PFSIKH Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 If the Owner can not, or will not, compete, get out of the Game. There is always someone else who may be a more fan-friendly owner. Ok, mbn let's have a sanity check on that. The Red Sox at 120 mill, LAA at 103mil and White Sox at 102mil are the only AL teams within 120 million of the Yankees and they are still a good 80 million by best estimate behind. More likely then not with the Yankee additions, they are site further behind. We will not even get into how much the Yanks (and Sox) can hide in their TV networks. The bottomline is the Yankees still have the most to spend,. This "if the owner cannot or willnot" drivel is stupid. If tomorrow, you inherited a billion dollars, would you invest 80-100 million a year for your team to be competitive for one season? And that is just in the event you were able to afford the 500-800 milion dollars to buy one of the big teams like the Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc. What happens if you can only get your hands on a Minnesota team were 60mil payroll is your limit? Then you are dropping 140mil to be competitive after probably sinking 200-300mil to be an owner. These people are not stupid. MLB and Bud can get down on their hands and knees with mouths open and go through the Forbes richest list and ask them, "Are you wiling to spend 100-800 million on a team and then another 80-150 million a year above your gross revenue to be competitive with the Yankees?" How many do you think will say yes? None. The game's economic system is flawed. Do not not dump that onus on sane owners to do insane things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonEJet Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 By this logic thes Boston Pulkes have......the Saxw with their 120 Million $$$$$$$ payroll should at least WALK away with the wildcard It's not always about the money.....it's about the commitment by the ownership to deliver when the pressure is on....step up to the plate and DELIVER Andruw Jones At least this year, Sawx ownership ****t the bed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbn007 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Ok, mbn let's have a sanity check on that. The Red Sox at 120 mill, LAA at 103mil and White Sox at 102mil are the only AL teams within 120 million of the Yankees and they are still a good 80 million by best estimate behind. More likely then not with the Yankee additions, they are site further behind. We will not even get into how much the Yanks (and Sox) can hide in their TV networks. The bottomline is the Yankees still have the most to spend,. This "if the owner cannot or willnot" drivel is stupid. If tomorrow, you inherited a billion dollars, would you invest 80-100 million a year for your team to be competitive for one season? And that is just in the event you were able to afford the 500-800 milion dollars to buy one of the big teams like the Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc. What happens if you can only get your hands on a Minnesota team were 60mil payroll is your limit? Then you are dropping 140mil to be competitive after probably sinking 200-300mil to be an owner. These people are not stupid. MLB and Bud can get down on their hands and knees with mouths open and go through the Forbes richest list and ask them, "Are you wiling to spend 100-800 million on a team and then another 80-150 million a year above your gross revenue to be competitive with the Yankees?" How many do you think will say yes? None. The game's economic system is flawed. Do not not dump that onus on sane owners to do insane things. Hang on a second here. There is one major point you are missing. And, coming from a fan of a team that actually does spend money, I am quite surprised. Why does anyone buy a team in Professional sports? I know all about the ego gratification, but the real reason is that they want to win, whatever the sport. So, they want to win, but won't do whatever it takes to be competative enough to win. Strange. In their real life world, these very same owners are ruthless in business, willing to do whatever they need to to gain an edge, and grow their business. But when they buy a sports franchise, they get all shy, scared, and dumb. They forget all the business acumen that made them successful in the first palce. Sorry, I do not buy your argument. You buy a team, you know the rules. Abide by them, or get out of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn306 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Ok, mbn let's have a sanity check on that. The Red Sox at 120 mill, LAA at 103mil and White Sox at 102mil are the only AL teams within 120 million of the Yankees and they are still a good 80 million by best estimate behind. More likely then not with the Yankee additions, they are site further behind. We will not even get into how much the Yanks (and Sox) can hide in their TV networks. The bottomline is the Yankees still have the most to spend,. This "if the owner cannot or willnot" drivel is stupid. If tomorrow, you inherited a billion dollars, would you invest 80-100 million a year for your team to be competitive for one season? And that is just in the event you were able to afford the 500-800 milion dollars to buy one of the big teams like the Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc. What happens if you can only get your hands on a Minnesota team were 60mil payroll is your limit? Then you are dropping 140mil to be competitive after probably sinking 200-300mil to be an owner. These people are not stupid. MLB and Bud can get down on their hands and knees with mouths open and go through the Forbes richest list and ask them, "Are you wiling to spend 100-800 million on a team and then another 80-150 million a year above your gross revenue to be competitive with the Yankees?" How many do you think will say yes? None. The game's economic system is flawed. Do not not dump that onus on sane owners to do insane things. Here is where your theory is flawed. You are looking at it from Red Sox perspective and Red Sox perspective/obsession is the being competitive with the Yankees. There is no one that can compete with Yankees money wise. I think it