Baseball needs a salary cap.

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ I don't think contraction is the answer. We don't have that many teams, after all. Just 30 - 14 in the AL, 16 in the NL. And even the poor performing teams still have fans.

What we need to do there is minor things, like get rid of the few remaining crappy stadiums (Oakland, Tampa Bay) and concentrate on building new talent.

And Cicero, I hope your 49ers get the new stadium they've been hankering for. Talk about crap, the Stick is beyond crap. It's *shit*.

 

[Canadave]

Instead of instituting a salary cap to lower the level of the best teams to that of the remainder of the leagues, why not close down or combine poorly performing teams? We have so many teams in our major sports that it's difficult to keep track of them all. (I didn't see the Houston Texans play until they'd been in the league for more than seven years, and I don't think I've ever seen the Rangers or the Padres.) With the exception of a few powerhouses, the best players are spread over many teams, rather than concentrated in fewer, more memorable squads.

Hell no. If my Jays were contracted, I would stop watching baseball. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. I think all that a league contraction would do would be to lose millions of fans.

 

[PlainSimpleJoel]

Here in Australia, we've had a salary cap in the Rugby League since 1990, and with the NRL since 1998 and in that time had 8 (out of 16) teams to win a premiership. I just hope a strike doesn't happen. All teams have lost players, as they simply couldn't afford them.

As a fan of sport - I believe a salary cap makes a fairer competition. It is something I read everyday as there are some problems and it is a worry.

Instead of instituting a salary cap to lower the level of the best teams to that of the remainder of the leagues, why not close down or combine poorly performing teams? We have so many teams in our major sports that it's difficult to keep track of them all. (I didn't see the Houston Texans play until they'd been in the league for more than seven years, and I don't think I've ever seen the Rangers or the Padres.) With the exception of a few powerhouses, the best players are spread over many teams, rather than concentrated in fewer, more memorable squads.

Hell no. If my Jays were contracted, I would stop watching baseball. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. I think all that a league contraction would do would be to lose millions of fans.

Don't give up. Protest it. They can always come back. Not sure of any of teams in world sport who have done it besides South Sydney Rabbitohs.

To close down clubs because they aren't performing or their stadiums, will annoy those fans. I don't know if mergers would work there. Concessions for two teams who wish to merge and form a more powerful team can help (ie Draft Picks)

 

[Aragorn]

While a cap would be helpful, some of the owners won't go for it because there will probably be a minimum payroll requirement too. Supposedly some of the crappy teams with low payrolls and lower attendance are actually netting the largest profits per season because they're not putting the money back into their teams.

 

[SmoothieX]

^ I agree with that. If they put a floor on payrolls, the Marlins of the world will cry foul.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

While a cap would be helpful, some of the owners won't go for it because there will probably be a minimum payroll requirement too. Supposedly some of the crappy teams with low payrolls and lower attendance are actually netting the largest profits per season because they're not putting the money back into their teams.

Exactly! People are always bitching about the Yankees and their huge payroll and how they supposedly buy championships and all that stupid crap, but at least the Steinbrenners put all that money where it should be - back into the team. You don't see Hal, Hank or even the Boss sitting on some yacht somewhere. The Steinbrenners may be hardasses but they spend their money wisely - to help the team.

And contraction is not the answer. Not anymore. Not now that we've gone to all this time and money and work to build these beautiful new ballparks!

 

[Aragorn]

^ It's not crap. How many other teams can legitimately have a $200 million payroll?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Who cares? They made their money through entirely legitimate means. So long as they spend it wisely, what's the problem?

 

[Aragorn]

^ Of course you don't care. You're a Yankees fan. Equality is the last thing you want in baseball.

But a cap is never going to happen anyway because the union is too corrupt and powerful. Just like the DH isn't going away because it's a starting position that can have a seven figure salary.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Of course you don't care. You're a Yankees fan. Equality is the last thing you want in baseball.

Hey, wait a minute, don't flame me for any of this...

 

[Aragorn]

I'm not flaming you. Fans of every team would love it if their team could outspend everyone else at will. You think if the Pirates could have a $200 million payroll that their fans would have any sympathy for the plight of the Reds?

