The Cowboys seem to be a throwback to an era when professional sports teams were the indulgences of the wealthy and too often poorly run by their wayward children and grandchildren who lacked any real acumen at business...or anything else for that matter.
Baseball seems to have fully moved beyond this business model to one that is more corporate, ruthless, and relentlessly focused on profits and losses while destroying inefficiencies. Not everyone likes it, but the results in places like Cleveland, Tampa Bay, Milwaukee, Atlanta and Houston strongly suggest it's a better way to do business.
Not so with the NFL. When you look around the NFL, you still see the old model hanging around with the "born on third base" owner continually meddling in issues they know nothing about, doing ill-advised radio and podcasts, and putting their unqualified offspring into positions of power throughout the organization to continue the legacy of a failure footprint. Dallas comes immediately to mind.
It's not everywhere of course. A few owners - usually those from successful private businesses who recently bought their way into the NFL - bring their corporate approach with them. They stay removed and exercise authority judiciously as called for by solid governance protocols. They tend to split the GM and head coach responsibilities, avoid nepotistic hires and instead bring in strong experienced GMs and staffs while largely deferring to their expertise. They also tend to win more just as they did in the private sector.
As an example, I've been nothing but impressed with the way the Commanders have quickly gone about their business in 2024 in less than a year under Josh Harris. Strong independent and experienced GM, logical consensus built Draft picks, experienced coaching staff, no talk of "rebuilding," and an owner who is largely seen but not heard.
Very un-Dallas like. You can just feel success and excitement finally emanating out of Ashburn, Virginia as Dallas avoids any discussion of fan attendance in Oxnard.
Ironically, this ownership issue became more real during the Daniel Snyder saga when the NFL reportedly examined taking an ownership vote to strip the franchise from Snyder. The votes were reportedly not close to the number needed to the surprise of many in the media. The reason was frightening precedent.
Many of these long-time owners worried that the precedent of an ownership takeover by a vote without standards or guardrails, could lower the bar on future takings. The NFL by a mere vote of the other owners could take an entire family franchise away (and upend estate plans to pass teams to heirs) in favor of some giant corporate conglomerate offering greater revenues to share with owners. The recent limited green light for private equity investors suggests they were perhaps onto something.
Of course, the media missed the issue entirely. As you note, they were too focused ad nauseam on Jerry, Stephen and Dak - for the same reasons they're too focused on where Taylor Swift's airplane is at.
The Cowboys seem to be a throwback to an era when professional sports teams were the indulgences of the wealthy and too often poorly run by their wayward children and grandchildren who lacked any real acumen at business...or anything else for that matter.
Baseball seems to have fully moved beyond this business model to one that is more corporate, ruthless, and relentlessly focused on profits and losses while destroying inefficiencies. Not everyone likes it, but the results in places like Cleveland, Tampa Bay, Milwaukee, Atlanta and Houston strongly suggest it's a better way to do business.
Not so with the NFL. When you look around the NFL, you still see the old model hanging around with the "born on third base" owner continually meddling in issues they know nothing about, doing ill-advised radio and podcasts, and putting their unqualified offspring into positions of power throughout the organization to continue the legacy of a failure footprint. Dallas comes immediately to mind.
It's not everywhere of course. A few owners - usually those from successful private businesses who recently bought their way into the NFL - bring their corporate approach with them. They stay removed and exercise authority judiciously as called for by solid governance protocols. They tend to split the GM and head coach responsibilities, avoid nepotistic hires and instead bring in strong experienced GMs and staffs while largely deferring to their expertise. They also tend to win more just as they did in the private sector.
As an example, I've been nothing but impressed with the way the Commanders have quickly gone about their business in 2024 in less than a year under Josh Harris. Strong independent and experienced GM, logical consensus built Draft picks, experienced coaching staff, no talk of "rebuilding," and an owner who is largely seen but not heard.
Very un-Dallas like. You can just feel success and excitement finally emanating out of Ashburn, Virginia as Dallas avoids any discussion of fan attendance in Oxnard.
Ironically, this ownership issue became more real during the Daniel Snyder saga when the NFL reportedly examined taking an ownership vote to strip the franchise from Snyder. The votes were reportedly not close to the number needed to the surprise of many in the media. The reason was frightening precedent.
Many of these long-time owners worried that the precedent of an ownership takeover by a vote without standards or guardrails, could lower the bar on future takings. The NFL by a mere vote of the other owners could take an entire family franchise away (and upend estate plans to pass teams to heirs) in favor of some giant corporate conglomerate offering greater revenues to share with owners. The recent limited green light for private equity investors suggests they were perhaps onto something.
Of course, the media missed the issue entirely. As you note, they were too focused ad nauseam on Jerry, Stephen and Dak - for the same reasons they're too focused on where Taylor Swift's airplane is at.
There are forests, and then there are trees...