Roughly $4 billion

[Whatever]

The world will never have a shortage of poor people who think they know how to better manage the finances of the wealthy.

If you're pointing at franchise valuation, the Bengals were ranked 32nd by Forbes last year. The Jags are 31st. Jaguars owner Shad Khan also owns an English Premier League soccer team and has literally wasted hundreds of millions on All Elite Wrestling so his son can live out his dreams of being a fantasy booker.

Everything is relative. To us, the Brown family could just wipe their asses with our yearly salary. However, when it comes to talent contacts, the club competes with entities that can buy and sell them multiple times over. The aforementioned Shad Khan is worth $13.4 billion. Robert Kraft is worth $11.7 billion. Jerry Jones is worth $16+ billion. That $4 billion doesn't sound so impressive now, does it?

[Hammerstripes]

(02-17-2025, 04:02 PM)TJHoushmandzadeh Wrote: If you are worth $4bn it’s a choice to not have cash to hand.

They’d have access to all the cash necessary. There might be a cost involved but it is their choice to not incur that cost.

Lol, no it's not.  Not when it's your only business.

It's no different that having a house that you bought in the 80s for 40k and now it's worth $1 million.  That doesn't mean you'll have a ton of cash just laying around.

[Hammerstripes]

(02-17-2025, 05:32 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: They actually owned only 10% when the team was created, they just had the reins of the team. They've spent most of that 57 years buying up ownership over, including picking up 10% in 2003 and 30% in 2011 so now they're one of only three people to have ownership in the team (One guy owns I think only like 3-5%, and another owns just 1 share of the 586 total.) To throw that into context it means as recently as when they drafted Palmer that they only actually owned ~55% of the team and ~65% when they drafted Dalton.


I'm absolutely sure they have $100m saved between them, but keep in mind that just Burrow, Orlando, Chase, and Hendrickson along with signing just your 1st round picks in a 3 year span are ~$360m guaranteed at signing of cash that needs to go into escrow and I am not sure if practical guarantees need to also go in or if its just guaranteed at signing. If it's practical as well, then that number will be much higher.

While the Browns aren't hurting financially, and they can afford to spend more overall, they do probably have a limit of how much guaranteed money in a time span they can dole out.


The NFL imposes a debt limit on owners. You can only leverage the worth of your team so much to get cash, and once you do that, you obviously can't do it again until you pay off that debt, so it's not an unlimited solution.

Pretty sure the Raiders ran into this a few years ago when they traded Mack because they couldn't afford to put the money in escrow for a guaranteed contract.

[Essex Johnson]

(02-16-2025, 03:18 PM)Clark W Griswold Wrote: Hope this continues to put pressure on the family…can’t really plead poor any more. They have plenty of money to get all of the deals done and improve through FA…

https://www.si.com/nfl/bengals/allbengals-insiders-plus/look-bengals-ownership-family-worth-nearly-4-billion-as-of-latest-forbes-400-list-01jm29rxmktg

Net worth has little to do with a nfl team, the nfl does not base cap space on a owners net worth

[reuben.ahmed]

4 billion is nothing nowadays, 5 billion is something, that is what they are shooting for. it should be all of our goals in this economy.

[*rfaulk34*]

(02-16-2025, 04:14 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: Overall value and money on hand are two separate ballparks.

Consider a start up company that has a boom and is valued at 200k, but the person running it has no cash on hand because everything is being funneled into the business. The business may be worth that much, but the person is only liquid for maybe 10 to 15k and one bump in the road buckles the business.

The Brown family and the Bengals are far from poor and need to spend more, but think your conclusion was a tad simplistic.

Imagine the Browns have owned and been running the team since the late '60s, always being cheap and hoarding money. Imagine during that time that the NFL has a policy for revenue sharing, so that you get free money every year. Then imagine that lately, the NFL is giving you hundreds of millions of dollars, every year. 

People need to drop this 'cash poor' BS. They've been making money hand over fist for decades. They're not some startup company.

[*rfaulk34*]

(02-18-2025, 12:26 PM)Whatever Wrote: The world will never have a shortage of poor people who think they know how to better manage the finances of the wealthy.

If you're pointing at franchise valuation, the Bengals were ranked 32nd by Forbes last year.  The Jags are 31st.  Jaguars owner Shad Khan also owns an English Premier League soccer team and has literally wasted hundreds of millions on All Elite Wrestling so his son can live out his dreams of being a fantasy booker.  

Everything is relative.  To us, the Brown family could just wipe their asses with our yearly salary.  However, when it comes to talent contacts, the club competes with entities that can buy and sell them multiple times over.  The aforementioned Shad Khan is worth $13.4 billion.  Robert Kraft is worth $11.7 billion.  Jerry Jones is worth $16+ billion.  That $4 billion doesn't sound so impressive now, does it?

