by Peter Ruzzo

Created on: October 15, 2009   Last Updated: October 19, 2009

The possibility that Rush Limbaugh could be a part of the National Football League reeks of hypocrisy on both ends of the spectrum. The reasons for a resounding 'yes' are as follows. The National Football League is one of the more socialistic enterprises (pardon the oxymoron) in this country. Secondly, the N.F.L already has an image problem and having Limbaugh as an owner would only taint this image more.

Perhaps the question should be, why would Rush Limbaugh want to buy into a socialistic system? Socialism as an economic ideology is predicated upon a strong governing body redistributing resources for the greater good; the greater good being the 32 franchises that make up the National Football League.

The National Football League redistributes income among its franchises. Each franchise shares revenue through television, merchandising and concessionary contracts. Home teams must give 40 percent of their general ticket sale revenue to the visiting team. If an owner is fortunate enough to own the stadium in which their team plays, they keep 100% of the concessions.

This is an exception to the rule as most owners do not own their own stadiums. Tax payers have willingly and unwillingly spent millions to build stadiums to promote their teams. Corporate sponsors pay millions to have their names associated with these stadiums.

Granted the NFL is a 6.3 billion dollar business that has become profitable by virtue of its popularity but inherent to its business model are aspects of socialism. The salary cap, which is going to be set at around $123 million in 2009, places financial restraints on the franchises. A salary cap sets spending limits upon teams so that they do not overspend and create a competitive disadvantage.

A stacked team would not be in the best interest of the NFL because a dominant squad would stifle competition. Weaker franchises that don't have revenue to spend still have to be competitive because it is in the interest of the greater good to make all franchises economically viable. Why would a fan in Tampa Bay want to spend $45 on a ticket to watch a miserable team?

Furthermore, the concept of survival of the fittest (in reference to Spencer's take on capitalism and competition) does not apply here because it runs contradictory to the business model espoused by the N.F.L. If the N.F.L. were a true capitalistic enterprise there might be only 6 or 7 teams competing each week because the other teams would go out of business.

To try to maintain and enforce

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>