Today was the final straw. I've been trying to hold myself back for a few months now but hearing about the Denny Neagle trade from the Reds to the Yankees has finally done it for me. Baseball is officially a joke. I am a strong supporter of a free market and players earning as much money as they can, (as some users of this BBS can attest) but Baseball has just gone too far. For me, any pretense that it was a sport is now gone. I really do hope now that the Yankees win the world series again, and maybe the players will start to wake up and realize that their sport is fast becoming a farce. Last year, 7 of the 8 playoff teams were in the top 10 of MLB payrolls (Houston being the exception at 13th). Houston, obviously the boy amongst men, shed some $10 million in payroll and is now in no danger of repeating that performance. It is now a game for the big market, big payroll teams and they alone. Sure, you will get your odd low dollar team that will make a run, but they will certainly be the exception to the rule. Is this how you guys want "Americas Game" to progress? Put yourself in Cincinatti's shoes. Imagine the excitement leading into this year signing Griffey and coming off a great season. All of sudden, half way through the current season and just 8 games back from the Cards, they are forced to trade their No.1 starting picture, effectively surrendering the chase, because they couldn't afford to pay him free agent money next year. And who do they trade him to? Of all teams, the Yankees! And then you have Sammy Sosa, cult hero in Chicago and one of the most popular players in the country, in a feud with the Cubs manager Don Baylor, who has been there a grand total of 6 months. Do you really think that argument is about Sammy's lack of commitment to improve his defense? No sir - its Cubs management looking for a way to trade him before they have to make a very unpopular decision. By no means is the NBA or NBA perfect, but at least they are respectable. I hear people complain about the Salary cap in football "ruining" the game because now you can't have dynasties like the 49ers and the Cowboys. Please - all I ask is that every year my team starts with the ability to be competitve, have a shot of the title if they perform very well, and compete on a level playing field. AT least the NFL has that and the NBA is getting there. I don't profess to have the answer, but it cannot continue the way it is. Maybe, as Bud Selig suggests, there has to be salary cap with profit sharing involved. To me that sounds intuituve, and in essence, that is what the NBA has introduced with the Salary Cap being tied to "Basketball Related Income". Regardless, it looks like the problem may solve itself. The attached article talks about the fall in baseball television ratings and the networks refusal to fork over the ludicrous sums of money that MLB is demanding. 2002 could be the end of baseball as we know it, especially if Mr Fehr maintains his current stance. http://sports.altavista.com/scripts/editorial.dll?efi=83&ei=1984906&ern=y ------------------ Current Rocket's Salary & Contract Info
davo - Take a look at the standings this year. Teams like the White Sox, A's, M's, and Blue Jays are all outperforming the Yankees and Red Sox. Traditionally, the White Sox and A's have built from within, while the M's and Blue Jays have recently traded some stars to get capable, younger, cheaper talent from contenders. For all four, it's panning out thus far. In addition, Sammy Sosa is a hot dog. It's all about spin. The way I see it, he's a gifted player that didn't like the way that his manager asked him to improve his all-around game. So what does Sammy do? He gets into a huff, and says that that is disrespect. All that Sammy accomplished was to highlight the fact that he's a stat-chasing, selfish, petulant ballplayer. He is not worth the money that he's asking for, in correlation to what other players are making. His abilities strictly as a player, as displayed this year, do not merit top-10 salary. If you look at it your way, then it's good that the Tribune Company is stuck with him. They are the ones responsible for making Sammy into what he is now, and it's biting them in the rear. That's great to see. They could be stuck with Sammy, who they cannot trade because they're too dumb to know they've got to lower the asking price. Believe me - I detest the fact that big market teams can throw around seemingly endless stacks of dough to get themselves over the hump. They can trade away prospects to get players and buy some new ones in the offseason. That's why I root against the Turners, Angeloses, Steinbrenners, and Murdochs of the world. Indeed 2002 will be an interesting year for baseball fans. That's almost become an Armageddon for baseball. It would be nice to see sensible salary reforms, however, that could cost the fans another work stoppage. And the next stoppage would be costlier than anything those in the business would ever care to contemplate. ------------------
Davo- I'm with you it's frustrating. But if you look at it from an owner's point of view they are there to win games & try not to lose money. At some point since only 8 teams make the playoffs they know they can't make a legitimate run at the playoffs. That is when they must decide if they can compete with that same roster next year or if changes need to be made. Cincinnati is gearing up for 2003 when their new stadium opens. Other teams (like Pittsburgh) is trying to build a team through young pitchers. They really do have 4 good starters but their trick is they must win before their youngster salaries are up. If not they lose any talent they may have via FA, or they can trade them for other prospects. Other teams (like Montreal) have strong farm clubs which produce a great player every 2-3 years. Vlady Guerrrero is a bona fide stud, yet they realize they can't afford him when his contract is up. Others (look at the Dodgers) spend a ton of money and still can't win. But genereally you are right you have to spend money to win games. It kills me because I am a Padre fan and to see them broken apart twice in the last decade (first trading McGriff, Kevin Brown then Caminiti, Finley, Ashby after the last pennant) is frustrating. It would be fun to be a Yankee or Met or Brave fan, but if you're not the game really sucks! ------------------