 

[Lindley]

I'm not flaming you.

Well, you did call him a Yankees fan.....

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I know that it's considered very 'cool' to hate the Yankees, but I just don't think it's fair to label them as some sort of ultimate evil uncaring malignant force just because they have a lot of money. Yeah, they DO have money. But like I keep saying, they spend it wisely. You gotta give them THAT much.

I mean, what's your favorite team? How would you react if they had as much money as the Yankees and spent it the same way?

 

[clint g]

I'm not flaming you. Fans of every team would love it if their team could outspend everyone else at will. You think if the Pirates could have a $200 million payroll that their fans would have any sympathy for the plight of the Reds?

This is something that needs to be considered. Each team is a business with investors. If the team can't generate enough money to remain competitive then that is their issue.

they spend it wisely

One need only look at the pre-Ike Davis Mets to see how important this is

 

[Canadave]

I'm not flaming you. Fans of every team would love it if their team could outspend everyone else at will. You think if the Pirates could have a $200 million payroll that their fans would have any sympathy for the plight of the Reds?

This is something that needs to be considered. Each team is a business with investors. If the team can't generate enough money to remain competitive then that is their issue.

I don't know about that. Very, very few teams can afford a $200 million payroll and hope to remain profitable. That's not the fault of the teams at all, either, that's just how it is: most markets simply can't pump that much money into a baseball team. A salary cap would enforce a certain level of fairness, while preventing teams from having to consider bankruptcy in order to remain competitive.

 

[Roger Wilco]

But how is it unfair that one club has more money than another? Why shouldn't the Yankees be allowed to make a profit from being more popular than the club you support and spend that money on its players?

 

[Canadave]

^ It's simply unbalanced and boring. I think that leagues should be trying to even out competition to a certain level, because it makes sports much more interesting. I'll point to the NHL once again as a perfect example of this. At the other end of the scale, you've got the English Premier League, where it's the same four clubs at the top of the table every single year. I don't want to see baseball degenerate to that point.

So maybe "unfair" was the wrong word, but I still think it's in the best interests of the league to reign in unchecked spending, and ensure that all teams have a shot at being competitive from year-to-year.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The simple fact is this: You want to be competitive, get better players. That's the end of it, really. How a team does that is up to them. Sure, some teams have more money, but as long as they got that money by legitimate means, it is not the government's business to tell them they must give it up. What is this, Robin Hood?

And yes, probably a lot of the reason I feel this way *is* because I'm a Yankee fan. Fine. I get that. But that also works the other way: people who do want a salary cap *aren't* Yankees fans and are motivated by jealousy and a desire to hurt a team that they hate.

 

[Smiley]

I think a lot of sports fans just want an entertaining game and a fighting chance at the championship every so often. I don't want to see any team or small group of teams totally dominate for very long. Even if it were the Suns, Diamondbacks, or Cardinals that were in a similar spot to the Yankees, I would support a measure to help spread the talent around.

 

[Roger Wilco]

^ It's simply unbalanced and boring. I think that leagues should be trying to even out competition to a certain level, because it makes sports much more interesting. I'll point to the NHL once again as a perfect example of this. At the other end of the scale, you've got the English Premier League, where it's the same four clubs at the top of the table every single year. I don't want to see baseball degenerate to that point.

So maybe "unfair" was the wrong word, but I still think it's in the best interests of the league to reign in unchecked spending, and ensure that all teams have a shot at being competitive from year-to-year.

Yes, it does make the league more interesting, and it's doable in North America because the leagues themselves de-facto have a monopoly (even in ice hockey still mostly). If the English Premier League adopted a salary cap, the best players would just go to Spain or Italy...

But on the other hand most fans of smaller teams are ok with not being really competitive there; if you support West Ham you know you'll never win the championship, but there's still plenty of sport and drama to get excited about and maybe, maybe some time in one miracle year?...
[btw: Scotland is a much more extreme example to make your point, the last time a team other than Celtic or Rangers won the league was in 1984–85, and even before that it was rare]