Who gives a **** how it sounds comparatively? The NFL has a salary cap. Other, wealthier owners can't outspend the less wealthy like the Dodgers do the Reds. The Bengals have more than enough money to be as competitive as ANY NFL franchise. They just have to decide if they're willing to manipulate the cap the way other teams do and be creative to field a championship roster. They don't lack the funds, they lack the want.

I don't get why anyone is bothering to debate this because there is no question that the Bengals can do whatever they choose to do, money not being a limiting factor. 

[Clark W Griswold]

(Yesterday, 02:26 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Who gives a **** how it sounds comparatively? The NFL has a salary cap. Other, wealthier owners can't outspend the less wealthy like the Dodgers do the Reds. The Bengals have more than enough money to be as competitive as ANY NFL franchise. They just have to decide if they're willing to manipulate the cap the way other teams do and be creative to field a championship roster. They don't lack the funds, they lack the want.

I don't get why anyone is bothering to debate this because there is no question that the Bengals can do whatever they choose to do, money not being a limiting factor. 

Thank you as this was the reason I first posted this. They have plenty of $ to sign who this team needs and keep them competitive.
They are not as rich as other NFL owners but they are rich enough and the salary cap evens a lot of that out.

This ownership group should have plenty of cash because they appear to spend far less than most other billionaires. There are no yachts/multiple huge homes around the world/$1 million cars in the garage (that we know of). They are a frugal family so now they need to invest that money back into the business that has given them everything they have. No excuse not to.

[J24]

Lets say the Bengals did have a limited budget. Why are they so against analytics? Why are the so against trading players for picks? Why are they so against signing players early? Why don't they do a better job of accumulating comp picks? Why don't they sign free agents that were cut by other teams?

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(Yesterday, 01:49 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Imagine the Browns have owned and been running the team since the late '60s, always being cheap and hoarding money. Imagine during that time that the NFL has a policy for revenue sharing, so that you get free money every year. Then imagine that lately, the NFL is giving you hundreds of millions of dollars, every year. 

People need to drop this 'cash poor' BS. They've been making money hand over fist for decades. They're not some startup company.

The first NFL broadcast deal that created the revenue sharing was for $4.65m/yr (total, not per team). The reason why the money-into-escrow rule was ever made? The PLAYERS demanded it to make sure the owners could fulfill the monetary demands of the contracts they offered because the NFL was not making money hand-over-fist like it does now. Not to mention that in the 90s the Brown family only owned 20% of the Bengals, up from the 10% they owned in the 60s.

All their money for the first 50 years was put towards buying the rest of the team which they finished in 2011.

So they've only been making money "hand-over-fist" for about 13 years. I put it in quotations because Forbes also projected the Bengals operating income (which is BEFORE taxes) for 2024 at $76m (and in 2011 NFL revenue was less than 1/2 of 2024). I don't know how much they pay in taxes, but I do know the government loves to get their cut.

Don't get me wrong the Browns/Blackburns are still probably making a couple ten million per year now and do need to spend more and hire a freaking non-embarassing professional scouting department, but this idea that the NFL has always been just printing hundreds of millions/billions of dollars and they have been Scrooge McDucking it all since the 1960s is silly.

Honestly they probably just need to sell the team to someone who can put up the liquid cash needed to run an NFL team these days, but I can't see them ever doing that.


- - - - - -

And now my day has been ruined because I had to defend the Browns/Blackburns. Thanks. Lol

[Whatever]

(Yesterday, 02:26 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Who gives a **** how it sounds comparatively? The NFL has a salary cap. Other, wealthier owners can't outspend the less wealthy like the Dodgers do the Reds. The Bengals have more than enough money to be as competitive as ANY NFL franchise. They just have to decide if they're willing to manipulate the cap the way other teams do and be creative to field a championship roster. They don't lack the funds, they lack the want.

I don't get why anyone is bothering to debate this because there is no question that the Bengals can do whatever they choose to do, money not being a limiting factor. 

But the wealthy owners CAN outspend the poorer ones.  That's the thing you don't get.

Contracts for top talent are now more about guaranteed money than average annual value.  How many times do you hear with the Bengals that contract issues revolve around guaranteed money?  All money guaranteed within a contract has to be put into escrow per the current CBA.  Teams can use strategies to alleviate the salary cap hit, like for example, they can use void years to push out a portion of the signing bonus hit.  However, you still have to come up with that cash up front for the signing bonus, and the wealthier teams will always have more liquid cash on hand to dish out for insane bonuses that the Bengals struggle to match.  The Bengals' issue is not having cap space.  It's the fact that strategies like void years allow teams with more liquid cash to offer larger guaranteed money numbers and stay within the cap.  