As per usual, Fehr responded in the same robotic fashion, "I don't see any historical precedent for it. We've always believed in free markets." Geez, I guess this guy never heard of monopoly. Baseball is in serious trouble IMO. Oh sure they are hitting more homeruns than ever and all that, but they are losing the small market teams. Teams such as the Royals, Twins, Expos, Padres, Brewers have 0 chance of winning a world series any time in the near future. The rich just keep getting richer. And the poor... well you know. Since the strike in '94 "they" have "livened" the ball in order to bring back the fans, who, they turned their backs on. It is very disheartening to me to see the direction this great game is headed. Case in point: Baseball will not allow "The Greatest Hitter" the game has ever known, into the Hall of Fame because he gambled. Yet guys like Steve Howe (cocaine) are given chance after chance. And all this time I thought gambling was legal in some states. Drugs are illegal, yet the message baseball sends out is that its ok to do drugs but not to gamble. I hope Bud Selig is happy with the direction Baseball is headed. Little does he know, there is an iceburg up ahead. ------------------ "Is this thing on? I'm in charge now"-Alexander Haig
keeley, Last time I looked the Yankees were in first, ahead of the Bluejays. ------------------ "Is this thing on? I'm in charge now"-Alexander Haig
sheesh. I need to look at the standings before lippin' off. It is only percentage points. Don't I get a little leeway? You see my point, though... ------------------
davo- Actually, Capitali$m is America's game. ------------------ WE WILL WATCH THEM FALL... next year, at least.
Actually keeley, I'm not sure that I do see your point. Maybe Sammy was a bad example, and maybe there are a few clubs performing "above their payroll". Actually, the Blue Jays Yankees thing is a further example of whats wrong. Even when a club like Toronto has traded for and developed young inexpensive talent, look at what happens. The club and its fans find themselves in a penant race and everyone gets excited. Do the Yankees square up to the fight? No - they go and buy someone's No1. starter and immediately improve their chances. Blue Jays fans are probably feeling nearly as sh*%ty as Reds fans right about now. What is the point of trading for and developing young talent? 4Chuckie is right - all you do is keep them for a few years until they become worth something and you have to trade them for, well, more young talent. It's an endless loop of mediocrity sprinkled with some good years. ------------------ Current Rocket's Salary & Contract Info
Davo-- I wholeheartedly agree. Small markets will never be able to compete with the big markets. Its getting to (and maybe has already passed) the point where we must ask ourselves this: "What is the point of even having small market teams?" ------------------ I need a new signature. 302
There are definitely, not maybe, definitely many teams performing above higher paid teams this year. As far as the Yankees getting a number one starter, I hardly think that them getting Denny Neagle even moves them to the head of the class of their own division. In addition to that, I'm not going to cry for the Reds, as they got Griffey after he coerced his team into a trade. Another story, another time. Here's the point. This is *not* the year to be whining about disparity. Enjoy it, for crying out loud! Don't worry about how much the Yankees try to spend. It's all panic spending at this point. Same goes for the Braves, and what they gave up for a guy with a near 6 ERA. Let them do that. Spending that kind of money can help your club. On the other hand, take a look at the Orioles. They kept on buying and buying and buying when they should have been rebuilding, and their fans now pay for the privilege to watch a stunningly mediocre team of fragile multimillionaires. The White Sox were in that same position 3 years ago, and they chose a different route. They alienated a slew of their fans along the way, however look where they are now - winning with kids. They were better off with a youth movement. When it's time for those kids want to go to the $$$, then there's a chance that you can swing a trade to get a replacement, sign a cheaper free agent, or perhaps there's already someone better waiting for his chance at AAA. I'm not sold on the idea that just by bringing in older, more expensive talent necessarily makes a baseball team a better club (ie unless you get the Big Unit). Second, there is hope - the 2002 labor war (again) is certainly a chance for the lords of baseball to set it right. I absolutely agree with you that there is a need for revenue sharing and a salary cap because it *does* upset the competitive balance to an extent. I think the NBA is doing it the right way. I don't like thinking that there will be a protracted work stoppage to go along with that, but if that's what it takes, then so bit it. Later [This message has been edited by keeley (edited July 13, 2000).]
