There are so many articles telling us that Nnamdi Asomugha might leave the Oakland Raiders. I hope not. He is a positive player, both on-and-off the playing field.
It looks like the lockout has brought the NFL to a crossroad. Many players are on alert, realizing that their agreements and contracts with the Oakland Raiders could change.
I admit this is the first time I have paid attention to the dynamics of a lockout. Overall, I believe these types of negotiations and work stoppages are good. The issues are complex.
One thing that concerns some of us is the fact that most of the teams do not have a structure that gives the public an opportunity to invest in the teams. Why not?
What would go wrong if the teams had shareholders? With the economy struggling, wouldn't it seem like a positive option to let either individuals or cities benefit, in some way, from the prosperity of a team by having shareholders?
It would probably be helpful for an economist to discuss the option of re-structuring the ownership of the Oakland Raiders, for example. If some restructuring is done, perhaps the Oakland Raiders would engender more enthusiasm in Oakland and in the United States.
Ownership often engenders pride. It seems to me that if some of the players, for example had a bit of ownership in the team, they just may perform better on the team.
It's a thought. It's an attempt to stimulate thinking to solve a problem. There has to be a way for the Oakland Raiders to stimulate the economy in the Oakland area, and to stop those blackouts.
Go Raiders! Consider some options to raise the quality of the program and to accelerate the process to reclaim the prominence of the Oakland Raiders in the NFL.
I truly believe that the Oakland Raiders have the potential of doing so much better. The team is at a crossroad, and the right decisions must be made to guarantee an even better season in 2011 and beyond.
Like the new article format? Send us feedback!