[*rfaulk34*]

(Yesterday, 08:24 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: The first NFL broadcast deal that created the revenue sharing was for $4.65m/yr (total, not per team). The reason why the money-into-escrow rule was ever made? The PLAYERS demanded it to make sure the owners could fulfill the monetary demands of the contracts they offered because the NFL was not making money hand-over-fist like it does now. Not to mention that in the 90s the Brown family only owned 20% of the Bengals, up from the 10% they owned in the 60s.

All their money for the first 50 years was put towards buying the rest of the team which they finished in 2011.

So they've only been making money "hand-over-fist" for about 13 years. I put it in quotations because Forbes also projected the Bengals operating income (which is BEFORE taxes) for 2024 at $76m (and in 2011 NFL revenue was less than 1/2 of 2024). I don't know how much they pay in taxes, but I do know the government loves to get their cut.

Don't get me wrong the Browns/Blackburns are still probably making a couple ten million per year now and do need to spend more and hire a freaking non-embarassing professional scouting department, but this idea that the NFL has always been just printing hundreds of millions/billions of dollars and they have been Scrooge McDucking it all since the 1960s is silly.

Honestly they probably just need to sell the team to someone who can put up the liquid cash needed to run an NFL team these days, but I can't see them ever doing that.


- - - - - -

And now my day has been ruined because I had to defend the Browns/Blackburns. Thanks. Lol

Well, i didn't twist your arm there.  

I'm not saying they've made similar money throught the years. They definitely have made money, comparable to income, over the years because they've always been seen as a cheap franchise. Even when they were always making a small amount, that amount addds up over the years and there's no indication that they've used that on expensive personal toys. Hell, they didn't even use it for new, big towels, jock straps, food, personal player services or even gatorade. 

I did get a chuckle out of "only" when you said the last 13 years. If i had been as fortunate as the Browns to have the ability to save like them for only the last 13 years, i'd be comfortably retired right now. I'm talking about the percentage of money coming in vs going out. 

I posted the amount of guarantees for each team in the upcoming year. If an NFL owner can't escrow between 100 and 200M dollars, they shouldn't be in the NFL business. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(Today, 01:56 AM)Whatever Wrote: But the wealthy owners CAN outspend the poorer ones.  That's the thing you don't get.

Contracts for top talent are now more about guaranteed money than average annual value.  How many times do you hear with the Bengals that contract issues revolve around guaranteed money?  All money guaranteed within a contract has to be put into escrow per the current CBA.  Teams can use strategies to alleviate the salary cap hit, like for example, they can use void years to push out a portion of the signing bonus hit.  However, you still have to come up with that cash up front for the signing bonus, and the wealthier teams will always have more liquid cash on hand to dish out for insane bonuses that the Bengals struggle to match.  The Bengals' issue is not having cap space.  It's the fact that strategies like void years allow teams with more liquid cash to offer larger guaranteed money numbers and stay within the cap.  

**** me running with this damn laptop! I had a gigantic post all typed out and i was down to my last line or two and i fat palmed something and it all disappeared...mfsob. Here's the end of the post.

Look at it this way. The Bengals are valued at roughly $4B. Liquid assets should be about 2-10% of value, depending on individual wants and needs. The Bengals are in a business that requires them to put large sums of money in escrow for guarantees, just like every other NFL franchise. If their liquid is only 5% of that 4B, that means they have 200,000,000 cash available to put in escrow, which would be about 37M more than the Eagles who have the largest amount of money in guarantees right now. 

The average NFL operating expense for an NFL franchise in 2023 was 541M. In 2023 the Bengals received 549M in revenue sharing. That means the NFL paid for 100% of the Bengals operating expenses for the 2023 season. The NFL has paid for at least a portion of the Bengals expenditures for a loooong while now. 

Anyone trying to say the Bengals simply can't pay whatever other teams pay, are "cash poor" or whatever hobspin someone wants to put on it, is either trolling or not willing to look at or believe the large sums of money the team has made for many years and how they've had heaps of money dropped on them for the last 10+ years. 

INb4 someone yells, "they barely broke even!!!!". Don't forget they get to keep 100% of ticket sales, concessions and corporate sponsorships.

[TecmoBengals]

(4 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: Anyone trying to say the Bengals simply can't pay whatever other teams pay, are "cash poor" or whatever hobspin someone wants to put on it, is either trolling or not willing to look at or believe the large sums of money the team has made for many years and how they've had heaps of money dropped on them for the last 10+ years. 

or they are named Geoff Hobson.

[*rfaulk34*]

(4 hours ago)TecmoBengals Wrote: or they are named Geoff Hobson.

