I thought the owners response to the players setting a strike date shows exactly what the owners want to accomplish. Peter Angelos illustrated excellently the need for a payroll tax. The salary level at which the players would institute a tax is greater than the 2001 gross revenues of 17 teams. After hearing both sides I am now totally on the owners side of the dispute. The conference will re-air on Fox News Channel between 4 and 4:20 this morning. Tape it and watch it...tell me what you think. If you've seen it already then tell me what you think right now.
I saw part of it on ESPN News earlier. I was also swayed to the side of the owners. It seems like they are trying to make the game more competitive, which is what I want. I don't want the Yankees winning every year, and the Devil Rays at the bottom. IMO, this will make baseball better. I like how they want to help the smaller market teams with the tax, if I heard right. I missed some of it, so if they talked about anything except the tax, I probably missed it.
I think mlb should adopt a tructure that is similar to the nfl or the nba. Market size would be irrelevant. If they don't give a crap about the fans or are too good for us, they should just play in stadiums without selling tickets or tv rights and say screw the fans. Who wins there? I don' t think athletes in any sport (especially MLB) realize what we mean to the sport. They take us for granted. Screw them.
Agreed. This is why the owners are on the right side this time around. They are trying to make the game more competitive, which is in the fans best interest. I realize it is also in the owners best interest...but hey...we all win that way.
You said it when you said"in the owner's best interest" It is. It's in every owners best interest except George's. I'm all for competitive balance. This isn't Wal mart vs Sears. Wal mart doesnt need sears, but the new york Yankees need the Oakland A's. That is a fact. The players, I have no sympathy for. They are the most genectically blessed people on earth. I would trade places with a single A baseball player in a heartbeat; a heartbeat. Let's switch. I do find it rather assinine that millionaires are fighting with billionaires, don't get me wrong. Congrats to the Yanks because they play in the largest market in the country and with the sweetest tv deal. But, unless they want to play in intrasquad scrimmages on national tv, I would suggest that Steinbrenner and co.should fina a way for the Floridas, Pittsburghs, St. Louis's of the world to compete. Check out the nfl or nba. MArket size is irrelevant.
The owners have the right idea, but the wrong way in fixing what ails baseball....it needs to be a greater fix, not something more temporary. The players have both things wrong - and going on strike won't settle things faster, because the owners know public sentiment is on their side this time. I'll admit, though, that hearing Angelos speak swayed me a bit to the owners side...now if he'd put a decent team together and drop all opposition of moving the Expos to D.C. should they be moved, he'd look much better.
I'd like to see a better solution too, but the owners are trying to compromise and keep the peace. If there is a strike that lasts a while...I'll bet the owners break off negotiations, implement a hard cap and drug testing and everything else they really want and let whoever wants to play tryout. When the players stop making money...they'll come back.
The Yankees will win regardless of tax, revenue sharing, or a soft salary cap. They are the premiere team in the MLB and always have been since that one transaction they made on January 6, 1920. It was something like $100,000 for a guy named George, but anyway.... They have the best front office in baseball, and the best scouts in baseball. The difference between them and the A's or Astros is that they can keep what their scouts bring in. It's not the Yankees fault that they are in NY (well actually it is, as they were once the Baltimore Orioles). Even with all of the nifty ideas the owners have came up with, they will only truly effect the Braves, Red Sox, and Dodgers, or the other "big" market teams, but not THE "huge" market team. The Yankees juggernaut will never be effected by this... "I would suggest that Steinbrenner and co.should fina a way for the Floridas, Pittsburghs, St. Louis's of the world to compete." I don't know where you have been, but St. Louis brings in monster amounts of income, and they are able to pay for many big name stars. Its not only George spending the money, although he spends the most. If you are a casual fan of the game, I excuse you.
BTW, I'm also a big A's fan. It's not bias, it's the truth. If you could come up with a reasonable explanation of why it ISNT, please do so.
The Yankees had revenues of $249M in 2001. Of this $176M was from local revenues. If there is 50% revenue sharing they will have to give up $88M, leaving them with $152M. Sure they could still have a $135M payroll, but if there is a 50% tax on salaries over $98M the Yankees would have to pay $18.5M. Revenue: $249M Sharing: ($176) Payroll: ($135) Tax: ($18.5) Total income = ($80.5M) So the Yankees would LOSE $80.5M. This is BEFORE paying managers and coaches, stadium fees, utilities, front office employees, broadcasters, etc etc etc. The Yankees aren't going to lose money...so they'll spend less on salaries. The amounts the Yankees pay in revenue sharing etc will be split amongst the poorer teams so those teams will be able to spend more on payroll. Thus, competitive balance ensues. The Yankees can keep the players they bring up because they can outspend everybody. The owner's system eliminates this problem.
