Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
NIGHT STALKER

YANKEES' SPENDING MAKES BASEBALL WORLD GO 'ROUND

Recommended Posts

Bugg, if you and others cared to read my posts, I say the same thing about teh Mets and other big Marjket teams.

This IS NOT just a Yankee issue. Why cant Yankee fans see that?

And yes, the same was said back in the 1930's, and the sport has survived.

But that does not make it the best solution or fairest either.

Ultimately, what's fair doesn't come into the equation and never has. Life's unfair. Deal with it, this is just another example. Bad news-Santa Claus is bullsheet too, though hiding my kid's presents is very real.

And has it occurred to you that the Reds, Royals, Pirates, Marlins, et al don't have a problem with this? Meanwhile some teams like the A's, Rays and the Twins aspire to becoming big revenue clubs with new stadiums or markets(the Rays talking about Orlando, the A's moving closer to San Jose).Those are good developments. What is pointless though is crying about piss poor teams who only like cashing checks, don't really care about winning and go through the motions. If they get lucky, great. if not they can act like bigshots and cash the revenue sharing cash anyway. And if they are okay with it, no big market team should lose any sleep over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So are these guys gonna say **** when the socks make tex a $200 million dollar offer.
Be pissed if it happens, but won't complain one bit about the unfairness of it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ultimately, what's fair doesn't come into the equation and never has. Life's unfair. Deal with it, this is just another example. Bad news-Santa Claus is bullsheet too, though hiding my kid's presents is very real.

And has it occurred to you that the Reds, Royals, Pirates, Marlins, et al don't have a problem with this? Meanwhile some teams like the A's, Rays and the Twins aspire to becoming big revenue clubs with new stadiums or markets(the Rays talking about Orlando, the A's moving closer to San Jose).Those are good developments. What is pointless though is crying about piss poor teams who only like cashing checks, don't really care about winning and go through the motions. If they get lucky, great. if not they can act like bigshots and cash the revenue sharing cash anyway. And if they are okay with it, no big market team should lose any sleep over it.

This isn't life, this is sport, you seem to have a problem distinguishing.

Think the A's don't want to keep their high profile players like Zito?

Think The Rays won't have to trade away their young talent as it goes to arbitration?

Think the Reds would not have like to keep Adam Dunn?

think teh Pirtaes would like to keep a Jason Bay?

think teh m arlins wanted to keep Cabrera?

You are acting a little too naive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If baseball were to put in a cap what would happen to the teams that would be over it from previous contracts, like the yanks, mets, sox, cubs, etc. And would the players union even allow it?

i think the owners should stand up to the union.....and it's simple you give the teams a year or 2 to get under the cap....or you give them percentages to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i think the owners should stand up to the union.....and it's simple you give the teams a year or 2 to get under the cap....or you give them percentages to hit.

:bwahaharoll:

How much do you worship socialism ? This is a free market economy. The teams are free to make all the money they can. If they can't "compete", they should fold up and get out. Why did they buy the teams in the first place ? Did they not know they were in "small markets" ? John Moores the owner of the padres bought a team in 1998, got the fans to vote him a new stadium. They did. They also gave him all the property surrounding it which he delveloped and makes tons of money on. Even before this he was a billionaire. Now you want to throw him on the welfare line for a hand out ? NO. He continues to pocket the revenue and the fans lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So are these guys gonna say **** when the socks make tex a $200 million dollar offer.

Nope. This is a Yankee bashing forum. Get your facts straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This isn't life, this is sport, you seem to have a problem distinguishing.

Think the A's don't want to keep their high profile players like Zito?

Think The Rays won't have to trade away their young talent as it goes to arbitration?

Think the Reds would not have like to keep Adam Dunn?

think teh Pirtaes would like to keep a Jason Bay?

think teh m arlins wanted to keep Cabrera?

You are acting a little too naive.

I have a solution. Maybe these teams you mentioned should have owners that can afford the players in today's game.

It's not fair to the fans of their perspective teams if you can't afford to keep players when other teams are willing to pay more for them.

