Are Public Sports Facilities Worth It? Part Two

I'm not sure if anyone can accurately calculate the overall financial impact of having professional sports teams in a community, as the whole thing is quite complicated, but if we lay out some of the benefits versus the negatives, I think we can make a pretty fair assumption. Teams bring people into communities* for games and other events associated with them, and those people spend money. They buy tickets, pop, beer, hotdogs, programs, and souvenirs at the facilities, plus they may pay to park, if they arrived by car, or they may stay at hotels where they pay for rooms, breakfasts, lunches and dinners, and then they're apt to go shopping, take tours, visit the various sites in the area, etc. Airports and airlines benefit, since teams, as well as press people who cover the visiting teams, fly in and out, and of course, the same with the officials for the games, umpires and referees (these people all stay at hotels, too). All of this is money coming into the community from outside. Then sports teams provide entertainment for the locals, who spend money in their own community on many of the things I've mentioned above, although, naturally, they don't have to book hotel rooms or travel all that far to attend games, but that keeps the money in the community, and it helps public transportation for those who use it to get to games.** I'm not sure what the general criteria is today, but when I was much younger, a team's drawing area was generally seen as a 150 mile radius of its home, although obviously that definition is not always possible due to geography. Having sports teams also helps local promoters "sell" the community to outsiders as a good place to visit, or to live in, if relocation is under consideration.

Communities take in money from rent on the facilities,*** and they often collect parking fees from city owned lots or garages. Then there are employees, not only at the facilities, like ticket takers, ushers, and security personnel, but at all of the supporting businesses, like the suppliers of hotdogs, popcorn and beer, and even at the places where the tickets and programs are printed. Further still, there are the outside businesses that benefit, like hotels, restaurants, shops, and bars. The money generated by all of this brings in tax revenue from sales taxes, bed taxes (common for hotels), and beverage taxes, plus income taxes, if the community has such. In the latter case, the community benefits from a local income tax by also getting the tax on the large salaries of the players and owners  Teams that consistently draw well can help to provide communities with revenues to maintain, or perhaps even expand or improve, services.  

Lastly, while I think salaries and the whole pro-sports program has gotten out of hand, I've also said here in previous articles that I realize we all need a certain amount of entertainment in our lives, which is often supplied by professional sports. Trust me, I get it.

Now, what about the other side? Well naturally it all depends upon how teams draw and help contribute to all of those things I mentioned above (and probably some I forgot to include). If a team struggles at the gate, the more seasons they struggle, the greater the decline in the benefits they provide, especially since the expenses incurred tend to stay about the same; that is, the facilities have to be maintained, debts on facilities have to be paid, police have to direct traffic, ushers and security personnel (I would guess usually police, in most communities) have to be present for games. Without being able to really calculate an accurate figure on how teams help communities, it is also not entirely possible to say if, or at what point, they hurt communities, although in some cases where teams lose community support, and attendance plummets, that determination may not be able to be given an exact number, but it is still an obvious negative.  

So what about now? As earlier, I'll use Cleveland as something of an example, although I realize not every community has the same situation in every case. As I noted in "Part One," here in Cleveland the issue of putting a retractable roof on the football stadium was raised recently. It was a big story for a couple of days, although it has subsided somewhat now, and "apparently" there was no concerted effort to push such a proposal, although we'll have to see how all of this plays out in the coming weeks and months, now that the Browns have a new owner. Let's just say for the sake of argument, the Browns make it known they want a retractable roof on the stadium. The new owner has hired architects and engineers to look at the facility, but for a number of reasons, according to his statements. To put a dome on a stadium that large, a stadium that wasn't built to accommodate such a dome, as far as I know, would, I have to believe, be a major undertaking with a huge price tag. The other thing to consider is this; the upkeep of the football stadium, the ballpark and the basketball arena all were funded by a special tax on alcohol and tobacco, and the authority for that tax expires in a couple of years. Voters would have to approve a renewal of the tax, and that's "IF" the State of Ohio even permits such a tax again, as, according to "Crain's Cleveland Business" earlier this year, lobbyists for both the alcoholic beverage and tobacco industries were able to get language into a state law a few years ago that forbids such taxes.That could prove to be very interesting, especially regarding alcohol, because the beverage industry could end up cutting its own throat by hurting the teams that sell their products, as alcoholic beverages and sports have a close relationship.

