The taxation applied depends on the basis a person holds in the asset (to over simplify what "basis" is, it is what the person paid for the asset). Ralph paid $25,000 for the Bills he will not be taxed on the first $25,000 he gains from the Bills, thus there will be no double taxation with regard to that amount. Other owners, who have higher basis can plan differently. For instance if Jerry paid 500 million for the Cowboys, the first $500 million will no be subject to taxation. So yes, in some instances it can make sense to sell off ownership stakes- it doesnt in Ralph's situation.
I think that people that have no experience with estate planning assume that there are a bunch of loopholes that make escaping tax easy. That is simply wrong. You are correct that an estate tax burden can be minimized by charitable giving. Ralph could do that, however the most likely way that is done is through a complete sale of the Team at death and a distribution of the proceeds to a charitable organization- so you theory is plausible in that regard. Assuming however that the tax plan Ralph has shared with us on numerous occasions is correct- no portion of the team will be sold until death.
As for your irrevocable trust statement- that all depends on what the trust is set up to do... some trust can avoid some types of taxation, but most likely another applies. If the trust benefits an individual or individuals it is a gift thus applying the gift tax- which is presently higher than the estate tax- meaning that the team would most likely be sold to raise the funds to pay the tax.
You simply are making statements you have no knowledge on so you should stop- you comment on Alzheimers makes that clear- if someone executes documents and they are not of sound mind those documents are not legally binding in this case with over a billion at stake that would lead to litigation, charges against his attorneys etc.