Since I'm a Yankees fan, I never have to worry under this current ownership that they're not willing to pay the price to put a competitive team on the field...I wouldn't trade that for anything. I love the fact that my team will have a chance to make the postseason every year. As you know, there's no guarantee that they will, but the odds are they will.

Life isn't fair, but you make the most of it. I've been a Jets fan for 44 years and wouldn't you know it, the only time the Jets were in the SB, I got stuck in some jungle far away...that's life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a solution. Maybe these teams you mentioned should have owners that can afford the players in today's game.

.

NS-You believe that all markets are created equal and that revenue streams in NY and Boston are teh same as Kansas City?

Is your solution just to have RICHER owners in KC to equal the inequity?

Really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NS-You believe that all markets are created equal and that revenue streams in NY and Boston are teh same as Kansas City?

Is your solution just to have RICHER owners in KC to equal the inequity?

Really?

You left out MN. I pointed out in an earlier post that this guy is loaded...he just doesn't want to spend the money on players. Hey, screw their fans, right? How about Dodger town. Pretty big market wouldn't you say? Yet they don't go crazy in FA spending. I can't worry about these teams...as long as my team takes care of its fans, that's all I can ask for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If baseball were to put in a cap what would happen to the teams that would be over it from previous contracts, like the yanks, mets, sox, cubs, etc. And would the players union even allow it?

That is easy. Those contracts would be grandfathered in until they expire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You left out MN. I pointed out in an earlier post that this guy is loaded...he just doesn't want to spend the money on players. Hey, screw their fans, right? How about Dodger town. Pretty big market wouldn't you say? Yet they don't go crazy in FA spending. I can't worry about these teams...as long as my team takes care of its fans, that's all I can ask for.

Should an owner who is successful in one business be forced to put money in another because it is a failing model? Put good money after bad?

I have not seen the books, so I don't know who is making what. Have you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Should an owner who is successful in one business be forced to put money in another because it is a failing model? Put good money after bad?

I have not seen the books, so I don't know who is making what. Have you?

I read an article maybe last year about this guy. He just refuses to pump money into the team. It's a "failing model" because of why you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I read an article maybe last year about this guy. He just refuses to pump money into the team. It's a "failing model" because of why you think?

You didn't answer my question-Should a small market owner be forced to pump money into a team from other businesses "just to keep up" with the Big Markets?

Why is it a failing model-Uneven revenue streams. Merchandising and local revenues are not shared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You didn't answer my question-Should a small market owner be forced to pump money into a team from other businesses "just to keep up" with the Big Markets?

Why is it a failing model-Uneven revenue streams. Merchandising and local revenues are not shared.

Yes I did answer your question. If Pohland put his money into the team he wouldn't have a failing franchise. People would be coming out to the games. Instead he gets rid of arguably the best pitcher in baseball and the countless others that have fled the Twins...how's big Pappi doing by the way?

You think when Steinbrenner bought the Yankees from CBS they were Fort Knox. No, he put his own money into that team...brought in some high priced players and people started coming out to the ballpark.

Look, if you have a problem with watching your Mets team spend money to improve their team, stay home. Someone else will gladly pay to see your team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You didn't answer my question-Should a small market owner be forced to pump money into a team from other businesses "just to keep up" with the Big Markets?

Why is it a failing model-Uneven revenue streams. Merchandising and local revenues are not shared.

If small market MLB teams really were losing money, they would go out of business. Which means these small market guys are not losing money. Hockey and basketball have had teams on the brink of bankruptcy(and in this economy may soon again!). May be on paper they're depreciating the daylights out of what ever they can(think new stadiums in Cinnicinati, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, and renovations in KC)to show paper loss and avoid paying any taxes)and be elgible for revenue sharing), but they still get baseball national TV and radio and internet money, road gates, licensing, local tv and radio,revenue sharing, and so on-all before selling 1 home ticket.

Edited by Bugg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If small market MLB teams really were losing money, they would go out of business. Which means these small market guys are not losing money. Hockey and basketball have had teams on the brink of bankruptcy(and in this economy may soon again!). May be on paper they're depreciating the daylights out of what ever they can(think new stadiums in Cinnicinati, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, and renovations in KC), but they still get baseball national TV and radio and internet money, road gates, licensing, local tv and radio,revenue sharing, and so on-all before selling 1 home ticket.