Just another item you might think worthy of discussion. Pro spots teams and communities generally have had a private-public partnership, of sorts, as communities provide the publicly funded facilities. With all the talk of "free markets," should teams have to provide their own facilities? In the past I have heard the argument, and I can't say exactly from which owner or owners, that if team owners had to build their own facilities, they would have to charge too much. Hm, I thought free markets always worked and government "distorted" the markets. We always hate things given to others, until we want something, then we find ways to say, "Well... I didn't mean when it applies to me." We must also remember, the teams pay rent, so the facilities aren't free for them to use, but by using public facilities, the owners don't have to lay out large investments to have such facilities built. And remember too, the communities have built these facilities to make money in a variety of ways, many of which I recounted above, so these are really business deals, as professional sports is really nothing like a game, in spite of apologists who say fans get too emotional, "because it's just a game." BALONEY! Anything with such huge sums of money involved is NOT a game. Anyway, communities choose to pact with professional sports franchises, some of the owners of which are ruthless devils, and when you pact with the devil, sometimes you get burned. Yes, when owners have burned certain communities by moving teams to other locations, the public and the politicians all scream bloody murder, but you can't have it both ways, although in more recent times communities have tried to protect themselves with clauses in leases saying teams can only leave town after conditions x,y, and z are met, or with signed declarations by owners to never move the team.**** 

In the end, sports teams DO help communities overall, in my opinion. Whether they need fancy ballparks and stadiums, I'm not so sure, but don't look for it to change anytime soon. Too many people are hooked on pro sports, and both the owners and players know it. Until the public stays away in droves, you'll keep hearing about new or improved facilities you'll help pay for. If you don't want to pay, the moving van will probably pull up to load the team's equipment for transport to a place where the people will pay.
 
* I'm using "community" instead of just "city." A hundred years ago, most people in Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Boston, Detroit, Chicago, etc actually lived IN the cities, with areas outside these cities often being sparsely populated countryside. Gradually this changed as suburban areas began to develop, which really took off after World War Two, and today, many of the suburbs are really connected to the cities in an urban community, so, in my opinion, it is far more appropriate to use the term "community."

** New York naturally has the subway system, and other communities have mass transit of some type. Here in Cleveland, you can drive to a transit parking lot, park for free, get on the train (called "the Rapid"), or a bus, and go downtown, where you can then use a walkway to go right over to see an Indians' or Cavaliers' game; or if you are going to a Browns' game, you change to another train which takes you right to the stadium. Needless to say, many people here use the public transit system this way. Since I went over some history in "Part One," I should note that, before the train ran right to the stadium, you could take a train or bus and get off downtown, where there were shuttle buses waiting to take you the few blocks to old Municipal Stadium for Browns' games, and Indians' games with large advance ticket sales. It was like 25 or 50 cents, but that was in the 1980s.

*** The rent and certain fees may go to a specific local entity that manages the facilities, rather than going directly into community coffers, and the money is then used for upkeep and retirement of debt on the facilities.

**** If I remember correctly, in order to get final approval for his move of the Browns to Baltimore, Art Modell had to buy out the remaining years of his lease in Cleveland, which cost him something like 10-12 million. 

WORD HISTORY:
Ground-This is the noun as in, "the soil of the earth." It goes back to Indo European "ghrendh," which meant, "to rub, to rub together to break down a substance." There are no apparent relatives outside of Germanic with a similar meaning as in Germanic. Old Germanic had "grunduz," which had the notion of "bottom, deep area, foundation;" from the idea of "particles that form a basis or foundation." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "grund," which meant "base, bottom, surface of the earth." The word later took on the extended meaning "basis, reason." Common in the other Germanic languages: German and Low German have "Grund" (ground, reason), West Frisian has "grun" (land, ground), Dutch has "grond" (soil, ground, base), Danish has "grund(en)" (foundation, base, site), Norwegian has "grunn," and Swedish has "grund" (reason, foundation). I could not find a form in Icelandic, where the word seems to have been replaced by other terms, although it could be archaic.

Are Public Sports Facilities Worth It? Part One

Here is the question: Should taxpayers fund sports venues for super wealthy owners and athletes?

