Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

CAMPOS: The Lions of commerce

By Paul Campos, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published September 24, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Opinion Columns & Blogs

More stories »

When it comes to sports teams, I've always been cursed with a severe case of monogamy. For example, even though I've lived in the Denver area for nearly two decades now, and one of the NFL's best-run and most successful franchises is just around the corner, I'm stuck rooting for the team of my childhood affections, the indescribably awful Detroit Lions.

And, at a moment when American taxpayers may well be asked to pony up a trillion or so dollars to deal with what economists describe delicately as "market failure," it's instructive to consider the ownership and management of the Lions.

The Lions were bought by, or perhaps more accurately were bought for, William Clay Ford in 1964. Four-and-a-half million dollars of Ford family money - William Clay is one of Henry Ford's grandchildren - purchased this particular plaything, which at the time was one of the most successful franchises in the NFL (the team had won the league championship three times in the previous 12 seasons).

Now, in what Lions fans like think of as the 45th Year of Our Ford, the team has become the longest-running joke in professional sports.

The NFL is a league in which everything is slanted to produce as much parity as possible, from draft choices, to free agency rules, to, most crucially, revenue. Nearly two-thirds of the league's billions of dollars of annual income are divided equally between all 32 franchises. (As one NFL owner put it, the league is full of capitalists who vote like socialists).

In short, it's almost impossible for an NFL team to either lose money or avoid being competitive at least some of the time. William Clay Ford's Lions have managed to do both.

According to Forbes magazine, the Lions were the only league franchise to actually lose money last year. On the field, the team has won the astonishing total of one playoff game in 44 - soon to be 45 - seasons.

It gets worse. Seven years ago Matt Millen, a former NFL player with literally no other qualification for the job besides a stint as a TV commentator was named the team's general manager.

Since then the Lions have lost 84 of 115 games, which is almost the worst record over such a stretch in the entire history of the league. Millen has achieved this while piling up a bloated payroll loaded with disastrously unsuccessful and expensive high draft choices - hence the team's unique money-losing status.

What does any of this have to do with the present crisis on Wall Street and in Washington?

Consider how "the market" - that purportedly all-seeing and beneficent entity that in recent years has been treated as if it were some sort of god - has "disciplined" William Clay Ford for turning one of the league's best franchises into a perpetual Titanic, searching for next season's iceberg.

According to Forbes, the Lions are now worth $917 million. This adds up to a nifty 3,000 percent appreciation for Ford's purchase, in inflation-adjusted dollars.

It's true the NFL makes up a rather unusual little corner of our economy.

Yet every day we learn details about Wall Street compensation packages that make William Clay Ford look like Warren Buffett. For instance, Richard Fuld, who has just captained the nation's oldest investment bank, Lehmann Brothers, into bankruptcy, has been paid $466 million by the firm since 1993.

A glance at the financial press reveals that cases like Fuld's are far from unique. Given Wall Street's mysterious willingness to pay gigantic sums in exchange for spectacular failure, it's no wonder American taxpayers are nervous about throwing more money into its rapacious maw.

To paraphrase the late Sen. Everett Dirksen: a trillion here, a trillion there - after awhile, it adds up to real money.

Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado. He can be reached at paul.campos@colorado.edu.

Comments

  • September 24, 2008

    9:59 a.m.

    Achilles writes:

    (This comment was removed by the site staff.)

  • September 24, 2008

    10:14 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    klsc85 writes:

    Observation from Michigan (where we've been practicing for the Mother Of All Recessions for quite some time...):

    Wall Street. Detroit Lions. Hmmm...nice comparison. Hadn't thought about it that way, but it's dang close to the truth. The only difference being, of course, that Wall Street's meltdown has taken place over the period of, what, a week or two, while the Lions' meltdown has been going on for FOUR FREAKIN' DECADES!!! Does Hank Paulson have a bail out for THAT?