I never said they were losing money

Just that they don't have equal money to put in.

That is obvious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I did answer your question. If Pohland put his money into the team he wouldn't have a failing franchise. People would be coming out to the games. Instead he gets rid of arguably the best pitcher in baseball and the countless others that have fled the Twins...how's big Pappi doing by the way?

You think when Steinbrenner bought the Yankees from CBS they were Fort Knox. No, he put his own money into that team...brought in some high priced players and people started coming out to the ballpark.

Look, if you have a problem with watching your Mets team spend money to improve their team, stay home. Someone else will gladly pay to see your team.

Why do you think the NFL shares almost everything equally?

They just stupid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you think the NFL shares almost everything equally?

They just stupid?

Hey, pissing contest is over from my side. I gave you an excellent answer using the owner of my team investing in a franchise that was maybe on a good Saturday or Sunday getting 20,000 people into the park...you get what you pay for has always been my motto.

I started my own business years ago when I lost my job with Pan American Airlines...I used my own money and time to get my business on a roll...thank god it's still thriving even in this terrible economy. I received help from no one and I didn't expect any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey, pissing contest is over from my side. I gave you an excellent answer using the owner of my team investing in a franchise that was maybe on a good Saturday or Sunday getting 20,000 people into the park...you get what you pay for has always been my motto.

I started my own business years ago when I lost my job with Pan American Airlines...I used my own money and time to get my business on a roll...thank god it's still thriving even in this terrible economy. I received help from no one and I didn't expect any.

My dad lost a job with Pan American too, but that is beside any point here.

ll baseball revenue streams are not created equally. That is a no brainer.

Sorry that you think it was a pissing contest. It was a dialogue. No one proven right or wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Yankees share some of their money. It is because of the Yankees that some teams have the amount of money they have, so enough of that bull****. And secondly, the Yankees had a lot of dead money and they still don't have a higher cap # this year than they do next year. So eat a bag of dicks, haters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The yankess have the most money because they are a brand of excellence. Just like the red socks. **** the market. If these teams spent some money and won some **** consistently they would see their markets magically expand. Don't cry for billionaire owners when the Yankees are in the red and still spending money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Twins owner (Carl Pohlad) has more money than the Steinbrenners and refuses to dump it into this team...sorry, I just don't feel sorry for their fans. And the Twins aren't the only ones out there with cash to burn.

NS and Bugg -

Why should he?

The stadium they are building is projected to cost $600 million. That would be just under one fifth of his net worth. Will this put him on equal footing with the big market teams? No. They still have TV deals that dwarf what the Twins earn. That is assuming they have a local TV deal. They still will take in more in tickets sales and clothing.

I will propose this question to you. Even if it was as black and white as you want to make it out to be and we know it is not because Pohlad's 2.8 million is not exactly liquid, but I digress.

If you had $2.8 billion, would you sink $600 million of your own money and then invest another 100 million a year to compete with the big markets? Knowing you will go bankrupt in 20 or so years? I might not be the brightest bulb, but that does not pass the common sense test. It would be stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NS and Bugg -

Why should he?

The stadium they are building is projected to cost $600 million. That would be just under one fifth of his net worth. Will this put him on equal footing with the big market teams? No. They still have TV deals that dwarf what the Twins earn. That is assuming they have a local TV deal. They still will take in more in tickets sales and clothing.

I will propose this question to you. Even if it was as black and white as you want to make it out to be and we know it is not because Pohlad's 2.8 million is not exactly liquid, but I digress.

If you had $2.8 billion, would you sink $600 million of your own money and then invest another 100 million a year to compete with the big markets? Knowing you will go bankrupt in 20 or so years? I might not be the brightest bulb, but that does not pass the common sense test. It would be stupid.

That is BS too. You think that after 3-4 years of putting a winning product on the field the market wouldn't expand? The owners know exactly what they are doing and are content to put a ****ty product on the field and still walk away with millions in profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Yankees share some of their money. It is because of the Yankees that some teams have the amount of money they have, so enough of that bull****. And secondly, the Yankees had a lot of dead money and they still don't have a higher cap # this year than they do next year. So eat a bag of dicks, haters.

