RANT: It's not even November Yet and...

[Enjoy Terror]

As an Orioles fan, I understand the frustration, but yes, teams like the Royals or the Twins or the A's have to a tougher time than we do. they have to be better at everything not involving spending dollars. Personally, I'd like to see a team salary cap, as well as a floor. Ratchet the payrolls down to 110 million a year, at most, and 65 million at the least. Now,the big spenders can still spend big, but they can't outspend the lowest spenders by 3 or 4 or 5 times. And, the small market teams may have to spend a bit more, but I think it forces a better team onto the field.

If parity in the MLB existed like it does in the NFL, the Twins, A's and Royals would have a better shot at going to the playoffs more often and would probably have larger fanbases to encourage more spending. The Royals will never have the fanbase that New York does, but if the Royals compete every year, maybe some Cardinals fans living in Kansas City might actually show up to Kaufmann stadium once in a while.

[Guest rochester]

The prospect of the Yankees opening up the check book already has me infuriated. It makes me sick that the O's can totally covet a player like Teixeira and potentially not even have a chance to sign him. We certainly won't be signing Tex AND Darvish, FRod or Sabathia. I'm not advocating that we do. I am saying that it's patently unfair that a few teams operate under totally different rules based on money that they make purely by virtue of their geography. At least we have a decent revenue stream. I feel terrible for Athletics, Twins and Royals fans.

MLB has a real problem on its hands and they really need to fix it. The Yankees, Mets, Red Sox and Angels are likely to target several VERY expensive FAs this year while other teams, particularly the Orioles, are much more limited in what we can realistically do.

I am anything but a socialist, but MLB needs to go to 100% revenue for its own good. This is sports, not the free market. Everyone should be playing with the same rules.

End Rant.

Did something happen or said to generate this?

Saying that, I could not agree more:rolleyestf:

[lint06]

If parity in the MLB existed like it does in the NFL, the Twins, A's and Royals would have a better shot at going to the playoffs more often and would probably have larger fanbases to encourage more spending. The Royals will never have the fanbase that New York does, but if the Royals compete every year, maybe some Cardinals fans living in Kansas City might actually show up to Kaufmann stadium once in a while.

I agree with you, and it is sad for KC, because they have a great stadium, and when I'm at the K I can see the fans are knowledgable and enjoy the game; perhaps for that alone, I wish parity in MLB.

[LookinUp]

Is this really a problem? The Sox-NYY deal, as annoying as it is, has been good for baseball. When the Yanks get beat, it's a big story. And when the Rays beat the Sox here in a couple days, it's going to be a good story.

The bigger story will be one that the TV execs see...declining ratings for the world series. All parties are way too vested in NY/Boston success. I'd argue that the ratings would be higher for a Rays series if people from more cities cared.

As much as I hate the Yanks and the Red Sox, it would be a travesty to now punish them for building their franchises into rich, money-making enterprises. Sure, the Yanks are spending 180M in payroll, but they're still making money. I can't hate them for being smart businessmen.

I love that they're smart business men. Of course, many could argue that they're not that smart at all with that payroll. We could argue that they're a huge benefactor of their market and that's the only reason they've remained up on their perch. The truth is somewhere in between, IMO.

The Sox do it a more intelligent way.

The Sox's more intelligent way is going to ruin the chances of other franchises competing long term. They will build minor league depth by over paying for players that were traditionally obtainable by the Rays of the world...guys like Arietta and Bobby Bundy. The rest of the league is starting to catch on to this. That means the competition for those players will ramp up and, just like the competition for FA's, the small market teams will be largely priced out of this market...without changes of course.

The Rays do it the best way and should give hope to teams like KC and Pitt. The Rays are going to be good for years to come and they still have a stacked system. Next year, the Rays attendance will be up, their merchandising is going to go through the roof. Someday sooner than you think, the Rays are going to be able to afford a $125M payroll.

Taking 11 years to build a winner is the best way? I hope they can sustain this, but I'll believe they can go to a $125 million payroll when I see it.

[Satyr3206]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know what each teams share is from the luxury tax the Skankees pay?

[LookinUp]

I wouldn't even begin to understand how to work it out fairly. How do you set the boundaries on new contracts while trying to get rid of the current ones?

