothing beyond the cosmetic?

 

You're saying that like (from the owner's standpoint) that that's a bad thing. 



#27 dcmissle


  • SoSH Member


  • 12414 posts

Posted 17 February 2013 - 01:54 PM

Has he? Or was he pushed to the front reluctantly and still done nothing beyond the cosmetic?


What would you propose, flag football? A good number of fans are lamenting that we're well on our way to it. You can't do much more than sneeze at a QB. Hits on WRs that were routine a generation ago now draw flags and fines almost without exception. They are on the cusp of eliminating kickoffs.

There is no technological fix to this problem, which has only grown deeper as players have become much bigger and faster and train 12 months a year. Linemen two generations ago were the size of LBs now and sold cars or drove delivery trucks during the offseason. Short of imposing weight limits at various positions -- substantially lower than average weights now -- and/or strict limits on the length of careers, I'm not sure what can be done other than fundamentally altering the way the game is played, and lots of people think we're doing just that.

As for "reluctantly", don't make too much of the lawsuits by former players. Those are serious but very manageable. The more dangerous threat, I think, is if the carnage of the game continues unabated, the sport may become culturally unacceptable over the next 20 or so years.

Edited by dcmissle, 17 February 2013 - 01:56 PM.


#28 twothousandone

  • 2885 posts

Posted 17 February 2013 - 03:47 PM


I don't give a damn when he gets paid - that's between Goodell and the owners.

My take on most of the comments is just about everyone agrees with that. But it seems a bit strange that for, say $500,000 LESS per team, they coudn't find some qualified and willing to take $8 million per year.

No good ever comes from players making statements in public about contract negotiations, but if Welker noted that Kraft seems fine paying $750,000/year as his contribution for the commissioner's salary, yet uses every negotiating trick at his disposal to avoid paying Welker, would Welker be "wrong."



#29 soxfan121


  • minidope/racontuer


  • 15129 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 09:53 AM

Presumably they do, but I can't help but think it's weird.  Given that it's a prestigious job that people like to have on the face of it, you'd think you could get someone awesome for way less money.

 

Let's say they did a broad interview process and offered any present or former fortune 100 CEO etc to apply and the pay would be $5 million a year, they could  get someone at least as good.

 

The owners may believe Goodell is worth it, they probably do, but they're fucking morons for thinking it.

 

Let's put this to the real world test in about a year when Selig's successor is chosen. If George W. Bush isn't the top candidate, based on prior executive experience and his on-record claim of it being his "dream job", then I'd say your theory holds no water. 



#30 wutang112878


  • SoSH Member


  • 5582 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 10:32 AM

I think at $25M he is underpaid. 

 

The guy got the owners the best tv deal in sports, everyone knew it as they walked into the CBA negotiations, and he somehow got the players to agree to one of the worst revenue splits in sports (at the time).  Thats locked up for 8 or 10 years, and all signs in the form of ratings are trending in the right direction.  This is the stuff the owners really look at, how he set them up for profits.  The guy took the most profitable sports league in the US and made it more profitable and gave it more stability. 

 

His salary should be significantly greater than Stern or Selig, they are basically Tagliabue's.  When Tag left office he pushed the owners to agree to a deal that they eventually opted out of, the TV deals were good and ratings were going up, but the issue of player conduct was quickly becoming a problem and Tag wasnt doing much about it.  Tag was simply a care taker of the league at that point, while Goodell was more a fix it and improve it type. So while his job is really easy now, with the established profitability and stability, its easy because of the great work he has already done, and the comish before him didnt accomplish that.



#31 Infield Infidel


  • teaching korea american


  • 8115 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 01:36 PM

 
Let's put this to the real world test in about a year when Selig's successor is chosen. If George W. Bush isn't the top candidate, based on prior executive experience and his on-record claim of it being his "dream job", then I'd say your theory holds no water. 


Condoleezza rice said that NFL commissioner is her dream job and I don't think she would do a worse job then Goodell

#32 wutang112878


  • SoSH Member


  • 5582 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 01:54 PM

Are you implying that Goddell sucks or she would be that good?  I have heard her say this before, but I just dont understand how her political background applies to running an organization that is concerned with tv ratings, and an NFL product that she has never been involved with whatsoever.



#33 Myt1


  • thinks tim thomas is a dick-fil-a


  • 19511 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 10:37 AM

Great, glad to see politics entering into it.  That's always illuminating.

 

As a consumer of NFL products, I find Goodell's pay insulting, since I don't think the NFL's product has improved a whit under his leadership.  If anything, he owes the NFL something for where and how he's led.

 

I can't think of something I find less personally insulting.  Maybe puppies.



#34 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25528 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 02:31 PM

I can't think of something I find less personally insulting.  Maybe puppies.

 

 

Are those puppies personally destroying a football league with a series of misguided, ham-handed decisions? 'Cause I'd pretty pretty insulted by puppies in that case.



#35 kenneycb


  • Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play


  • 7243 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 02:36 PM

puppy-bowl.jpg

You tell me.



