The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Posted: **Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:36 pm**

NFL Blitz: Ticket Prices And the Fan Cost Index

By Larry Weisman
Redskins.com
Posted: September 18, 2009

Everything is just a little bit bigger in Texas.

Except the price of admission to a Dallas Cowboys game. That’s a whole lot bigger and almost the entire reason the NFL’s average ticket prices rose nearly 4 percent in 2009.

The Cowboys open their new stadium for regular-season play on Sunday night against the New York Giants and this magnificent spectacle of a building may be something the average person sees once in a lifetime, as it requires a lifetime’s earnings to do so.

Dallas’ average general admission ticket price is $159.65, up nearly 90 percent from its previous level, when the Cowboys labored at the old Texas Stadium.

Team Marketing Report, a Chicago-based publication that annually charts such information, says NFL ticket prices would have moved up only .6 percent without the Cowboys driving numbers skyward.

“I think the NFL teams did a great job collectively holding the line,” says David Chavez, president and CEO of Pro Sports MVP, a sports marketing firm in Colorado Springs, Col. “With Dallas opening a new stadium, prices went up. And they’ll go up next year with the economy coming back and the new stadium opening in New York.”

Twenty-one of 32 teams, including the Washington Redskins, cut prices or kept them the same for general admission, sensitive to strained finances amid a severe recession.

Team Marketing Report compiles a Fan Cost Index (FCI) based on the model of a family attending a game. The FCI includes four average-price tickets, two small draft beers, four small soft drinks, four regular-size hot dogs, parking for one car, two game programs and two of the least-pricey ball caps in calculating a figure representative of the family’s dip into the purse.

Hold on to those caps. Dallas’ FCI hits $758.58, up a hair more than 74 percent from last year. The Redskins don’t even reach the league’s top quartile, ranking ninth at $441.43, reflecting no increase. Teams in larger markets (Dallas, New England, Chicago) tend to rank higher while the smaller ones, such as Jacksonville and Buffalo, maintain the lowest cost. Jacksonville has severe problems selling tickets and Buffalo plays a regular-season game in Toronto to broaden its fan base.

The Chicago Bears have the highest parking fee: $46. Four other teams charge $40 or more while the Redskins collect $35.

Beer anyone? Thirsty folks pay a league-high $8.75 in St. Louis. The Redskins charge $7, less than 11 teams and the same as seven others. The Redskins, however, sell a 20-ounce beer, as opposed to others proffering pint-sized pilsners or smaller. Ten teams make fans pay more than the Redskins for the same quantity of beer or less.

Hot dogs? Three teams charge the top-end price of $5.50 and six more are right in line with the Redskins at $5.

The Redskins’ average ticket price of $79.13 was a little more than $4 over the NFL’s average of $74.99 as computed by Team Marketing Report. The Redskins’ nearest neighbor, the Baltimore Ravens, came in substantially higher at $86.92, up a hefty 12.6% this year.

Of the 10 teams with the highest FCI, only Washington’s and the New York Jets’ FCI did not increase in 2009 and the Jets’ figure will surely rise when the club goes into its new stadium (shared with the Giants) in 2010.

Luring new customers remains a priority but now there’s more emphasis on retaining the base, even at some cost.

“Not only are sales contracting in some markets, but even in the markets that have seen an uptick clubs have had to add amenities like parking or promotional items,” says David Carter, principal of The Sports Group, a Los Angeles-based sports consulting firm. “You don’t see the elements of that in the FCI.”

The NFL has attempted to show concern for fans by extending television blackout rules. Generally games are not shown in the home market unless sold out 72 hours in advance but the NFL granted three extensions last week and avoided any local blackouts. It has also said it will show blacked-out games on NFL.com in affected markets on a delayed basis.

The San Diego Chargers, with 2,500 tickets left midweek for an attractive matchup with the Baltimore Ravens, were anticipating a blackout and that could happen in Detroit as well. Detroit and San Diego applied for extensions but Jacksonville, with 17,000 tickets remaining, did not and will be blacked out.

Staving off the blackouts was once the province of local television stations and automobile dealers with an interest in showing the game and selling their products but the economy no longer allows them to buy the unsold ticket inventory.

