Forbes: Cowboys have NFL's most valuable team; Redskins No. 2

[ExoDus84]

Hmmm...

The Raiders I agree with, the Bengals though, are poised to have a good year. Where is this turmoil you speak of?

The Cowboys are picked by everyone in the media to win the Super Bowl and are widely considered to have one of the most talented rosters in the league. What are you talking about?

Both Parcells and Johnson have been out of coaching for some time, why do you think they would somehow still be coaching the Cowboys if JJ wasn't still here? It is a ludicrous assertion.

The brokebacks are picked to win the superbowl every year in recent memory. How's that worked out for you?

[jnhay]

I would be curious which teams have the most cash flow, ROI, and healthiest balance sheets. Total value seems almost irrelevant.

The Redskins had easily the highest operating income in the 2009 report. Dallas was 4th to last in 2009, and 10th in 2008. Go back to 2005, and the Cowboys edged out the Redskins only slightly for the number 1 spot. I think the Redskins have been #1 ever since.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/30/football-values-09_NFL-Team-Valuations_Income.html

[No_Pressure]

The new Cowboys stadium puts them ahead of the Redskins in franchise value, but thats just looking at it from an assets standpoint. When you figure in the fact that Jerry Jones doesn't own his stadium outright and it isn't paid off and Dan Snyder does and FedEx Field is paid for it probably puts us back on top or something. I don't know how much revenue the Redskins bring in but it must be a lot.

These types of things aren't important though, a franchise in the end is worth whatever the highest bidder is willing to pay for it, and I know we all have pride in our teams and love to be the best at everything, but when both teams have missed even a trip to the championship game for the past what...15 and 19 years respectively, it isn't really a good thing to brag that one team is worth more than the other. In fact, as fans one could even say it reflects poorly on us as we're stupid enough to keep forking over more money than anybody else out there for a continually lackluster result. Still, some would say it is an indicator of fan dedication and is a good thing.

Whatever you believe, being the richest team in the league or the most valuable or whatever is pointless. My final thought is simply this: Even though things aren't as intense in the Dallas-DC rivalry (though they are finally heating up again a little bit), we can certainly agree that it is a profitable one for both franchises and thats something that both fan bases can be happy about...or angry about...or whatever, who cares?

[coolbeans]

The Redskins had easily the highest operating income in the 2009 report. Dallas was 4th to last in 2009, and 10th in 2008. Go back to 2005, and the Cowboys edged out the Redskins only slightly for the number 1 spot. I think the Redskins have been #1 ever since.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/30/football-values-09_NFL-Team-Valuations_Income.html

That list is for the 2008/09 season when all of Jerry's income was going into the stadium. The link I provided earlier is for the 2009/10 season in which the cowboys dwarf every team, including the skins, in every category. That new stadium is the mother of all cash cows.

Here it is again in case you missed it. Read the little paragraph under the chart for clarification.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_NFL-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

[jnhay]

That list is for the 2008/09 season when all of Jerry's income was going into the stadium. The link I provided earlier is for the 2009/10 season in which the cowboys dwarf every team, including the skins, in every category. That new stadium is the mother of all cash cows.

Here it is again in case you missed it. Read the little paragraph under the chart for clarification.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_NFL-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

Thanks. I only found a bunch of articles relating to the 2010 report, but not the report itself. That makes a lot more sense considering how massive that stadium is.

[Switchgear]

That list is for the 2008/09 season when all of Jerry's income was going into the stadium. The link I provided earlier is for the 2009/10 season in which the cowboys dwarf every team, including the skins, in every category. That new stadium is the mother of all cash cows.

Here it is again in case you missed it. Read the little paragraph under the chart for clarification.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_NFL-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

So your owner screws over the fanbase better than our owner. Congratulations.

[ArmchairRedskin]

Who paid for the new Meadowlands? Is it the Giants owner or is that a city owned deal? Do the Jets own any part of it? What's the deal?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Only here does the last decade include the past 11 NFL seasons!:ols:

Gotta love this place!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Only in Cowboys fans' minds does a playoff win that occurred in 2000 not count as a playoff win that occurred during the last decade! :ols:

Gotta love those 'Boys fans!!!!!!!!!!

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

That is an interesting link. Especially the Patriots- what in the world are they in so much debt for?

Kraft has been trying to build some kind of entertainment/retail/studio complex next to the stadium for years. I wonder if he's acquired a lot of debt in the process.

Color me a bit skeptical, though. I don't see how it's possible to build xanadu and have one of the healthiest debt ratios the very next year.