#36 Myt1


  • thinks tim thomas is a dick-fil-a


  • 19511 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 02:43 PM

Are those puppies personally destroying a football league with a series of misguided, ham-handed decisions? 'Cause I'd pretty pretty insulted by puppies in that case.

 

I agree that many of Goodell's decisions are misguided and ham-handed.  I disagree that they're destroying the league and I think the TV numbers support me as do secondary market ticket prices.  And last year he got his bosses a ton of money.

 

I guess I just don't see the need to be insulted by someone else paying someone else a whole bunch of money.



#37 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25528 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 02:48 PM

I agree that many of Goodell's decisions are misguided and ham-handed.  I disagree that they're destroying the league and I think the TV numbers support me as do secondary market ticket prices.  And last year he got his bosses a ton of money.

 

I guess I just don't see the need to be insulted by someone else paying someone else a whole bunch of money.

 

 

I certainly understand where you're coming from, but he's a lousy commish and I feel strongly that they could have someone in there that would be a much better person for the job. And while it's a bit rich to be insulted by someone else's pay (which doesn't affect my life one iota) the level of pay seems to indicate that his masters believe he's doing a good job, which just makes me irrationally angry.

 

He's a horse's ass and an incorrigible buffoon, and I'm uncomfortable with any public action that indicates the contrary. Paying him $25 million kinda does that.



#38 bowiac


  • I've been living a lie.


  • 9577 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 02:48 PM

I'm not gonna wade too far into this for fear of turning this into V&N, but there's a major difference between presiding over a profitable expansion, and being responsible for it. When I said he's fungible, I mean I think there are many many people who could have done the same job for a fraction the price. I don't think he had any special skills or talents. Not my money, so I don't care much. Doesn't make it any less dumb.



#39 wutang112878


  • SoSH Member


  • 5582 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 03:02 PM

For those who dont like Goodell, where do you rank him among the other 3 commissioners?  Do you think Selig, Bettman or Stern is better?  Not sure what Bettman makes but Selig and Stern make roughly the same amount for leagues that are much less healthy from a ratings and profitability standpoint.  Are all 4 leagues are stupid when it comes to hiring commissioners?



#40 Dehere

  • 2414 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 03:15 PM

puppy-bowl.jpg

You tell me.

 

The refs really lost control of the Puppy Bowl this year. Biting the chest was supposed to be a point of emphasis this year for crissakes.

 

The thing about Goodell's gargantuan pay in 2011 was that about two-thirds of that compensation was bonus in a year in which the league signed both new TV deals and a new CBA. I would imagine he'll see less in 2012.



#41 Myt1


  • thinks tim thomas is a dick-fil-a


  • 19511 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 03:44 PM

I'm not gonna wade too far into this for fear of turning this into V&N, but there's a major difference between presiding over a profitable expansion, and being responsible for it. When I said he's fungible, I mean I think there are many many people who could have done the same job for a fraction the price. I don't think he had any special skills or talents. Not my money, so I don't care much. Doesn't make it any less dumb.

 

There's an even bigger difference between presiding over a profitable expansion and destroying the league.  The owners seemed pretty happy with how things went in the CBA negotiations in which he played a large role.  He's been in the league for about 30 years and was COO for five years prior to becoming commissioner and probably has a bit in the way of experience, contacts, and relationships that helps.

 

He loses points in public opinion because the things that he does that are public have been the ones that seem most ham-fisted (Patriots videotaping, Saints suspensions, Replacement refs).  I doubt very much that any of those three have a material effect on the health of the league.


Edited by Myt1, 19 February 2013 - 03:46 PM.


#42 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10121 posts

Posted 21 February 2013 - 09:55 PM

You're saying that like (from the owner's standpoint) that that's a bad thing. 

 

No, I'm saying that like someone who thinks that Goodell hasn't taken the lead on player safety.  He hasn't.  That's all I'm saying.

 

What would you propose, flag football? A good number of fans are lamenting that we're well on our way to it. You can't do much more than sneeze at a QB. Hits on WRs that were routine a generation ago now draw flags and fines almost without exception. They are on the cusp of eliminating kickoffs.

There is no technological fix to this problem, which has only grown deeper as players have become much bigger and faster and train 12 months a year. Linemen two generations ago were the size of LBs now and sold cars or drove delivery trucks during the offseason. Short of imposing weight limits at various positions -- substantially lower than average weights now -- and/or strict limits on the length of careers, I'm not sure what can be done other than fundamentally altering the way the game is played, and lots of people think we're doing just that.

As for "reluctantly", don't make too much of the lawsuits by former players. Those are serious but very manageable. The more dangerous threat, I think, is if the carnage of the game continues unabated, the sport may become culturally unacceptable over the next 20 or so years.

 

You said he took the lead on player safety.  He hasn't.  He's behind the media, former players, and NFLPA.

 

I mean, I'm not making a very nuanced argument here, and I haven't even said he's done either a good or a bad job vis a vis player safety.

 

You said he has taken the lead in making the game safer for players.  I just said the only reason why he has done it at all is because he was forced too.

 

Being forced to do something isn't taking the lead.  You too responded to statements, for sure, but not ones that I made.  Congrats.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users