PDA

View Full Version : Steeler Question


Livinginthe past
04-10-2006, 12:52 AM
Steeler fans,

I remember when we had all that fuss over the new CBA - and alot of Steeler fans were worried about losing out in a capless season scenario.

The theory was that Pittsburgh is still a small market team, and wouldnt be able to cope with the Redskins, Giants and Patriots of the NFL.

I also remember hearing quite a bit about how well the Steelers are represented on a national scale - wouldnt this be enough to make them a large market team?

I'd appreciate some feedback on this - I always thought 'market' basically meant the size of the consumer base.

Thanks

NM

HburgXL06
04-10-2006, 12:56 AM
Wouldn't the market be more of like TV coverage and ticket sales in the stadium or the size of the city and population. I don't really understand the CBA so if someone knows enlighten me as well. Peace.

BuFu

MasterOfPuppets
04-10-2006, 12:58 AM
i think the tv deal comes into play,and stadium naming rights.

ArmyMonkey
04-10-2006, 01:12 AM
To me, I always was under the impression that they based what size "market" a team was in on available media outlets, i.e., newspapers, television, etc..etc.. Factors such as stadium naming rights, local tv deals(think Yankee Sports Network, Madison Square Garden Network), and other licensing deals owners have, and I am sure that plays a part in what size "market" a team is in.

While Pittsburgh has a huge fanbase, teams like ours cannot compete with the Jerry Jones, and the George Steinbrenners of the world. I know one of those guys are from baseball, but when you are in a position to do the things they do, its easy to see why these guys can offer the huge bonuses they give out to players, due in part to all of the secondary and ancillary income that they can generate. Pittsburgh simply cannot do that. I mean just look at the owner of the Seahawks, He has billions just from when he was with Microsoft.

Livinginthe past
04-10-2006, 01:22 AM
Thanks guys - I guess the media outlet viewpoint is probably very crucial to what size market you are thought to have.

NM

OX1947
04-10-2006, 01:49 AM
It is media market. Has nothing to do with profit of a team and things like that. I'll tell you what though, when it comes to the local market in pitt and ratings. The steelers are #1. They had a stat on ESPN once and the host named the teams who had the highest local ratings. Pittsburgh had the highest with 69%. Which meant that 69% of the local tv rating for the steelers game was watching the Steelers.

However, if the Rooneys owned the NY giants or the NY Jets, and they ran things the way they do with pitt, they would be the most successful team in sports.

Haiku_Dirtt
04-10-2006, 02:04 AM
This is where the Steelers organization would rank - top of the middle tier. But if you consider the population and the socioeconomics in western PA (and the solidity of the Rooney family) then pound for pound they are one of the best franchises. The new revenue streams from Heinz Field gave them the leverage to retain more homegrown talent.

BUT...the intangibles are unfolding before our very eyes. They gave Hines about a $9 million signing bonus. How many No. 86 jerseys will be sold in South Korea over the next several months??? Really!!! Of course the cynic in me also realizes that half will be bootlegs.

MasterOfPuppets
04-10-2006, 02:14 AM
It is media market. Has nothing to do with profit of a team and things like that. I'll tell you what though, when it comes to the local market in pitt and ratings. The steelers are #1. They had a stat on ESPN once and the host named the teams who had the highest local ratings. Pittsburgh had the highest with 69%. Which meant that 69% of the local tv rating for the steelers game was watching the Steelers.

However, if the Rooneys owned the NY giants or the NY Jets, and they ran things the way they do with pitt, they would be the most successful team in sports.
it has everything to do with profit.and the media market is that profit. they pay for the rights to televise the games.

83-Steelers-43
04-10-2006, 02:12 PM
Speaking of the new CBA, keep in mind this is one of the guys that was against it......

http://espn-att.starwave.com/photo/2006/0410/nfl_a_wilson_412.jpg AKA The Predator (with it's helmet off)

Stlrs4Life
04-10-2006, 04:05 PM
Man, he looks alot like Alan Alda doesn't he?

Suitanim
04-10-2006, 05:04 PM
Wilson voted against the new CBA in part because he didn't understand it. His option was uncapped football which would have run the Bills out of Buffalo on a rail.

Here's a nice article on it.

http://www.wgrz.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=36044&provider=top

The biggest difference between Buffalo and Washington, or Green Bay and Dallas is that the amount of extra money floating around to be had. If Dan Snyder had his way, he'd sell ad space on his teams jerseys. Why? Because he doesn't give a flying **** about the history or integrity of the game, but he definitely knows how to make a buck, and for a big market team like the Skins, he'd have a line of possible suitors lined up around the corner.

Livinginthe past
04-11-2006, 12:52 AM
Man, he looks alot like Alan Alda doesn't he?

Looks like a waxwork Alan Alda that has been left in the oven too long....

NM