You make our point precisely.

The Yankees (and some other) can AFFORD to have dead money. Most other teams can't

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Naive

It's not Naive. The yankees are a brand, not a team. The yankee hats everyone wears. It has become a symbol associated with success. The royals? associated with failure. If a team puts out a divisional champion for 3-4-5-6 years in a row the fan base will grow and so will profits, merchendise sales and a bigger tv deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not Naive. The yankees are a brand, not a team. The yankee hats everyone wears. It has become a symbol associated with success. The royals? associated with failure. If a team puts out a divisional champion for 3-4-5-6 years in a row the fan base will grow and so will profits, merchendise sales and a bigger tv deal.

The reason the Mets were able to afford Santana is because of THEIR brand.

See how dumb that sounds?

The Royals, in the late 70's and early 80's were associate with success MORE than the Yankees. They DID put a division winner out on the filed all of those years.

But Free Agency does not allow that to happen now. At one time, the Royals were the model everyone else wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not Naive. The yankees are a brand, not a team. The yankee hats everyone wears. It has become a symbol associated with success. The royals? associated with failure. If a team puts out a divisional champion for 3-4-5-6 years in a row the fan base will grow and so will profits, merchendise sales and a bigger tv deal.

They also have the benefit of selling hats with "NY" on them in New York. You know how many tourists buy Yankees hats? A LOT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The reason the Mets were able to afford Santana is because of THEIR brand.

See how dumb that sounds?

The Royals, in the late 70's and early 80's were associate with success MORE than the Yankees. They DID put a division winner out on the filed all of those years.

But Free Agency does not allow that to happen now. At one time, the Royals were the model everyone else wanted.

You're talking about the 70's this is 40 years later, times change. The Mets have a brand as well. The point with the Yankee caps is true. I'm just saying, if the royals won the division 5 years running I'm willing to bet that they find some money in increased ticket price, memorabilia... etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A successful Product in New York > A successful product in KC, and its not even close. If you don't realize this there really is no argument. It would be equivalent to debating a rock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think the Mess have overpaid for a closer

Between Wags and FRod, what are they paying $25 Mill?

Jeez, and you think the Yanks overpay:rolleyes:

Wags is out for the season. The Mets don't sign KRod if that is not the case.

Big market teams will spend. The Yanks to the extreme.

The funniest part is last season the standard talk from many Yank fans was how they had returned to the mid to late 90's model of building the team through the farm and good clubhouse type role players while not overpaying for every FA on the market.

We heard that talk endlessly. Unfortunately it lasted about three Ian Kennedy and Phil Hughes starts with 43 disappointing Brett Gardner AB's tossed in for good measure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A successful Product in New York > A successful product in KC, and its not even close. If you don't realize this there really is no argument. It would be equivalent to debating a rock.

You're 100% right and not every city can be new york. But, if you're telling me that a team in a "small" market couldn't afford 80-100m a year if they actually tried to win and establish their fan base and market it would be the same but on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're 100% right and not every city can be new york. But, if you're telling me that a team in a "small" market couldn't afford 80-100m a year if they actually tried to win and establish their fan base and market it would be the same but on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Hey, the Braves and Cubs expanded their exposure nationally through Cable TV. In theory, any team could get on that bandwagon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how Yankee hatred produces the most swollen vaginas on this forum. This thread clearly proves it. If the Mets of Sux would've signed these 2 players, no one would be complaining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:bwahaharoll:

How much do you worship socialism ? This is a free market economy. The teams are free to make all the money they can. If they can't "compete", they should fold up and get out. Why did they buy the teams in the first place ? Did they not know they were in "small markets" ? John Moores the owner of the padres bought a team in 1998, got the fans to vote him a new stadium. They did. They also gave him all the property surrounding it which he delveloped and makes tons of money on. Even before this he was a billionaire. Now you want to throw him on the welfare line for a hand out ? NO. He continues to pocket the revenue and the fans lose.

what are you talking about? what does putting a hard cap in place so tjhat teams can't spend over a certain amount and a floor in so that teams have to spend a certain amount have to do with what you're talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  



Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
×
×
  • Create New...