I threw the hobspin reference in there! 

[TecmoBengals]

(4 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: I threw the hobspin reference in there! 

Oops, overlooked it!

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(5 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: I posted the amount of guarantees for each team in the upcoming year. If an NFL owner can't escrow between 100 and 200M dollars, they shouldn't be in the NFL business. 

(4 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: If their liquid is only 5% of that 4B, that means they have 200,000,000 cash available to put in escrow, which would be about 37M more than the Eagles who have the largest amount of money in guarantees right now.

And Joe Burrow and Orlando Brown alone got $250m guaranteed in 2023, and Chase and Hendrickson are about to get another ~$170m guaranteed this offseason. That's $420m in 3 years not counting anyone else that has been drafted or signed (our 3 1st round picks over the 3 years should be another ~$40m).

Even if the escrow is only guaranteed at signing money and not total guaranteed (I can't actually find out which it is) that's still ~$330m for the 4 (with the 3 1st round draft picks still being another $40m). That's not even getting into any OL or DL improvements we need to make.

- - - - - - -

I already said they probably need to get out of the NFL. The guaranteed money is increasing faster and there's no point in having an NFL team if you can't hang with the other bigger billionaires. Also they ARE cheap, there's no reason we can't hire 8 more scouts to have an actual NFL caliber scouting department, or hire a GM.. that would be what, $3m total?

[*rfaulk34*]

(2 hours ago)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: And Joe Burrow and Orlando Brown alone got $250m guaranteed in 2023, and Chase and Hendrickson are about to get another ~$170m guaranteed this offseason. That's $420m in 3 years not counting anyone else that has been drafted or signed (our 3 1st round picks over the 3 years should be another ~$40m).

Even if the escrow is only guaranteed at signing money and not total guaranteed (I can't actually find out which it is) that's still ~$330m for the 4 (with the 3 1st round draft picks still being another $40m). That's not even getting into any OL or DL improvements we need to make.

- - - - - - -

I already said they probably need to get out of the NFL. The guaranteed money is increasing faster and there's no point in having an NFL team if you can't hang with the other bigger billionaires. Also they ARE cheap, there's no reason we can't hire 8 more scouts to have an actual NFL caliber scouting department, or hire a GM.. that would be what, $3m total?

They only have to escrow the portion that is due that year. 

https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/cincinnati-bengals
https://overthecap.com/player/joe-burrow/8741

(Yesterday, 03:37 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: They also use a lot of void years and pay big guarantees.

2025 guarantees: teams w/big QB contract (and i'm not counting to the penny) and playoff hopes.


Eagles - approx. 163M
Miami - approx. 143M
Jags - approx. 143M
Chiefs - approx. 118M
Lions - approx. 113M
Bills - approx. 106M
LAC - approx. 94M
Ravens - approx. 81M
49ers - approx. 70M
Cards - approx. 68M
Bengals - approx. 64M
Rams - approx. 34M
Pack - approx. 27M

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(57 minutes ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: They only have to escrow the portion that is due that year. 

You have that backwards. They need to escrow the guarantee the parts that AREN'T due that year, because the whole point of it all was to protect the guaranteed money to make sure it's there for the player in the future.

The parts due this year are getting paid out, so they're the only part that isn't escrowed since you're not going to escrow something like a $40m signing bonus just to then un-escrow it 6 days later to pay it out or immediately un-escrow a roster bonus that is normally paid out March or June 1st.

[*rfaulk34*]

(39 minutes ago)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: You have that backwards. They need to escrow the guarantee the parts that AREN'T due that year, because the whole point of it all was to protect the guaranteed money to make sure it's there for the player in the future.

The parts due this year are getting paid out, so they're the only part that isn't escrowed since you're not going to escrow something like a $40m signing bonus just to then un-escrow it 6 days later to pay it out or immediately un-escrow a roster bonus that is normally paid out March or June 1st.

Ok, i was looking at it wrong. I was thinking the guarantee is part of the salary that is figured year by year. 

So it's the full amount, beyond the first year (signing bonus + salary) that has to be put aside. 

Burrow:
Total guaranteed $219M
2023 salary $1M + $40M signing bonus = $41M
Escrow $178M
**it's at this point i'm starting to get a real headache**

Orlando Brown:
Total guaranteed $31.1M
2023 salary $1.5M + $31.1M signing bonus
Escrow 0

Trey will prob be similar to OBj

If Chase gets something similar to Jefferson it should look something like this: (these are jefferson's numbers. Chase will be higher but structure about the same)
Total guaranteed $110M
2025 salary $1.5M + $37M signing bonus = $47.5M
Escrow $62.5M

Total for those 4 players, approx $241M