This will mix some history with the above question, since history and community commitments to professional sports teams are central to how many people answer that question. I haven't really spent any time researching this, so most is from memory, although the recent death of Art Modell has brought the issue of private sports franchises operating in publicly funded facilities back into view, at least to some people, and the recent news coverage has refreshed my memory somewhat. Modell's sweetheart deal to move a solid franchise like the Cleveland Browns to Baltimore for the 1996 season showed that no franchise in any sport was really safe, and that ruthless owners could exploit the fear of a community losing its team to gain new or extensively updated facilities, with the cost largely, or entirely, borne by taxpayers. Generally, as professional sports developed (more so baseball, at first), well over a hundred years ago, cities had facilities for the local team or teams to play their games. Generally these facilities were small by many of today's standards, although Fenway Park in Boston retains much of the odd configuration of  some of the old ballparks,* but of course, even there they added more seats in recent times, and there has been a trend to build new ballparks more like the the intimate facilities of the earlier 20th Century.

Here in Cleveland, the Cleveland Indians played at "League Park" on the near East Side (E. 66th Street). Famous Cleveland players like pitchers Cy Young and Bob Feller and outfielder Tris Speaker played many a game there, as well as non Cleveland players like Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio. Clevelanders approved funding for a new city owned multipurpose stadium in the late 1920s, the result being a new 80,000 seat colossus right off of Lake Erie in downtown Cleveland.** The Indians played their first game there in 1932 in front of over 80,000 fans. Initially Cleveland Municipal Stadium did not have a fence, but the huge distance to most parts of the seats for a home run was prohibitive (fans like to see home runs), and a temporary fence was put up for baseball games (it could be taken down for football or other activities, and then reinstalled relatively quickly).*** The Indians continued to play at League Park, with occasional games moved to Municipal Stadium for big crowds. I believe League Park could only hold something like 25,000 people maximum, and that may well have included any standing room. The Indians permanently moved to Municipal Stadium after World War Two, and in 1948 the team drew an amazing (for those times) 2.6 million fans, a record which stood until more recent times, and that was when teams played 77 home games during the regular season, compared to 81 now (this started in the early 1960s).

Professional football was played at the new stadium in the 1930s, but it really took off in the post World War Two era with the Cleveland Browns, who regularly drew crowds of 80,000. Boxing matches, concerts and other events were also held at Municipal Stadium over the years. I have no idea how much the city of Cleveland charged for rent, but by the 1970s, tight budgets had the city turn the operation of the stadium over to Browns' owner Art Modell for a nominal annual leasing fee to the city (the city retained ownership of the property). Modell set up the "Stadium Corporation," with himself as head and majority owner, to run the aging facility, and he collected rent from the Indians and from the Browns (he was majority owner of the Browns, so he essentially paid rent to himself). He invested in new scoreboards (including smaller auxiliary scoreboards at various locations around the stadium) and he had a system of luxury loges, complete with bar service and televisions, built below the upper deck for corporate and wealthy fans, who paid an annual rent. The arrangement proved to be a good one for Modell, but not for the Indians, as they received none of the rental money. Over time, the Indians argued that with escalating payrolls, they needed all the income they could get to sign or retain quality players. That was years ago, it's far worse now! In the late 1970s, the Indians signed highly touted pitcher Wayne Garland for the sum of like $300,000. That was BIG money in sports back then; now you can't get a shortstop who bats .198 and makes two errors a game for that amount, which tells you how out of hand all of this nonsense is.

The loge rental money became a serious issue between the Indians' owners and Modell, who was their landlord. Since the Indians played 81 home games compared to the Browns 7 regular season games (back then) and one or two preseason games; the Indians were Modell's major tenant, but I don't recall how much they paid in rent or other fees, but I seem to remember they paid a base rent, and then some percentage based upon attendance. By the late 1980s, after much planning and arguing, a grand plan was developed to build a new sports complex on the southern edge of downtown, where the Indians would have a new ballpark and control their own revenue, the NBA Cavaliers would have a new arena, and the Browns would get a new stadium. Modell had been pushing for a dome on the existing stadium, but the plan did not have total community support, nor general support from the Indians, who wanted revenue from the increasingly popular (in other cities) luxury seating; something Modell did not want to share. Modell chose not to participate in the new complex, but to keep the Browns playing in the old stadium. Whether you like or hate Modell, he was NOT a stupid man, but undoubtedly his ego interfered with his judgment, a common problem for egomaniacs, as once a ballpark was open for the Indians, his stadium revenues had to fall.**** Modell's Browns were the kings of the town, but the new owners of the Indians (brothers Richard and David Jacobs) were smart business people. I just have to believe Modell could not bring himself to give up control of the old stadium, where he kept the Indians playing second fiddle to the Browns, and where he kept revenue for himself, and thus from their owners in a sports world gone nuts on big bucks.