It's probably not entirely accurate, but Jerry got $350 million from Arlington and $150 million from the NFL. So, that's $800 million that he financed.

That's basically what Snyder paid for the Skins. And - at least according to Wikipedia - Snyder pays $50 million a year on that loan. The Skins' debt is 15 percent and the Cowboys is 11 percent.

Considering that Jerry has already turned that place into an absolute money making machine - Big 12 title game, NBA all-star game, Cotton Bowl, NBA All-Star game, Paul McCartney, U2, George Strait with a Super Bowl and Final Four to come - he may have been able to make a large lump payment at some point. He also may have a better rate.

What I don't get is how he is at 11 percent and the Giants are at 55 percent while the Jets are at 66 percent. Where their deals that ****ty?

On Edit: I just did the math. There is no way that the Cowboys only have $200 million in debt. I wonder if the "debt" is the interest payments on the stadium. That would make sense. And maybe the Jets and Giants are calculated with the principal.

Anyway, the question is: If Jerry or Danny wanted to sell, who could possibly buy? Seriously, how are you going to finance a $1.8 billion purchase in 2010? There was some discussion about this on the Yankees a while ago. Basically, the only entity rich enough to buy the Yankees was the Yankees.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Who paid for the new Meadowlands? Is it the Giants owner or is that a city owned deal? Do the Jets own any part of it? What's the deal?

It's a 50-50 partnership for the Jets and Giants. (Old Giants Stadium was the Giants' place with the Jets basically renting the joint).

I don't know as much about it as I do Jerry World, but it looks like it was financed almost entirely by private funds.

[brianm23]

When you figure in the fact that Jerry Jones doesn't own his stadium outright and it isn't paid off and Dan Snyder does and FedEx Field is paid for it probably puts us back on top or something.

I thought that he is the sole owner of the new stadium (still being financed through various of loans/investors) it's just hasn't been paid for quite yet. I vary well could be wrong on this and it is the City of Arlington's stadium.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowboys_Stadium

Seems he had to scrape up some extra dough from peeps to pay for the extra costs to the stadium. A loan from the NFL? really?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Last I checked, FedEx is not "paid off." I don't think it will ever be "paid off." It's not a Chevy Malibu. Though maybe on paper it is.

But Dan Snyder did not have $800 million in the bank when he bought the team. He's been paying off various partners over the years. I think he owns the team entirely now, but I'm not sure.

If I had to guess, I would think that in the next ten years, Dan Snyder's hedge fund will actually buy the team from Dan Snyder.

[Ken]

Only in Cowboys fans' minds does a playoff win that occurred in 2000 not count as a playoff win that occurred during the last decade! :ols:

Gotta love those 'Boys fans!!!!!!!!!!

Only in a skins fan mind does a playoff win in the 1999 season count in both the 1999 season and 2000 season.

At least, this is how you are trying to portray it....lol.

[darklight1216]

As much as I hate them, I'd love to see the Cowboys topple Manchester United.

The Skins also have won only a single playoff game. It's a lot tougher to beat a division team in the playoffs, especially when you're going for the sweep. It makes it even tougher when you predicted that the Eagles would go to the Superbowl before they got housed by the Cowboys in back to back weeks.

I don't know the stats on all divisional playoff game, but teams that have beaten rivals twice in the regular season usually beat them a third time if they meet in the post-season. It's something like 11-7, but I'd have to look up the exact stat.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Only in a skins fan mind does a playoff win in the 1999 season count in both the 1999 season and 2000 season.

At least, this is how you are trying to portray it....lol.

Here's a fun thing to try, Ken...point out where I said the playoff win in 2000 counts as a playoff win for the 2000 season. It should keep you busy and entertained for hours looking for it :yes:...

[brianm23]

Here's a fun thing to try, Ken...point out where I said the playoff win in 2000 counts as a playoff win for the 2000 season. It should keep you busy and entertained for hours looking for it :yes:...

[Califan007 The Constipated]

^^^

Somebody photoshop a dog tag on him with the name "ken" on it, please ...

[jnhay]

Here's a fun thing to try, Ken...point out where I said the playoff win in 2000 counts as a playoff win for the 2000 season. It should keep you busy and entertained for hours looking for it :yes:...

I really hate to say this, but considering it's August 2010, the playoff win in 2000 isn't within a decade of today's date. If it was the 2000 season, you'd be correct. So it looks like you and Ken are both wrong.