Pre-game: "Oooh...say can you see...by the dollarly light. What so madly we all hail... your high priced team's standing. And the baseball's nowhere...the ball's lost all it's glare... gave proof to the fight....that our game's not all there. Oh say does that ball game sour and cave in. Or the land of the rich...and the home...of the...Yanks." I think that about sums it up . That's original by the way...hehe. Thank you. Thank you. Surf ------------------ [This message has been edited by Surfguy (edited July 13, 2000).] [This message has been edited by Surfguy (edited July 13, 2000).]
Now Major League owners are talking about eliminating 2 teams. Thursday July 13 8:15 PM ET Owners Think of Eliminating Teams By RONALD BLUM, AP Sports Writer NEW YORK (AP) - Owners appeared set to put off realignment until 2002 and might even discuss getting rid of the Montreal Expos and another team when they meet Friday. Colorado owner Jerry McMorris first discussed so-called contraction a year ago, but commissioner Bud Selig played down the idea. When asked the question on national TV last weekend, Selig said: ``I don't want to rule anything out today, because there's no question that we do have to solve that problem, because (disparity) is getting worse by the day.'' Owners gather Friday to receive the sport's latest economic study report, and to be briefed on the format of next year's schedule and the negotiations for new national TV contracts. While contraction may not be on the formal agenda, two owners, speaking on the condition they not be identified, said the idea is being given increased attention by team heads because of Montreal's inability to get a new ballpark and probably will be discussed in the hallways. If the major leagues ever decide to shrink, its central fund, which gets money from national broadcasting and licensing contracts, could be used to buy back the Expos along with one other team, one of the owners said. While there is no obvious choice for a second team, Florida, Minnesota and Oakland have failed to get new ballparks. As for realignment, Texas had been pushing hardest in order to get out of the AL West. But the Chicago White Sox, Kansas City and Minnesota were against the plan to place six teams in the AL Central and just four in the AL East and AL West. In addition, Arizona objected to the plan, under which it would move from the NL West to the AL West. Selig, several owners said, does not appear ready to call for a vote on realignment any time soon, effectively putting it off until the 2002 season at the earliest. ``Nothing seriously has been debated in the last few months,'' Houston Astros owner Drayton McLane said. ``I think most likely significant realignment will be put off a year.'' The two owners who spoke on the condition of anonymity confirmed McLane's assessment that no realignment would take place for 2001. The one change owners will hear Friday is the format for next season's schedule: Teams will play division rivals 18 times each instead of 12 or 13. And in another new twist, the Astros and Texas Rangers will meet in interleague play for the first time. ``We're the last natural rivals who haven't played yet,'' McLane said. On Thursday, owners on the executive council began receiving the report of the ``Blue Ribbon Task Force on Baseball Economics,'' appointed by Selig on Jan. 13, 1999. The committee's four outside members - former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell, former Federal Reserve board chairman Paul Volcker, Yale president Richard Levin and political commentator George Will - are set to appear before owners Friday and then hold a news conference to discuss their findings. Small market teams have complained in recent months of the increasing disparity. When the Yankees add Denny Neagle to their roster Friday, their payroll will be about $107 million - more than six times Minnesota's payroll of about $16.5 million. ------------------ "Is this thing on? I'm in charge now"-Alexander Haig
Everything davo said and some of the others are echoing in this thread points to exactly the reason I gave up following baseball about 6 or 7 years ago. That's when I realized it will always be the team with the payroll that has the best chance of winning. There's no competition. Growing up I used to listen to Gene Elston do PBP and associate myself with a Jose Cruz, Nolan Ryan, or a Cesar Cedeno. These guys were ASTROS. As the years went by, teams just became pit-stops for players... I couldn't cheer for the Astros because every year they seemed to be a completely different team. Basketball has a salary cap that keeps this somewhat "under control", but I can see it starting to happen there, too. The fact that there is no salary cap in baseball has turned the sport into a complete joke. Until they institute one, I'll never be a fan of the sport. ------------------ Just shut up and post
