The W
Views: 99379301
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
1.10.14 1117
The W - Baseball - Should Anyone Even Care Anymore? (Page 2)
This thread has 17 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2(1505 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (31 total)
Triple Preperation H
Chipolata








Since: 26.3.02
From: Chesapeake VA

Since last post: 2651 days
Last activity: 2647 days
#21 Posted on
Boy, the more I go thru life the more I realize how right Walt Williams is.

I wrote a long response which joyfully was lost when my computer crashed, so if I seem a little hostile it's not at any of you. I'm just pissed that I have to start over, and I have no intentions of writing all of that again. Thus, this will be condensed.

First off, individual baseball teams ARE separate entities. Sure, they are all under the "umbrella" of MLB and must follow it's rules, but that is the way it is with all business. All doctors have a medical board they must report to, but not all hospitals are the same business. All lawyers must adhere to the standards of the ABA, but not all lawyers are part of the same firm. All restaurants must adhere to the policies of the HRC, but certainly they are not all the same business. Ditto to pharmaceutical companies and the FDA. Teams are individuals and the MLB is just the controlling authority.

Look at this. The Yankees and Devil Rays are two entirely different organizations. They file separate tax returns. They make individual decisions on how to best run their franchises. They hire their own staffs. And they make their own money.

(By the way, 99.5% of all McDonalds and BurgerKing's are franchises also. They are independently owned and operated, yet under the same umbrella...just like MLB teams are.)

When is the last time you saw the Marlin front office strike a television deal for the Yankees? Have you ever heard of the Twins securing naming rights for the Astros home field? How often has Tampa paid for the Dodgers to promote their upcoming games? They don't, and why? Because they are not the same organization.

With all due respect, I think the notion that the Yankees are "actively trying to put (another team) out of business" is crazy. When you get your paycheck every week, do you run across town to the fellow who just missed his rent payment because he can't afford it and pay a portion of his rent for him? Probably not. So does that mean that you are "actively trying to make this man and his family homeless?" That's an insane conclusion to draw. Just because the Yankees want to keep the money that the Yankees have earned through their hardwork and good fortune doesn't mean they are trying to put anyone out of business. I'm sure if Florida and Montreal helped pay the uniform cleaning bills, cleanup and security crews, ticket takers, parking lot attendents, grounds crew, and other aspects of the NY organization, the Yanks wouldn't hesitate to fork over its own money to help those clubs out. But that isn't the case because they are separate entities.

"But, the Yankees make money off of Tampa Bay! They owe it to them!" Right, and guess what? Tampa makes money off of the Yankees! Everytime they play, TB gets a cut of the gate, broadcast rights, etc. For the last 100 years while NY has been in the playoffs, TB has been losing triple digit games. Still, the Ray's make beaucoup cash off the the TV post season deal without ever coming close to playing an October game. In essence, we already have revenue sharing.

Socialism has failed every where it has been tried. That is why sick people in Canada, France, and other countries with socialistic medical systems run as fast as they can to the US when they need medical attention. We provide the fastest, cheapest, and best medical help in the world because up until now we have shunned socialism.

Guru Zim was headed towards the right point but he stopped just short. He said, "In a system that needs two teams to exist, no one is going to watch if it is guaranteed that team A will always beat team B because of it's economic advantage." Exactomundo my good man! So what needs to happen? We need to get rid of all the Team Bs so that every time you see a game it has a chance to be competitive. Do you like seeing the Yankees play half their games against Toronto, Tampa, and Detroit? What if, instead of playing those teams, they played more against Boston, Atlanta, Seattle, and Arizona instead? Baseball would be a lot more exciting.

No where is it written that every city in North America has the right to a baseball team. If the city can't support the squad or if the owner is too stupid to be solvent, then the team goes bankrupt. That's the way life goes. I guarantee you that if baseball allowed the handful of teams that are struggling to go defunct that the Yankees days of being a dynasty would come to a crashing halt. Of course they would still be competitive every year, and probably would still be one of the favorties, but they would be no where near as dominate as they are today. Why? Because you can't have but so many people on your payroll. NY already finds itself with studs across the board, and they can't really add anything else without letting someone go. Not so in Atlanta. Not so in Seattle, Boston, LA, or Phoenix. The two allstars from Montreal would be on Atlanta instead. The handful of Stars from Minnesota would be with Boston. Seattle and LA would pick up their share of studs also. Sure, the Yankees could get some of these guys, but they couldn't get them all, and for every single one they did get, they would have to let a good player on their own roster go. Suddenly, everyone else is getting better, and the Yankees are staying pat. It's economics 101, and it has been proven in every industry you can possibly mention time and time again.

