01:00 AM EST on Sunday, March 5, 2006

In his offices at publicly funded Paul Brown Stadium, Bengals owner Mike Brown complains he can't generate enough revenue in small-market Cincinnati to compete with teams that really rake it in, like the Patriots do in bucolic Foxboro.

Over in Buffalo, Bills owner Ralph Wilson has Brown's back. They can't make enough money from things like luxury suites in Ralph Wilson Stadium. Why can't teams like the Patriots kick back some of the dough they make in their markets?

Didn't the Patriots get millions when they sold the naming rights to Gillette Stadium? Can't they help out a small-market brother and share some of that money that has been unshared for 13 years?

The ever-rising salary cap cuts hard into the profits of the small-market teams that generate less local revenue than teams like the Patriots, Redskins or Cowboys. Let's get that unshared money shared so that everybody carries the same burden in meeting salary costs.

To which a high-revenue team like the Patriots says, "You're joking, right? We took over a team that was 28th out of 28 in revenues and worked our market until we got in the top-quarter.

Then when the team had some success, we worked three times as hard to build a stadium on our nickel -- not the public's.

Then we sold the daylights out of the place -- parking lots, entrances, ramps -- everything sponsored so that we could meet the mortgage and pocket some dough for the effort. And now you want us to share that money and you can't even get a name put on your stadium?"

This fissure between teams that make big money in their own markets (money they don't have to share) and the ones that do not is the root of the NFL's dizzying problems right now.

While all 32 owners are voting against the players getting the 60 percent of total football revenue in salary each year (the owners are offering 56.2 percent), not all of them have the same motivation for being against it.

For a team like the Pats, not giving more is based on principle. The cap's going to go up $20 million per team next season if they give the players 56.2 percent. Where do they get off asking for more?

For a team like the Bengals or Arizona Cardinals, the 56.2 percent (and accompanying $105-million cap number) represents a big chunk of their yearly revenue. The Pats take in almost $70 million more each year than the bottom-tier teams. They don't hurt like the Cardinals hurt when it comes time to meet payroll. The Cardinals don't hurt like the Patriots hurt when it comes time to pay the mortgage on their stadium.

Bill Polian, president of the Indianapolis Colts (a lower-revenue team) told USA Today in the summer of 2004, "We can't keep as many people as some teams can. The issue is cash. If you have cash that your stadium is generating every year, you can commit that to bonuses to retain or get players in the free agent market."

Polian said the above two months after the Colts gave Peyton Manning a $99.2-million deal with a $34-million signing bonus. Six months after saying that, Polian and the Colts gave Marvin Harrison a seven-year, $67-million deal with $23 million in guaranteed money. And last month, they signed Reggie Wayne to a six-year extension worth $40 million and $13.5 million in signing bonuses.

That's $70 million in signing bonuses to three players in less than two years. And they can't compete? That kind of disingenuousness doesn't help the cause of those teams one bit.

"I believe in revenue sharing and helping those teams who work hard in their markets," Robert Kraft told The Journal last spring. "There is discussion about whether higher-revenue teams should be taxed and that that money should be shared with lower-revenue teams.

"I don't believe that will fly. We have a lot of debt. We built a stadium on our own. I didn't take that risk to take a hunk off the top and give it to people who aren't working their markets hard.

"Every team has the ability to field a competitive team. Green Bay and Kansas City get the same revenue pool as the Patriots. Television represents 70 percent of all revenue. (Gate receipts) are shared.

"If people want to get their gates up, they need to work their market hard. In 1994, we were 28th out of 28 teams in total revenue. In four years we were in the first quartile. Anyone privileged to have an NFL team can have the same thing.

"There's billions in TV money distributed between them and some (franchises) sit back and don't work their market hard. I don't care about making them more profitable. I want them to field competitive teams."

Unfortunately for the NFL, the blanket has been pulled back on the league during this labor imbroglio. The things revealed aren't pretty.

The players are uninformed or uninterested in what their union heads are warring over. The union heads -- with NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw at the forefront -- are fighting with the owners over whether the players can have 60 percent of $6 billion because 56.2 percent just won't do.

The low-revenue owners are looking like a collection of lazy whiners in pinstriped suits and the high revenue owners -- the fattest of the fat cats -- actually come out looking OK in all this. They're just trying to do business as they were told business could be done. They put in the elbow grease to create these revenue streams where they were never seen. Instead of the other owners getting after it themselves, they want a handout.

They'll be back at it today, trying to hammer out a deal before it's too late. Meanwhile, it's already too late for some of these parties to save face.

tcurran@projo.com / (401) 277-7340

Team revenues

Here is how NFL teams ranked in revenue in 2004, the most recent year for which numbers are available. Figures are in millions:

1. Washington Redskins 287

2. New England Patriots 236

3. Dallas Cowboys 231

4. Philadelphia Eagles 216

5. Houston Texans 215

6. Cleveland Browns 203

7. Denver Broncos 202

8. Carolina Panthers 195

9. Tampa Bay Buccaneers 195

10. Chicago Bears 193

11. Baltimore Ravens 192

12. Miami Dolphins 190

13. Green Bay Packers 189

14. Tennessee Titans 186

15. Detroit Lions 186

16. Seattle Seahawks 183

17. Pittsburgh Steelers 182

18. Kansas City Chiefs 181

19. St. Louis Rams 176

20. New York Giants 175

21. New Orleans Saints 175

22. Buffalo Bills 173

23. New York Jets 172

24. Cincinnati Bengals 171

25. San Francisco 49ers 171

26. Jacksonville Jaguars 169

27. Oakland Raiders 169

28. Atlanta Falcons 168

29. Indianapolis Colts 166

30. San Diego Chargers 165

31. Minnesota Vikings 164

32. Arizona Cardinals 153

-- SOURCE: Forbes Magazine