Dan Shaughnessy: Taking a dump in your mouth one column at a time

Deweys New Stance

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2001
2,836
Here to Eternity
After today's humiliating, embarrassing, traumatizing loss, the Orioles have fallen to third place in popularity in the Baltimore market, behind the Ravens and Hopkins lacrosse. Not certain if they can ever come back after the way they disgraced themselves today; word is they might just forfeit the balance of the 2023 season.

Every team in MLB has several tough losses during the course of a season like the Sox had Opening Day. And they all have exciting comeback walk-offs like the Sox did today. And of course today's ending was a lot more fun, but I imagine a lot of fans had a really good time at Thursday's game even though the rally fell short. But yeah, if Shank even writes about this game it will be to complain about Sale and the pitching. Don't know why anybody would want to read it.

And can we give this "THE SOX ARE #4 IN THE BOSTON MARKET OH THE HUMANITY!!!" stuff a rest already? Don't know how you can make such a definitive statement to begin with, and more importantly even if it's true why should I (or anybody else) care? If the other Boston sports franchises are doing really well and generating a ton of buzz and interest like the Celtics and Bruins right now.......well, great! Why should it impact how you root for, and view, the Sox? If the "fact" that the Sox have fallen behind the other local teams in popularity bothers you so much, then, you know, find something else to entertain you and occupy your free time. Life if short, and time is precious. The Sox are in a very tough division, and their starting pitching appears suspect. I'll greatly enjoy following them this season to watch Yoshida, Casas, Bello and others, but I recognize that grabbing a playoff spot is going to be a tough ask this year. I'm fine with that; this team has had a ton of success this century, and I believe that they're moving in the right direction overall for the future. But if you disagree, and can't get over last season (or The Trade That Must Not Be Named), then why wallow in misery?
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
23,835
Unreal America
I imagine Shank's "4th in the market" point is built upon him remembering the days when the Pats truly were a very distant 4th in popularity among pro teams in Boston. But that's an apples-and-oranges comparison.

Plus, it's simply incorrect. There are all sorts of ways to measure "popularity" -- TV ratings, attendance, merch sales, social media followings, etc. And you can just simply survey area fans and ask them what their favorite team(s) are. From all the data I've seen across those areas, the Sox are the 2nd most popular team among the big 4.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
696
Just thinking, is there really a "ranking in the market?"

I mean, I guess you can measure ratings and draw a conclusion.

But it seems to me that the only fan for whom that might ever would be relevant for would be one who likes all four equally. For fans, say, who are HUGE football fans, lesser hockey and baseball fans, and not at all fans of pro basketball, the idea of fourth in the market is nonsensical.

And doesn't it always, to a great extent, pivot on how well the teams are doing? Meaning, it's blindingly obvious that last place teams will garner less interest than championship contenders. No matter who the manager is, what the spending is or what the mistakes are.

If the Sox contend this summer, Boston fans will follow them rabidly. If they don't contend, given that they've been down a lot over the last few years, and they will not in fact be a contender, they will not. But that's like saying if a movie is bad, people wont go to see it.

No shit.....

Also, comparing fan interest by attendance and ratings is weird science when comparing every day versus once a week or 3-4 times a week sports. What I mean is that it's easier to compare the Bruins and Celtics than it is to to compare anyone to the Pats or the Pats and Sox to the Bruins and Celts. Frequency matters.

I like all four teams virtually equally. If you forced me to choose, I would take another Lombardi first. But that's like choosing among my kids for me, and in the end I care about them all pretty much equally and get most engaged when I think one has the chance to win it all. Again, this seems obvious and typical, and not based on a concept of ranking among the four teams.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
23,835
Unreal America
Just thinking, is there really a "ranking in the market?"

I mean, I guess you can measure ratings and draw a conclusion.

But it seems to me that the only fan for whom that might ever would be relevant for would be one who likes all four equally. For fans, say, who are HUGE football fans, lesser hockey and baseball fans, and not at all fans of pro basketball, the idea of fourth in the market is nonsensical.

And doesn't it always, to a great extent, pivot on how well the teams are doing? Meaning, it's blindingly obvious that last place teams will garner less interest than championship contenders. No matter who the manager is, what the spending is or what the mistakes are.

