Menudo Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Again with the pity for bottom level teams in the MLB "not being able to spend more money". None of these teams are owned by poor men. Plenty of these teams you guys are saying can't compete are choosing not to. They take their shared revenue and luxury tax checks and put them in their pockets. If you're pissed because the Royals haven't mattered in 20 years, tell them to take that money and go buy some players. Once again, rather than praising the fact that NFL teams can only spend so much, we should be looking at what has incentivized all of them to at least come close to maxing out what they're allowed to spend every year. That, I believe, is the answer. Why are there no NFL teams spending 1/3 the cap? You do realize that the Yankees bring in a ton more money than the small market teams do, just in television money alone ? They have every advantage, and have a lot more money rolling in than the small market teams do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I think you meant "If you can't see that a team with a 208 million dollar budget DOES have an advantage". Anyway, let's play results for a minute. In baseball there's NO salary cap. In the NFL there IS a salary cap. In the past 6 years, there have been 6 different World Series champions, and at least 2 of them have been "small market" teams. In the NFL, the past 6 years have produced only 4 Super Bowl champions, and most teams enter the season realistically knowing that they have no shot of winning or even making the playoffs. This can't just be coincidence, can it? Yes, I understand that more money equals more buying power, but I don't equate money with advantage to the same degree that you do, and the results have shown it to be the case. Good scouting, good management, and good farm systems are equally important to having the largest payroll. The only thing the Yankees have to show for their payroll is a hugh luxury tax, not rings. I don't find this to be a coincidence. The A's put a winning team on the field year in and year out and they do it on a shoestring budget. It's good management and good farm systems. George Steinbrenner needs to learn this. You can't go on the "winning rings" argument for the Yankess, and then the "solid season" argument for the A's. The A's have no recent rings, and though the Yankees haven't won one recently, they are always in the thick of things year in and year out, I'm sure they would be just as successful on the Royals budget. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 You do realize that the Yankees bring in a ton more money than the small market teams do, just in television money alone ? They have every advantage, and have a lot more money rolling in than the small market teams do. I understand this. Better, I would imagine than others understand the fact that teams that refuse to spend money on their product don't deserve all the sympathy they get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 in favor of salary cap and non guaranteed contracts...NFL style. Never going to happen in the NBA or MLB, though. Yup- guaranteed contracts are the key- and it will NEVER happen in MLB or the NBA- NFL has the best model, MLB the worst with the NBA somewhere in the middle. The uneven playing field really hurts MLB, although I have a feeling this won't change either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 For what its worth, guaranteed contracts are what has ruined the NBA...it is the main reason the T-Wolves will not be competitive for the next two years... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I understand this. Better, I would imagine than others understand the fact that teams that refuse to spend money on their product don't deserve all the sympathy they get. I think we are actually closer than you think to agreeing. I absolutely 100% agree that teams like the Pirates don't deserve pity to the level that some give them. They should be spending more money, Pirate fans, like myself, are irate that they don't. The Pirates don't simply lose because they are in a small market, they lose because they refuse to spend money, they are utterly and completely mis-managed, and they do not have the money to buy themselves out of their mistakes (Even if they did, they would probably just screw up again). However, that still doesn't change the fact, that the difference in spending abilities in baseball is so uneven. A salary cap would bring baseball back a bit. Baseball is going to suffer, most sports fans my age (32) don't care about it. I still love it, and am a glutton for punishment, as I still follow the Pirates daily. However, a lot of my friends, who are absolute sports nuts, gave up on baseball a long time ago. The 50+ generation still likes baseball, as they remember how great it used to be and are hooked, but, I think baseball is going to run into a problem down the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I think we are actually closer than you think to agreeing. I absolutely 100% agree that teams like the Pirates don't deserve pity to the level that some give them. They should be spending more money, Pirate fans, like myself, are irate that they don't. The Pirates don't simply lose because they are in a small market, they lose because they refuse to spend money, they are utterly and completely mis-managed, and they do not have the money to buy themselves out of their mistakes (Even if they did, they would probably just screw up again). However, that still doesn't change the fact, that the difference in spending abilities in baseball is so uneven. A salary cap would bring baseball back a bit. Baseball is going to suffer, most sports fans my age (32) don't care about it. I still love it, and am a glutton for punishment, as I still follow the Pirates daily. However, a lot of my friends, who are absolute sports nuts, gave up on baseball a long time ago. The 50+ generation still likes baseball, as they remember how great it used to be and are hooked, but, I think baseball is going to run into a problem down the road. Hockey and Basketball both have salary caps and are likely in even worse shape than baseball in terms of fan interest. Name another "major" sport who's world championship is shown on a channel that shows rodeo right before it and bow hunting right afterwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Hockey and Basketball both have salary caps and are likely in even worse shape than baseball in terms of fan interest. Name another "major" sport who's world championship is shown on a channel that shows rodeo right before it and bow hunting right afterwards. No argument that baseball is still more popular than Hockey or Basketball, but, it used to be by a greater degree. Baseball used to be the most popular sport in America, and they are now not even close to football, and I expect that to get worse and worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 No argument that baseball is still more popular than Hockey or Basketball, but, it used to be by a greater degree. Baseball used to be the most popular sport in America, and they are now not even close to football, and I expect that to