What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Marlins Team Payroll now at $8 million (1 Viewer)

The real problem with the economic model of MLB. If any team has a payroll that isn't $10 million higher then what they receive in revenue sharing and luxury tax subsidies - at least - they should be punished severly by baseball.
No, the real problem is that not all teams have access to the same revenue streams, which creates competitive imbalance. When one team has $300 million in revenue and another has $150 million, there's a built-in flaw there, not that it'll ever get fixed.Without a salary cap, a salary floor makes no sense at all.

Sure, the Marlins should be spending more, but if they're gutting their team to make another run with guys who they can control for a long time, there's nothing wrong with that. And the money they don't spend now will be available when it can actually make a difference. In 2 or 3 years, they may have another strong roster of guys who they control the rights to for a short window of opportunity.
:thumbup: Having a salary floor is dumb. I can't imagine requiring the Marlins to have to spend an additional 20-30MM this year especially with the mediocre talent that is available. Everyone has there model of how to run a franchise. Not every market can support a team with a 150MM payroll. Some teams have to be more shrewd about things.
why do they need to share in revenue if they aren't going to spend that revenue on players? why should other teams offer profit subsidies for the Fish?
That is the point. If they want to put out a crappy product that is fine, but they should get any funds. The purpose of revenue sharing is to give the teams that can't get as much "other" revenue, some money to spend on their team...not line their pockets. I am in favor of a salary cap anyway, but teams like the Yankees lose money, but the value of their franchise goes up so much that they really aren't losing money (plus they get other income)
Huh?Am I missing something?

 
wilked said:
Yankees payroll at $200MM, set to go to close to $220 if they get Santana
And this just reminds me of a small market teams problem. The margin of error is so small on those teams. You make a JD Drew or Julio Lugo mistake, and your team is done (likewise with a Jason Giambi/Carl Pavano). If you are the Yankees or Sox, you can weather that storm. Thats one reason why I don't think the Marlins should be forced to give players like Aaron Rowand or Carlos Silva 10-15 mil per year contracts.
 
They need to spend the revenue sharing money on players. Otherwise they get to game the system by accumulating money from year to year and then spending in one big shot.

It's not fair to the fans in ANY city - since they pay to see the Marlins, nor to the other teams who get to deal with the repurcussions of the system.

Limiting revenue sharing to payroll spending would be a reasonable compromise.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top