“The regional businesses can’t step up,” Carter says. “Once the economy rebounds, you may see those blackouts become a thing of the past.”

Team ----------------- Avg. Ticket ---- Fan Cost Index
Dallas Cowboys ------- $159.65 ------ $758.58
New England Patriots - $117.84 ------ $597.25
Chicago Bears --------- $88.33 ------- $501.33
New York Giants ------- $88.63 ------- $483.02
Baltimore Ravens ----- $86.92 ------- $481.69
New York Jets ---------- $86.99 ------- $476.26
Indianapolis Colts ----- $82.79 ------- $452.16
Kansas City Chiefs ---- $80.69 ------- $445.76
Washington Redskins - $79.13 ------- $441.43
San Diego Chargers -- $81.39 ------- $436.56
NFL AVERAGE ------ $74.99 ----- $412.64

The Skins average ticket price is only $4.14 more than the league average.

Link

Posted: **Sat Sep 19, 2009 7:43 pm**

I don't think ticket prices have ever been the major complaint.

Posted: **Sat Sep 19, 2009 8:38 pm**

Neither do I. Who said it was the "major" complaint?

Posted: **Sat Sep 19, 2009 8:50 pm**

SkinsFreak wrote::hmm: Neither do I. Who said it was the "major" complaint?

Oh, OK then. I figured that was the implication, since the subject line was "About those ticket prices. . ." as if referring to something in the past, and the 'surprise' was that the Redskins are close to the league average.

So, I read it as "about that thing we discussed, turns out (surprisingly!) that the Redskins aren't so bad on prices." My mistake.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 1:07 am**

Well it does sort of fly in the face of the "Snyder is so greedy and tries to suck every dollar out of the fan's pocket" crowd.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 6:36 am**

Deadskins wrote:Well it does sort of fly in the face of the "Snyder is so greedy and tries to suck every dollar out of the fan's pocket" crowd.

Now if we could only get Snyder to sell them to the fans and not the brokers. :lol:

Seriously thought, I wonder if the Redskins selling those tickets to brokers last year was to avoid local blackouts?? I have gotten 3 calls and two emails from the Redskins in the past two weeks trying to get me to upgrade or buy more seats…Are we facing blackouts this year???

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 8:48 am**

Deadskins wrote:Well it does sort of fly in the face of the "Snyder is so greedy and tries to suck every dollar out of the fan's pocket" crowd.

Again, I don't really think so. If you look at the past exchanges, very little ink has been spilled over the ticket prices. What Snyder has done otherwise is enough, in my opinion, to demonstrate that he's a greedy owner who isn't actually interested in connecting fans with a good product — just whatever he can get them to pay for.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 8:55 am**

Irn-Bru wrote:
SkinsFreak wrote::hmm: Neither do I. Who said it was the "major" complaint?

Oh, OK then. I figured that was the implication, since the subject line was "About those ticket prices. . ." as if referring to something in the past, and the 'surprise' was that the Redskins are close to the league average.

So, I read it as "about that thing we discussed, turns out (surprisingly!) that the Redskins aren't so bad on prices." My mistake.

I made the same mistake

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 10:51 am**

Irn-Bru wrote:he's a greedy owner who isn't actually interested in connecting fans with a good product

Irn-Bru wrote:just whatever he can get them to pay for.

To be clear, I'm really not much of a Snyder fan. If people more criticized him for being arrogant and self centered I'd be pretty much with them, I just think stuff is too over the top. But when you say this, Irn-Bru, from a logic perspective, you completely lose me. The definition of what customers want IS what they will pay for. This makes no sense. :hmm:

Example, airlines. They say they want more leg room, better food, bigger seats. Then they just buy the cheapest ticket. Then they complain the airlines didn't listen to them about the seats, food, ... Actually, the airlines listened to them loud and clear, this is what we'll PAY for. That is the voice of the customer.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:13 am**

KazooSkinsFan wrote:To be clear, I'm really not much of a Snyder fan.

Don't worry, I'd never accuse a non-enemy with that level of insult.

But when you say this, Irn-Bru, from a logic perspective, you completely lose me. The definition of what customers want IS what they will pay for. This makes no sense.

