Small Market BS
A classic Bengals excuse for not spending money on free
agents, facilities and staffing is because of Cincinnati's market size compared to other NFL teams. This was the same argument they used to negotiate one of the sweetest
deals in the NFL. Former Hamilton County
Commissioner Bob Bedinghaus, who was the cheerleader-in-chief to get public
financing of the Reds and Bengals stadium’s said in 2000: “Their concern is,
"We will always be operating in a smaller market than many of the other football
teams in the NFL.'”
Bedinghaus is now the Bengals Director of Development for
Paul Brown Stadium. You can expect more
on this issue soon.
Bengals fans need to stop accepting this reasoning to excuse
the Bengals management from their constant griping and penny-pinching. The NFL
revenue sharing agreement means that even Isiah Thomas could make money running
the Bengals. Unlike other major sports,
the NFL’s policy means that funds generated from tickets, merchandise,
sponsorships and national media deals (such as the NFL’s TV and Radio
contracts) are divided equally between all 32 teams.
Major League Baseball, on the other hand, lets teams
negotiate their own TV contracts, leaving the Yankees with their own TV network
(the YES network) and the Reds on Fox Sports Ohio. Guess which team generates more money in this
situation?
A recent article in the Enquirer detailed the financial
arrangement of Bob Kraft and the New England Patriots. Kraft purchased the team in 1994 for a then
NFL record $172 million, then put $350 million of his own money into their new
stadium. To recoup this investment,
Kraft sold the naming rights to new P&G brand Gillette and is building a
mixed use development adjacent to the stadium, at an additional cost to Kraft
of $850 million.
The article also points out that Bengals could have adopted
a similar approach by developing the Banks project between PBS and Great
American ballpark, but chose not too. And why would they? The ransom
paid by
In contrast to the Patriots, the Bengals, will receive an
estimated $800 million from
The same article continues: “The Bengals' lease in some departments
surpasses some of its contemporaries — Baltimore and Cleveland, for instance.
The Ravens pay no rent, and the Browns pay $250,000 annually, while the Bengals
will pay $11.7 million over nine years.
But both the Ravens and the Browns will pay for year-round maintenance
of their stadiums, currently about $5 million a year. The Bengals will pay
costs only on the 30-or-so days the team actually uses the stadium, about $1.1
million this season. In 2017,
Make sure to read that entire article to get a better sense
of the Paul Brown Stadium sweetheart deal, as well as the recent article on the
Bengals’ refusal to sell naming rights to PBS to help
Bottom line – the funds are there for the Bengals to compete
with other teams for free agents, to build best in class facilities and improve
their scouting departments. However,
Mike Brown and the Bengals continue to be more concerned with maximizing
profits than maximizing wins. In the
pseudo-socialist NFL system, the “small market” excuse is as empty as Mike
Brown’s determination to win a Super Bowl.
That is about as shady as it gets. And all this time we have been buying into the small market excuse, and giving the club the benefit of the doubt. I am starting to think that the Monday hangover is no longer worth it.
Posted by: Winn | May 29, 2008 at 12:38 PM
Good work Simon! This post is the exact reason that I will be watching the games from the comforts of my man cave this season as opposed to shelling out the money to support that crook of an owner.
Posted by: Jonathan Smith | May 29, 2008 at 02:23 PM
I have some questions. Arthur Blank comes from Home Depot money, Jerry Jones from oil, are the Bengals Mike Brown's only source of income, his only asset so to speak? Are he and his family the sole shareholders in the club or are there minority partners? And to what temperature must tar be heated for it to effectively cover the entirety of an average human body- poured over the head? Also, are there specific sorts of feathers called for in a good old fashioned "tar and feathering"- and is goose down also considered feathers? Thank you in advance...
Posted by: IgnatiusJReilly | May 30, 2008 at 07:44 AM