NFL owners fear death of golden goose

AMELIA ISLAND, Fla. — Jim Irsay thinks the Indianapolis Colts are dying.

Not on the field — at least not yet. But the Colts’ owner perceives his franchise’s ability to stay competitive as bleeding away in small-market Indianapolis.

Holding court with a small group of reporters at the recent owners’ meetings, Irsay insisted he isn’t looking ahead to a future in Los Angeles but nonetheless painted a bleak picture of the prospects in Indianapolis.

“I’ve been in the league 33 years,” said Irsay, the son of former Colts owner Bob Irsay, who moved the franchise from Baltimore to Indianapolis in 1984. “I’m in it to win, [but] I think the problem is you get to a point of ‘how long?’”

The clock is ticking on a financial battle that threatens to disrupt the NFL’s envied state of affairs. Although generous revenue sharing among NFL clubs has helped drive the league to the pinnacle of the sports world, owners on both sides of the debate are unhappy these days.

On one hand are Irsay, other small-market owners and the old guard. They believe revenue sharing is a crucial pillar that needs to be strengthened. If dated loopholes aren’t closed, they argue, the current setup will lead to baseball-style competitive disparity. The Pittsburgh Steelers of today will become the Pittsburgh Pirates of tomorrow.

On the other hand are a growing number of owners who are either so indebted from recently buying into the NFL’s bull market or so confident of their marketing acumen that they want more control of local revenue. They worry the league is riding its gravy train rather than finding new ways to propel it. Front and center in this capitalistic push are Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder and the Dallas Cowboys’ Jerry Jones.

The widening schism presents the greatest test in the system’s four-decade existence. Each side makes a compelling argument that the other could undermine the long-term success of the league.

“There’s definitely a bigger spread today between the haves and the have-nots,” Atlanta Falcons owner Arthur Blank said. “The question is whether that’s self-imposed. Is every team doing the same amount in terms of effort? Does every team have the same opportunity? There’s a lot of moving parts in that.”

Regardless of how the battle is resolved, it illustrates how much the league has changed since the first national television contracts were signed in 1964. Being an owner in the modern NFL requires a broader focus. Winning off the field now seems as important as winning on it.

“The big item of discussion at our meetings used to be the player limit or the adoption of the football,” 87-year-old New York Giants owner Wellington Mara said. “Now we go to the meeting, and we might be here all day and football not be mentioned. It’s a business.

“It was a lot more fun many years ago,” he added with a grimace.

An untenable situation

To demonstrate the financial vice squeezing small-market clubs in general and the Colts in particular, Irsay presents Exhibit A: The $98million contract extension Colts quarterback Peyton Manning signed not too long ago. Club coffers were too shallow to cover such a pact, and a portion of the funds had to come from Irsay’s own pocket.

“Not an intelligent business decision in the short term,” the owner called the move.

Story Continues →