Worst Owner in Football

[JamStone]

I apologize if what I inferred was inaccurate.

So please explain fully what you meant by simply stating that since it's Detroit, the article is stupid. And if you weren't suggesting the economy, why your subsequent posts focused on the economy.

[Blake]

So please explain fully what you meant by simply stating that since it's Detroit, the article is stupid. And if you weren't suggesting the economy, why your subsequent posts focused on the economy.

Most of the time when rankings come out, the source will clearly lay out many different aspects and criteria that lead them to their conclusions.

This article says that Ford is the worst owner because the Lions were the only team to lose money last year and the value of the franchise has dropped over the last five years.

That's it.

It's stupid for Forbes not take the Detroit economy, among other things, into account for some of the Lions financial woes and simply call Ford the worst owner in the NFL because they are losing money.

.......especially when the exact same Forbes takes the Detroit economy into account for some of the Pistons' financial woes.

[JamStone]

So what did you mean by saying "they play in Detroit?"

What does it matter that they play in Detroit? The economy has been bad for a long time. This year the economy has been as bad as it has been in recent years. So far this season, home attendance in the first 4 home games is at 98%. The Lions will not be in the red this season.

What were you suggesting by saying "they play in Detroit?" What was your point?

[Blake]

So what did you mean by saying "they play in Detroit?"

What does it matter that they play in Detroit? The economy has been bad for a long time. This year the economy has been as bad as it has been in recent years. So far this season, home attendance in the first 4 home games is at 98%. The Lions will not be in the red this season.

What were you suggesting by saying "they play in Detroit?" What was your point?

The person(s) writing the article should have given Ford a bit of a break due to Detroit's economy, among other things.

Since they didn't, I don't give the article much credence and find it lazy and stupid.

I can't dumb it down for you any further than this.

[JamStone]

As I already pointed out, Detroit's economy won't negatively affect the business bottomline enough to put the team in the red (like it has been the last few years) if the product on the field is good. If the team is good, the team sells and makes money regardless of the economy in Detroit. That's proven. I can't dumb that down any further for you. The team being in Detroit does not matter. The product on the field matters.

Now that you have failed to make any relevant point about the team playing in Detroit being a factor, your initial comment that they play in Detroit still makes no sense.

If you find the article stupid because they didn't consider all the factors, that's fine. Your comment that they play in Detroit is irrelevant and pointless.

[Blake]

If the team is good, the team sells and makes money regardless of the economy in Detroit. That's proven. I can't dumb that down any further for you. The team being in Detroit does not matter. The product on the field matters.

You yourself have said that the economy affects the profit margins.

Now that you have failed to make any relevant point about the team playing in Detroit being a factor, your initial comment that they play in Detroit still makes no sense.

I've got a quote sourcing Forbes in this very thread that says the city's economy affects profits for the Pistons.

Logic and common sense dictate that it would also affect the other sports teams like the Lions.

If you find the article stupid because they didn't consider all the factors, that's fine. Your comment that they play in Detroit is irrelevant and pointless.

I was wondering if we were going to get to page 3 before you caught on.

Yes, it's stupid because they didn't consider all the factors.

One of the factors is them playing in Detroit. You have said so yourself in other posts before saying it's irrelevant in this post.

Either the Detroit economy has affected profit margins or it hasn't. Pick a lane.

[JamStone]

The bottomline is losing money and the Lions being in the red. The issue is to what degree the economy affects the Lions financially. Does it play a part? I've already said it does. But it's not anywhere near a major reason why the Lions have lost money in recent years. I don't see how you don't understand that.

The economy is bad right now in Detroit. The Lions are selling 98% of their seats in home games. They will make money this season. If the poor economy doesn't prevent the Lions from earning money, making a profit, and staying out of the red RIGHT NOW while the economy is bad, then it's not an excuse in previous seasons. You don't seem to get that.

The Lions have lost money in recent years because the fans got sick of the product on the field because the Lions have been so bad. Poor people in Detroit weren't going to Lions games anyway. The people not going to the games in recent years weren't going because the team sucked and they were sick of William Clay Ford and Matt Millen up until he left, not because they couldn't afford to go.

It started in 2005 when fans started to get sick and tired of Matt Millen and William Clay Ford. They wanted Ford to fire Millen and sell the team. Millen was the GM for the next 2+ seasons. Typically a GM gets 3 years to start turning things around, especially in the NFL where teams can make dramatic improvements on a year to year basis. In Millen's first 4 seasons as GM, 2-14, 3-13, 5-11, 6-10. That's a record of 16-48. No GM would make it out alive. Matt Millen was the GM for the next 3 seasons plus 3 more games into the 2008 season. Matt Millen didn't get fired immediately after the Lions went 0-16 in 2007.