1. The owners will never get their system. 1a. Even if the owners did, the revenue you have there is a little off, with the new YES channel and all. 2. Steinbrenner does not care about the money, he cares about winning (which about, oh, 1 other owner does, and thats John Henry). 3. The Yankees would still be above the others because they have a superior scouting system. 4. Competitive balance does not ensue. This is like the NBA, mind you, not the NFL. (The NFL's system is a complete and utter joke. Dynasties are good for sports.) 4a. Once again, the competitive balance does not ensue, but this time because of the inability of teams to actually draft quality players. If you haven't noticed, a few teams have this ability to keep making the crappiest front office decisions over and over. 5. The salaries will be off. The Yankees are paid half of Mondesi's contract next year. Roger Clemens will get his 300 wins next year and bow out. Robin Ventura might come back, but if he does, it'll be at a reduced salary. They'll still have the highest payroll, but it wouldn't be as drastic as it is now. edit--6. Its painfully obvious that you side with the owners only because it helps your Astros. I'll tell you one thing, if the 4th most populated city in the US can't even get a packed house at Enron Field every night like Yankee Stadium, it just shows the FANS are to blame in this situation.
Wrong. They will eventually get something close to what they have offered. The news conference clearly shows that the owners are prepared to go to war. Whatever it is...he'll have to fork over half of it. He does care about winning, but he won't lose money year after year...he is a businessman. And I suppose that nobody else has a good scouting system. Come on. There are many teams that draft quality players and then lose them as they are entering their prime. Ever hear of the Montreal Expos? That's right...a few. No economic system will help those teams. But we're not talking about a few, we're talking about 25 teams that aren't in the economic elite. The economic plan will force it down farther. I just showed you how it works...maybe the Yankees only lose $20M instead of $80M on the payroll...George doesn't want to lose $20M.
"And I suppose that nobody else has a good scouting system. Come on. There are many teams that draft quality players and then lose them as they are entering their prime. Ever hear of the Montreal Expos?" They don't draft quality players, they find them in the Carribean. "The economic plan will force it down farther. I just showed you how it works...maybe the Yankees only lose $20M instead of $80M on the payroll...George doesn't want to lose $20M." But he'll do it. You just don't understand Steinbrenner. And as long as you don't, you'll never get the full scope of the Yankees. BTW, the unloyal fans of the Astros, and the loyal fans of the Yankees are the biggest reasons for the disparity. But hey, you'll never believe that the Astros have droves of unloyal fans. And as long as McClane keeps being frugal (and that won't be changed with revenue sharing), the Astros will never have loyal fans. With the Texans and Rockets about to emerge, the Astros will have less and less loyal fans (its hard to be loyal when the god damn WNBA franchise probably has more playoff victories than the Astros). It'll be fun to watch another franchise turn to crap. Or should I say, stay at their respective position. Nine playoff victories (or 1 less than the Yankees won last year in the playoffs) in 39+ years is nothing to call home to momma about. Expansion was the worst idea. "When the players stop making money...they'll come back." You do realize that 80% of major league ball players are set for life? If you really think they'll come back, you have another thing coming to you. Have your Shane Spencers, Rick Reeds, Brian Daubachs, and Mike Remlingers...because thats the kind of quality you'd see on the field.
As an aside from the debate going on here, Baseball Prospectus put out a couple of articles over the past couple of days on the labor situation. Most of the writers there are pro-players, but most of what they write makes sense. This article outlines revenue sharing...it may not be what the owners want in this exact form, but it's something to consider: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20020815zumsteg.shtml Here's another approach to revenue sharing...a bit easier to follow and more in line with the owners' current plan: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20020816pappas.shtml All I care about? Keep the game going, but fix what's wrong with it in a way that will permanently fix the problems. I'd love to see my Braves win this season, but if it comes at the cost of a potential title or two down the road, then it's almost not worth it. NYKRule - the Yankees' system isn't that superior to the rest of the league's. Though the Yankees' system is among the elite, other teams have better scouting and drafting systems and other teams make better management decisions. The Yankees can simply get away with it all because they have the money to do so...see the Mondesi trade for one. A revenue-sharing system needs to eliminate or at least greatly this advantage. And, unlike you, I don't think Steinbrenner is willing to see multi-million dollar losses rack up year after year; winning titles is not going to enhance his image in the public nor expose him to new groups as nearly everyone knows who he is. He may have a lot of money, but if his influx is curtailed in baseball, he'll take steps to curb the losses - or end up losing money rapidly.
Larry Walker, et al are from the Carribean. I had no idea. And the earth is flat. I have spent more than my fair share of time at the ballpark. A good deal of the tickets are sols as season tickets. In the diamond club people buy 4 seats for the season at $200 a night. That's the only way they are sold. In any event, most of the lower level along the baselines and the club seats are sold as season tix. They'll come back for the same reason they are fighting the owners right now...the eternal quest for more.
I'd like to see a better solution too, but the owners are trying to compromise and keep the peace. If there is a strike that lasts a while...I'll bet the owners break off negotiations, implement a hard cap and drug testing and everything else they really want and let whoever wants to play tryout. When the players stop making money...they'll come back Agreed -- that's why I think a strike is the worst move the players can make. At that point, they lose all their bargaining power because the owners will just say "screw it, there's nothing to save this season anymore". All I need to know to support the owners is that the players share of revenues increases year after year, which is a recipe for disaster. The NBA did it right where they linked their salary cap to a % of total revenues - league and players now both have an interest in total income rising.