If the Sox contend this summer, Boston fans will follow them rabidly. If they don't contend, given that they've been down a lot over the last few years, and they will not in fact be a contender, they will not. But that's like saying if a movie is bad, people wont go to see it.

No shit.....

Also, comparing fan interest by attendance and ratings is weird science when comparing every day versus once a week or 3-4 times a week sports. What I mean is that it's easier to compare the Bruins and Celtics than it is to to compare anyone to the Pats or the Pats and Sox to the Bruins and Celts. Frequency matters.

I like all four teams virtually equally. If you forced me to choose, I would take another Lombardi first. But that's like choosing among my kids for me, and in the end I care about them all pretty much equally and get most engaged when I think one has the chance to win it all. Again, this seems obvious and typical, and not based on a concept of ranking among the four teams.
Ultimately it doesn't matter how each of the pro sports teams ranks because there is clearly enough population and corporate spending available for each of the teams to generate sellout attendance and lucrative sponsorship deals.

Obviously, that's not the case in some markets. So there's a real competition between franchises to capture a larger share of both. Boston/New England has an abundance of riches when it comes to fan support.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
23,973
Just thinking, is there really a "ranking in the market?"

I mean, I guess you can measure ratings and draw a conclusion.

But it seems to me that the only fan for whom that might ever would be relevant for would be one who likes all four equally. For fans, say, who are HUGE football fans, lesser hockey and baseball fans, and not at all fans of pro basketball, the idea of fourth in the market is nonsensical.

And doesn't it always, to a great extent, pivot on how well the teams are doing? Meaning, it's blindingly obvious that last place teams will garner less interest than championship contenders. No matter who the manager is, what the spending is or what the mistakes are.

If the Sox contend this summer, Boston fans will follow them rabidly. If they don't contend, given that they've been down a lot over the last few years, and they will not in fact be a contender, they will not. But that's like saying if a movie is bad, people wont go to see it.

No shit.....

Also, comparing fan interest by attendance and ratings is weird science when comparing every day versus once a week or 3-4 times a week sports. What I mean is that it's easier to compare the Bruins and Celtics than it is to to compare anyone to the Pats or the Pats and Sox to the Bruins and Celts. Frequency matters.

I like all four teams virtually equally. If you forced me to choose, I would take another Lombardi first. But that's like choosing among my kids for me, and in the end I care about them all pretty much equally and get most engaged when I think one has the chance to win it all. Again, this seems obvious and typical, and not based on a concept of ranking among the four teams.
I think that Dan Shaughnessy, like most of us here, is a baseball fan. Not only that but he grew up where baseball was king in this region. Now it's not and while the Sox aren't moving to Albuquerque any time soon, at the same time, it's a little disheartening to turn on sports radio and listen to four hours of "Who's going to be the Patriot's special teams coach?" in February. Not too long ago, once the Pats were eliminated and the Celts and B's were in the malaise of their long seasons, it was time to turn to baseball and discuss the upcoming season.

It isn't like that any more and I agree with Shaughnessy that it sucks. It almost feels like Boston has been homogenized like the rest of the country to kneel at the altar of football. And I like football fine, but I can't listen to another word about Bill O'Brien, Matt Patricia and Joe Judge. I just can't. And yes, it's absolutely my fault for tuning into sports radio--but sometimes I'm only going cross town and I don't feel like loading a podcast. As much as I dislike the way this roster was constructed, the 2023 Red Sox were a far more interesting topic than who's coaching the Pats in nine months.

I like Red Sox discussions. I especially like it in January and February when it's 10 degrees out, there's a foot of snow but I can at least think about warmer days and the upcoming season.

Who's to "blame" for this is up for debate, I guess. You could blame the talk show hosts for not talking about it. You could blame the fans for not caring enough. You can blame the team for having no sizzle (and please, I beg of you, spare me the whole, "the front office shouldn't care about winning the offseason, it's the regular season that matters" line, I understand this. Completely. But at the same time, the Red Sox are an entertainment option and need word-of-mouth [among other things] to sell tickets). I don't know. But it's just a drag that something that used to be such an ingrained topic of conversation 12 months out of the year has been relegated to the bench behind the NFL. I think that's what's at the heart of what Shaughnessy is trying to say.