I don't believe implementation would be the problem. Reasonable parties could agree on a method. The problem would be with powerful interests giving up their competitive advantage.

The good news is that things tend to change when they become absurd. If the Yankees go overboard this offseason...say they sign Teixeira, Sabathia and Darvish all for over $100m each...it might get enough attention to mobilize people.

My worry is that the current revenue sharing is enough to shut people up. That's a shame because the revenue sharing alone is not enough to fix the problem.

[Enjoy Terror]

Next year, the Rays attendance will be up, their merchandising is going to go through the roof. Someday sooner than you think, the Rays are going to be able to afford a $125M payroll.

It's nice to think that way, but the Marlins have two world series titles in the past decade and a whole lot of talent to look forward to watching in the near future, but they can't get more than 5000 people to any game nowadays. Explain that logic to me, and I'll bet it extends to the Rays as well. The Rays may show the world they are ready to be contenders for a long time, but I don't expect them to have a lot more fans because of it.

[Greg Pappas]

I would argue that this is false if you look at the long term. Selig's done a couple of things right. Interleague play has paid dividends. That will continue, but on a smaller scale than before. Similarly, the new stadium craze has paid off immensely. This too shall pass. Heck, from a bottom line perspective, Selig was completely smart to ignore steroids. That certainly paid off, but that ship has sailed as well.

I look at this sport and see a sport that's losing popularity with young people because of the competition from any of 100 different areas. I see a sport that is fooling itself. It's a benefactor of the times, not a better product.

The competition is unavoidable. However, giving people in more cities something to root for should be their primary goal. This will bite MLB in the butt if they don't fix things. Unfortunately, TV revenue from the NY market seems to be their goal. I just think their priorities are out of wack.

We agree again... my point was that since baseball is making money hand over fist, they won't change.

People with the vision to see what will be are few and far between. We are a deeply caring and -in my view- insightful minority. Shame... but who knows, maybe things will be different than we anticipate. I hope so.

[LookinUp]

We agree again... my point was that since baseball is making money hand over fist, they won't change.

People with the vision to see what will be are few and far between. We are a deeply caring and -in my view- insightful minority. Shame... but who knows, maybe things will be different than we anticipate. I hope so.

People with vision should be in charge.

[Greg Pappas]

People with vision should be in charge.

Again... we see it the same. Good thread and train of thought(s).

[Skeletor]

It's nice to think that way, but the Marlins have two world series titles in the past decade and a whole lot of talent to look forward to watching in the near future, but they can't get more than 5000 people to any game nowadays. Explain that logic to me, and I'll bet it extends to the Rays as well. The Rays may show the world they are ready to be contenders for a long time, but I don't expect them to have a lot more fans because of it.

Refresh my memory here, but the Marlins were pretty open that they were a one off and there was going to be a firesale. I can imagine that didn't go over well with the fanbase.

[LookinUp]

Refresh my memory here, but the Marlins were pretty open that they were a one off and there was going to be a firesale. I can imagine that didn't go over well with the fanbase.

The point is that sustained competitive teams build fanbases. Flash-in-the-pan success builds band wagons. There's a lot of competition in South Florida, from everything from soccer to the beach. It's a tough place to build a franchise for that reason. They need loyalty, and only sustained competitive teams can do that.

[Skeletor]

The point is that sustained competitive teams build fanbases. Flash-in-the-pan success builds band wagons. There's a lot of competition in South Florida, from everything from soccer to the beach. It's a tough place to build a franchise for that reason. They need loyalty, and only sustained competitive teams can do that.

That was my point.

[LookinUp]

That was my point.

Well, great point then. :laughlol:

[wildcard]

To say that the high payroll gives the big spending team an advantage is accurate.

To say that teams that don't spend as much have no chance is a hard argument.

2002 WS Winners Angels -$61M

2005 WS Winners White Sox - $75M

2006 AL Champs Tigers - $82M

2008 AL Eastern Div Champs - $43M

Cleveland, Oakland and Minnesota have all made the playoffs since 2002.

And all these teams are in the AL.

I'd have to say that the Orioles have just not done it right in the last 11 seasons.