HOST MIKE LUPICA: Before we start on some of the topics of what's going on in your individual sports, I was wondering, if you were the commissioner of boxing, what would you have done to Tyson after he tried to bite Holyfield's ear off?
NFL Commissioner PAUL TAGLIABUE: What would you have done?
LUPICA: I would have suspended him for two years, and made him come back to me in two years and show me that--that had he had changed in some sort of meaningful way.
TAGLIABUE: I couldn't argue with that.
LUPICA: During the break we were talking about something, the romantic idea about commissioners in sports and it's probably outdated and extremely old-fashioned--is that you--you're the commissioner of everybody. You're the commissioner of the owners; you're the commissioner of the players; you're the commissioner of the fans. But it seems to me that as--as we get to the end of the 20th century, your job really is sort of acting as the Mills Lane of professional football in trying to get Jerry Jones to not bite off, you know, Bob Kraft's ear. I was going to use Al Davis, but from what I know about he and Jones, they actually like to just nibble on each other's ears. But isn't it--aren't you a ref--a boxing referee more than a commissioner?
TAGLIABUE: I don't think so. You know, I think the problem is one that's been forced on us in some ways by the courts, frankly. Go back to the Raiders' move from Oakland to LA; that's where it started with us, in some ways. The courts say the teams are competitors. It's a wacky notion; Pete Rozelle thought it was wacky for 30 years. Teams are partners in the league. They have to work as partners. But once the court set up that type of competition, then you have a relationship which is very tough to manage, and you have a relationship which starts to become destructive with court sanction.
That's the issue we had in Properties; it's the issues with Jerry Jones; it's the same--in some ways, the issue that Bud Selig has with Adidas and--and the Yankees. So it's not something we brought on; it's not something that's good for sport. It's a reality of the legal system which I think we all feel is very negative. The NBA had it in the Bulls case out in Chicago. But, yes, that's transformed not only the relationship among owners, but the relationship of owners to the players and players' associations. It's a much more complex set of relationships today than it was 10, 20 years ago.
LUPICA: But let me interrupt you for a second. Paul has done a fine job with the National Football League, taking it into this modern era, and--and he followed a guy who is the--the model of--of great commissioners in--in--that we will ever see, and that's the late Pete Rozelle. So however the job has changed, it's ridiculous to say that--that all of these sports just make it so difficult to be a great commissioner. Pete Rozelle was an unbelievable, forward-thinking commissioner.
Mr. SELIG: There's no question about that, Michael. But even in the last 10 years, if Pete were still here today, I think he would agree--and certainly Paul would--that things have changed dramatically. I'm not saying it's difficult. Every sport is different. We've had a different relationship with our players' association since 1967 than the other sports have had. That alone has made it difficult for, first, Bowie Kuhn, and then Peter Ueberroth, then Bart Giamatti for five or six months, and then Fay Vincent. I mean, each sport has its differences in a myriad of ways. My only point to you is to say in 1994 that somebody was pulling the strings; Michael, we had 20 to 22 of our franchises that couldn't make it. Nobody was pulling the strings. I don't care what little mythology was--was sort of spun out that Jerry Reinsdorf did that. It was mythology. It was absolutely not true. The fact of the matter was there was as much despair, if not more, in Seattle and in Oakland and in--and in San Diego and a lot of other places. And so what we tried to do, frankly, was to--to accomplish what they already had in the NBA or in the National Football League, which I think makes great sense.
LUPICA: You know, the Rooneys, one of the great families in the history of professional sports in this country, are they going to be in the football business in five years?
Mr. TAGLIABUE: I think it's a tough question to answer. I have to say yes because our collective bargaining agreement, our player costs are escalating in a way, and our structure is such under this agreement, that the Rooneys' ownership is in jeopardy. If they don't get a new stadium in Pittsburgh, as an individual family, despite the fact they've been in the league since 1933, they may not be able to continue in the NFL.
It's exactly what David Checketts says and what Bud Selig has been emphasizing. It's a question of the economic structure. A lot of it is driven by the labor agreements, which have become one-sided under court pressure, and they're destructive of family ownership. I think that's part of the problem that Peter O'Malley's had, based on my conversations with Peter.
You know, the other thing about corporate ownership, I think, has to be recognized. Whether it's Michael Eisner or Dan Rooney or Jerry Jones, if he wants a win, he can be great for the sport. I think that Michael Eisner and Disney have shown that with the Ducks in Anaheim.
Our problem in the NFL with corporate ownership is a different one; it's a conflict of interest. Are they really coming in because they want to own a football team or are they coming in because they want to be in the cable television business or some other business that's subsidiary to our primary set of interests? So we have a policy on that. It's different from the other sports. But corporations can be darn good owners when they want to win.
LUPICA: We got a call from Ohio for Paul Tagliabue. Go ahead.
Caller #2: Yes. Hi. I was wondering, are they ever going to do away with the signing bonuses to get around the--to--to get--to get around the salary cap? And another comment for--for baseball: You don't need to play payers big-time money, because look at the Pirates, you know? Look at Albert Belle type of money--What is it?--$8 million a year or $10 million a year. And a Pirate--he makes--he--he makes more money than the Pirates' organization does, you know, for the--for the year.
LUPICA: First on signing bonuses, because I know when you talk about doing away with signing bonuses, you just wanted to say to the caller, `From his lips to God's ears.'
Mr. TAGLIABUE: Well, the caller understands the problem very well. It's the signing bonuses which become a technique for circumventing the salary cap, and then it breaks down, and people like the Rooneys, teams like the Vikings, can't make it under this system. You have to be a high-revenue team and that creates the economic instability. Can we eliminate them? No. Can we modify the system? We're trying to do that.
LUPICA: We're running out of time. Last question: If you could change one thing in your sport that you believe would make it better for the fan, what would it be?
Mr. TAGLIABUE: The collective bargaining agreement, clearly.