Image: Jerry Watson, owner of Stadium View Bar in Green Bay
Mike Roemer  /  for
With a sign dealing with the NFL lockout behind him, Jerry Watson, owner of Stadium View Bar, stands in front of his bar that is a few blocks from Lambeau Field in Green Bay, Wisconsin. Watson has also put a black tarp over a statue of a Super Bowl trophy that he has in front of the bar and says it won't come down till the strike is over.
By contributor
updated 6/21/2011 12:45:07 PM ET 2011-06-21T16:45:07

Inside a Green Bay, Wis., bar near the corner of Lombardi Avenue and Holmgren Way, Jerry Watson envisions the dark, lonely winter looming if the NFL lockout sends pro football packing for a long run or — shudder — for a full season.

“Without the Packers playing on Sundays, I’ll have maybe five people working and maybe 15 customers versus a normal Packers Sunday where I have up to 175 people working and do we 8,000 to 10,000 people through the door,” said Watson, owner of the Stadium View Bar & Grill, just around the corner from Brett Favre’s Steakhouse. A lost season would sap about $1 million, Watson estimated, from his typical annual revenue of $3.5 million.

  1. More must-read stories
    1. The Hartford Courant, Political
      Wild Wall St.

      Has the market volatility got you nervous? These cartoons may give you a little comic relief.

    2. Cyber-thieves create fake Kelley Blue Book site
    3. US says Reebok toning shoes don't really
    4. Can you live on $9 an hour? Play the game

“Football might be the only (true) religion in Green Bay,” Watson said. “When I look out my window, I can see Lambeau Field with the big ‘G’ on it. Depending on the day of the week, that ‘G’ stands for 'God' or 'Greed.'”

Less than three months before the NFL champion Packers are scheduled to kick off against the Saints, you can imagine which ‘G’ Watson is pointing to these days. Confidential mediation chats between NFL owners and players continue, yet both sides remain engaged in a separate, almost surreal ground game.

That PR scramble involves a core question now tormenting mayors and merchants in every NFL market: How much financial pain will pro football cities feel if the lockout gobbles a fat chunk of the 2011 schedule, or devours all of it?

Warning: Finding the answer is like trying to read the scoreboard at the 1988 “Fog Bowl” in Chicago. The players union, citing a study it sanctioned, contends each NFL city will forfeit, on average, $20 million in revenue, fan spending and lost jobs for every home game cancelled — $160 million if the season is scrapped. The NFL, citing different research, claims the economic impact will be closer to zero.

“I’m a retired Teamster — drove a semi,” Watson said. “I’ve been through enough strikes. Nobody wins but everybody has to posture for position. But do you know how many years I can stand (with no NFL)? Maybe two. And then this place gets shut up.”

Indeed, the NFL Player Association’s estimated $20 million per-city, per-game loss factors in the expected hits to businesses within NFL markets — including restaurants, bars and hotels that rely on Thursday night, Sunday, Sunday night and Monday night games to draw patrons and fuel revenue, said Jesse David, the study’s author.

To calculate the lockout’s possible fallout, David dissected and “aggregated” 11 previous examinations of the NFL’s value to local markets. The studies were conducted (or outsourced) by cities and development groups seeking to convince voters to pay for new stadiums to either keep or attract NFL franchises — including Santa Clara, Calif., Houston and Minneapolis. David declined to say how much the NFLPA paid his firm to crunch the NFL’s dollar punch.

“If you take out the part related to construction of the (new) stadium, and if you take out the piece (accounting for) concerts or college teams maybe playing there, what you have left over is the economic activity from playing NFL games — that’s what these 11 studies all measured,” said David, a senior vice president of Edgeworth Economics, based in Los Angeles.

“We extract that piece of it and say: If you turn the games off, if you stop paying salaries, and you stop paying all the people who work at the stadium, and you stop having visitors from outside the region come to the stadiums — like media and fans — here’s what’s going to happen.”

Armed with David’s assessment, the NFLPA in late 2010 sent letters to the mayors of NFL cities warning that their areas would suffer $160 million revenue decreases without NFL football, and underscoring that the lockout comes “during one of the worst economies since the Great Depression.”

Image: Jerry Watson, owner of Stadium View Bar,
Mike Roemer  /  for
Jerry Watson, owner of Stadium View Bar, un-boxes autographed Packers memorablia at his bar.