Here I should emphasize a distinction between people who will pay for things and fans. Sure, to the extent that Snyder is getting paid for the product he puts out there, those people are showing that they want the product. I've got no problem affirming that.

However, I think that real, true Washington Redskins fans show up in fewer numbers to the games. The base of fans willing to support the team financially has been increasingly tapped throughout Snyder's tenure. Fans are not getting enough in return for the investment, and even though Redskins fans are loyal, there is a limit to how much they can put up with.

The anecdotal evidence seems to be backing this up, too. It's a hell of a lot easier to obtain season tickets than it was a decade ago. Snyder has burned through a lot of the good-will buffer he inherited. My own estimation, based on the little evidence I've seen, is that Snyder is on pace to face issues other Redskins owners have never had to deal with: trouble filling seats and decreased financial support from DC.

Example, airlines.

Considering how over-regulated and distorted the market is in air transport, I'd say that's a fairly poor example.

I do see your point, but I hope you see what I mean with mine.

Just because exchanges are consensual and freely-entered into doesn't mean someone can't be greedy or not meet a set of expectations that (in my estimation) he ought to be meeting. See the principle I'm getting at?

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:43 am**

Irn-Bru wrote:
SkinsFreak wrote::hmm: Neither do I. Who said it was the "major" complaint?

Oh, OK then. I figured that was the implication, since the subject line was "About those ticket prices. . ." as if referring to something in the past, and the 'surprise' was that the Redskins are close to the league average.

So, I read it as "about that thing we discussed, turns out (surprisingly!) that the Redskins aren't so bad on prices." My mistake.

I know exactly where you're going here, Irn. But you said "major" complaint. I agreed with you that it's not THE "major" complaint, but it IS a misrepresented assertion that the Skins charge exorbitant prices and many of those blatantly false assertions come from the media and certain members of this board.

For example, just this morning I read in the Miami Herald...

Snyder has taken advantage of his fan base for years with outrageous prices, screaming boobs on the public address system, surly parking attendants and in-stadium ushers and clearly one of the worst fan ``experiences'' in the league for anyone who braves the maddening traffic to get there. And so, there you have it, finally a first for the proud old Washington franchise. Congratulations Daniel Snyder, now the worst owner in the NFL.

Of course this article was written on the heels of the WaPo article regarding the Redskins and 23 OTHER NFL teams that sue people who default on huge contracts worth tens of thousands, and even some over a million dollars.

I know, I know... it's should be relative to the product on the field and the Redskins under Snyder's ownership have been mediocre and nothing more than an average NFL team. I agree. But if the ticket prices charged by Snyder are near the league average, within $4.14 of league average, doesn't that support that the product is accurately priced?

And isn't there an economic principle that a product is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it? And we aren't talking about some commodity here needed for survival that could be construed as price gouging. The NFL and football is about entertainment, and in that regard, the simple economic principle of supply and demand is extremely relevant. I think Snyder could charge a lot more for tickets and people would still turn out for games. Yet how many times has he increased ticket prices? And when those prices reach a point where there aren't enough butts in the seats, then there is typically a price correction, such as the one we're now seeing in the real estate market.

But at the end of the day, the NFL and football is a business and I'm not sure I understand the sense of entitlement expected by some fans. Whether the waiting list for season tickets is at 150 or 150,000, the fact that there is a demand at all and that the stadium sells out for every game is the overriding factor. I pay my money to watch the team and I'm happy to do it. I'm not one who thinks I'm somehow entitled to it for free or for what I'd like to pay for it just because I'm a fan. And for those in the DC area that don't go to the games, I've gotta think they're extremely happy these games DO sell out, otherwise the black-out rules take effect and you won't be watching them at all. And why are there black-out rules set forth by the NFL? Because it's a business.

Irn, you've made some valid complaints in the past regarding Snyder's greed in certain circumstances, charging for camp, water... etc., and I agree with you on those. Snyder has even recently admitted fault for some of those things. But I don't agree with the ridiculous notion that the Redskins charge outrageous prices when the facts clearly show the average ticket price is only $4.14 over the league average.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:54 am**

Irn-Bru wrote:Just because exchanges are consensual and freely-entered into doesn't mean someone can't be greedy or not meet a set of expectations that (in my estimation) he ought to be meeting. See the principle I'm getting at?

