First — if I somehow gave the impression that I was minimizing the importance of the ‘58 Championship, then that’s on me for being inadequate in my language. All of my points on the growth in viewership and ad income (hell, even the creation of a second viable league could be said to have been the result of the impact of that game on public consciousness) stem from that date as an assumed beginning. A fact that I do not in any way dispute.

And I still read your position as being more anti-gambling than on point.

Perhaps the terminology of Maher’s point is the issue here. He used the term socialism. The league calls it revenue sharing. When a group of participants in an economic activity choose to pool their resources (licensing revenues) together toward a collective goal (making more money than God) and equally share the benefits and costs, that can accurately be described using the word “socialism” correctly (small-s socialism, as opposed to capital-s Socialism as a political philosophy). Such things also go by names such as Credit Unions, Food Co-Ops and growers’ cooperatives in other non-football contexts.

The big revenues come from an increased interest in the game. You attribute it to gambling (which, again, seems like a personal agenda based on your emphasis on it in this thread — no issue with that, we merely disagree). I don’t dispute that gambling on sports is huge, and that it has a tremendous negative aspect to it. I have a hard time connecting that gambling has an influence on the many non-gamblers who love the game — and who lay out frightfully-large amounts of coin for clothing items with League-licensed logos. I mean, if I see a guy wearing an entire 49ers ensemble — logo pants, logo shoes, logo hats in various colors and designs, a team jersey, a team logo jacket and sweater, team ring, team watch, team socks, team logo undergarments, and team logo earrings, my first thought isn’t going to be “gee, that guy must be a gambler or a bookie” — it’s going to be “gee, that dude just paid Goodell’s salary for the next year”.

Granted, Maher has all the subtlety of a neon-glazed, nuclear-glow-green, 1000-ft-tall flying mallet, and I wouldn’t blame anybody for reacting against his statements, just on GP.

(And I’m hoping my tone is nothing more than spirited — I’m enjoying the conversation….)