Truthful, 10 teams could go under tomorrow and the Yankees would not be out of opponents. There would still be enough squads for 4 divisions of 5 teams each, and they would be 20 pretty dog gone good teams, not 10 real good ones, 10 okay ones, and 10 teams that blow chunks. Not only that, but the level of play at AAA would dramatically increase, which would help them out as well.

The Yankees didn't hold a gun to anyone's head and demand that the league put two teams in Florida. There is risk involved in these things, and the successful teams shouldn't be on the hook to bail out the teams who have made bad decisions, can't get support, and in many cases, should have never come into exsistence to begin with.






"I'm a stupid moron with an ugly face and a big butt and my butt smells and... I like to kiss my own butt."--Moe

I am not a has bean! I AM THE BEST WIENER IN ALL THE LAND!
edturtle
Linguica








Since: 24.1.02
From: HI in the middle, round on both ends!

Since last post: 4316 days
Last activity: 3592 days
#22 Posted on
Again, I don't see a real problem with the system - just the people IN and RUNNING the system.

"Small market" teams can be competitive. "Large market" teams with oodles of dough can suck. Oakland and Baltimore are prime examples of both. The key is HOW a team is ran.

Bad management will result in bad teams no matter how much money a team claims to have - no matter the things put in place for revenue sharing and/or competitive balance.

I just don't see the point in revenue sharing and/or competitive balance. I'm sorry. There's nothing more pathetic to me than seeing a "suprise" team turn it around in the NFL via the league gifting them with an easy schedule after a poor year. And the "compettive balance" in the NBA sure does help sad-sacks like the Clippers and Cadavers, doesn't it?

BTW - nice breakdown on the revenue sharing problems, Trip.



My name is Sue!
How do you do??
Now you gonna die!!
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 28 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#23 Posted on
I know it will never happen, but I wish the baseball powers-that-be could rip off the structure of English soccer, where there are twenty teams in the Premier League and the worst three get relegated and replaced by the best three Division One teams. Good-bye Devil Rays and Cubs! Come back when you get better. of you can play your way in.

On a TOTALLY separate note regarding the Yankees, in yesterday's newspaper there was an article about the All-Overpaid team, and we noticed that there wasn't one Yankee one it. In fact, there wasn't one player on the list who had ever *been* a Yankee. Dean Palmer, Greg Vaughn, and Jose Awful-man were a few names on the list. Say what you want to about them, the Yankees don't give guys the big cash unless they deserve it. They actually should be thanked for thaking on some of the bad contracts give to players by the stupid teams. (Sterling Hitchcock and Raul Mondesi for example.)
drjayphd
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 22.4.02
From: Long Island

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 2 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#24 Posted on
Not to mention, JayJay, that they got hosed on the Jay Witasick trade. The Pads got him for a warm bucket of spit, built him up, got the Yankees to trade Jimenez for Witasick, and as soon as he arrived in NYC, he returned to his sucky ways. Then they sent him off to SF, in exchange for John Vander Wal, who hasn't exactly been hitting (although he never really was more than a very good bench player). So they traded their future 2B to San Diego and got a platoon player (on most teams, not just them) in return?

...oh, right, Soriano. Still, how often do I get to gloat? It's another example of a well-run small-market team building themselves up. I'll always have a place in my heart for those trades, right near Lowe/Varitek for Slocumb.
And JayJay, that's something I've been trying to picture happening. Oh, if only we could build this up on a club level.
JALman
Boerewors








Since: 7.7.02
From: Almost there

Since last post: 62 days
Last activity: 8 hours
#25 Posted on

    Originally posted by edturtle


    There's nothing more pathetic to me than seeing a "suprise" team turn it around in the NFL via the league gifting them with an easy schedule after a poor year.


Wrong! NFL Teams receive *harder* schedules for a high performance the previous year. The better a team finishes in their division, they will face harder teams from within their conference.

(...or at least that was how they did it in the previous alignment...)



    And the "compettive balance" in the NBA sure does help sad-sacks like the Clippers and Cadavers, doesn't it?