For me, I completely understand your point. But this is a game, not a business that you can simply adjust the price to become more competitive in the marketplace. Snyder could have the lowest prices in the league, but does that mean Ravens fans in the DC area will all of a sudden start going to Skins games and become Skins fans? I doubt it.

This is a game played 16 weeks a year and played against paid competitors on the field. I think Snyder's tenure has proven that even having the best players and the best coaches, backed by a financially strong owner, doesn't always guarantee results on the field. That's because the game includes some level of luck on certain plays and no one can predict which way an odd shaped ball will bounce on every play. A market can be predictable to some degree. A game played on a football field is not. If football was predictable or could be accurately managed into wins every time, no one would play and there'd be no interest in the game. Sometimes it's simply about how the cards fall or the luck of the draw. Even the best poker players in the world lose on the first day of the tournament, because it's a game.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 12:58 pm**

Irn-Bru wrote:
kaz wrote:Example, airlines.

Considering how over-regulated and distorted the market is in air transport, I'd say that's a fairly poor example. I do see your point, but I hope you see what I mean with mine.

To engage in any broader discussion of the airline industry, I totally see your point for the reason you stated. But in the narrow point I made the airline industry is a great example because the industry has been lambasted for how they don't "listen" to customers. Yet airlines have been started and went out of business and others have added space in planes and every initiative failed because no matter what they added, customers overwhelmingly would only buy the cheapest seat available. That particular dynamic wasn't driven by the rest of what you accurately point out is a bastardized industry.

Irn-Bru wrote:Just because exchanges are consensual and freely-entered into doesn't mean someone can't be greedy or not meet a set of expectations that (in my estimation) he ought to be meeting. See the principle I'm getting at?

Value is defined by the market. When a price is struck, it is because the seller and buyer agree. The seller is maximizing profit, the buyer is looking for value among the various alternatives, including doing nothing. Anyone can be "greedy," buyers or sellers. The free market is great because it not only sets value but keeps "greed" in check.

If an owner is "greedy" they overcharge, which reduces demand. They adapt and get back in check or they start to wither and die. If customers are greedy, they don't want to pay market prices. If the owner is not overcharging, others buy the product and they lose out until they put their greed aside and pay the market rate. The whiners say it's not worth it and complain but pay it because it is worth it.

What you said is he's greedy and he's just pursuing what people will pay for, that didn't make sense and it still doesn't. If you read all my comments on Danny, I never argue actually he is not greedy, I just argue his pursuing the market isn't greed. Actually fans who don't want to pay market are the greedy ones because they want something for less then it's value, which is by definition set by the market.

You added this time he's creating "ill will." It was speculative, you could be right, if you are it'll show more clearly. There are weaknesses in your seat availability argument in that we are in a deep recession and he has a larger stadium, more expensive stadium then he had before. That doesn't prove you wrong, it makes the question in play, we'll see and you concede you're going by your feeling.

My final point is market setting value is fantastic for consumers. They set the ultimate value by what they are willing to pay for and the companies who listen to them ultimately win. The power is in the market in the hands of the consumer. As your prediction if Snyder's screwing up he will learn. It is in fact ONLY government that can screw up the market and that is because they are the only entity with the power backed up by guns to manipulate companies. And in fact government does nothing else because but manipulate markets because except where minorities want decisions made not by consumers but by decree there is no reason for them to take any role.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 1:08 pm**

SkinsFreak wrote:
Irn-Bru wrote:Just because exchanges are consensual and freely-entered into doesn't mean someone can't be greedy or not meet a set of expectations that (in my estimation) he ought to be meeting. See the principle I'm getting at?

For me, I completely understand your point. But this is a game, not a business that you can simply adjust the price to become more competitive in the marketplace. Snyder could have the lowest prices in the league, but does that mean Ravens fans in the DC area will all of a sudden start going to Skins games and become Skins fans? I doubt it.

This is a game played 16 weeks a year and played against paid competitors on the field. I think Snyder's tenure has proven that even having the best players and the best coaches, backed by a financially strong owner, doesn't always guarantee results on the field. That's because the game includes some level of luck on certain plays and no one can predict which way an odd shaped ball will bounce on every play. A market can be predictable to some degree. A game played on a football field is not. If football was predictable or could be accurately managed into wins every time, no one would play and there'd be no interest in the game. Sometimes it's simply about how the cards fall or the luck of the draw. Even the best poker players in the world lose on the first day of the tournament, because it's a game.

