Changes

Unlike Olympic sports and the [[Ultimate Fighting Championship]], the NFL administers its substance abuse program independently of the [[United States Anti-Doping Agency]] (USADA).  So, the quality and rigor of the NFL's drug testing is not independently controlled.  However, since December 2009, USADA has a "Supplement Safety Now" program, in partnership with the NFL, [[Major League Baseball]], the [[National Basketball Association]] (NBA), the [[National Hockey League]], the U.S. Olympic Committee and other national sports and health organizations. The program seeks to end dangerous and unscrupulous practices of "rogue" manufacturers within the nutritional supplement industry. The effort works to eliminate the practice of selling supplement products containing [[steroid]]s and other drugs which are labeled as "safe and legal" dietary supplements.

Unlike Olympic sports and the [[Ultimate Fighting Championship]], the NFL administers its substance abuse program independently of the [[United States Anti-Doping Agency]] (USADA).  So, the quality and rigor of the NFL's drug testing is not independently controlled.  However, since December 2009, USADA has a "Supplement Safety Now" program, in partnership with the NFL, [[Major League Baseball]], the [[National Basketball Association]] (NBA), the [[National Hockey League]], the U.S. Olympic Committee and other national sports and health organizations. The program seeks to end dangerous and unscrupulous practices of "rogue" manufacturers within the nutritional supplement industry. The effort works to eliminate the practice of selling supplement products containing [[steroid]]s and other drugs which are labeled as "safe and legal" dietary supplements.

== Harmful effects on cities and taxpayers ==

== Questionable Economic Impact ==

There are "Five Reasons Losing an NFL Football Team is Good for a City,"<ref>http://sandiegofreepress.org/2015/02/five-reasons-losing-an-nfl-football-team-is-good-for-a-city/</ref> and the first reason is that the NFL bilks taxpayers of billions of dollars.  Even though NFL owners are making billions of dollars for themselves, they get taxpayers to foot much of the costs for their stadiums.

There are "Five Reasons Losing an NFL Football Team is Good for a City,"<ref>http://sandiegofreepress.org/2015/02/five-reasons-losing-an-nfl-football-team-is-good-for-a-city/</ref> and the first reason is that the NFL bilks taxpayers of billions of dollars.  Even though NFL owners are making billions of dollars for themselves, they get taxpayers to foot much of the costs for their stadiums.

*Fewer traffic jams

*Fewer traffic jams

On December 17, 2015, the [[NFL]] demanded that the State of Missouri reduce the obligation by the NFL for a new $1.1 billion stadium in [[St. Louis]] to less than 20% of the cost, with taxpayers of the struggling city then bearing the bulk of the enormous cost.  St. Louis refused, and ultimately the Rams relocated (back) to Los Angeles, from which they initially came.

On December 17, 2015, the [[NFL]] demanded that the State of Missouri reduce the obligation by the NFL for a new $1.1 billion stadium in [[St. Louis]] to less than 20% of the cost, with taxpayers of the struggling city then bearing the bulk of the enormous cost.  St. Louis refused, and ultimately the Rams relocated (back) to Los Angeles, from which they initially came.  Similarly, in April 2024 the citizens of Jackson County, Missouri, refused to extend a 3/8th cent sales tax to renovate the stadium for the [[Kansas City Chiefs]] (the measure would also have built a new stadium for [[MLB]]'s [[Kansas City Royals]]; notably, the measure was opposed by County Executive Frank White, a former Royals player and inductee into the team's Hall of Fame).

== Poor economic impact of Super Bowl ==

== Poor economic impact of Super Bowl ==