    BTW - nice breakdown on the revenue sharing problems, Trip.



Nope. The NBA's structure is different than the NFL's, in which there's a cap imposed on younger players, but salary restrictions become more lax (or don't exist at all) for vets, IIRC.
edturtle
Linguica








Since: 24.1.02
From: HI in the middle, round on both ends!

Since last post: 4316 days
Last activity: 3592 days
#26 Posted on

    Originally posted by JALman

      Originally posted by edturtle


      There's nothing more pathetic to me than seeing a "suprise" team turn it around in the NFL via the league gifting them with an easy schedule after a poor year.


    Wrong! NFL Teams receive *harder* schedules for a high performance the previous year. The better a team finishes in their division, they will face harder teams from within their conference.

    (...or at least that was how they did it in the previous alignment...)





Umm, read it again. I referred to poor teams getting easy schedules so they can show some improvement. You know, like how the Falcons made the Super Bowl a few years back.

I agree with you on how strong teams *DO* get the harder schedules though.




      And the "compettive balance" in the NBA sure does help sad-sacks like the Clippers and Cadavers, doesn't it?

      BTW - nice breakdown on the revenue sharing problems, Trip.



    Nope. The NBA's structure is different than the NFL's, in which there's a cap imposed on younger players, but salary restrictions become more lax (or don't exist at all) for vets, IIRC.



And that helps the competitive balance of the NBA, how? The cap is a farce in the NBA. And the Clips and Cadavers have a history of suck.





My name is Sue!
How do you do??
Now you gonna die!!
drjayphd
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 22.4.02
From: Long Island

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 2 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#27 Posted on

    Originally posted by JALman

      Originally posted by edturtle


      And the "compettive balance" in the NBA sure does help sad-sacks like the Clippers and Cadavers, doesn't it?

      BTW - nice breakdown on the revenue sharing problems, Trip.



    Nope. The NBA's structure is different than the NFL's, in which there's a cap imposed on younger players, but salary restrictions become more lax (or don't exist at all) for vets, IIRC.



Yeah, IIRC, the draftees get contract values almost assigned, then they can get raises based on a percentage of their last deal. And they still have the Bird exemption, correct? The cap isn't so much a hard cap on total salaries as much as it is a luxury tax. It's so oppressive that Cuban's the only one willing to go over it, and so it basically subsidized the Mavs. Even the Lakers won't do it, which is why they have no one past ShaqandKobe and Horry. So basically, yes, a team built in the Patriots style can compete, but it's still not yet enough to overcome two dominant players on one team. Sort of like the salary structure of the NBA.
ekedolphin
Scrapple








Since: 12.1.02
From: Indianapolis, IN; now residing in Suffolk, VA

Since last post: 104 days
Last activity: 14 days
#28 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.52
Besides, anyone who knows anything about the NBA can tell you that Clippers owner Donald Sterling isn't interested in winning, just making money. As long as his team is profitable, he doesn't give a shit.

That's why he's let so many of his best players leave over the years. Maurice Taylor. Mark Jackson. Danny Manning. And that's what he'll do with Michael Olowakandi, Darius Miles and all the rest of the guys too, mark my words. He won't dish out the big bucks to keep his best players, so they leave and make money for another team, while Sterling keeps his low-budget roster and rakes in the dough.

But there's a difference between a team whose owner is not interested in winning and a team whose owner is interested in winning, but simply doesn't have the kind of money that Steinbrenner does. If you know the Yankees are going to win the World Series because they bought it in advance during the off-season, then what's the point of watching in the first place? What the hell is the point?

And, yes, I know the Yankees didn't win the World Series last year, the Diamondbacks did. And for the record, I did watch that series, and I marked out like an eight-year-old schoolgirl when 'Zona won. But five out of the last eight championships, or something like that, have been won by the Yankees.

This is the same argument I use to trash the NBA's Lakers, by the way. And I don't think there's any way they're using the same salary cap everyone else is using. But at the same time, you know it will be impossible for them (without major cooperation from several other teams) to practically build their own All-Star team, which is something that teams like the Yankees have been doing. Shaq and Kobe can both play on the same team because the Larry Bird exception exists for players that re-sign with their own team. A player can be offered as much money as possible to stay with his current team, regardless of the salary cap-- but if another team wants to sign him, they must do so while staying under the salary cap.

