Yanks Don't Buy Championships

[gRYFYN1]

but why does MLB need the welfare of a salary cap - (beacuse the only way to do it would be to take money from the rich and hand it to the poor -- or just line the pockets of rich owners) - when it already has the socialism of the draft?

[rschusta24]

I do give the organization credit. In alot of ways they have earned many of their advantages just by being the Yankees. Yankee merchandise outsells all others. Television wants the Yankees so will pay money for them.

It just sucks that some teams will spend years prepping a player, teaching him the game and fine tuning his skills and then some other team who has the capital to basically triple what this guy's best offer can realistically be from the team that taught him the game gets all the benefits of this guy's newly developed skills.

That has being going on for too long and some way to put a halt to that type of poaching is something I would like for MLB to consider.

It won't happen but it would be nice if it did.

It's a very old sport and the Yankees just happen to have a lot of history and what I call "passed down fans". The team is also located in a major booming city, so there is a lot working for them over a small market team like the Marlins or Rays. There is real no allure for fans to get excited and spend money on a product like that, plus its a poor location for both teams because there are a lot of Yankee and Red Sox transplants down there. All the retired people go to Florida and continue to support their original home teams.

[HoustonGM]

The Yankees already give money to every other team in the form of revenue sharing and luxury tax.

There are other teams that just simply don't invest the money they make back into the team. Take a look at the chart here. The figures may not be 100% accurate as there's a lot of off-the-books stuff and such, but they give the jist of it. I also don't know if the revenue numbers include money teams receive via revenue sharing and luxury tax.

[Jeffy25]

aj and schu said what i was thinking already in this thread

[RobToxin]

The Yankees already give money to every other team in the form of revenue sharing and luxury tax.

There are other teams that just simply don't invest the money they make back into the team. Take a look at the chart here. The figures may not be 100% accurate as there's a lot of off-the-books stuff and such, but they give the jist of it. I also don't know if the revenue numbers include money teams receive via revenue sharing and luxury tax.

That is also part of the problem no doubt. Some teams do have lousy ownership. No one need look any further than the difference between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Los Angeles Clippers.

That's part of why I say this isn't just a Yankee problem. Several factors, including disinterested ownership in some cities, disinterested fan bases in another and also includes disinterested media outlets in some cases..see the demise of the Montreal Expos as an example of a last one.

Then again, which comes first? The chicken or the egg? Does knowing you have no real shot of competing financially with another team make you disinterested or does the disinterest cause the shift in financial competitive balance?

[HoustonGM]

Then again, which comes first? The chicken or the egg? Does knowing you have no real shot of competing financially with another team make you disinterested or does the disinterest cause the shift in financial competitive balance?

Considering there are plenty of examples of teams succeeding despite the financial disadvantage, I'm more inclined to say that the disinterest/bad ownership/bad decision-making is a bigger problem than one team having a huge financial advantage.

[actionjackson]

but why does MLB need the welfare of a salary cap - (beacuse the only way to do it would be to take money from the rich and hand it to the poor -- or just line the pockets of rich owners) - when it already has the socialism of the draft?

Please. Let's not use the word socialism about sports. It's not socialism. The business is MLB/NFL/NBA/NHL. The teams are franchisees. Does a business use profits from one arm to help out another? Yeah. Do some franchises in a business like McDonalds/Starbucks/Tim Hortons make more than others? Yeah. Would anyone accuse these businesses of being socialists for engaging in "socialist" practices within their own business. Nope, what they do within their companies, provided it's within the law, is their business, and as long as they make money, the shareholders are happy. They are examples of extremely successful businesses thriving in a capitalist system.

Same thing with MLB. It is in MLB's best interest as a business to be as successful as it can be in as many markets as possible. The players have benefitted greatly from expansion and would be dead-set against any form of contraction, as it would shrink the job pool. So, what do you do to help the struggling teams? Everything you can, stopping short of a salary cap, which as many have pointed out puts more money in the owners pockets and no baseball fan pays to watch the owners. I think MLB has probably reached the saturation point as far as expansion goes and contraction ain't happening, so they've got to do what they can to keep these franchises healthy. Maybe you could move some teams, but that can harm the business overall if it engenders enough discontent among baseball fans.

If the same teams make the playoffs over and over, as seems to be starting to happen, fans in the non-playoff markets will begin to see Bud the Slug's: "Everyone has hope on Opening Day" for what it really is: a crock of s**t. They'll begin to lose interest and that's bad for baseball, except if Toronto fans lose interest, because they can't make a dime of TV money off us anyway. So you see, it is in professional sport's best interest to be a bunch of "raving", "rabid" socialists, within reason of course, in order to grow/thrive within our capitalist system.

