Posted on 10/01/2017 2:58:07 PM PDT by T Ruth
Separation of Sport and State.
None taken but that’s not what I’m saying.
With how crazy the NFL is acting with trying deceive and lie to the American people, about what is going on and if they are complicit in pushing the BLM lies to help undermine our current President, that’s not partisonship, it’s traitorous.
With more lies and BS coming from the NFL, I’m more and more convinced they have something to hide and are complicit in this.
CGato
The exemption was given based on a number of things, including in large part that the NFL was never a political animal and it brought the USA together for the better. So again, I disagree.
>> Separation of Sport and State.
Good one.
“Separation of Sport and State.”
Yes, while they are removing Christian crosses from County Logos, they can also remove the crossed jock straps!
.
This idea has been posed before, and its time is long overdue.
.
>>Separation of Sport and State.
*********************************
So true. Taxpayer-built stadiums, tax-exempt status, etc. is unconstitutional.
Please cite any evidence you have to support this.
The anti-trust exemptions extended to sports leagues are based on a fundamental understanding of the unique business environment in which these leagues operate -- where the teams are supposed to compete on the field but cannot be expected to engage in competitive business practices with each other like any other industry. It defeats the whole purpose of having a sports league if all of the teams except three or four of them end up going out of business.
This is why U.S. law allows these sports leagues to engage in practices that would be outlawed in any other industry -- like player drafts and salary caps.
Even the thought of a draft would be absurd in any other industry. Can you imagine a top lawyer graduating from Harvard law school and being told: "Sorry, dude. I know you wanted to join that top law firm in New York City, but the Los Angeles prosecutor's office had the first pick in the draft so you have to go work for them." LOL.
I think a better anti-trust case could be made against the TV networks and cable/satellite companies. There’s no reason why anyone who doesn’t want to watch the NFL (or any sports, for that matter) should be forced to pay $7-$9 per month for ESPN’s subscriber fees as part of his cable package.
Can you name any industry that hasn't been given an exemption that hasn't been insanely regulated except sports? Democrats and Republicans, and normal people, supported an exemption for years due to the fact it wasn't offensive to anyone and people liked their team/super bowl/nba final/whatever. But many sports leagues globally operate without a monopoly, including soccer in the US so to say it can't or shouldn't is ridiculous.
Anheuser Bush comment number 800 342 5283 NFL comment line 212 450 2225
White House comment line 202 456 1111 all work I’ve called
The NFL is trying to undermine President Trump because he has stated any number of times over the last couple of years that his administration would be looking closely at the anti-trust implications of these cable subscriber fees and bundled cable packages. They're going to lose their captive "audience" (i.e., people who have to pay for ESPN as part of a bundled cable package even if they don't want it), and they know it.
Those soccer leagues absolutely operate with a monopoly in individual countries. They even have limits on the number of foreign-born players they can have on their rosters -- which is something you'd never see here in the U.S.
Some sports (like soccer) are more complicated than others because they operate in multiple leagues around the world and are subject to the laws of different countries. In cases like that, the individual leagues end up signing agreements with each other so their player contracts are recognized in every league and the players can't just move from one team to another in the middle of a season.
The US has multiple professional soccer leagues going on currently right now that aren’t affiliated with one another. Most of the other sports had the same thing. The only thing that happened post merger was ticket prices went up, parking went up and cable costs skyrocketed (ie the anti-trust should have held, all things being equal - but they weren’t b/c they weren’t political animals at all).
Best time to do it. Needed to do it the first time any of the sports leagues got political..the whole reason for getting the exemption was so they would not, and so the richest owners could not buy championships.
The NFL policy manual, distributed annually around the league, states: "Please note that public criticism by players or club employees of game officials or officiating is prohibited and is subject to fines and/or suspensions."
Source: ESPN.
The only thing that happened post merger was ticket prices went up, parking went up and cable costs skyrocketed ...
Why did this happen post-merger? For the same reason why the NBA and NHL went through the same consolidation process in the 1970s: television. Before television, teams generated most of their revenues through ticket sales and merchandise sales. When that was the case, it was common to see regional sports leagues to exist all over North America. Television put an end to all that because each team now had the ability to broadcast to a national market. It was inevitable that TV contracts would eventually be governed by sports leagues instead of individual teams, because these leagues couldn't maintain a competitive balance on the field if they had to deal with the dominant teams broadcasting into the smaller regional markets.
That is exactly why they should lose the exemption - they are fixing prices and monopolizing. Grocery stores can’t do it, why should they? We don’t need to subsidize industries that make billions, but are not essential to the nation in terms of defense, infrastructure, etc.
Heh heh, think Trump now is going to the NFL folks and telling them, “Looks like putting the USFL out of business is going to cost you a hell of a lot more than just $3 now.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.