It's not so much that things are changing and change is bad, it's that this seems to be a self-inflicted wound and I'm not sure why it has to be this way.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
696
I think that Dan Shaughnessy, like most of us here, is a baseball fan. Not only that but he grew up where baseball was king in this region. Now it's not and while the Sox aren't moving to Albuquerque any time soon, at the same time, it's a little disheartening to turn on sports radio and listen to four hours of "Who's going to be the Patriot's special teams coach?" in February. Not too long ago, once the Pats were eliminated and the Celts and B's were in the malaise of their long seasons, it was time to turn to baseball and discuss the upcoming season.

It isn't like that any more and I agree with Shaughnessy that it sucks. It almost feels like Boston has been homogenized like the rest of the country to kneel at the altar of football. And I like football fine, but I can't listen to another word about Bill O'Brien, Matt Patricia and Joe Judge. I just can't. And yes, it's absolutely my fault for tuning into sports radio--but sometimes I'm only going cross town and I don't feel like loading a podcast. As much as I dislike the way this roster was constructed, the 2023 Red Sox were a far more interesting topic than who's coaching the Pats in nine months.

I like Red Sox discussions. I especially like it in January and February when it's 10 degrees out, there's a foot of snow but I can at least think about warmer days and the upcoming season.

Who's to "blame" for this is up for debate, I guess. You could blame the talk show hosts for not talking about it. You could blame the fans for not caring enough. You can blame the team for having no sizzle (and please, I beg of you, spare me the whole, "the front office shouldn't care about winning the offseason, it's the regular season that matters" line, I understand this. Completely. But at the same time, the Red Sox are an entertainment option and need word-of-mouth [among other things] to sell tickets). I don't know. But it's just a drag that something that used to be such an ingrained topic of conversation 12 months out of the year has been relegated to the bench behind the NFL. I think that's what's at the heart of what Shaughnessy is trying to say.

It's not so much that things are changing and change is bad, it's that this seems to be a self-inflicted wound and I'm not sure why it has to be this way.
All well taken and I am not up there. BUT no matter how popular the Sox were and no matter what they have done to themselves, aside from the Pats angle, in a season when the Bruins are playing at a historic clip and the Celts are number 2 in the Eastern Conference and are again Championship contenders, it's no shame that people are also focused a lot on the Bs and Cs.

Again, I can't authoritatively comment on the Pats obsession. I would guess a lot of that is that we are still in the immediate past of a historic NFL run in NE. And that we still have BB and Kraft around from that era, and some really interesting story lines relating to Bill's part in the regression.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
7,665
I’m a Pats fan, but I get really tired of the incessant focus on the Patriots by sports radio. It’s March, nothing is really going on with the NFL, do we need to spend so much time talking about how next season is important for Mac Jones? Enough already!
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
696
Dan's recent column on Jaylen Brown is a good example of why so many players seem to hate him and some talk about the media making Boston less desirable.

At the same time, I doubt many fans didn't at least wonder what that hand injury was about, and it did remind me of Irving Fryar.

So I find myself in the uncomfortable position of being pissed at the CHB for possibly throwing another log on Brown's discontentment fire and thinking he might have a fair question/point.
 

ColdSoxPack

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
2,129
Simi Valley, CA
Dan wallows in misery. He has a card catalog of things to complain about and to compare them to things he has complained about in the past. Hence Wade Boggs, then Irving Fryar, and Larry Bird, and now Jaylen Brown. It's the gift that never stops giving.
 

richgedman'sghost

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2006
1,838
ct
I've been to 2 Bruins games in my life and basically pay no attention to hockey until the playoffs. (This year is just a little different because they are so damn good). I've been a season ticket holder to the Sox for about 30 years. The Sox are 4th in my consciousness. I am not going to any games this year - I've sold off every ticket.
Suppose they are in first place in September? You still are boycotting every single game? How about if they make the playoffs? You still not interested ?
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
23,973
Yeah. Shaughnessy doesn't really take out the carving knives until the meat is cold. Expect to get kicked in the gut about this game during the summer, when the B's open training camp, after a big win next season and before next year's playoffs.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
696
That column reminds me of a humblebrag. Indirect douchery of the highest order.

Yes, he didn't stab the knife in deep about this year's team. But he did manage to list off the parade of miserable endings and horribly painful defeats in the process. I don't know about others but today was not a day when I needed to be reminded in graphic detail of several of the worst sports fan nights of my life. "Your Aunt Sadie's death was bad, but not nearly as bad as Uncle Joe, Grandma Etta, Cousin Eddie and of course your little sister, Kay."