[RobToxin]

I look at that chart and let us count the number of teams whom, if they invested 100% of revenue into salary would still not be able to equal what the Yankees at 54% invested in salary:

Detroit, Houston, Seattle, Atlanta, Kansas City, Toronto, White Sox, Milwaukee, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Colorado, San Francisco, Arizona, Minnesota, St Louis, Tampa Bay, Oakland, Texas, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Washington, Florida and San Diego.

23 of the 30 teams in MLB had a total revenue (according to this chart) that is smaller than what the Yankees spent on payroll.

So, even if they put 100% back into payroll, the Yankees can still out bid them at only 54% return of revenue into payroll.

23 teams!

There is a serious competitive imbalance here.

[Jeffy25]

I look at that chart and let us count the number of teams whom, if they invested 100% of revenue into salary would still not be able to equal what the Yankees at 54% invested in salary:

Detroit, Houston, Seattle, Atlanta, Kansas City, Toronto, White Sox, Milwaukee, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Colorado, San Francisco, Arizona, Minnesota, St Louis, Tampa Bay, Oakland, Texas, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Washington, Florida and San Diego.

23 of the 30 teams in MLB had a total revenue (according to this chart) that is smaller than what the Yankees spent on payroll.

So, even if they put 100% back into payroll, the Yankees can still out bid them at only 54% return of revenue into payroll.

23 teams!

There is a serious competitive imbalance here.

so you are going to hate on the yankees for that?

it's not their fault

[HoustonGM]

There is a serious financial imbalance, yes. What are you going to do about it? A salary cap? Or, in other words, a "Screw the Yankees" cap, considering any reasonable cap would only affect them? Is one team worth screwing over for it, when they already pour money into revenue sharing and luxury tax? It's not as if the Yankees have a stranglehold on World Series championships. Yes, they seemingly don't have to go through rebuilding periods that nearly all other teams are bound to have to go through every so often, but the opportunity is easily there for other teams to win - so long as they invest their money intelligently and efficiently.

If the Yankees didn't win this year, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. Instead, people would be making fun of the Yankees for losing despite a huge payroll, just like what's happened for the last decade.

[actionjackson]

That is also part of the problem no doubt. Some teams do have lousy ownership. No one need look any further than the difference between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Los Angeles Clippers.

That's part of why I say this isn't just a Yankee problem. Several factors, including disinterested ownership in some cities, disinterested fan bases in another and also includes disinterested media outlets in some cases..see the demise of the Montreal Expos as an example of a last one.

Then again, which comes first? The chicken or the egg? Does knowing you have no real shot of competing financially with another team make you disinterested or does the disinterest cause the shift in financial competitive balance?

Could we please have a discussion about this without throwing Les Expos under the bus? Talk about the perfect storm for driving away fans: ugh! The best team in the history of the franchise has the plug pulled on it by Bud the Slug and his merry band of billionaires. Did we really expect the fans to come back as if the botching that was 1994 never happened? Their case is not a good example of an apathetic fanbase. That was an angry fanbase of a team that had built itself up the right way and was torn apart when baseball returned.

Montreal was a great baseball market and should never be forgotten for it's historic contributions to the game. The Jackie Robinson experiment began there after all. I know it would've begun somewhere else (although probably not in the U.S.) if not Montreal, but really it was the perfect place for it. Quebecers have always felt like outsiders in this country, as had Jackie Robinson in his own country. It was a perfect match. When in god's name was Miami or Tampa/St. Petersburg a good baseball market?

[ragecage]

After reading this, I would like to see a minimum spending cap for teams. A lot of owners just hoard in cash by not expanding their payroll at all.

[RobToxin]

Could we please have a discussion about this without throwing Les Expos under the bus? Talk about the perfect storm for driving away fans: ugh! The best team in the history of the franchise has the plug pulled on it by Bud the Slug and his merry band of billionaires. Did we really expect the fans to come back as if the botching that was 1994 never happened? Their case is not a good example of an apathetic fanbase. That was an angry fanbase of a team that had built itself up the right way and was torn apart when baseball returned.

Montreal was a great baseball market and should never be forgotten for it's historic contributions to the game. The Jackie Robinson experiment began there after all. I know it would've begun somewhere else (although probably not in the U.S.) if not Montreal, but really it was the perfect place for it. Quebecers have always felt like outsiders in this country, as had Jackie Robinson in his own country. It was a perfect match. When in god's name was Miami or Tampa/St. Petersburg a good baseball market?

I'm not throwing the fan base under the bus. But the media base. What killed Montreal? Wasn't the final nail in the coffin the lack of a television contract?

[KowboyKoop]

They definitely have an advantage. I wouldn't mind some tweaks to level the playing field a bit, but nothing major. No matter what, there will never be a scenario where all 30 teams have a dead even playing field....it could be better than it is now, but it's not that bad.

[ragecage]

I'm not throwing the fan base under the bus. But the media base. What killed Montreal? Wasn't the final nail in the coffin the lack of a television contract?

Could be, but the franchise was doomed after the strike. Im sure the fan base felt they got screwed out of a possible World Series berth.