That's also another reason why NBA teams' rosters aren't constantly changing, because without cap flexibility, many teams can't sign marquee free agents unless the player's willing to take a pay cut. And any trades between teams over the salary cap must occur with nearly-equally-paid players. So you won't see the kind of glorified farm team system that the Yankees seem to love to employ.



“And each and every one of you, when you see me, you will not put your eyes directly on me-- you will look to the ground and you will refer to me as 'Lord Master.'”

Kevin Nash, January 17, 2000

Two-Time, Two-Time Randomly Selected Weiner of the Day, 5/27/02 and 7/3/02

BobHollySTILLRules
Bockwurst








Since: 3.1.02
From: C-Bus, Ohio

Since last post: 4362 days
Last activity: 4362 days
#29 Posted on

    Originally posted by Triple Preperation H
    First off, individual baseball teams ARE separate entities. Sure, they are all under the "umbrella" of MLB and must follow it's rules, but that is the way it is with all business. All doctors have a medical board they must report to, but not all hospitals are the same business. All lawyers must adhere to the standards of the ABA, but not all lawyers are part of the same firm. All restaurants must adhere to the policies of the HRC, but certainly they are not all the same business. Ditto to pharmaceutical companies and the FDA. Teams are individuals and the MLB is just the controlling authority.

    Look at this. The Yankees and Devil Rays are two entirely different organizations. They file separate tax returns. They make individual decisions on how to best run their franchises. They hire their own staffs. And they make their own money.

    (By the way, 99.5% of all McDonalds and BurgerKing's are franchises also. They are independently owned and operated, yet under the same umbrella...just like MLB teams are.



Yes, but if McDonald's is 10 times better than Burger King than no one will go to Burger King right? They're not the Kansas City Burger King. They don't represent a whole city. You have the option to go to Burger King or McDonald's. You won't stop caring about McDonald's because Burger King sucks. However, some people will stop caring about baseball because too many teams are at a disadvantage. Burger King and McDonald's don't have to worry about the viability of the National Fast Food League. MLB teams BETTER worry about their fellow teams or else they're going to struggle themselves. I mean, the Yankees don't sell out every game. But, if more of the teams were good they'd sell more tickets. Man, this post is beginning to not make sense. Let me say this:

If the each baseball team is a separate entity, then the Yankees could just leave Major League Baseball and still be viable. Could they do that? NO. Therefore, they aren't a separate entity.



I am Mr. Positivity! Sometimes.

Bengals, Playoffs, 2002.

DON'T BELIEVE IT!

*I* want to be the right one!
deadbeater
Morcilla








Since: 12.2.02
From: Parts unknown

Since last post: 4349 days
Last activity: 4349 days
#30 Posted on
The Yankee's road games sell at a higher rate than those of anybody else's, to the tune of about $53 million in revenue for the other teams. Thy put fannies not only in Yankee Stadium, but in other stadiums as well.



Molly practices pureresu, which means "Pure Wholesome Goodness" in Japanese.
HitTheSnoozeButton
Boudin rouge








Since: 2.1.02
From: Pittsburgh PA

Since last post: 2067 days
Last activity: 417 days
#31 Posted on

    Originally posted by deadbeater
    The Yankee's road games sell at a higher rate than those of anybody else's, to the tune of about $53 million in revenue for the other teams. Thy put fannies not only in Yankee Stadium, but in other stadiums as well.



That, my friend, is coz everyone goes hoping to see the Yankees get their asses kicked reallll bad.



What a Manuever!

Ross During Jeff's Ladder Match, after the KO chairshot:
"CLIMB THE LADDER KID, MAKE YOURSELF FAMOUS!" Just awesome.
Pages: Prev 1 2
Pages: Prev 1 2Thread ahead: Drayton McLane wants out
Next thread: Indianapolis ABCs
Previous thread: From the producers of "Tanya Harding Bat Night"...
(1505 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Here's the percentage of the vote received last year by players who are again on the ballot, along with the number of years of eligibility remaining after this year. Jim Rice-72.2% (0) Andre Dawson-65.9% (7) Bert Blyleven-61.9% (3) - Lee Smith-43.3% (8)...
- Mr. Boffo, HOF Ballots Mailed (2008)
Related threads: The rich get richer - More...
The W - Baseball - Should Anyone Even Care Anymore? (Page 2)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.103 seconds.