Originally Posted by ChiefsFanatic
First off, FO. Secondly, I never said he owed me anything, although I believe he does. My definition, and I believe the definition that most Chiefs fans share, is that success for the Chiefs means wins, playoff victories, etc.
But what success means to me as a fan, and what it means to Clark Hunt as an owner, aren't necessarily the same thing.
Did you tell the SOC movement that Clark Hunt didn't owe them a damn thing? Because you have stated that you don't believe he does. But, I think you are wrong. Yes, the NFL is set up for every team, regardless of market size, to have the same shot at winning, and a level playing field, with their revenue sharing model.
But, team owners not only share in the revenue, but they get to keep 60% of the gate for each home game, including pre-season games. That 60% comes directly from the pockets of every fan that buys a ticket.
And then there is the revenue from parking. And the revenue from apparel and officially licensed products that don the Kansas City Chiefs logo and name.
Team owners are also often the recipient of large tax breaks and incentives from their cities and states, in order to secure a long term lease on their stadium, which in turn creates revenue for that city or state.
In a way, team owners create an ad hoc contract with the fans and members of the communities that contribute to their revenues outside of the league's revenue sharing set up. And because of this, I believe team owners do owe their fans a competitive product on the field, and with that they should pursue winning in good faith.
When team owners continually make bad football decisions based on increasing their profits, they are violating that ad hoc contract. Examples would be hiring a new HC every two or three years, because new and first time HCs cannot demand a high salary, which saves the owner money.
Another example would be when team owners cut or trade away veterans to avoid paying higher salaries. Etc. Etc. So on and so forth.
The SOC movement was born out of the frustration of a loyal and passionate fan base. But based on your statement, those passionate fans had no business being frustrated or voicing their unhappiness with the direction of the team, because according to you, team owners don't owe fans shit.
Anyway, a lesson perhaps, in how fan loyalty, sold out stadiums, apparel revenue, and revenue in the form of tax breaks paid for by the taxpayers, creates a social contract, and why team owners actually do owe their fans something.
And, as far as my assumption that Clark Hunt did not care about winning, I didn't assume, I weighed his actions and reactions to losing, and the results from the scale informed my belief that winning wasn't as important to Clark Hunt, as his definition of success didn't match my own.
Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk
|