Alaska Darin Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 The NFL formula works great. I will never understand Bills fans who say "screw the small market" teams in baseball. Darin, you are the King of Irony (I mean that in a good way). You have to get it. 196151[/snapback] Except you can't compare the NFL to any other sport because they are the only sport who get television numbers NO MATTER WHERE THEY ARE. There isn't an NFL franchise in LA and they still get huge ratings. It has nothing to do with "getting it". The BILLS were uber competitive without a salary cap in the early 90s.
Yoho Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 Except you can't compare the NFL to any other sport because they are the only sport who get television numbers NO MATTER WHERE THEY ARE. There isn't an NFL franchise in LA and they still get huge ratings. It has nothing to do with "getting it". The BILLS were uber competitive without a salary cap in the early 90s. 196174[/snapback] No salary cap in the glory days but always revenue sharing. You correctly point out that the national TV contract is where the money is. Imagine if the NFL allowed each team to sell the rights to their home games and keep the revenues. The Bills would get a tenth of the money that the Giants would (pure demographics). Think we would still be competing if all teams were allowed to spend an unlimited amount with a paltry luxury tax kicking in at amount way above the Bills revenue stream?
Like A Mofo Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 Did the Yankees wake up one day with all this money?????? YES!!!!!!!!! They are in a metropolitan area of 25 million people. It is easy to sell tickets, the television contract is huge. So under that theory the Mets and Yankees should be equal correct???? How come they arent?? Just because of the amount of people in the area?? Sure the helps I wont deny that, but thats not the only reason. Then the NY Islanders should be a powerhouse in the NHL too when it comes to money, and they arent. In any form of competition, there will be haves and have-nots, plain and simple. Would I like to see a better structre for salary control in baseball? Sure...but look at the NBA...how come some teams (Golden State, Clippers, Bucks, Atlanta Hawks just to name a few) are almost ALWAYS a joke under a salary cap structure??? What is their problem?? NO system is perfect...NONE (maybe the NFL, but the NFL cannot be compared to the other sports)
Alaska Darin Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 No salary cap in the glory days but always revenue sharing. You correctly point out that the national TV contract is where the money is. Imagine if the NFL allowed each team to sell the rights to their home games and keep the revenues. The Bills would get a tenth of the money that the Giants would (pure demographics). Think we would still be competing if all teams were allowed to spend an unlimited amount with a paltry luxury tax kicking in at amount way above the Bills revenue stream? 196191[/snapback] Baseball has revenue sharing and will never have a lucrative league wide television contract. The sport doesn't translate well to the medium, unlike football (which is perfect for it). Baseball owners don't care and haven't ever. Doesn't matter which end of the fiscal spectrum we're talking about.
Alaska Darin Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 So under that theory the Mets and Yankees should be equal correct???? How come they arent?? Just because of the amount of people in the area?? Sure the helps I wont deny that, but thats not the only reason. Then the NY Islanders should be a powerhouse in the NHL too when it comes to money, and they arent. In any form of competition, there will be haves and have-nots, plain and simple. Would I like to see a better structre for salary control in baseball? Sure...but look at the NBA...how come some teams (Golden State, Clippers, Bucks, Atlanta Hawks just to name a few) are almost ALWAYS a joke under a salary cap structure??? What is their problem?? NO system is perfect...NONE (maybe the NFL, but the NFL cannot be compared to the other sports) 196198[/snapback] And the salary cap has seriously watered down the quality of the NFL and penalized the teams that are properly managed.
Yoho Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 So under that theory the Mets and Yankees should be equal correct???? How come they arent?? Just because of the amount of people in the area?? Sure the helps I wont deny that, but thats not the only reason. Then the NY Islanders should be a powerhouse in the NHL too when it comes to money, and they arent. In any form of competition, there will be haves and have-nots, plain and simple. Would I like to see a better structre for salary control in baseball? Sure...but look at the NBA...how come some teams (Golden State, Clippers, Bucks, Atlanta Hawks just to name a few) are almost ALWAYS a joke under a salary cap structure??? What is their problem?? NO system is perfect...NONE (maybe the NFL, but the NFL cannot be compared to the other sports) 196198[/snapback] The Mets television contract is huge too. They just decided to throw their money at some ridiculous people. They are probably still paying Mo Vaughn. I never said spending money guarantees success and I give the Yanks credit for signing very talented players. But when the Yankees infield payroll is larger than other teams entire payroll (read earlier post- not because the other team is cheap but because there is not enough money to be made in that metropolitan area), the playing field is so unlevel that it takes away the drama for fans of all but the highest paid teams. Not fun to me and I miss the days when all teams had a legitimate chance.
erynthered Posted January 6, 2005 Author Posted January 6, 2005 The Mets television contract is huge too. They just decided to throw their money at some ridiculous people. They are probably still paying Mo Vaughn. I never said spending money guarantees success and I give the Yanks credit for signing very talented players. But when the Yankees infield payroll is larger than other teams entire payroll (read earlier post- not because the other team is cheap but because there is not enough money to be made in that metropolitan area), the playing field is so unlevel that it takes away the drama for fans of all but the highest paid teams. Not fun to me and I miss the days when all teams had a legitimate chance. 196224[/snapback] For someone who is not a baseball fan anymore, you sure seem to follow it.