Every company and industry is different. Do you know there were originally 10 companies in the Dow, 8 of them were railroads. Today no railroad is sniffing at the Dow. No matter how good a railroad you ran, the industry was doomed to dramatic reduction because of trucking, air freight, etc.

My point is competitors aren't just inside an industry. I agree with you on the Ravens, but the Skins competitors are Baseball, Basketball, Hockey, College Football. They could also be parks and afternoons out with the family. Their competitor is being watched on TV instead of at the stadium. Their competitor could be people buy fewer Jerseys or just ignore them, you don't need football to live (meant literally, like food, water).

So Danny may not have competition in that sense, but it is absolutely a business and to be run well will absolutely follow business principles. I am not arguing Danny is maximizing profit, which is the best way for his CONSUMERS of he does, but time will tell. Again maximizing profit can only happen if customers are getting the most of what they truly value, that which they will pay for.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 5:18 pm**

Right. I'd argue that Snyder is likely functioning on too high a time preference. He's tapping his "capital" for the sake of additional profits now, while a longer-term perspective would be evidenced by his working hard to have a better relationship with the fan base.

I say this, of course, not as the billionaire businessman. (Actually, when one considers what I do, my hubris to judge here is comical.) But that's still how I interpret the facts before me.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 5:20 pm**

This isn't only about ticket prices though. He's clearly not gouging fans on concessions either.

Posted: **Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:55 am**

Irn-Bru wrote:Right. I'd argue that Snyder is likely functioning on too high a time preference. He's tapping his "capital" for the sake of additional profits now, while a longer-term perspective would be evidenced by his working hard to have a better relationship with the fan base.

I say this, of course, not as the billionaire businessman. (Actually, when one considers what I do, my hubris to judge here is comical.) But that's still how I interpret the facts before me.

I understand what you're saying, and you certainly could be right. But my experience wouldn't indicate that was likely. Basically the guy pumped out 800 mil to buy the team and spends 100 mil + now on salary. I understand why I'm paying $350 or whatever it is a year for DirectTV and why the games, jerseys, water etc. cost so much. He needs to lay out all that cash and then be generous to pay goodwill? I'll tell you the business reality of the people who do and don't complain about it, it's like this in every industry.

- The people who complain aren't ever going to provide him with much money. They say they want "goodwill" implying they will then spend in return, but they're never going to do that, at least not as a group. He's spending his 800 mil + 100+ a year NOW, he needs people who maybe will spend money later? They can whine all they want they're "fans," but he's spending hundreds of millions a year in salary and financing, goodwill doesn't pay that back. To say somehow he owes people something for being "fans" is just crap. Mostly they complain because they can't afford it and rather then saying that they complain he's not being "appreciative."

- The people who have the money just aren't offended. There is a reason we have money, we understand what he's invested in the team and completely understand what he needs to do to survive. He can't deposit fan appreciation in the bank and his lenders aren't going to let him slide on his debt payments for it.

That is business reality in almost any industry you enter. There will be loud customers who demand a lot and think their patronage is some sort of payment to you. They will never spend much, they are cheap, picky and critical and usually buy your low margin products/services. There are those who appreciate what you offer and understand that you're running a business.

The funded also recognize real quality over the cheap. For example, the cheap are focusing here on wins and losses, hating Snyder, whatever. But if the Skins win more they will ALWAYS find something to say they didn't get what they paid for. I am paying for Snyder to take a swing, he is. To do things like coax Gibbs out of retirement and sign AH, he is. I love watching the Skins, I am getting quality and I know that. The ones who complain they aren't getting quality now never will be satisfied and Snyder never will survive on them no matter how much he gives them in exchange for "appreciation." And ironically he'll never get the appreciation either.

Posted: **Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:25 am**

I guess the main thing I'm looking for, Kaz, is whether Snyder has almost gotten through his fan reserves: people waiting in line to buy season tickets. Insiders like DEHog have been noticing that the Skins are working much harder now to fill seats. When Snyder inhereted the team he didn't even have to try to sell tickets.

