Well, does the new argreement make good organizations (but not as wealthy) like the Twins and Oakland A’s more competitive.
It hasn’t done much for the Kansas City Royals.
Are the baseball teams competitors or partners?
The Whistler - 06:10pm on 10/26/2006
Liberals must not watch baseball.
Sen. Gaylord Conrad’s gal pal, Lucy Calautti does! She rakes in big bucks for doing so.
Kevin - 06:10pm on 10/26/2006
Whistler, from what I can tell most of the “small market” teams that get the money don’t actually spend it on player development. The owners pocket most of it.
It’s just plain socialism, and that never works.
Rob - 06:10pm on 10/26/2006
I thought the CBA required them to spend a certain portion of their revenues. I could be wrong of course.
Is it better to spend the money and put some butts in the seats or to pocket that cash and draw next to nothing?
I don’t exactly buy the socialism because to some degree the baseball teams are partners. It’s not good for baseball (or even the Yankee’s) to win all the time.
Now making the Yankee’s share with the NHL, that’d be socialism.
The Whistler - 06:10pm on 10/26/2006
Minimum payrolls are non-existant in baseball. That’s how come the Royals can have a payroll of $16 Million and the owner can pocket $10 Million.
Don’t bust on the NHL. It’s a beter game than basketball is any day of the week.
bak72 - 06:10pm on 10/26/2006
Don’t bust on the NHL. It’s a beter game than basketball is any day of the week.
I agree with you there. I’ve to the NHL package and everything.
However you have to admit that they have some revenue issues compared to baseball.
The Whistler - 06:10pm on 10/26/2006
I agree with the revenue issues compared to baseball, but baseball has an economic problem worse than the NHL.
In the NHL, at least salaries are tied to revenues. Yes, that is socialist according to some people, but the NHL would be down to 5 teams if some sort of salary cap wasn’t implemented. To me, baseball needs to institute some sort of socailism on their salaries. If the Yankees are paying $200 Million on their payroll, I think it would be safe to assume that Kansas City, Tampa Bay, Florida, and another 10 teams have no chance of getting the same players because of salaries. You also need a minimum salary cap like the NHL does as well. That would prevent owners from pocketing revenue sharing.
bak72 - 06:10pm on 10/26/2006
Liberals must not watch baseball.
No I don’t watch baseball. Talk about boring. Motor-racing though, that’s where the action’s at.
Anarchist Vegan: The Final Insult - 06:10pm on 10/26/2006
Liberals must not watch baseball.
Simply watching doesn’t give them the ability to correctly evaluate what they see. That takes good judgment and the ability to think.
robert108 - 07:10pm on 10/26/2006
Baseball isn’t a perfect metaphor for real life, but the point here is clear: Taking from the rich (read: taxing the hell out of them) and giving to the poor (read:entitlements) doesn’t accomplish what it sets out to accomplish. Which is equality.
Competition is the better choice by far. Don’t prop bad behavior up with handouts.
Well, does the new argreement make good organizations (but not as wealthy) like the Twins and Oakland A’s more competitive.
It hasn’t done much for the Kansas City Royals.
Are the baseball teams competitors or partners?
Sen. Gaylord Conrad’s gal pal, Lucy Calautti does! She rakes in big bucks for doing so.
Whistler, from what I can tell most of the “small market” teams that get the money don’t actually spend it on player development. The owners pocket most of it.
It’s just plain socialism, and that never works.
I thought the CBA required them to spend a certain portion of their revenues. I could be wrong of course.
Is it better to spend the money and put some butts in the seats or to pocket that cash and draw next to nothing?
I don’t exactly buy the socialism because to some degree the baseball teams are partners. It’s not good for baseball (or even the Yankee’s) to win all the time.
Now making the Yankee’s share with the NHL, that’d be socialism.
Minimum payrolls are non-existant in baseball. That’s how come the Royals can have a payroll of $16 Million and the owner can pocket $10 Million.
Don’t bust on the NHL. It’s a beter game than basketball is any day of the week.
I agree with you there. I’ve to the NHL package and everything.
However you have to admit that they have some revenue issues compared to baseball.
I agree with the revenue issues compared to baseball, but baseball has an economic problem worse than the NHL.
In the NHL, at least salaries are tied to revenues. Yes, that is socialist according to some people, but the NHL would be down to 5 teams if some sort of salary cap wasn’t implemented. To me, baseball needs to institute some sort of socailism on their salaries. If the Yankees are paying $200 Million on their payroll, I think it would be safe to assume that Kansas City, Tampa Bay, Florida, and another 10 teams have no chance of getting the same players because of salaries. You also need a minimum salary cap like the NHL does as well. That would prevent owners from pocketing revenue sharing.
No I don’t watch baseball. Talk about boring. Motor-racing though, that’s where the action’s at.
Simply watching doesn’t give them the ability to correctly evaluate what they see. That takes good judgment and the ability to think.
Baseball isn’t a perfect metaphor for real life, but the point here is clear: Taking from the rich (read: taxing the hell out of them) and giving to the poor (read:entitlements) doesn’t accomplish what it sets out to accomplish. Which is equality.
Competition is the better choice by far. Don’t prop bad behavior up with handouts.