So a few years later the Indians moved into their new ballpark, selling out the place for every game for several years. Meanwhile, the very first year the Indians were gone from old Municipal Stadium, Modell felt the pinch of his bad decision, as his revenue at the old stadium plummeted. Having missed an opportunity for a brand new stadium, still in a lease at the old stadium, ego bruised and undoubtedly envious of the success of the Indians (who were the talk of the town), and now seriously pressed for cash, Modell secretly negotiated with Baltimore and Maryland officials and moved the Browns to Baltimore, where he got a new stadium, revenue streams and public money to operate the franchise! There too he had to eventually take in a partner to supply money, which eventually brought him a Super Bowl win, but Modell's overall ego driven business sense left him in debt again, and the league eventually pressured him to sell the team, which he did.

With the Browns gone, the Cleveland community fought to get a new team with the promise of building a new football stadium, which took place at the same location as the old stadium. In 1999 a new Browns team started play in Cleveland. Now a new owner has just taken over in 2012, and just this last week or so the idea of putting a retractable dome on the football stadium has surfaced. The stadium is owned by the city and some people have wondered how to better utilize the large facility, which seats somewhere around 73,000, and to bring in more revenue. This is a major problem with football stadiums, since NFL teams only play 8 home games (in more recent times) and one or two preseason home games. What the hell do you do the rest of the 355 days? Like any building or home, just being in existence brings wear to such a facility, which then require repairs and updates, which all cost money. There has been criticism at times for placing the new stadium on the site of the old facility, right on the lakefront, where winds come whipping down from Canada, at times picking up moisture from Lake Erie and depositing it on land as either rain or snow. I'm not an architect or an engineer, but the critics have argued that this naturally takes a toll on the structure, which certainly makes sense, but whether having the football facility on the southern edge of downtown, along with the other facilities, would be all that better, is beyond me. Critics have also argued that the land on the lakefront could then have been better utilized for attractions to compliment the nearby Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and the Great  Lakes Science Center. Just to be clear, Browns Stadium is used for some college and maybe even some high school games or events, but not nearly anywhere enough to take a real chunk out of the 355 days when it is not used by the Browns, who don't even train there, but rather use a facility in the southwest part of town, in Berea, not far from Cleveland Hopkins International Airport.   

Naturally every community's history with sports franchises varies, but this gives you an idea of what can go on. It should be noted that Baltimore suffered the loss of their NFL team, the Colts, in 1984. At that time Modell and many other owners spoke against such a move, as the Colt's owner, Robert Irsay, moved the team to Indianapolis without any announcement and in the middle of the night. In a show of extreme disconnect, many Baltimore fans cheered the arrival of the Browns and Modell, quickly forgetting their anger over the loss of the Colts, although many commentators and other fans noted their unease over those who cried and cursed the move of the Colts, but then wildly cheered the arrival of another community's team. In "Part Two" I'll try to put an answer to the initial question.    

* "Ballpark" was a common term in the past; and in fact, my father always used that term, never "stadium." The facilities themselves were usually called either "park" or "field," and some of the facilities were (some still are): League Park (Cleveland), Crosley Field (Cincinnati), Wrigley Field (Chicago-for the Cubs), Comiskey Park (Chicago-for the White Sox), Fenway Park (Boston, for the Red Sox), Braves Field (Boston-the Braves were originally in Boston), and Forbes Field (Pittsburgh), to name a few, but there were exceptions, notably Yankee Stadium in New York, but then New York also had Ebbets Field for the then Brooklyn Dodgers and the Polo Grounds for the then New York Giants (baseball, of course), and the New York Mets played there for the first couple of years of their existence in the early 1960s.

** Some city leaders hoped the new stadium would give Cleveland a shot at landing a future summer Olympics, and Municipal Stadium came complete with a great running track and plenty of room for other field events. The "official" number of seats for baseball varied over the years as adjustments were made, but when important games were held, the 80,000 figure was generally used, although that usually included standing room behind the fence. The biggest adjustment for baseball was for seating in the center field bleachers, where eventually seats in a number of sections were not for sale, and the seats were painted dark blue to provide a good background for batters. (Note: Similar happened in other cities too, as batters had complained about losing sight of the ball in white shirts worn by fans seated in the bleachers.) The temporary "baseball" fence that was put up around much of the outfield was a simple chain link type, and later (maybe mid to late 1960s, I just forget), blue padding was added to protect outfielders who crashed into the fence when chasing a fly ball. About 1980, I was at a game when the Yankees were in town, and, I guess by agreement with the Yankees (and maybe the American League?), attendants  took some of the padding down from the fence in right center field for standing room, and some fans were permitted to sit in the usually closed for baseball center field bleachers (they were not seated in direct center, but to the sides), as most or all of the regular seats had been sold.