get worse and worse. I agree entirely with this statement. My contention is that the salary cap might not be the silver bullet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Hockey and Basketball both have salary caps and are likely in even worse shape than baseball in terms of fan interest. Name another "major" sport who's world championship is shown on a channel that shows rodeo right before it and bow hunting right afterwards. Please don't use hockey and basketball in the same sentence.......... Not even remotely comparable. Hockey is dying, while basketball is becoming the most popular sport on the planet. The NBA finals were brutal, I admit- but with the global interest, and it is gaining fans all over the world. Still trails baseball, no question in overall fan support, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I agree entirely with this statement. My contention is that the salary cap might not be the silver bullet. Not having a salary cap might not be the Silver bullet, but, developing one could be the saving grace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Please don't use hockey and basketball in the same sentence.......... Not even remotely comparable. Hockey is dying, while basketball is becoming the most popular sport on the planet. The NBA finals were brutal, I admit- but with the global interest, and it is gaining fans all over the world. Still trails baseball, no question in overall fan support, etc. Very true, they aren't on the same level. Basketball is much more popular than Hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 No argument that baseball is still more popular than Hockey or Basketball, but, it used to be by a greater degree. Baseball used to be the most popular sport in America, and they are now not even close to football, and I expect that to get worse and worse. Q: How many times has the death knell rang for the sport of baseball? A: Every summer since the 1876. Chicken Littles are rampant with this sport. However, it doesn't change the fact that the attendance is at a high, tv ratings REGIONALLY (not nationally) are at an all-time high, and the game has successfully marketed itself across the borders, not to mention the vast overall success of its internet product (which is 10x as good as what nfl.com offers). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Hockey and Basketball both have salary caps and are likely in even worse shape than baseball in terms of fan interest. Name another "major" sport who's world championship is shown on a channel that shows rodeo right before it and bow hunting right afterwards. International Team Cagefighting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SheikYerbuti Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I may be in the minority, but I like dynasties. There's something a little bogus when being a fan of a team goes like this: Year 1: Wow, my team sucks Year 2: Hey, my team won the championship Year 3: My team just barely made the playoffs Year 4: Wow, my team sucks Year 5: championship!! That's a little blown out of proportion, but you get the idea. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Year 1: Wow, my team sucks Year 2: Hey, my team won the championship Year 3: My team just barely made the playoffs Year 4: Wow, my team sucks That's a little blown out of proportion, but you get the idea. . . Steelers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Steelers? Here's the Steelers 1. We are the worst 2. We are the best ever (Dynasty) 3. We are very good 4. We won another championship 5. We are 8-8, which is average for most teams, dreadful for the Steelers Here's the Vikings 1. We can't win the big one 2. We suck 3. We suck 4. We suck 5. We suck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmypg Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Baseball needs a cap for minimum salaries as well as a total spending cap. However, with the players union that will never happen. For those of you that think salary doesn't matter I will make a bet with you. I get the top 15 teams salary wise & you get the bottom 15. Whoever wins the world series wins the bet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 (edited) This is complete and total nonsense. St. Louis, Chicago, Boston... those are small market teams? Baloney! The facts: From 1995 on, only one team in the bottom half of total payrolls won the World Series. The 2003 Marlins were a nice feel good story, but they were the exception, not the rule. For those of you that think salary doesn't matter I will make a bet with you. I get the top 15 teams salary wise & you get the bottom 15. Whoever wins the world series wins the bet. Yeah, nobody is going to take that bet, but everyone has a chance to win. Edited June 20, 2007 by The Irish Doggy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Yeah, nobody is going to take that bet, but everyone has a chance to win. Exactly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 For what its worth, guaranteed contracts are what has ruined the NBA...it is the main reason the T-Wolves will not be competitive for the next two years... That and a GM who is a horse's ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 That and a GM who is a horse's ass. well yeah, he is the one who signed marginal players to long term deals... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seminoles Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 And slightly off topic, why can't you type the word H U G E on this board without it being changed to hugh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 (edited) hugh back That is funny, I didn't realize they actually filtered it. Although, it looks like they have to get brack to work and filter another word. Edited June 20, 2007 by Menudo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 (edited) xactly. Some of those teams payrolls are less than the luxury taxes they get from the top teams. The worst thing about the MLBs system has nothing to do with the fact that the Yankees and Sox can spend as much as they want and everything to do with the fact that the lowest teams are financially rewarded for being cheap. The Yankees are doing far less to destroy the game than the D-Rays are. the problem with the current system is that it essentially rewards BOTH approaches. if you're a big-market team, pull out all the stops, throw $100 million at a guy who's never thrown a single pitch in the bigs, etc. if you're a small market team, trade away every decent player you've got, keep the payroll under $50 million, put out a mediocre product and leech off the yankees and "fans" who don't care how chitty your team is, they're just happy to spend $200 bucks to take their family out and hang out at the ballpark. blaming one approach or the other for "ruining baseball" is shortsighted -- the problem is the system that makes both approaches viable. For those of you that think salary doesn't matter I will make a bet with you. I get the top 15 teams salary wise & you get the bottom 15. Whoever wins the world series wins the bet. hmm, you don't seem to be getting any takers. Edited June 20, 2007 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.