Salary Cap Is Now A Must!

In article <1161001904.295269.269670
@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, david.a.rutter.DeleteThis@gmail.com says...
> There is alot to be said for a salary cap. Clearly the Yankees are
> allowed to spend too much money. However, we are a long way from that
> in baseball. How about we change some simple things along the way to
> make it more competitive?
>
> One thing that would help spread the money more evenly would be true
> revenue sharing. Teams already share ticket revenue on a per game
> basis. How about sharing the TV and radio money on a per game basis as
> well? Currently the teams get the money from their TV and radio
> contracts thats it. How about instead the teams split the money made
> from that game evenly? Example the Royals get half the money the
> Yankees make on a Royals v. Yankees game and the Yankees get half the
> money the Royals make. so if 50,000 is made on a game, each team gets
> 25,000.

Well, this wouldn't be very good for the Royals due to the
unbalanced schedule. The rest of the AL East would love this.

As currently designed, the Royals actually get far more money
from the Yankees than they would on a per-game basis, even with
a high revenue split.

The current revenue-sharing arrangement is tremendous for David
Glass, thought not for Royal fans, because as currently
designed, with revenues shared based on revenue rather than
market size, revenue-sharing functions not as an inducement to
compete but an inducement to not invest in a team.

This didn't happen accidentally, either - the current revenue-
sharing plan was instituted not to help competitive balance but
to reduce the marginal value of players and serve as a drag on
player salaries. Which it has - even using MLB's own presented
figures, which we know underestimate revenues by quite a bit due
to lack of related party transactions, revenue growth has
exceeded salary growth by a good margin.

> Yes the Yankees will still have more TV money than anyone else, but it
> would be more evenly shared.
>
> I'm well aware that critics say the Yankees should keep all their
> because they negotiated that money fair and square, but they would be
> making the money on a game vs the Royals if the Royals didn't exsist.

This isn't a convincing point at all. If the Royals didn't
exist, the Yankees wouldn't be stuck without a team to play,
they'd simply play 1 more series against 2 or 3 teams a year.
And if you move to a per-game revenue-sharing model, you make
Steinbrenner want the Royals to exist even *less* as the 9 road
games of receipts he'd get would be far more if he played
practically any other team during those 9 games.

--
Dan Szymborski
dan.DeleteThis@baseballprimerREMOVE.com

"A critic who refuses to attack what is bad is not
a whole-hearted supporter of what is good."

-Robert Schumann
 >> Stay informed about: Salary Cap Is Now A Must! 

I didn't say this was a grand solution to all of baseball's economic
troubles, it's simply a step in the right direction; this plan also
makes more sense, business-wise, than the current revenue sharing plan.
You seem to know it all, give me your grand solution.

p.s. part of my grand solution is going back to a balanced schedule
 >> Stay informed about: Salary Cap Is Now A Must! 

I didn't say this was a grand solution to all of baseball's economic
troubles, it's simply a step in the right direction; this plan also
makes more sense, business-wise, than the current revenue sharing plan.
You seem to know it all, give me your grand solution.

p.s. part of my grand solution is going back to a balanced schedule
 >> Stay informed about: Salary Cap Is Now A Must! 

> How about we change some simple things along the way to
> make it more competitive?

Well, I'm not too sure it isn't competive already. The past five years
or so have shown that's it's not as easy to buy a championship as it
seems. We've had teams go from very bad to very good in a pretty short
period of time. The Tigers are a good example of this. And small market
teams like the Twins have been the post season fairly regularly. And
teams with a large payroll like the Cubs have had poor seasons despite
their high payroll

> Also, if there is a salary cap there should also be a salary floor.
> The Marlins spending 15 million this year was a joke.
>

They ended up as good or better than 13 other teams this year, and were
in the wildcard hunt for most of the season.
 >> Stay informed about: Salary Cap Is Now A Must! 

Regardless of how competitive they were, spending that little money is
a joke. If you win and spend that little money you've gotten lucky at
least 3 times with rookies. That's as good of a formula for success as
gambling the rent money is the path to a ripe finical future No one
would be trying to justify if if they lost; so there shouldn't be
justification for it when they win. If there is everyone going to be a
salary cap, there will also be a salary floor. The "player's" union
will demand it. And having seen too many Royals team skimp on the
payroll, I'd like to see it too.
 >> Stay informed about: Salary Cap Is Now A Must! 

In article <1161865186.582970.279830
@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, david.a.rutter.DeleteThis@gmail.com says...
> Regardless of how competitive they were, spending that little money is
> a joke. If you win and spend that little money you've gotten lucky at
> least 3 times with rookies. That's as good of a formula for success as
> gambling the rent money is the path to a ripe finical future No one
> would be trying to justify if if they lost; so there shouldn't be
> justification for it when they win. If there is everyone going to be a
> salary cap, there will also be a salary floor. The "player's" union
> will demand it. And having seen too many Royals team skimp on the
> payroll, I'd like to see it too.

Actually, the MLBPA has come out strongly against a salary floor
as they have a salary cap.

--
Dan Szymborski
dan.DeleteThis@baseballprimerREMOVE.com

"A critic who refuses to attack what is bad is not
a whole-hearted supporter of what is good."

-Robert Schumann
 >> Stay informed about: Salary Cap Is Now A Must! 

> Regardless of how competitive they were, spending that little money is
> a joke.

So you don't want teams to spend a lot of money and be sucessfull, and
you don't want teams to spend a little bit and be sucessfull. Smart.

If putting together a .481 winning percentage is the punchline to a
joke I hope it's a joke the Royals are the butt of next season. I'd be
happy with that much improvement.

And scouting and training has a lot more to do with having rookies do
well than luck does.
 >> Stay informed about: Salary Cap Is Now A Must!