Okay, I Will Now Solve The NFL's Impending Lockout Dispute

[Yavin4]

First, the owners citing increased costs due mostly to construction of new stadiums want a larger share of the revenue pie. Second, the players want to maintain the current salary structure, but they'd like to have more revenue devoted to assist disabled retired players.

In essence, this dispute is about getting more money, right? Okay, I have an elegant, simple, easy way for the NFL to increase their revenues dramatically all without adding more games or anything else.

Here's the solution: Allow cable television franchises to sell out of market games on their systems. Right now, DirectTV has the exclusive rights to sell out of market games for $40 billion, but that's nothing compared to the money the NFL would make if they take away their exclusivity.

For example, in NYC, DirectTV has minimal penetration. So, if you want to watch out of market games, you have to go to a sports bar. Imagine how much money the NFL would make if millions of NYers could buy out of market games through their cable service? Such revenue from NYC alone would probably exceed the DirectTV exclusive rights. DirecTV has 18 million subscribers compared to cable franchises that have well over 100 million. I'm not saying take it away from DirecTV. I'm saying take away their exclusivity.

This move alone would probably bolster revenues from out of market sales by 1000%. Thus, no need for a lockout nor an extended season nor anything else.

Did I solve it?

[PVnRT]

1. Not a bad idea, but I doubt it will happen

No one wants to sign a contract with sports leagues unless it is exclusive anymore.

[Yavin4]

3. Cable Franchises Would Get A Fee to Carry The Channels

And the NFL would give them a % of the on-demand money. Everybody makes a fortune.

Exclusivity only matters to broadcast networks and in-market games.

[Auggie]

2. Sounds like a great idea