Chicago Sun-Times

Forbes ranks Bears 9th in franchise value; McCaskeys panned by Silver

| 8 Comments | No TrackBacks


The wobbling economy has hit the NFL hard in some markets but the Bears remain strong.

Forbes released its annual list of franchise values on Wednesday and the Bears came in ninth at $1.082 billion. What's better, the club ranks eighth in operating income at $41.6 million. It's no surprise that Dallas was tops on the list at $1.65 billion, a figure bolstered by the sparkling new Dallas Cowboys Stadium. Washington came in second at $1.55 billion and Daniel Snyder was the runaway leader in operating income at $90.3 million, almost $20 million more than the next closest team.

The rest of the top 10 in current value--New England, New York Giants, New York Jets, Houston, Philadelphia, Tampa Bay, Bears and Denver. Nineteen teams were valued at $1 billion or more, but for the first time in a decade there were franchises that lost value. In fact, eight teams dropped in value, led by the Oakland Raiders, who dipped seven percent to $797 million.

The publicly held Green Bay Packers were 18th at $1.019 billion with an operating income of $20.1 million. Because their books are public, Forbes can obtain great detail on the franchise.

Forbes noted that the Bears are the second most expensive stadium to attend a game at according to Team Marketing Report behind only New England. Forbes characterized the Bears' contract with the Chicago Park District to play at Soldier Field as a sweetheart deal.

The Bears have one of the best stadium deals in the NFL. The team pays $5.7 million a season in rent and gets all football-related revenue at Soldier Field. A big plus for the Bears: $35 million a season from premium seating. The Bears also have one of the leanest operations in the NFL, a tradition that started with the team's founder, George Halas. As a result, the team should still make a fortune this season despite not increasing ticket prices.

But one writer believes the Bears should be doing more, much more with their corporate opportunity. Mike Silver of Yahoo! Sports, the former longtime NFL writer for Sports Illustrated, released his annual ranking of the owners, or the bottom half of the owners. The top half comes on Thursday. Silver hammers the McCaskey family, ranking them 30th, ahead of only runaway maverick Al Davis in Oakland and Mike Brown of the Cincinnati Bengals.

Yes, Silver has the McCaskeys below William Clay Ford, who watched Matt Millen run the Detroit Lions into the ground (or underground) last season at 0-16. Silver ranks the McCaskeys below the Bidwills, Ralph Wilson Jr., the Yorks and Tom Benson.

"From a business perspective, no franchise in sports underachieves like this one. The Bears have a storied history, the NFL's second-largest market all to themselves and, for the first time in forever, a saleable franchise quarterback in Jay Cutler. The brand should be booming; sponsorship revenues should be raining down upon Halas Hall like M.J.'s fadeway jumpers in the mid-'90s. The Bears also react cautiously to league-level proposals for increasing revenue. On a positive note, Michael McCaskey, as chair of the NFL's Super Bowl committee, does a thorough and comprehensive job of reciting the rules before bids are considered. I can't imagine where his peers would be without him."

Silver quotes one unnamed owner on the McCaskeys: "They could take that thing and run it to the moon. But they get less for what they've got than any team in our league."

They probably should get some props for plucking Cutler out of Denver. I am curious to read the writeup Thursday on Broncos owner Pat Bowlen, who has been respected for a longtime but watched his rookie coach really drop the ball in losing a franchise quarterback.

No TrackBacks

TrackBack URL:


What a coincidence that an anagram of 'BEAR DOWN' is 'BAD OWNER'


We foot the bill and finally get a QB,
At this rate in 30 more years we'll have a Wide Receiver

So Silver's logic is that the Bears are a poorly run franchise because they don't try to make every buck possible through maximizing corporate sponsorship? Not everything in life is about maximizing revenue Mr. Silver! His reasoning makes me sick! Maybe they are putting their energies on other things? Players, families, staff, charities, who knows?

Bob, I stopped reading anything Silver wrote some time ago. His articles never focused on sports; sports were the sideshow. The articles were about him and how such a rad and clever dude he was. :|

And yeah he always seemed to have a huge man crush on Aaron Rodgers. Made me sick.

bob, you're an idiot. by maximizing corporate sponsorship they would have a lot more money to donate to charity, spend on players, employ more people, do more in the community, etc. i suppose you think they should be run like the government. use your brain.


It also means selling who you are. Goofs like you would easily rename Soldier Field "Morgan Stanley Field" or "Aspercreme Park" or some other filth like that. I want the Bears to do more but Bob is RIGHT. Maybe it's not only about the bottom-line.

Keep your right wing koolaid politics of out this dicussion.


Whoa!! I think we can agree that the McCaskeys could do a heck of a lot more to pull in additional revenue and maintain taste and integrity at the same time. How soon we forget that earlier this year, B.C. (Before Cutler), they were looking pretty bad with the only roster addition of Frank Omiyale. Pat Bowlen's dementia and Josh McDaniels' stupidity do not somehow make Angelo and McCaskey geniuses. Silver can be right about some things.

ok, guy. is that french? no one said anything about renaming soldier field, although it was pretty much destroyed when the mothership landed on it anyways. i bet you were one of the people complaining about the patch on the practice jerseys too. wow, what a disgrace and outrage that was.

Leave a comment

Twitter updates


About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Brad Biggs published on September 2, 2009 7:49 PM.

Vet CB Rod Hood just glad the Bears were still interested in him was the previous entry in this blog.

Projecting the 53-man roster for the Chicago Bears is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.