Romano: Glazers spending less, Bucs suffer
Times columnist John Romano has a column for Wednesday's newspaper with his opinion on the revelation that the Bucs spent less money on player salaries and bonuses than any other NFL team since 2004.
For one reason or another, the Glazers are not spending money the way they once did. And, perhaps not coincidentally, the team is not winning as much, either.
You can read the full column here, and come back to leave your comments here ...



Wasn't Tampa one of the highest priced tickets in the NFL as of late as well; and aside from this past offseason, seen one of the largest year to year increase on ticket prices? I am a die hard Buc fan and will not jump ship, but definitely view the Glazers differently now. If they wonder what happened to the waiting list for Season Ticket holders and are curious as to why they still haven't been able to clear out this year's season tickets, they should search within!!!
Posted by: Rob | July 01, 2009 at 05:20 AM
Its a "revalation" that the Buc's are cheap? Its been all over these blogs for years.
Coming soon in 2013, John Romano's opinion on the revalation that Michael Jackson has died.
Posted by: Matt H | July 01, 2009 at 10:54 AM
When you clean house (which we all knew was coming eventually), you have to expect the fans to feel a bit disenfranchised. A good young team with potential and a few games under their belt will put some fans in the seats eventually. I already have tickets, so I guess people are waiting for a top free agent player to sign before they buy tickets? I am not so sure.
I think Bucs fans are used to cheering for underdogs and love to see us topple teams known as "top franchises".
I doubt this year people canceled all their season tickets due to a loss of their favorite player. I think it is totally a financial decision to cancel season tickets. Oh yeah, that is the EXACT same reason that the Glazers don't spend so much. They are as cheap (or frugal) as the fans in the Tampa area and Tampa never paid the Rays well either, but this isn't New York is it? We have a lowest cost of living and income level so the ticket levels dropped this year when money was tight.
All I know is if you ever DID want to get season tickets, now is your time. I used to live in the Washington DC area and you would have to wait on their waiting list for half your life just so you could take your kids or grandkids to a game. I am much happier with my franchise here. Would you want to cheer for the Redskins with their huge salaries? Me either.
Posted by: Dspkable | July 01, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Matt, didn't say it was a revelation the Bucs were cheap. Said it was a revelation that they were the cheapest in the league over a five-year period.
Posted by: Greg Auman | July 01, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Espn's "In the Herd" reported yesterday that the Patriots, Steelers, Colts, Eagles, and Giants spent the least amount of money "per win" of any other franchise over the past 5 years. Of course the more you win, the less "per win" the price is. The point being, it's too difficult to say how much of an impact team spending has on the win/loss record. Last week DT Albert Haynesworth commented that Tampa offered him more money than the Redskins (not including the cheaper taxes in Florida). If he signed with the Bucs would that make this a non-story ($100 million commitment)? Shrewd decision making, and not spending for the sake of spending, is the hallmark of success in the NFL today. A better question would be "how do you fell about the way the Bucs are spending money on the team? It's not how much you pay, it's value for what you buy. I don't think there are too many instances in which the Bucs should have spent money and the chose not to in recent times? However, the the current "Ruud situation" is confounding? Time will tell.
Posted by: Vincent | July 01, 2009 at 03:22 PM
Vincent, I agree with you.
I am glad Fat Albert wanted the bling of DC, instead of Tampa Bay.
I also think the "Ruud" situation should be a done deal, now.
Posted by: Duffiedawg | July 01, 2009 at 03:57 PM
I have found in life that "greedy" is not a very solid long term strategy.
Posted by: Itch | July 01, 2009 at 04:36 PM
$40 million under the cap last year. We had the opportunity to get Jared Allen and a couple of other marquee players on defense with that money. The difference would have been a 11-5/12-4 record; division title and possibly home-field throughout. Don't kid yourselves, a couple of players would have made the world of difference to us last year. Instead of McCoy (who should have been a special teamer only,) we could have had a replacement/backup for an injured Brooks, but we didn't and we suffered greatly in the end. It is what it is and the Glazers are obviously cheating on us for their bride across the ocean.
Posted by: Kurt | July 02, 2009 at 09:33 AM
Not every player goes for the money. Allen signed pretty quickly with the Vikings. The Bucs never had a chance. I agree though, the futbal team isn't helping things here in Tampa. I expect Ruud to be signed before training camp. I don't think Ruud helped himself this offseason, but still deserves a contract before next training camp. The silence of his situation hopefully means they are talking contract.
Posted by: DR | July 02, 2009 at 11:11 PM
Dallas Retard or in this case Spin-DR, Gee I thought you had all the inside connections(see Lynch, Simeon) on all these behind closed door contract talks and inner organization meetings?
Posted by: OAR | July 06, 2009 at 09:56 AM
To those of you who haven't jumped ship (in relation to season tickets), you all are getting hosed.
Posted by: dobie315 | July 07, 2009 at 02:03 PM