After a nearly double-digit ratings freefall last year, the NFL experiences a lighter than expected demand for advertising buys for the upcoming season. “A number of factors have conspired to cast a bit of a pall over this year’s NFL market, which some insiders say is the softest since the Great Recession of 2008,” Ad Age points out. “For example, a number of marquee clients have slashed their pro football spend, while a few load-bearing categories aren’t committing anywhere near as many dollars to the NFL as they did a year ago. A source for Ad Age estimates a two percent to four percent increase in the price of commercials. Declines in demand for advertising from automobiles, movies, and male sexual enhancement products account for sales not meeting expectations. The piece speculates that the saturated schedule of NFL games, which include Thursday night broadcasts, several Sunday morning contests from London, and Saturday doubleheaders in Week 16 and Week 17, diminishes demand. A consumer shift away from broadcast television toward streaming services also receives consideration as a factor in the softening of expected sales. The article avoids mention of Colin Kaepernick, and several other players, who protested the national anthem in 2016 by refusing to rise as adversely impacting the league’s bottom line. Fans repeatedly cited Kaepernick’s protest as the top cause of their disinterest in football in 2016. In a Seton Hall poll, for instance, fans cited the anti-anthem protests as the top reason for tuning out NFL broadcasts. NFL ratings declined by nine percent in 2016. Penalties for hits once considered clean, rules largely negating the excitement of kick returns, referee involvement slowing the pace of the game, the suspension of Tom Brady for four games and the retirement of Peyton Manning, and players making a political football of football all come up as reasons for the ratings drop. A resurgent Dallas Cowboys, the New England Patriots looking to extend their dynasty after winning one of the most exciting Super Bowls in history, and Colin Kaepernick promising to end his protest should he find a suitor in free agency all give the league hope for a turn-around in 2017.
NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick compared police officers to fugitive slave patrolmen after a Minnesota officer was acquitted in the shooting death of a black motorist. Kaepernick tweeted his displeasure with the verdict, with a graphic reading “You can’t ignore your history – always remember who they are.” Between the lines, a police badge is shown side-by-side with a “fugitive slave patrol” badge. Minnesota police officer Jeronimo Yanez has been dismissed as a police officer after he was acquitted of manslaughter in the shooting death of black motorist Philando Castile.
And Colin continues to be the worthless tool that he is..
Colin Kaepernick, the former San Francisco 49ers quarterback, who made headlines last season for refusing to stand during “The Star-Spangled Banner” may be suiting up for the Seattle Seahawks next season. Pete Carroll, Seattle’s head coach, was asked Monday on ESPN Seattle about a potential backup for Russell Wilson. Some of the names listed were Kaepernick and Robert Griffin III. “We’re looking at everybody. We really are,” Carroll said. “We’ve been tracking everything that’s going on, and we’ve got cap and roster issues and stuff like that that we’re still trying to manage properly. But quite frankly, yes, we are looking at all those guys.” Kaepernick was benched last November by former coach Jim Tomsula in favor of Blaine Gabbert. The 2011 second-round pick, less heralded than other QBs in his draft class, went on season-ending injured reserve and needed a trio of surgeries: his non-throwing left shoulder, left knee and right thumb. He hardly disappeared as a backup, instead taking his old job back last month. And he made international headlines when he stopped standing for the national anthem in what he said was a protest against racial oppression. First he sat, then he kneeled. Others joined him. As his team struggles, the 28-year-old Kaepernick appears as collected as any losing quarterback in the league. This is the same guy who led San Francisco to a runner-up Super Bowl finish following the 2012 season.
Colin is such a nauseating tool… Let’s hope Coach Carroll has the sense to go with RG3, or someone else as their backup QB.
The city of St. Louis’ lawsuit this week against the NFL and its 32 teams over the Rams’ move to Los Angeles could trigger alarm bells for league officials that approved three controversial franchise relocations in the last two years. About 15 months after losing the Rams franchise, St. Louis officials say the NFL violated its own standardized relocation guidelines and breached its contract when it approved the team’s move. The city has asked a St. Louis court to compel the NFL to hand over its profits from the relocation, and to award punitive damages to make up for lost revenue. The NFL also approved relocations for its Raiders and Chargers franchises within the last year – much to the chagrin of fans and officials in their respective home cities of Oakland and San Diego. If St. Louis’ case against the league and its team owner proceeds to trial, the legal and PR fallout from the suit could extend far beyond Missouri, according to Richard Roth, a New York-based sports attorney. “The case will hinge on the club’s motion to dismiss,” Roth told FOX Business. “If it is granted – and it may not be – then there will be little damage to the NFL’s image as, typical of other lawsuits against the league, the suit will come and go. If, on the other hand, the motion is denied and the suit continues, antennas will go up with not only the league but the Chargers and Raiders organizations.” Officials in St. Louis claim the loss of the Rams cost the city more than “$100 million in net proceeds,” including up to $3.5 million in annual amusement and ticket tax revenue and roughly $7.5 million in property taxes. The filing points to the rising value of the Rams’ franchise, which Forbes said doubled in value to $3 billion after the move, as well as the $500 million relocation fee the Rams paid to the other 31 owners, as proof that league officials improperly benefitted. “The Rams, the NFL, through its member teams, and the owners, have violated the obligations and standards governing team relocations by seeking and approving the relocation of the St. Louis Rams from St. Louis to Los Angeles, California, despite the fact that the Rams failed to satisfy the obligations imposed by the League’s relocation rules and the fact that relocation was not supported by the required statement of reasons or the adopted relocation standards. In so doing, Defendants have breached their contractual duties owed to Plaintiffs,” the lawsuit says. The NFL established its current relocation guidelines in 1984. Under the rules, teams interested in a move must “work diligently and in good faith to obtain and to maintain suitable stadium facilities in their home territories, and to operate in a manner that maximizes fan support in their current home community.” The suit alleges the NFL’s actions during the Rams’ relocation bid violated this standard. The filing lists several instances in which league and team officials, including Rams owner Stan Kroenke, allegedly made false statements about their intention to keep the franchise in St. Louis.