    Thank God for the Red Wings (ooops...sorry Avs fans)

    Uncle E

  • September 24, 2008

    10:24 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    malis writes:

    John_, based on that last posting, who are you and what have you done with the real John_II?

    Really, do you have something to say? Or were you just walking by that wall and happened to have a can of spray paint in your hand, so...

  • September 24, 2008

    11:11 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Achilles writes:

    I can no longer muster the energy to offer thoughtful and critical responses to Campos columns. If Campos is not going to make any attempt at making any sense; if he is not going to put more than two minutes of thought into his columns, well, why should I bother spending the time in writing a cogent response?

    His columns follow the same mundane pattern each time: start off on some obscure topic (Detroit Lions, talent scouts, etc); create a far-fetched link to either an anti-Bush sentiment, an anti-war sentiment, an anti-capitalism sentiment, an anti-white sentiment or an anti-diet sentiment (those are his only choices); then apply slander, speciousness, spurious statistics, and intellectual silliness. Add a touch of moral preening and Poof!: a Campos column.

    Sure, a Campos column is a tad bit more interesting than the typical Littwin verbal-servicing of Barack Obama. And its a lot more interesting than the typical lugubrious columns (obituaries) from gloomy Griego. But, there's something about the intellectual laziness and dishonesty of a Campos column that really bothers me. Combine that with the knowledge that RMN actually pays for this Campos crap and I can't help but wonder if the world is coming to an end.

  • September 25, 2008

    7:24 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    VVVV writes:

    Go back to Detroit if you aren't going to assimilate. We have more loitering tourists here than actual natives. Even after twenty years, you're nothing more than a tourist. I can understand why you don't feel like returning to Michigan, but you need to live where your heart is. Otherwise you end up with a state where education plays second (or more like fifth) fiddle to traffic on I-70, legislators pander to the soup du jour, like unions, who only make up about 10% of the population, and the future is forgotten, or leveraged for petty self interests, because nobody is paying attention. Building a better "here" loses out to the worthless nostalgia of "there", wherever your "there" may be.

    Talk about poor planning providing poor performance. If this isn't your home, go home. We need people who care enough to wake up and pay attention to here and now.

  • September 25, 2008

    2:46 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Achilles writes:

    Well said VVVV. I am not a Colorado native. I grew up in the NYC/NJ area so I was a Yankee/Giants fan most of my life. Once I moved to Colorado, I became a die-hard Rockies/Broncos fan. Why shouldn't I be? I chose to live here. I love Colorado. My loyalties are with this state above all other states.

    I was very disappointed last year to see so many Boston Red Sox fans residing in Colorado. Of course the BoSox are a great team. It doesn't take die-hard BoSox fan to recognize that. But, is that all it takes to be a team fan? If that is the case, why bother assigning teams to cities and states? I guess we should just treat these teams as corporations that just happen to be based in any particular state. No. I do not cheer for the Rockies because I am loyal to that particular group of players. I cheer because I am loyal to Colorado and I want everything associated to my state to succeed.

    Now, I have a few tests I use to determine who is a liberal and who is a conservative. One of those tests is whether or not someone likes the Rocky movies. Another is how likely one is to use multiple exclamation points in a single sentence. I am debating whether to add another test: whoever remains loyal to another state's team is most likely a liberal.

  • September 30, 2008

    12:36 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    HopiMedicineMan writes:

    It's a sobering realization that the writer of the piece educated half the judges of the state. It is also evidence that a college education is over rated and of questionable value. In this case, of no value.

  • September 30, 2008

    10:04 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    WestminsterJ writes:

    VVV, John_II: *That's* your criticism of Campos's piece, that, as a way of introducing his main topic, the financial meltdown, he expressed loyalty to a Detroit team? That's just sad.

    Hopi- You certainly have a high opinion, of your, uh, opinion. Tell me, what are your credentials for passing judgment on higher education in Colorado?