EDIT: Hold up. You were right Califan (only wrong to say "in the last decade"). I can't believe I assumed a Cowboys fan wasn't 100% wrong.

[Ken]

Here's a fun thing to try, Ken...point out where I said the playoff win in 2000 counts as a playoff win for the 2000 season. It should keep you busy and entertained for hours looking for it :yes:...

So did you have a playoff win in the 2000 NFL season or not? I go by the NFL calendar when computing when teams went to the playoffs or not.

It is semantics to say that they went and won a playoff game in 2000, especially when I take "the last decade" as the last 10 years, not the LAST decade that ends in 0. The 2010 season has started, so it is inclusive of the 2000 season.

Dictionary.com says the 1st definition of decade is how I interpreted it. Not how you choose to interpret it to fit your argument.

[jnhay]

So did you have a playoff win in the 2000 NFL season or not? I go by the NFL calendar when computing when teams went to the playoffs or not.

It is semantics to say that they went and won a playoff game in 2000, especially when I take "the last decade" as the last 10 years, not the LAST decade that ends in 0. The 2010 season has started, so it is inclusive of the 2000 season.

Dictionary.com says the 1st definition of decade is how I interpreted it. Not how you choose to interpret it to fit your argument.

Actually Tweed was right...whenever we talked about the Cowboys' playoff futility lasting "X" amount of years, we started from the date of their last playoff win, regardless of what season it was a part of. So in the decade of 2000-2009, the Skins do have 2 playoff wins.

[Ken]

but have not won one in the last decade of nfl seasons.

Again, only a futile skin fan would take pride in winning a playoff game by calendar date.

Unreal.

Also, the NFL would not include anything from the 1999 season in any all decade team or team accomplishment regardless of when it occurred. But it fits the silly argument so lets go with it.

[jnhay]

but have not won one in the last decade of nfl seasons.

Again, only a futile skin fan would take pride in winning a playoff game by calendar date.

Unreal.

Also, the NFL would not include anything from the 1999 season in any all decade team or team accomplishment regardless of when it occurred. But it fits the silly argument so lets go with it.

You're basing your whole argument over one line that wasn't worded correctly, while the entire discussion had already established that they were talking about the 2000-2009 decade. You are aware of how people refer to the 90s, 80s, 70s as decades? This is what is going on here.

How many playoff wins did the Redskins have last decade? 2. It's so incredibly simple.

[coolbeans]

Kraft has been trying to build some kind of entertainment/retail/studio complex next to the stadium for years. I wonder if he's acquired a lot of debt in the process.

It's probably not entirely accurate' date=' but Jerry got $350 million from Arlington and $150 million from the NFL. So, that's $800 million that he financed.

That's basically what Snyder paid for the Skins. And - at least according to Wikipedia - Snyder pays $50 million a year on that loan. The Skins' debt is 15 percent and the Cowboys is 11 percent.

Considering that Jerry has already turned that place into an absolute money making machine - Big 12 title game, NBA all-star game, Cotton Bowl, NBA All-Star game, Paul McCartney, U2, George Strait with a Super Bowl and Final Four to come - he may have been able to make a large lump payment at some point. He also may have a better rate.

What I don't get is how he is at 11 percent and the Giants are at 55 percent while the Jets are at 66 percent. Where their deals that ****ty?

On Edit: I just did the math. There is no way that the Cowboys only have $200 million in debt. I wonder if the "debt" is the interest payments on the stadium. That would make sense. And maybe the Jets and Giants are calculated with the principal.

Anyway, the question is: If Jerry or Danny wanted to sell, who could possibly buy? Seriously, how are you going to finance a $1.8 billion purchase in 2010? There was some discussion about this on the Yankees a while ago. Basically, the only entity rich enough to buy the Yankees was the Yankees.[/quote']

Actually, USA Today recenty reported in an article that the Cowboys are only $190 million in debt. It seems Jerry sunk alot of his own money into the stadium to already be that far into paying the stadium off.

[Ken]

You're basing your whole argument over one line that wasn't worded correctly, while the entire discussion had already established that they were talking about the 2000-2009 decade. You are aware of how people refer to the 90s, 80s, 70s as decades? This is what is going on here.

How many playoff wins did the Redskins have last decade? 2. It's so incredibly simple.

Right and your missing it.

The NFL Considers the 2000 NFL SEASON thru last year (which ended technically in 2010) the last decade.

You are aware of this, right?

[ArmchairRedskin]

This thread deserves a face palm and a head shake. Or maybe just a "c'mon man!"