This is a follow up to our story we posted about this earlier today (scroll down about 7 articles)..
The city of St. Louis sued the NFL on over the Rams’ relocation to Los Angeles and is seeking $1 billion in damages, Reuters reported Wednesday. The suit alleges that the league violated its own relocation guidelines and profited off the move that left St. Louis without a football team for the first time since 1995. The lawsuit, filed in St. Louis Circuit Court 15 months after the Rams left for L.A., names the league, all 32 teams and their owners. “While we understand the disappointment of the St. Louis fans and the community, we worked diligently with local and state officials in a process that was honest and fair at all times,” NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said in an email to Reuters. The suit alleges Rams owner Stan Kroenke began plotting a move back to Los Angeles soon after he purchased the team outright in 2010. The Rams moved from Los Angeles to St. Louis before the 1995 season after the city offered to build a new publicly funded dome stadium. “In the years leading up to the Rams relocation request, Rams officials decided to move the team and confidentially determined that they would be interested in exploiting any opportunity to do so,” the lawsuit states, according to the Associated Press. The suit alleges that the city will have lost more than $100 million in net proceeds from the move. The Rams currently play at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum while their stadium in Inglewood is expected to open in 2019. The NFL has allowed three teams to relocate in a little more than a year. The Chargers left San Diego and will join the Rams in Los Angeles starting this season, and NFL owners approved the Raiders’ move to Las Vegas, which is expected to occur before the start of the 2020 season.
This story is near and dear to yours truly.. I’ve been a lifelong RAMS fan, and also originally from St. Louis. So, when they came to St. Louis, I was a kid in a candy store! But, when owner Stan K. (a man named after famed St. Louis Cardinal Stan “the Man” Musial, and who made his millions in real estate IN St. Louis) moved the team back to LA, that was seen for what it was; purely about money. And, it was a slap in the face to all the fans in St. Louis who stuck by a team through thick and thin…and let me tell ya.. Being a RAMS fan requires fortitude. And, not that there is anything wrong with wanting top make money. BUT, apparently there WAS a breach of contract, and there is a case to be made that Stan, and the NFL, did not act in good faith. So, we predict that this lawsuit will go forward, and that there will be SOME settlement. After all, this is bad press for the NFL and they want this to go away. Glad to see my hometown sticking it to the NFL. This will be interesting to keep an eye on.. The NFL is all about money, politics, and political correctness nowadays; praising tools like Colin K. for his “statements” and wearing pink on everything for an entire month, etc. It’s no longer about just playing football….and that’s turning off fans…like me.
NFL owners approved the Oakland Raiders’ move to Las Vegas at league meetings Monday despite a plea from the California city’s mayor to delay the vote over a potential last-ditch stadium deal. The vote was 31-1. The vote was a foregone conclusion after the league and Raiders were not satisfied with Oakland’s proposals for a new stadium, and Las Vegas stepped up with $750 million in public money. Bank of America also is giving Raiders owner Mark Davis a $650 million loan, further helping convince the owners to allow the third team relocation in just over a year. The Rams moved from St. Louis to Los Angeles in 2016, and in January the Chargers relocated from San Diego to LA. The Raiders likely will play two or three more years in the Bay Area before their $1.7 billion stadium near the Las Vegas strip is ready, Fox 2 reported. Oakland’s mayor earlier Monday asked NFL owners to delay voting on the move, wanting to give her city a chance to negotiate with a small group of owners to complete a stadium deal at the Coliseum site. “Never that we know of has the NFL voted to displace a team from its established market when there is a fully financed option before them with all the issues addressed,” Mayor Libby Schaaf said in a statement. “I’d be remiss if I didn’t do everything in my power to make the case for Oakland up until the very end.” Schaaf said the city had presented a $1.3 billion plan for a stadium at the Coliseum site that would be ready by 2021. She said the existing Coliseum would be demolished by 2024, with the Oakland Athletics baseball team either moving to a new stadium at the Coliseum site or somewhere else in the city. She also asked for owners to conduct a secret ballot on the vote, as was done last year when the league approved the Rams move from St. Louis to the Los Angeles area. The Raiders had hoped to move back to LA, where they played from 1982-94, to share a stadium with the Chargers, but were rejected by the owners. Schaaf said the Raiders have refused to negotiate with the city on a new stadium since completing a short-term lease last March that gave the team options to play at the Coliseum in 2017 and 2018. The city had a deal with the Fortress Investment Group and a group led by Hall of Famer Ronnie Lott to build a stadium at the Coliseum site. Fortress would provide $600 million in a traditional loan, with the Raiders and NFL committing $500 million and the city giving $200 million for infrastructure funding. “We believe that moving the Raiders will be a negative `tipping point’ for the NFL,” a group of Raiders fans said in a letter also sent to NFL owners. “Thousands of fans may very well be turned off forever by what they perceive is the NFL’s lack of loyalty to its most important constituents — the fans!” Meanwhile, Las Vegas, long taboo to the NFL because of its legalized gambling, is getting an NHL team this fall, the Golden Knights.