“NFL owners are preparing to cancel the 2011 season and, in the process, devastate Atlanta businesses and stadium workers who count on football Sundays to make ends meet,” NFLPA president Kevin Mawae wrote in letters sent to former Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue, current Gov. Nathan Deal and Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed.

Many officeholders – including the mayors of Miami, Houston and Baltimore – subsequently wrote to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, urging the  owners “to create breathing room” with the players “for a deal to be struck,” and in some cases mentioning the hundred-million-dollar shock their cities faced without the game.

The NFL’s response to the union-sanctioned study? “The fairy tales continue,” league spokesman Greg Aiello said. He further criticized the union for “circulating unattributed research.”

Late last week, Aiello declined to comment further on the NFLPA’s $20 million per-game estimate. Instead, his office emailed a link to an article published by the Atlanta Journal Constitution and That article – which, according to Aiello, “debunked” the union’s financial damage estimate – also concluded “there will be little economic impact if there is no NFL action next season. … (P)eople will find other ways to spend their money.”

Can the NFL provide a more accurate number to gauge the possible harm to local economies if games are lost?

“No, we have not calculated that,” Aiello said in an email.

“I don’t understand,” David responded, “why the league doesn’t just say, ‘Yeah, it’s a big deal if we don’t have football; it’s an important economic driver and it’s a reason to get this deal done.’ ”

Another irony, David added, is that about half of the 11 studies he examined for the NFLPA were completed only after NFL teams provided those cities with proprietary financial information.

“The NFL and the owners have engaged in the height of hypocrisy here,” said economist Victor Matheson, who also has studied how sports strikes and team relocations affect cities. “For years, (NFL owners) have commissioned bogus economic-impact studies that produce inflated claims … in order to justify taxpayer subsidies for new and improved stadiums. Now that the NFLPA is using these same studies to put public pressure on the owners and league, the owners and league are now disavowing their own impact studies as unreliable.”

But Matheson, an associate professor of economics at the College of the Holy Cross, isn’t siding with the NFLPA – or with the claims made by Davis, the union’s paid consultant.

Working with two other professors, Matheson previously examined whether Los Angeles suffered any economic scars after it lost two football teams. The academic trio determined there was little to no economic impact after the Raiders and Rams left town. In 2008, those same professors “found no identifiable change” in the economies of Tampa or Miami following the NFL strikes of the 1980s.

“The obvious explanation … is that people simply found other things to do on Sunday afternoons in the absence of the NFL, so the NFL's loss was someone else's gain,” Matheson said.

If the entire season is, ultimately, scratched by labor unrest, Matheson believes NFL cities may feel a total financial pinch that’s closer to, on average, about $16 million – or one-tenth of the union’s assertion.

That smaller number, however, gives no comfort to the owners of hospitality businesses in some NFL markets. They don’t need economic studies to know their operations are in the eye of the lockout storm.

At La Bayou Restaurant on Bourbon Street in New Orleans, gross revenues total as much as $30,000 on days when the Saints have a home game.

“We expect to see that number at around $10,000 if we don't have the Saints playing,” said Shad Stearns, the restaurant's general manager. “After Katrina and the BP oil spill, the Saints became our symbolic, natural rallying point. People (now) take their football very seriously here.”

At the 380-room Doubletree by Hilton hotel in Cleveland, which sits around the corner from Cleveland Browns Stadium, a lost season would slice about $350,000 in revenue, estimated general manager Leonard Clifton. For context, he is assuming that 250 of his rooms will sit empty without football.

“Not too many people will be driving to downtown Cleveland in the late fall or early winter unless there’s a football game,” Clifton said. “You don’t come downtown to hang out in a blizzard.”

Bill Briggs is a frequent contributor to and author of “The Third Miracle.”

Video: Fans fear upcoming NFL season will be sacked

  1. Closed captioning of: Fans fear upcoming NFL season will be sacked

    >> now we turn to the nfl where owners are citing rising costs due to shiny new stadiums are trying to take a larger chunk of revenue from the players'payroll.

    >> a court hearing could bring clarity. the ruling will force everyone back it work or uphold the lockout leaving players out of options and paychecks. this is not the first time we have been promised a court ruling that could be the tipping point. until anything actually happens, nfl fans will be left in the dark searching for signs of hope. the owners with shiny new tax funded stadiums, the cost they want to transfer to the players apparently. the latest shenanigan, a meeting between the commissioner, owners and players association . so secret that owners didn't know it happened. i want to get the latest on all this craziest. david and a sports analyst and andy brandt , pleasure to see you both. dave , does anybody have any leverage?