*** The bleachers in dead center field were 480 feet from home plate, but then there was a fairly high wall, so a batter had to hit a ball over 500 feet to reach into that area of the bleachers, something that was never done in the more than 60 years of its existence. At some point (I believe in the late 1970s?), extra bleacher seats were erected below that wall for Cleveland Browns' games, but no one ever hit a ball on the fly into those seats either.

**** While I noted Modell wasn't stupid, his business judgment has oft been called into question, and he had frequent money problems, even with large cash infusions from other sources, until he left football. I use the term "egomaniac" for Modell, because winning a championship at ANY cost, no matter whose money or emotions were spent, became his life's goal, and that quest cost many people. That's what can happen when some people see themselves as the center of the universe and seem to say, "I'm important! I'm more important that you or anyone else." To me, they deserve a penalty flag.  

WORD HISTORY:
Stadium-This word traces back to the Indo European root "sta," which meant "stand." This gave its Greek offspring "stadios," which meant "something fixed in place." This then gave Greek "stadion," which meant "a running track of fixed size." Latin borrowed the word from Greek as "stadium," with the meaning "measured running track." English borrowed the word from Latin in the 1500s (some believe earlier), with the meaning "racetrack." When seating was added around such a track, the entire complex took on the meaning "stadium," which later often came to be applied to sports venues in general.  

The Egos Have Landed

One of the big national news stories in the last couple of weeks has been about what LeBron James would do with his free agency. Whether you like pro sports, or more specifically, pro basketball, or not, you couldn't get away from this story, unless perhaps you disconnected your television, radio, and computer, didn't retrieve your newspapers, locked your doors and sealed your house up with duct tape and plastic wrap, like you were expecting an anthrax attack at any moment. It seemed that the whole fate of the nation was resting upon the decision of one egomaniac; although there turned out to be more than one egomaniac in this mix; three to be specific. During this same time period, I don't recall seeing "breaking news" or reading headlines about how tens of thousands of teachers might lose their jobs, and what this might mean to the nation's children. Even the Gulf oil spill seemed only to be on par with, or more important than, this story at times, and the spill is a financial and environmental disaster the likes of which we have never before seen. It just seems to me that somewhere along the line quite a number of years ago, this country lost its bearings about what really is important in life.
Now I more than realize the human need to escape some of the realities of life and enjoy some entertainment, and that's what professional sports is, entertainment. Like just about everything about us humans, some people get carried away and let their love of particular teams or players virtually take over their lives, like an addict on heroin. They lose perspective. Virtually their whole life is consumed by this very unimportant stuff.* I can write this, because I was one of those people. I can happily say, "I kicked the habit!" Ah, I mean of sports teams... ah... not that I ever had a heroin addiction. Somehow I think I could have worded all of this better.
Sports teams and players (especially so called "superstars") market their tickets, shirts, caps, keychains, and just about anything else they can sell to an addicted part of the public that has lost all sense of the perspective I just mentioned above. Many folks unwittingly let the teams or an individual player become such a part of their life, that it affects their very self-esteem. They can't let go. Then, in some cases, the team owner(s) or player ruthlessly tosses them to the side, as Art Modell did to the legion of diehard Cleveland Brown fans in the mid 1990s, and as LeBron James has just done to not only his fans here, but to the potential shambles of a team he leaves behind.
Those who have lost their perspective about sports need to remember one thing, this is all about money and ego! It is a business, not only for the owner(s), but for each individual player. When Modell moved the Browns out of town, something this town has never recovered from, in my opinion, now retired Plain Dealer columnist, Dick Feagler, wrote a GREAT column about the event. I still have that column somewhere, but the one part of the article that EVERYONE who is hooked on, or might become hooked on, sports teams or players should keep in mind is, "never fall in love with a hooker!"
At least Art Modell sort of crept out of town, but James put it on national television!** This after a number of local business people, celebrities and politicians recorded the "love song" to him, which I'm sure many of you saw. In my opinion, and I felt this way BEFORE James' decision, they embarrassed themselves and this community with such nonsense. I'm sure some will disagree with me, and others may "now" agree with me, but the key is, did you feel that way BEFORE James threw you and Cleveland overboard? If not, you're still hooked, and you need to go to that mirror and start asking yourself some serious questions about what is really important in life.
These are links to some of my previous views on sports, for those interested:

http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2007/10/example-to-shun.html

http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2008/12/little-of-everything.html

Sorry, no "Word History" today, but next time, for sure.