The fans stopped going to games because of the product on the field and their disgust with ownership and management. But you want to suggest that William Clay Ford deserves a break because his team plays in Detroit? The economy hasn't prevented the team from making a profit. The team has. The ownership and management have. The team the last two seasons has started to show minimal progress and improvement and already the ticket sales show it. The team doesn't even have to be Superbowl contenders. They don't even have to a perennial playoff team. Just be respectable, and Lions fans will spend money and go to games and the team will turn over a profit. That wasn't happening for a good 5-6 years and that's where they lost their fans and money. Not because of the economy.

Your posts are pretty ignorant to what truly has been the case with the financial issues the Detroit Lions have had in recent years. It's pretty ridiculous to suggest as you did earlier that the "article should have given Ford a bit of a break due to Detroit's economy." Beyond ridiculous actually.

[Blake]

5 paragraphs of tldr .

you're saying I should believe you instead of Forbes?

Very poor logic. Beyond ridiculous and really stupid, tbh.

[JamStone]

Shrugs, I can't do anything if you're too lazy to read it.

I'll leave you with this then. If the economy is still bad in Detroit right now, and they have no problem selling out the games and making a profit, then why should Ford be given "a break" in previous seasons because of Detroit's economy?

The point I've been making from the beginning is that Detroit's bad economy isn't much of a factor at all as to why the Lions were losing money. It was the team, management, and ownership all being . The team can make and has made money regardless of the economy. Ford should not get "a break" because of Detroit's economy.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Stadium debt.

Sucking that bad for that long leads to ginormous high dollar rookie contracts and one of the worst cap situations in the league.

Apathy.

Economy.

⌃⌃That's the less wordy version.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Maybe what Ford needs is a hurricane and to win a SB to become a great owner.

Seems to have worked for Benson after years of threatening to move the Saints and being universally hated by Saints' fans.

[Blake]

Shrugs, I can't do anything if you're too lazy to read it.

I'll leave you with this then. If the economy is still bad in Detroit right now, and they have no problem selling out the games and making a profit, then why should Ford be given "a break" in previous seasons because of Detroit's economy?

The point I've been making from the beginning is that Detroit's bad economy isn't much of a factor at all as to why the Lions were losing money. It was the team, management, and ownership all being . The team can make and has made money regardless of the economy. Ford should not get "a break" because of Detroit's economy.

you have your opinion based on ass and I have mine based on what I've read about detroit which I shared in part with you.

Great logic you're using, brah.

[JamStone]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance/_/year/2011

Year, win/loss record, home attendance:

2006, 3-13, 93.7%
2007, 7-9,94.3%
2008, 0-16, 84.5%
2009, 2-14, 76.6%
2010, 6-10, 87.3%
2011, 6-2, 98.3%

The Lions went 3-13 in 2006 and still sold 93.7% at home games. Before 2008 and 0-16, they were still making money, still close to selling their home games. Look at 2008 and since. A 10% drop in home attendance is up to $3-5 million. That's why they were in the red. And that was a result of the team being bad and fans being fed up with ownership and management. The team has gotten to a 6-2 start this year, and attendance is up to 98% for home games. The Detroit economy has been as bad as it has been the previous 3 years.

So how can they sell with the economy still being bad?

[Pelicans78]

Maybe what Ford needs is a hurricane and to win a SB to become a great owner.

Seems to have worked for Benson after years of threatening to move the Saints and being universally hated by Saints' fans.

Worked for me. Benson has improved somewhat thanks to his granddaughter who has a big part in this team. But yeah he's made a lot of mistakes.

[Blake]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance/_/year/2011

Year, win/loss record, home attendance:

2006, 3-13, 93.7%
2007, 7-9,94.3%
2008, 0-16, 84.5%
2009, 2-14, 76.6%
2010, 6-10, 87.3%
2011, 6-2, 98.3%

The Lions went 3-13 in 2006 and still sold 93.7% at home games. Before 2008 and 0-16, they were still making money, still close to selling their home games. Look at 2008 and since. A 10% drop in home attendance is up to $3-5 million. That's why they were in the red. And that was a result of the team being bad and fans being fed up with ownership and management. The team has gotten to a 6-2 start this year, and attendance is up to 98% for home games. The Detroit economy has been as bad as it has been the previous 3 years.

So how can they sell with the economy still being bad?

you're saying the economy this year in Detroit is as bad as it was when the auto makers needed the bailout back somewhere near the 09-10 season?

I think you're talking out of your ass again.