The NFL’s Never-Ending Hunt for Free Money
Thursday’s #PFTPM brought to light a recurring theme that won’t make it any easier for teams to access the vault of public funds. Despite the significant increase in the salary cap, which indicates rising revenues, and the astronomical rise in franchise values—such as the 49ers considering selling up to 10 percent at a $9 billion valuation—teams are still clamoring for free cash to revamp their perceived clunkers. It’s a familiar story, where teams seek public money to update or build new stadiums, and politicians, eager to keep local teams, often oblige.
The Temptation of Free Money
Who wouldn’t want free money? No matter how wealthy a team owner is, the allure of public subsidies is hard to resist. Why should a team pay out of pocket for a new stadium when the government can be persuaded to contribute? The Texans, for instance, are exploring a new stadium to replace NRG Stadium, which is less than 25 years old. This isn’t an isolated incident; at least eight teams are actively seeking significant public funds for stadium projects. The list includes the Browns, Bengals, Chiefs, Broncos, Eagles, Commanders, and Bears. Additionally, the Bills, Titans, Panthers, and Jaguars are currently benefitting from public contributions for new venues or expensive renovations. That’s 12 out of 32 teams, a staggering 37.5%, that are either getting or trying to get updated or new places to play, all with substantial taxpayer money on the table.
Public Sentiment and Political Pressure
For years, public sentiment has been increasingly against subsidizing multi-billionaires. Last year, the Chiefs, despite their recent Super Bowl success and the star power of players like Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce, failed to secure votes to extend an existing sales tax that would have funded a new stadium. This reflects a growing skepticism among the public about why their tax dollars should be used to enrich already wealthy team owners. However, the temptation for politicians to keep local teams is strong, and the threat of a team moving to a city that offers better financial incentives makes it difficult to refuse.
The Commanders’ Dilemma
While the transfer of RFK Stadium to the District of Columbia came at no taxpayer expense, it’s highly unlikely the Commanders will build a stadium there without a taxpayer contribution. The current political climate in and around D.C. is not favorable to such proposals, making the task even more challenging. Sports owners continue to ask for public money because it has historically worked. No politician wants to be responsible for a team’s departure, and as long as there is a viable city willing to offer financial incentives, the process will continue.
The Future of Stadium Funding
The day will come when no city is willing to provide the necessary financial support. When that day arrives, it will be game over for the league, and owners will have to foot the bill themselves. Consequently, the cost of tickets will likely increase to offset the expenses. However, this raises an important question: if anyone in a community is going to be digging deep to pay for a new stadium, shouldn’t the money come from the people who attend the games and not from those who have no interest in football?
The Disconnect Between Fans and Taxpayers
Strangely, in most cities with NFL teams, the number of people who don’t care about the NFL outnumber those who do. This disconnect highlights the unfairness of using public funds to subsidize private enterprises. It’s a complex issue that pits the interests of team owners against those of the general public, and it underscores the need for a more equitable and transparent approach to stadium funding.