Not helpful.

Is it fair game? Yes. And it's even relevant. But it still sucks ass and is still classic Dan.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,003
Westwood MA
You knew he was going there, but I think he took a little off of his heater after it happened: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/05/01/sports/boston-bruins-collapse-dan-shaughnessy/
Pretty tame all things considered.

And IMO, he's spot on, 1986 will always wear the gold medal of disasters, 2007 SB is right behind it with the silver.

This one sort of blends in with a bunch of others trying to win the bronze.

That said; did not realize the Panthers had the 17th best record in the NHL this year.

Unfuckingbelievable.
 

ColdSoxPack

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
2,129
Simi Valley, CA
The 25 players 25 cabs thing has always sounded like the media grinding an axe. Was there ever been a documented player to cab ratio? The more he brings it up the less I believe it. I liked those teams. Was I not supposed to?
 

Two Youks

lurker
Jun 18, 2013
116
Serious question: why does anyone care about what this guy thinks? He’s not smart, not insightful, not even interesting. He’s just a bitter old man, and the less attention/clicks he gets, the sooner he disappears.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
62,565
Rotten Apple
The 25 players 25 cabs thing has always sounded like the media grinding an axe. Was there ever been a documented player to cab ratio? The more he brings it up the less I believe it. I liked those teams. Was I not supposed to?
Right? agreed. If Dewey didn't hang with Yaz for BBQ after the game was that really the end of the world?
Also, their main rivals, The Bronx Zoo Yankees, were a chaotic mess with tons of in-fighting but they managed to grab a few rings.
 

ColdSoxPack

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
2,129
Simi Valley, CA
Right? agreed. If Dewey didn't hang with Yaz for BBQ after the game was that really the end of the world?
Also, their main rivals, The Bronx Zoo Yankees, were a chaotic mess with tons of in-fighting but they managed to grab a few rings.
Plus how many players can you get in a cab? Two?
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
23,973
The 25 players 25 cabs thing has always sounded like the media grinding an axe. Was there ever been a documented player to cab ratio? The more he brings it up the less I believe it. I liked those teams. Was I not supposed to?
Are you asking if, in the past, all members of the Boston Red Sox hated each other so much that they literally (I’m using this word in its correct meaning) took 25 separate cabs after they left the clubhouse, got to an away airport, etc?
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
29,072
Right? agreed. If Dewey didn't hang with Yaz for BBQ after the game was that really the end of the world?
Also, their main rivals, The Bronx Zoo Yankees, were a chaotic mess with tons of in-fighting but they managed to grab a few rings.
Remy was never very direct about it, but I dont think *anybody* hung with Yaz.
 

Deweys New Stance

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2001
2,836
Here to Eternity
Dan Shaughnessy once called David Ortiz "a pile of you-know-what".
Dan Shaughnessy called Masataka Yoshida "soft" after a slow start.
The Red Sox this past winter signed Rafael Devers to a 10-year, $314mm extension and Masataka Yoshida to a 5-year deal.

Dan Shaughnessy is an idiot who knows nothing about baseball. No one should ever care what Dan Shaughnessy thinks.
 

Dotrat

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 11, 2002
2,050
Morris County NJ
I'm old enough to remember when Dan was the new guy on the Celtics beat. I had stopped reading him before I moved to NYC--even when I schlepped down to Hotaling's on 42nd Street to buy the Sunday and an occasional weekday Globe. It baffles me that anyone reads him. He's a good writer, but one with nothing to say beyond miserable, bigoted takes. Life is too short to squander time reading Dan Shaughnessy.
 

Comfortably Lomb

Koko the Monkey
SoSH Member
Feb 22, 2004
12,774
The Paris of the 80s
I think there are enough bitter assholes who like him. Read the comments on his columns many people have also turned to the dark side.
Newspaper comment demographics skew male, older, lower education, and lower income in general. I'm assuming they skew even more heavily in that direction for sports columns in particular. The kind of folks who have been left behind by the last few decades of baseball analysis. They're still living in the 80s and 90s and Shaughnessy is there for them.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
7,468
Boston, MA
LOL boo hoo, Shank. You irrelevant putz.
The linked article has some concerning numbers whether you're a sports writer or professional athlete.

