ShareThis Page

Donald Trump, NFL have long, not-so-friendly history

| Monday, Sept. 25, 2017, 3:18 p.m.
Donald Trump, left, and Stephen Ross in 1985 announce they have reached agreement to merge the USFL's Houston Gamblers and New Jersey Generals.
Donald Trump, left, and Stephen Ross in 1985 announce they have reached agreement to merge the USFL's Houston Gamblers and New Jersey Generals.

Donald Trump found himself across the field from the NFL long before he became U.S. president and took on the league Friday night from a podium in Alabama and later via Twitter.

He first faced off with the professional football giant in the 1980s, when he owned the New Jersey Generals of the then-fledgling and soon-to-be defunct United States Football League.

The Washington Post chronicled "Trump's long, stormy and unrequited romance with the NFL" over the weekend.

From the Post article:

In 1983, when the going rate for an NFL team was about $80 million, Trump spent $6 million to buy the New Jersey Generals of the rival U.S. Football League, which played its seasons in the spring.

In interviews after the real estate magnate announced his acquisition at a news conference in the atrium of Trump Tower, Trump said he decided to buy into the rival league because he wanted a challenge.

"I could've bought an NFL team if I wanted to. . . . But I'd rather create something from scratch," Trump said. "I feel sorry for the poor guy who is going to buy the Dallas Cowboys. It's a no-win situation for him, because if he wins, well, so what, they've won through the years, and if he loses . . . he'll be known to the world as a loser."

In 1984, Trump told the New York Times that he didn't buy the Cowboys — which are now the NFL's most-valuable sports franchise, worth an estimated $4.8 billion , according to — or another NFL team because he wanted to create something new.

Trump soon pushed to abandon the USFL strategy to play football in the spring and avoid confrontations with the NFL, wanting instead to "go head-to-head with the bigger league," according to

The Fortune article noted:

"Rather than organically grow a new league, (Trump) hoped to force an immediate merger with the NFL, which would provide huge returns for surviving USFL team owners. That goal hinged in part on an antitrust lawsuit alleging the NFL was an unlawful monopoly.

But things didn't go Trump's way. While the USFL technically won the antitrust case, the jury concluded mismanagement was mostly at fault for its problems. There was no merger and no buyouts. By 1986, the USFL was finished."

Former NFL senior executive and longtime spokesman Joe Browne provided an insider's look for Sports Illustrated about the $1.7 billion lawsuit Trump and the USFL filed against the league.

"When the foreperson read the jury's findings of $1 in damages, Donald raced out of the building faster than Herschel Walker," Browne wrote.

Not all USFL owners supported Trump — or his demeanor. That included John Bassett, the late owner of the Tampa Bay Bandits, wrote Trump that he would "have no regrets whatsoever punching you right in the mouth the next time an instance occurs where you personally scorn me, or anyone else, who does not happen to salute and dance to your tune."

Three years ago, Trump unsuccessfully bid to buy the Buffalo Bills.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me