Ben Gilbert

In exchange, there was a salary cap put in, capped at some fixed percentage of the amount of revenue that the league generates.

Right.

So that today is actually a pretty high number.

It's 48.8% or something like that.

So players are effectively a partner in the league because the league's success ends up being their success, not necessarily evenly distributed among all players by any means.

In fact, quite the opposite.

But at least players are virtually guaranteed in whole to make a

close to half of the league's overall revenue.

But how does that work with local and national revenue?

Well, since it is based on the total revenue, if a team makes a whole bunch of local revenue, they're going to have no problem making the obligation that they have to pay the players.

Ed, you're saying that that fixed amount...

Right.

It's okay as long as the local revenue doesn't become too big of a part.

But at some point, you have to imagine that...

what is 48.8% of league average could be 90% of what I make as a team in a small market with a crappy stadium.

And then because I have to pay players so much, there's no way I can pay for other stuff.

And so, you know, my coaching gets hurt or the production for fans gets hurt or something that makes me a less competitive team, even if the players on the field are paid just as much as the players on the field from other teams.

Yeah.

And it's interesting because I think in 93, when the salary cap first came out, it was just of the shared revenue.

But now that in the more recent agreements, it includes all league revenue and local revenue is actually growing as a portion of the overall revenue for the top teams.