How Gen Z is killing sports media as we know it (awfulannouncing.com)

Only 23% of Gen Zers say they’re passionate sports fans, compared to 42% of millennials, 33% of Gen Xers and 31% of baby boomers. Even more concerning, 27% of Gen Zers said they dislike sports altogether, compared with just 7% of millennials, 5% of Gen Xers and 6% of baby boomers.
27% of Gen Z disliking sports altogether starts to limit who you can market to.
 

Patriot_Reign

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2011
1,104
Not exactly breaking news but these days there's just too much competition for eyeballs.
It's actually pretty amazing that baseball has managed to hold on, though very curious where MLB will be in 20 years.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

critical thinker
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
9,386
To be fair, it's hard for sports to compete with over-the-top YouTubers and "influencers." Plus the rise over the last 20+ years of playing video games becoming full-time jobs for some people (that others watch).
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
69,408
National TV broadcasts have really hurt sports IMO, maybe get better announcers than John Smoltz and Mark Jackson to cover the biggest games of the season and see if that helps.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
8,083
(1) Fuck Dan Shaughnessy. He made a career by bottom-feeding and appealing to the worst instincts of Boston fans. The idea that his intended audience was "knowledgeable" sports fans is laughable.

Insulting the customer should be a fireable offense.

I'm heartened by the fact that he hates his job so much but is still doing it. I guess Curse of the Bambino wasn't enough to make him set for life.

(2) I know we've been provided a lot of evidence about the stupidity of billionaires over the past few years, but I'll start to believe this stuff about sports dying just as soon as a pro franchise sells at a loss. There were multiple bids for the Washington football team, a terrible team in a crap stadium that's spent 2 decades driving away its fans.

The problem of competition for eyeballs has existed forever. I'm sure the Sons of Red Ruffing were worrying about how talkies were going to impact baseball attendance.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

critical thinker
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
9,386
The days of the great sports broadcaster are just about over, I fear. The networks don't really care who gives the PBP and color so long as they don't say anything offensive (that is recorded, anyway) and aren't egomaniacs, but have enough of a personality so as not to be the cure for insomnia. The rise of the Internet has made their knowledge of the players and the game almost an afterthought, as fans can look up the stats or just see them in real time on the screen. Their roles have diminished greatly and so has the talent pool, as a result, similar to anchors and news broadcasters. People would rather get their news and opinions from characters then the ones who tell it like it is. That's why a meathead like Joe Rogan is so popular and so many people think he knows better than actual scientists, doctors, and the like. Meanwhile, there are innumerable podcasts with much smaller audiences that are far more educational and interesting while also being far less divisive. Or, to get back on topic, why Barstool and Magary and their ilk are much more widely read than actual sportswriters at this point, especially the oldheads like Shank.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
31,477
(1) Fuck Dan Shaughnessy. He made a career by bottom-feeding and appealing to the worst instincts of Boston fans. The idea that his intended audience was "knowledgeable" sports fans is laughable.

Insulting the customer should be a fireable offense.

I'm heartened by the fact that he hates his job so much but is still doing it. I guess Curse of the Bambino wasn't enough to make him set for life.

(2) I know we've been provided a lot of evidence about the stupidity of billionaires over the past few years, but I'll start to believe this stuff about sports dying just as soon as a pro franchise sells at a loss. There were multiple bids for the Washington football team, a terrible team in a crap stadium that's spent 2 decades driving away its fans.

The problem of competition for eyeballs has existed forever. I'm sure the Sons of Red Ruffing were worrying about how talkies were going to impact baseball attendance.
Point 2 is not really a relevant metric to me. These franchises have become trophies for billionaires. Their price increases seems more related to more individuals being incredibly wealthy and there being a mostly fixed number of teams. It’s not like these things are spitting out huge amounts of cash.
 

ColdSoxPack

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
2,129
Simi Valley, CA
Point 2 is not really a relevant metric to me. These franchises have become trophies for billionaires. Their price increases seems more related to more individuals being incredibly wealthy and there being a mostly fixed number of teams. It’s not like these things are spitting out huge amounts of cash.
Point 1 is spot on though.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
10,055
Point 2 is not really a relevant metric to me. These franchises have become trophies for billionaires. Their price increases seems more related to more individuals being incredibly wealthy and there being a mostly fixed number of teams. It’s not like these things are spitting out huge amounts of cash.
I'm not sure that's really true, it's just that a lot of ways they make the cash now are through things that we normal fans might consider less directly related to our enjoyment of the game, and perhaps even detrimental - international broadcasting rights, online gambling, real estate development around the ballpark, a different jersey for every day of the week and two on Sunday, game times that suit TV networks but not fans, special "club seating" sections, collective bargaining agreements that cap player income, etc...