Alaska Darin Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 Not fun to me and I miss the days when all teams had a legitimate chance. 196224[/snapback] When was that? I don't remember it.
Alaska Darin Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 Not fun to me and I miss the days when all teams had a legitimate chance. 196224[/snapback] When was that? I don't remember it.
NYGPopgun10 Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 Blue he is going for both reasons. But too bad he wont get the WS. And Clements your the goddamn moron!! Say all you want about massachusetts !@#$!! I dont give a damn. !@#$ing !@#$!! Did this guy have too much ale today?
Like A Mofo Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 The Mets television contract is huge too. They just decided to throw their money at some ridiculous people. They are probably still paying Mo Vaughn. I never said spending money guarantees success and I give the Yanks credit for signing very talented players. But when the Yankees infield payroll is larger than other teams entire payroll (read earlier post- not because the other team is cheap but because there is not enough money to be made in that metropolitan area), the playing field is so unlevel that it takes away the drama for fans of all but the highest paid teams. Not fun to me and I miss the days when all teams had a legitimate chance. 196224[/snapback] Ok so then your argument also has another aspect to it...its the bad CHOICES the Mets have made too...hence, proving having a good organization that knows baseball first is still the most important component of building a winning franchise....so many Yankee haters think its ONLY money when it isnt...this $$$$ buying mode that King George is doing right now without building a good farm system WILL catch up with the Yankees. Bank on it.
Like A Mofo Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 When was that? I don't remember it. 196246[/snapback] If you play games on PS2 or XBox (MLB 2004, NBA Live 2005 etc) thats about the only time Ive ever seen everyone having a fair chance in the sports world. Thus it is pure fantasy.
Yoho Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 When was that? I don't remember it. 196248[/snapback] From 1980- 1990, the World Series was won by Philadelphia, L.A., St. louis, Baltimore, Detroit, Kansas City, Mets, Minnesota, L.A., Oakland, Cinncinatti. Sounds like a lot of teams from both large and small markets to me.
erynthered Posted January 6, 2005 Author Posted January 6, 2005 Did this guy have too much ale today? 196264[/snapback] Ya think?
Like A Mofo Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 From 1980- 1990, the World Series was won by Philadelphia, L.A., St. louis, Baltimore, Detroit, Kansas City, Mets, Minnesota, L.A., Oakland, Cinncinatti. Sounds like a lot of teams from both large and small markets to me. 196279[/snapback] 2001 Arizona 2002 Anaheim 2003 Florida 2004 Boston Red Sox...... Similar isnt it?
Alaska Darin Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 Did this guy have too much ale today? 196264[/snapback] Or not enough. You have to excuse Vinny. He has issues. Probably wears a helmet.
Yoho Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 Ok so then your argument also has another aspect to it...its the bad CHOICES the Mets have made too...hence, proving having a good organization that knows baseball first is still the most important component of building a winning franchise....so many Yankee haters think its ONLY money when it isnt...this $$$$ buying mode that King George is doing right now without building a good farm system WILL catch up with the Yankees. Bank on it. 196267[/snapback] Take off your Yankee goggles and read what I have been going on about. There are only 8 -10 teams that have a chance to win the World Series unless a small market team is willing to lose money. Some of the 8 - 10 teams are so poorly run, that despite their economic advantage they wont compete either. Therefore the well run teams, Yankees, Red Sox, Braves are almost always in the playoffs.
Like A Mofo Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 Take off your Yankee goggles and read what I have been going on about. There are only 8 -10 teams that have a chance to win the World Series unless a small market team is willing to lose money. Some of the 8 - 10 teams are so poorly run, that despite their economic advantage they wont compete either. Therefore the well run teams, Yankees, Red Sox, Braves are almost always in the playoffs. 196296[/snapback] My Yankee goggles arent on, so dont label me like you label everyone else. And even when there were 12 teams in MLB there were a couple have not's too (Washington Seantors, Philly A's).....you will ALWAYS have that, period. Ad you said it yourself, so dont go on and on and on about money: Some of the 8 - 10 teams are so poorly run, that despite their economic advantage they wont compete either. Therefore the well run teams, Yankees, Red Sox, Braves are almost always in the playoffs
Yoho Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 My Yankee goggles arent on, so dont label me like you label everyone else. And even when there were 12 teams in MLB there were a couple have not's too (Washington Seantors, Philly A's).....you will ALWAYS have that, period. 196302[/snapback] First, there were always at least 16 teams in the major leagues since 1900. Second, of course, there were poorly run organizations that dont compete at any time. Compare the Steelers and 49'ers. But it is not because there is a systematic bias against one teams success but because one organization is run better than the other given the same resource pool to work with. Third, who else have I ever lablelled? Where did that come from?
wwovince Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 Alaska I dont find that funny !@#$! I have a close friend who is in that state. You !@#$ing PRICK!
Recommended Posts