Yahoo Sports columnist Dan Wetzel is best known for being the America’s foremost critic of the BCS. But in his latest column, he tackles the NFL’s blackout rule, Minnesota’s new stadium for the Vikings, and how the two were (far too) briefly intertwined. And, as usual, he does so beautifully.

You can read the column here: Vikings get their new stadium, but fans are still subjected to ‘blackout’ rule

As we’ve told you, legislation to fund a new Minnesota Vikings stadium is working its way through the state legislature. The legislation will ultimately cost the public at least $550 million, including $150 million from the city of Minneapolis. We oppose the funding of what are essentially private stadiums through public dollars, but as long as the public is forced by the NFL and Vikings ownership to build a new stadium or risk losing its team, there should be some caveats. And let’s start with blackouts. How about an amendment preventing blackouts from occurring in Minnesota if the public agrees to build a new stadium?

There are many ways this could be done, but Florida State Sen. Mike Fasano has sponsored legislation down there that would fine any team that has received public money and blacked out its fans. According to Fasano: “This legislation states that if a team accepts those dollars then they have the responsibility to make certain their home games are sold out before the 72-hour rule kicks in. If not, then they will be fined $125,000 for each blacked out game. The funds collected through these fines will be used to purchase game tickets for underprivileged children, military personnel, foster children and others.”

The blackout rule is counterproductive, archaic and unethical. Keep in mind that nine top sports economists recently wrote that “blackouts have no significant effect on ticket sales in the NFL.”

Granted, blackouts haven’t been a huge problem in Minnesota, but the team has flirted with them from time to time and who knows what will happen in the future. The Vikings could raise ticket prices in order to pay down their share of the construction debt and some seats may go unfilled. The team may also continue to struggle, leading to declining attendance. It’s easy to paint a rosy picture with a brand new stadium but Minnesotans should prepare for the worst and think about safeguards now so they don’t end up in the same boat as Cincinnati. That city is struggling to pay off its stadium debt, can’t field a decent team, and is now being blacked out because of the NFL’s punitive rules.

The NFL and Vikings ownership will oppose a blackout amendment, but who cares? If they don’t want to treat Vikings fans with respect, starting with guaranteeing they won’t black them out, they can pay for their own stadium. Now, which of Minnesota’s public officials is going to stand up for Vikings fans?

One year after removing 10,000 seats from FedEx Field, the Washington Redskins are removing 4,000 more seats for supposed “party decks.” The Redskins admitted last season that those seats were previously removed because they were unable to sell season tickets for the seats. The new capacity at FedEx for Skins games will be 79,000, down from 93,000 just two seasons ago. The team was supposed to sell standing-room-only party deck tickets in 2011, but the decks were never built.

The Redskins would like fans to believe that the removal of seats is for a “better fan experience.” But one former senior Redskins official told Sports Fans Coalition that Redskins owner Daniel Snyder specifically nixed any emphasis on improving the fan experience because fans will continue to attend games no matter what. Guess not…

There is yet another retransmission consent dispute occurring between media companies that threatens to cause a large number of sports fans to miss baseball’s opening day. This time it is Tribune Company and DirecTV who are fighting over carrier fees. Tribune Company owns owns or operates 23 television stations, WGN America on national cable and Chicago’s WGN-AM. The current agreement expires on March 31, at which time Tribune has threatened to take down programming. According to AdWeek,  ”Some of the programming at stake for DirecTV subscribers includes Mets baseball on WPIX-TV in New York, Phillies baseball on WPHL-TV in Philadelphia, and Cubs and White Sox baseball games in Chicago.”

Sports Fans Coalition is fighting to end all blackouts and has filed formal comments at the FCC asking the agency to allow sports programming to remain up during these “retransmission consent” disputes. “Sports should not be used as a weapon during retransmission consent disputes,” we wrote.

SFC is looking into the latest dispute on behalf of sports fans everywhere. (And for the record, we have never received any contributions from DirecTV or DISH Network.)

Now that the FCC’s public comment and reply period is complete, we can sit back and assess all the arguments and evidence presented on whether to end the sports blackout rule. Sports Fans Coalition and other public interest groups have argued that the rule is a needless government regulation that only serves to prop up the NFL’s anti-fan blackout policy. The public overwhelmingly supports repealing the rule — over 4,000 individuals submitted comments asking the Commission to do so. And in one of the most important research papers on the subject in decades, nine top sports economists told the FCC that “local television blackouts have little or no effect on ticket sales or attendance for the game that is being televised. Local blackouts of home games harm consumers without producing a significant financial benefit to teams.”

The National Football League has yet to provide any evidence to the public that refutes the finding from the economists that “blackouts have no significant effect on ticket sales in the NFL.” Remember that in this case, the NFL is asking for a government subsidy – it thinks the government should play a role in keeping games off the air. But for that to be the case, it needs to provide an overwhelmingly compelling case. It hasn’t even remotely done so. Further, the NFL has yet to explain why it’s morally acceptable to black out elderly and disabled fans who have helped finance local stadiums.

NFL blackouts may have existed for the last 50 years, but that doesn’t make them right, particularly at a time when the league is making money hand over fist from its television contracts. More importantly, the government has no business propping up counterproductive blackouts and the NFL has yet to prove that the government should.