There's always egos involved in buying these things, but the people who do buy sports franchises have gotten pretty clever about extracting value from them.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
23,973
I don’t mind Shank as much as a lot of you guys (his powers have been reduced to nothing) but his running to Bob Cousy every time the Celts make news is worthless. Cousy sorta insinuated that in the piece.

And he (and Bob Ryan) have been writing the baseball-sky-is-falling schtick since 1980s. The reason? Because kids today (and yesterday) don’t play baseball every second of every day like they did. They’re typical Boomers.

“Respect my past by doing exactly what I think I did otherwise the whole shithouse is going up in flames!”
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
31,477
I'm not sure that's really true, it's just that a lot of ways they make the cash now are through things that we normal fans might consider less directly related to our enjoyment of the game, and perhaps even detrimental - international broadcasting rights, online gambling, real estate development around the ballpark, a different jersey for every day of the week and two on Sunday, game times that suit TV networks but not fans, special "club seating" sections, collective bargaining agreements that cap player income, etc...

There's always egos involved in buying these things, but the people who do buy sports franchises have gotten pretty clever about extracting value from them.
I didn’t run a spreadsheet so I’m just winging it, the Broncos just went for 5B. If they could otherwise get 5% on that, it’s 250M. How much are they netting annually by owning the Broncos?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
19,951
Maine
The most recent figures I could find say the NFL as a whole generated ~$17 billion in 2021. That's an average of roughly $530 million per team. Salary cap per team was around $200 million, which leaves roughly $300M or so to cover all other team personnel (front office staff, coaching staff, training staff, stadium staff, etc) and operating costs. How likely is it that even the worst franchise isn't making at least $100M profit annually?
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
31,477
The most recent figures I could find say the NFL as a whole generated ~$17 billion in 2021. That's an average of roughly $530 million per team. Salary cap per team was around $200 million, which leaves roughly $300M or so to cover all other team personnel (front office staff, coaching staff, training staff, stadium staff, etc) and operating costs. How likely is it that even the worst franchise isn't making at least $100M profit annually?
This story says Packers profits were $77m. It’s kind of hard to believe that a franchise is worth $5B if that $77m is to be believed in terms of a business. It’s not hard to believe if it’s a plaything/trophy that earns you some money. They’re good investments insofar as speculative appreciation but that was what I was getting at earlier, people in general getting wealthy enough to bid up scarce assets.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
10,055
This story says Packers profits were $77m. It’s kind of hard to believe that a franchise is worth $5B if that $77m is to be believed in terms of a business. It’s not hard to believe if it’s a plaything/trophy that earns you some money. They’re good investments insofar as speculative appreciation but that was what I was getting at earlier, people in general getting wealthy enough to bid up scarce assets.
The recent change in the interest rate environment has changed things a little bit, but sports assets have routinely sold for north of 20 times their cash flow in recent years, just like other assets that are seen as very stable revenue generators like enterprise software businesses.

And the published figures on team revenue probably exclude things on the side like real estate development or concert promotion, and certainly ignore the tax breaks these owners get.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
45,453
This has to be a bit at this point. Because good lord this is just lazy shitposting from a supposed “journalist”


 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
45,453
I am positive that Many of us here knew someone who was a passionate Red Sox fan who never lived to see the Sox win it all in their lifetime.

if you told that person who never saw the Sox win it all, that after winning 4 WS since 2004, people were calling the Bloom era “the Great Depression of Sox Baseball” they would smack you silly
 

MuzzyField

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
This has to be a bit at this point. Because good lord this is just lazy shitposting from a supposed “journalist”


For this picture to achieve its goal Cooper should be at the top left instead of the Boomer corpse. The first two in the front row (and the second guy in the back row) are the poster children for the end of my childhood sports fan innocence. Is the next scrub Rick Miller?
Yes, CHB you nailed the pinnacle GJGE, except you give no effort.