    >> that a good question. you ask each side and each side says they have the leverage. the players association says they feel they can keep winning this court. owners feel they can lock the doors and shut everything down. but the biggest problem is an absence of trust. if i do nothing else on this segment, dylan, i have to read this quote from troy palomalou. he says the fact it people are fighting against big business . the big business argument is i've got the money and power therefore i can tell you what to do. that's life everywhere. i think this is a time when football players are standing up and saying no, no, no, the people have the power . that's hardly a statement that says they are about to sing kumbaya.

    >> and it resonates true in so many places, whether the banking system , healthcare system , health insurance companies, energy debate. i don't know whether they can capture that sort of messaging, andy . do you think the players can tap into the national frustration at the hands of sort of greedy bastards all over the place here?

    >> i hear from so many fans, tweets, e-mails, and dylan i don't think the public has a lot of sympathy for either side. it is changing with whatever recent comment is in the news. or whatever players says he was having fun in the lockout and i'm not sweating it. you see different feelings about the two sides. the problem is you focus on the $9 billion and not having a lot of ability to split it up. i think both sides are trying to search for the hearts and minds of fans. at the end much day, it is nasty, boring, not interesting. but it is a prs says. i think we are getting through the process. i'm here in st. louis and tomorrow we have the big hearing on courtroom football . they may tilt the leverage one way or the other. i think the big thing to note is after this hearing tomorrow, there are no more mashers on the calendar. that could direct a losing side towards real purposeful negotiations to get something done this summer.

    >> do you agree with that dave ?

    >> i think andy is> on a couple of points. you get the sentive it is billion airs versus millionaires. what you have troy palomalou trying to do is to reframe the debate and say, no it is not millionaires versus billion airs, it is some of the richest people in the united states , against a playing life of 3 1/2 years that will statistically die 20 years before the typical american male so people should give us a break. we're not the ones who tore up the collective bargaining agreement. we are trying to keep our piece of the pie. i don't know how effective that message will be given everything else happening in the country right now and people want their entertainment. people want a sense of escapism. the thought of not having football this fall, it is interesting if you see mayors get in on this too. you are talking about persistent unemployment and the jobs around football stadiums are not high end jobs. they are low pay , jobs with no benefits. but they are jobs. and the unemployment will be mammoth this fall.

    >> i think both sides, if you pen pin them in a corner in a dark road , they will say, we will have football . each side is using courts to gain leverage and negotiations. we have had meetings the last few days. we have baby steps, imminent nowhere near an agreement. but to me, not having football go in september would be a surprise. i think it is a surprise this off season. owners had a chance. they said, we will change the system. we have no more public a appetite towards financing stadiums. the 50/50 split players have is not working for the long-term, even if it is working now. player pay is outpacing revenues. whether we believe it or not, they had a clans to do it and they did it and the players the fight back the best they can. at the end of the day , time will dictate that we will have a season. in my opinion we will have an agreement towards the start of the season.

    >> do you agree dave .

    >> i hope andy is right. i would like it see football this fall. but i know unless owners open the books and say this is how we need to prove to you that we are actually not financially viable for the long-term, it is going to be a very tough sale to get an agreement for the simple reason that trust isn't there. people should read this interview drew brees just gave with sports illustrated where he said we don't trust owners because they lie to us. then he just reeled off five lies right there. when have you someone like drew brees saying that, it is a tough environment to see a deal getting done in time.

    >> a sign of the times at least. andy , i'm sorry, i'm out of time. andy brand, espn sports analyst, you can follow him on stwiter. dave zyron, you can follow him on twitter at edge of sports. it fits directly as you guys know, inside the base narrative of why we do this show, which is the need for transparency when you are asking people to solve problems with vast


Discussion comments


Most active discussions

  1. votes comments
  2. votes comments
  3. votes comments
  4. votes comments

Data: Latest rates in the US

Home equity rates View rates in your area
Home equity type Today +/- Chart
$30K HELOC FICO 3.79%
$30K home equity loan FICO 4.99%
$75K home equity loan FICO 4.69%
Credit card rates View more rates
Card type Today +/- Last Week
Low Interest Cards 13.83%
Cash Back Cards 17.80%
Rewards Cards 17.18%