* In May of 1981 I saw Cleveland Indians' pitcher, Lenny Barker, throw a perfect game against Toronto. For those unfamiliar with baseball, that means Barker faced the minimum 27 Toronto batters and retired all of them, with no batter successfully reaching base. A perfect game is certainly one of baseball's greatest achievements, but it didn't stop the Cleveland area's economic decline. It didn't provide a cure for cancer or any other potentially fatal illness. I could go one and on, but the point is, you've got to keep things in perspective.

** Readers may agree or disagree with my opinions, but I make an effort to be fair, admittedly by my own standards, so I have to make note, both Modell and James contributed to charities in town.

A Little Of Everything

A few thoughts on some things:

First, I no longer follow professional sports and I haven't for quite a number of years now. Whiny players and whiny owners... put them all in a bag and shake it up and you won't know which one will hop out first! This situation, probably more than others, has given my progressivism and populism a shot in the arm. It just shows, to paraphrase a famous saying, "Money changes people, and lots of money changes people absolutely!" If you're a regular reader, you already know that I am VERY pro-worker, but in the case of whiny pro-athletes, I'm not sure which side is worse, the players or the owners, so I detest both with equal passion. In Cleveland, we don't have many "professional" teams, or at least it seems that way, and I don't go against them, but I just don't pay much attention to them. Of course, someone's got to win, so I'd just as soon it be our own whiny millionaires, as some other town's. And, we need something here to lift the spirits of this beleaguered community. Having said that, I heard this from someone who said they heard it on one of the local sports programs. I kept chuckling for 24 hours, so help me!!! Just so everyone understands, even though I pay little attention to sports here, even I knew that the Cleveland Browns were "supposed" to be pretty good this season. That hasn't happened, and they have (CORRECTLY!) become the butt of jokes in these parts. (Hey, you want millions? Then play and coach like deserving millionaires, not a bunch of dweebs!) Anyhow, and I'm not claiming this is exactly how the story went, but you'll get the gist of it...

A guy parked in a lot so he could do some shopping. He left two Cleveland Browns' tickets on the dashboard. When he came back, he found that the car had been broken into, and now there were FOUR tickets!!!

About the governor of Illinois, Blagojevich, or maybe it should be "Son-of-a vich:" ("Vatt?" "No vich!") Everyone is innocent until proven guilty, so once that's over....FRY HIM!!!

Yesterday I heard on the radio that Census statistics show how devastated some states have been economically since, I believe it said, the year 2000. Try though I have, I couldn't find out where they got the story, but I believe it!!! Come to Ohio, if you don't already live here, and you can see for yourselves. Anyway, the report mentioned how incomes have fallen, and believe me, I know it! If I find the overall Census stats, I'll post them here at some point.

Word History:
Lot (Lottery)-Noun-This goes back to Old Germanic "khlut/khlutom." The word denoted the use of some objects, often times pieces of wood with names on them, which were then put into some container which was then shaken, the first "lot" to fall out (or be drawn out by hand) was used to determine the selection of a person for something, or to give them a share of something; thus we still say, "cast lots." Land was often distributed this way, and this gave us "lot," for a piece of land, as the process transferred its name to the parcel of land. It wasn't until the 1800s that the word also took on the meaning of "many, a large number, or bunch," and this idea may have come from land being distributed in many "lots;" that is, a large number of drawings were held to distribute land. In Old English the word was spelled "hlot," with the "h" obviously becoming silent over time.*** German has "Los" (an eventual sound shift made many "t" sounds in German become "s" sounds; thus, for example, we say "kettle," but they say "Kessel.") which means "lot, portion, share of something, but also a ticket of chance." The word also is used in other Germanic languages, for example, Swedish has "lott."


The word was either borrowed directly into Latin, or via Old French, and eventually gave Italian "lotteria," which eventually came into many of the Germanic languages, including English, as "lottery." Old French had the root word from Frankish, a Germanic language, which gave its name to the French language.

***The Old English verb, meaning "to cast lots," was "hleotan." To "cast your lot with," originally meant to share in the winnings of something.