That, to me, will be when the truth comes out (yay or nay). If the Skins can't fill the seats at any point within the next 5 years, it will be entirely on Snyder's shoulders . . . and I really think that his relationship with the fan base will be the reason it happens (if it does).

Can you imagine a blackout in the DC area? It may no longer be unimaginable. I guess we'll see.

Posted: **Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:36 am**

Irn-Bru wrote:Can you imagine a blackout in the DC area? It may no longer be unimaginable. I guess we'll see.

IB I think the best keep secret in D.C. is that we have faced a BO but Snyder has (or has gotten someone to) step up and brought seats. I think last years sale to the brokers was a "bailout" I saw a lot of orange seats upstairs yesterday???

Posted: **Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:48 am**

Irn-Bru wrote:I guess the main thing I'm looking for, Kaz, is whether Snyder has almost gotten through his fan reserves: people waiting in line to buy season tickets. Insiders like DEHog have been noticing that the Skins are working much harder now to fill seats. When Snyder inhereted the team he didn't even have to try to sell tickets.

That, to me, will be when the truth comes out (yay or nay). If the Skins can't fill the seats at any point within the next 5 years, it will be entirely on Snyder's shoulders . . . and I really think that his relationship with the fan base will be the reason it happens (if it does).

Can you imagine a blackout in the DC area? It may no longer be unimaginable. I guess we'll see.

As you say, we'll see. I thought the waiting list was still like 15 years though still, is that wrong? I understand some of the more expensive seats they have trouble selling don't count towards a blackout. Also remember the economy is still horrible. Anyway, I'm not arguing you're wrong only that I'm not convinced at this point and I'm particularly not convinced because the specific complaints I see levied strike me as what I was describing above.

I will say though if the Skins are EVER blacked out under Snyder, I will concede you were totally correct that he is a screw up.

Posted: **Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:42 am**

Kaz, even with all the money he shells out for payroll and financing, he is still making great profits due to the TV contracts and revenue sharing. The salary cap is set at a percentage of income for the owners each year, so it really is no money out of his pocket to pay team salaries. I'm not trying to argue that he is wrong for doing business this way, or that your points on the market are incorrect, just pointing out that it's not really like he is just doing what he needs to survive. He is going to make big money either way. That's just the way the league is structured, and it has positioned itself for the benefit of all the owners.

Posted: **Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:53 am**

Deadskins wrote:Kaz, even with all the money he shells out for payroll and financing, he is still making great profits due to the TV contracts and revenue sharing. The salary cap is set at a percentage of income for the owners each year, so it really is no money out of his pocket to pay team salaries. I'm not trying to argue that he is wrong for doing business this way, or that your points on the market are incorrect, just pointing out that it's not really like he is just doing what he needs to survive. He is going to make big money either way. That's just the way the league is structured, and it has positioned itself for the benefit of all the owners.

Agreed... so much so I think many here could run the Skins and still turn a profit!

Posted: **Mon Sep 21, 2009 12:09 pm**

Deadskins wrote:Kaz, even with all the money he shells out for payroll and financing, he is still making great profits due to the TV contracts and revenue sharing. The salary cap is set at a percentage of income for the owners each year, so it really is no money out of his pocket to pay team salaries. I'm not trying to argue that he is wrong for doing business this way, or that your points on the market are incorrect, just pointing out that it's not really like he is just doing what he needs to survive. He is going to make big money either way. That's just the way the league is structured, and it has positioned itself for the benefit of all the owners.

I agree he has an income stream, but that doesn't address that he paid $800 million to buy the team. He has to make that back. And when you say he's going to make "big money" either way, you need to measure not return but Return on Investment (ROI). To illustrate, if I invest $10 and make $100 in one year, that's a great return. If I invest $1 million and make $100 in one year, that's a horrible return. He's putting in hundreds of millions, the return needs to be consistent with that just to break even. He also does everything he can to circumvent the salary cap with players and pay coaches. Agree with his choices or not, it's still more out of pocket money.

None of that proves anything, I'm just arguing the arguments against him aren't sufficient as presented that he's being stupid.

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

About Those Ticket Prices

About Those Ticket Prices