was Seymour who said the problem is the Yankees window of opportunity never closes. BINGO !!!! That is is right there in a nutshell. Three, four years ago the Tigers were the joke of MLB. Illich wasn't spending dime one on them, using the money instead on the Red Wings. Now look at where they are right now. They nurtured some young talent and sprinkled that young talent with some FA, brought in a manager with clue (Sorry all you Alan Trammell and Buddy Bell fans) and now they have the best record in MLB. That is what fans of the Pirates, Brewers, Royals, or D-Rays yearn for. They don't want to be the Yankees. They look at what has happened the last couple of years with the Tigers, Oakland, Minnesota and even to some extent the Marlins and want that for their teams. A team that at least makes a commitment to building a team that can compete for the playoffs and make a run at the World Series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Shawn and MBN good arguments. MBN That is disengenious. They own teams because it is a toy. The nostalgic days of citizen owners like the Yawkeys is long gone. All sports, even hockey, is a business first and foremost. Lets not pretend otherwise. Ewing Kaufman wanted to win, but when he owned the Royals, he did not mind sending his money on his team because the difference between the haves and have nots was not as great. In 1990, they actually led the league in payroll and the difference between their total payroll and the White Sox was only 14 million. I am sure a billionaire could give two craps about 14 million back then. However, now is something totally different. It will take more then 14 million to close the gap. Winning for these guys is making a profit. Anything the Twins or A's accomplish on the field is just gravy. Unless, you own the Yankees, you know it will take close to 80 milion, if you own the Red Sox, to compete with the Yankees. Again I ask, and answer honestly, if you were owner of the Braves, a decent TV contract, decent crowds, except for playoffs, and a billionaire, would you drop money to be competitive with the Yankees? I am not talking picking up 7 million on a 10 million contract. I mean dropping a tenth of your value to be comeptitive and on par for the Yankees...for one season. No gurantee of a championship or a chance to recoup money spent. Would you do it? Yankee fans have an easy time of spending other owners money, but have yet to say what they would do if it was them even in pretend. If you would do what I proposed above, you can cut me a check for a tenth of your assets. 306 I agree. Theo summarized the Sox/Yankee dynamic perfectly. He said, "The Yankees are going to win a 100 games and spend 200 million. The Sox do not comepte with the Yankees." I am sure the Sox would rather spend 80 million, but to be competitive, they need to maximize profits and push their payroll to 120+. The Yankees are the straw that stirs the drink. A residual effect is the Sox spending and trying to compete with the Yankees has seen the White Sox and Angels break the 100 million mark. They both could try to do it the A's and Twins way, but it is easier (sort of) to spend the money. Like I said, I agree with your point. My only point is that owners need to spend their money to comnepte with the Yankees. They are going to do it like you said. Try to build within their own profitable means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winB4eyeDIE Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 I'd just like to point out that 3 big portions of that 200+mill haven't seen much of the field this year. Pavano, Sheffield, and Matsui have all been out most if not all of the year. Scream all you want about salary, we've been winning with Melky in Left, and Crosby in Right(before Abreu of course). If it pisses you off that the Yankees are run like a team that wants to win every year, tough. Deal with it. Boston Sucks, always has, and always will, so whats the F'n difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbn007 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Fair response. But the point is that the Bostons, White Sox, etc., do spend a fair amount, and are competative. This draws fans, and opens other revenue streams. But then you have the Billionaires in KC and other spots who do not even try. They just refuse to attempt to field a decent team. Those guys need to get out. They are in Pittsburgh, KC, Florida, and a few other spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn306 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 I'd just like to point out that 3 big portions of that 200+mill haven't seen much of the field this year. Pavano, Sheffield, and Matsui have all been out most if not all of the year. Scream all you want about salary, we've been winning with Melky in Left, and Crosby in Right(before Abreu of course). If it pisses you off that the Yankees are run like a team that wants to win every year, tough. Deal with it. Boston Sucks, always has, and always will, so whats the F'n difference. Somebody hangs out in Section 39. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winB4eyeDIE Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Somebody hangs out in Section 39. Yes, I used to be a semi-creature. I wouldn't consider myself a full fledge creature because I wasn't part of the "core" group. But I sat right there 2 rows in front of Sheriff Tom from 1995 to 2000. Would any of them be able to pick me out of a line up, 6 years removed probably not. Those seats are the by far the best. Twins shishkabob runs, buying beer in the bathroom speak easy after section went non-alcholic, etc. Loved paying the $6 for GA, then had to get seasons. Me and my buddies had to switch seats with people who had our old seats because we ended up at the wrong end of the row. Basically at every game, we'd see a group of three in our old seats. We'd explain to them that it would be in their best interest to take our seats at the end of the row. Normally they would switch but for those who didn't, they would quickly understand why and oblige us on the transaction later on. But then I got married, moved to PA and had to give them up. Thank God for YES in HD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted August 22, 2006 Author Share Posted August 22, 2006 5 game sweep... JetBoSox won't be here for months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 I'd just like to point out that 3 big portions of that 200+mill haven't seen much of the field this year. Pavano, Sheffield, and Matsui have all been out most if not all of the year. Scream all you want about salary, we've been winning with Melky in Left, and Crosby in Right(before Abreu of course). If it pisses you off that the Yankees are run like a team that wants to win every year, tough. Deal with it. Boston Sucks, always has, and always will, so whats the F'n difference. Sheffield 13 million Matsui 13 million Pavano 8 million Even with out that, the Yanks salary is still almost 180 million. Or, more than 50 million more than anybody else in the league. Nice try, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn306 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Yes, I used to be a semi-creature. I wouldn't consider myself a full fledge creature because I wasn't part of the "core" group. But I sat right there 2 rows in front of Sheriff Tom from 1995 to 2000. Would any of them be able to pick me out of a line up, 6 years removed probably not. Those seats are the by far the best. Twins shishkabob runs, buying beer in the bathroom speak easy after section went non-alcholic, etc. Loved paying the $6 for GA, then had to get seasons. Me and my buddies had to switch seats with people who had our old seats because we ended up at the wrong end of the row. Basically at every game, we'd see a group of three in our old seats. We'd explain to them that it would be in their best interest to take our seats at the end of the row. Normally they would switch but for those who didn't, they would quickly understand why and oblige us on the transaction later on. But then I got married, moved to PA and had to give them up. Thank God for YES in HD. I sat out there from 86-96. My best friend is the guy the who used to sing "Syphillis" after "Take me out to the Bleachers". I wasn't a core guy either. Back then you had your usual core (Chico, Ali, Tina,Captain Bob, etc) Then our group. (Syphillis Joe, Black Ike, Howard the anti-comic). Those days were great. Alot of times I would just go straight from school (Went to Kean College) by myself, knowing that someone from the group was there. I'll date myself here a bit. The first couple of years the bleachers used to cost $3.00. We would chant at the box seaters. We pay three, you pay 10 We have fun you have none. Great times indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winB4eyeDIE Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Yes the Syphillis song, I actually still sing those lyrics if I hear Yesterday on the radio. You're friend is very talented, I enjoyed his work. I worked downtown Manhattan, and would just catch the 4 train straight up. Those days were awesome. Now I'm old. So, I'll root, root, root for the Yankees If they don't win its a fix, suck my **** Cause its 8, 9, 10 beers you're done at the Yankee game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbn007 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Over the years, I must have seen you guys a bunch. I normally get seats in the RF main box (section 323 - 339). Right near Gate 6, easy to exit. A bit more expensive these days. They go for about $52. I recall paying $7.00 for those seats way long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted August 22, 2006 Author Share Posted August 22, 2006 RF overhang is the place to be for $5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Sheffield 13 million Matsui 13 million Pavano 8 million Even with out that, the Yanks salary is still almost 180 million. Or, more than 50 million more than anybody else in the league. Nice try, though. Yankees payroll was 198 - pre Abreu 13+13+8 = 34. Thats a 164 mill team. Just FYI, I could care less what the Yankees payroll is, but I'd like to see it lower next season - and it will be lower, because Sheffield is a goner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 The 2004 Red Sox had the highest payroll of any WS winners, ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 The 2004 Red Sox had the highest payroll of any WS winners, ever. That's because the Yankees haven't won since 2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 That's because the Yankees haven't won since 2000 Well hopefully this year, the Yanks can regain that title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Well hopefully this year, the Yanks can regain that title. I you look at my posts before and during the series you will see that I said the Sox rolled over. No doubt about it the Yankees were superior in every way. For the postseason I'm not so sure how they will do. They feasted on bad Boston pitching. Can they do the same in the postseason against teams with much better pitching staffs? Only time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbn007 Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 I you look at my posts before and during the series you will see that I said the Sox rolled over. No doubt about it the Yankees were superior in every way. For the postseason I'm not so sure how they will do. They feasted on bad Boston pitching. Can they do the same in the postseason against teams with much better pitching staffs? Only time will tell. That argument can be made against every team that has ever made the post-season in the history of Baseball. Think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 That argument can be made against every team that has ever made the post-season in the history of Baseball. Think about it. The more important question is, can the Yankees get a solid performance from their starters and give the ball to Mariano with a lead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbn007 Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 The more important question is, can the Yankees get a solid performance from their starters and give the ball to Mariano with a lead? That, is the question. If they can do that 11 times this October, they will be WS Champs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.