They say “Don’t mess with Texas” for a reason. And if the National Football League wants to avoid getting blindsided, it might want to think twice about what that advice means. Just a week after Houston hosted Super Bowl LI, the League suggested that if the Lone Star State legislature passes a proposed bill requiring people to use the bathroom, locker room or shower rooms and changing room assigned to their biological gender, Texas may forfeit high-profile sports events in the future. Why? Because gay rights groups consider the law tantamount to legalized discrimination against trans-gender people. The NFL’s threat is nearly identical to one issued by the National Basketball Association and the NCAA, the governing body for collegiate sports, against North Carolina, which has already enacted a similar law. Earlier this week, Bellwether looked at the nasty standoff between North Carolina’s Republican-controlled legislature and opponents of the law. The NBA moved this year’s All-Star game, slated for Charlotte, to New Orleans, as punishment for North Carolina’s so-called bathroom bill. And the NCAA has threatened to shut the Tar Heel state out of future sports events unless the law, officially known as HR2, is repealed. North Carolina isn’t backing down, and Texas probably won’t, either, when its bill comes up for a vote next month. “The NBA and the NFL have lost their minds, as well as their moral compass, ” says Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. “They are shaking in their sneakers because they’re so afraid of political correctness.” “The far left is out of touch on this issue,” says Texas Republican State Senator Lois Kohlkorst, the bill’s chief sponsor. “What I find frustrating is that most people who say they oppose this bill haven’t even read it.” A former college athlete, Kohlkorst says that the proposal, formally called SB6 but shorthanded as the bathroom bill, covers more than restrooms. For example, if SB6 fails to become law, a player on the men’s basketball team who self-identifies as female can choose the girls’ locker room to suit up and shower in. She warns, “The thought of 15- and 16 –year-old boys and girls showering together at school is something we should think about.” Women’s groups are now voicing alarm. “We’re hearing from women, especially rape victims, who are offended and traumatized by the thought of a man being in these most intimate places with them,” Kolkhorst says. “This cuts through party lines and goes to our shared system of values.” She cites internal polling showing SB6 is favored by every ethnic group in Texas but one: white liberal Democrats. Certainly, trans-gender people – by which I mean those who have undergone medical alteration to make them what they choose to be – should not endure discrimination. But what about those who have not taken such steps? How should they prove they are the gender they say they are? An anatomy exam? Wouldn’t that be the most humiliating test of all? The NBA and the NCAA declined to talk last week when I called about the North Carolina law. The NFL has issued a statement saying it is inclusive and opposed to discrimination of any kind, but won’t comment further. Yet none of these sports associations have opened their players’ locker rooms to the opposite gender. Nor have they taken steps to ensure that spectators can enter any bathroom in the stadiums where their games are played. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott thinks the NFL is sticking its faceguard where it doesn’t belong. “The NFL has its own problems,” Abbott told Bill Hemmer on Fox News Channel. “The NFL coddled players who refused to stand for the National Anthem. The NFL has its own problems with regards to violence against women. The last thing the NFL needs to do is tell states how to operate.” NFL referees are pretty good at recognizing offside, when one team wanders into an opponent’s space. Perhaps a quick glance in the mirror would help end this latest, unnecessary scrimmage, and help everyone make the right call.
John Moody was responsible for that piece. Again, Texas (as well as N. Carolina, in this case) is on the cutting edge of common sense! It’s interesting.. Apparently it’s liberals ho are anti-women. To oppose such legislative measures in NC and TX is to be clearly anti-women. To suggest otherwise is intellectually dishonest. Period! Kudos to TX and NC for passing such laws. Hopefully other states will follow suit! As for the NFL.. This is just another reason why their ratings were SO low this past season. People are simply turned off by the over-the-top political correctness. It’s beyond nauseating. So, the people are voting with their wallets, and their remotes…and changing the channel. Maybe the NFL, and NBA, will wake up and start respecting their fans; instead of rubbing their politically correct nonsense in their faces.