swatski wrote: ↑01 Nov 2025 23:35 pm
Unless owners institute a salary cap, I’m outta here. I’ve been a fan since 1960. I won’t watch, read or discuss the game ever again. It is a travesty that Dodgers can just buy the best team. So I really enjoyed being a part of Cards talk and wish all of you guys and gals the best going forward. God Bless.
2027 is the most consequential year this century for MLB. They have instituted all sorts of goofy ideas some of them too crazy even for Charlie Finley and all designed to bring more fans to the ballparks. The reason fans aren't showing up is because 2/3 of the league have no chance to win a WS.
Small and medium market teams need to stand up. Threaten to break away and start their own league if necessary. Along with the payroll cap - and a serious one - get rid of the DH, runner on second in extra innings, institute a 100% electronic strike zone. I watch zero baseball now.
The NBA is rigged by the players. MLB is rigged by the big money teams.
I still view it as just a game, one that needs playing. On paper won’t do it. I like sports for one reason- to witness greatness, intensity, and success.
I have very few favorite teams so being emotionally unattached is quite easy.
Sometimes it’s mere back round noise.
I understand but when you know who is going to win and who has zero chance in February and the season ends in November it kind of ruins it.
So, you had Toronto going to the WS and losing 2 games in extra innings. Mostly due to incredibly stupid mistakes
Decker57 wrote: ↑02 Nov 2025 01:25 am
The players don't want a salary cap either. Only the teams like the cardinals want a salary cap.
Teams with very low payrolls don't want to have to spend what would be required for the players to agree with a salary cap because the players are not going to agree with a upper cap with no lower cap requirements.
I don’t think there should necessarily be a spending floor, but instead a threshold dollar amount that prevents teams from receiving revenue sharing from the more profitable teams if they’re not investing in the overall product themselves.
I think it’s actually unfair to teams like the Dodgers who have to share their profits from investing in their own product and forced to hand it over to other owners who just pocket the proceeds. It’s like getting a welfare check just for being part of MLB while bringing nothing to the table themselves. They are negatively impacting competitive balance more than the big spenders.
dugoutrex wrote: ↑01 Nov 2025 23:36 pm
best WS in many many years - baseball is alive and well!
Pressure beat the Blue Jays, not money.
Both of those were in play, plus good fortune for the Dodgers, (such as the screaming line drive right at Muncy who was playing in for a bunt, and the ball stuck at the bottom of the outfield wall in game 6), plus some outstanding defensive plays by the Dodgers (Pages catch in LCF in the 9th saved the game - I don't think Hernandez was going to catch that ball, and the ground ball that Rojas fielded and threw home for the force out)
Good fortune indeed. I think the luck factor was way bigger than the payroll difference. The Blue Jays kind of outplayed them but the ball bounced the right way for the Dodgers in ways that money can’t buy. Better to be lucky than good sometimes.
Decker57 wrote: ↑02 Nov 2025 01:25 am
The players don't want a salary cap either. Only the teams like the cardinals want a salary cap.
Teams with very low payrolls don't want to have to spend what would be required for the players to agree with a salary cap because the players are not going to agree with a upper cap with no lower cap requirements.
I don’t think there should necessarily be a spending floor, but instead a threshold dollar amount that prevents teams from receiving revenue sharing from the more profitable teams if they’re not investing in the overall product themselves.
I think it’s actually unfair to teams like the Dodgers who have to share their profits from investing in their own product and forced to hand it over to other owners who just pocket the proceeds. It’s like getting a welfare check just for being part of MLB while bringing nothing to the table themselves. They are negatively impacting competitive balance more than the big spenders.
Decker57 wrote: ↑02 Nov 2025 01:25 am
The players don't want a salary cap either. Only the teams like the cardinals want a salary cap.
Teams with very low payrolls don't want to have to spend what would be required for the players to agree with a salary cap because the players are not going to agree with a upper cap with no lower cap requirements.
I don’t think there should necessarily be a spending floor, but instead a threshold dollar amount that prevents teams from receiving revenue sharing from the more profitable teams if they’re not investing in the overall product themselves.
I think it’s actually unfair to teams like the Dodgers who have to share their profits from investing in their own product and forced to hand it over to other owners who just pocket the proceeds. It’s like getting a welfare check just for being part of MLB while bringing nothing to the table themselves. They are negatively impacting competitive balance more than the big spenders.
That is how income taxation works.
Income tax is based on how much you earn. BDW is granted money from higher earners and putting it in his pocket or investing in business ventures of his choosing instead of his team. Not the intent of revenue sharing and more like communism than income tax. It’s dishonest and a disservice to the fans who made his initial investment increase exponentially. He paid $150 million and the team is currently worth 2.55 billion. Yet many still buy his narrative that lack of fan support is crippling his ability to increase payroll.
Gob wrote: ↑02 Nov 2025 20:19 pm
This is such loser talk. Owners need to stop treating sports like a hobby or a side hustle, and more like a dck measuring contest.
But for the most part it is a hobby/side hustle for them. And it’s a business. How many of these people built their fortunes with the teams they own? They play with it like a toy they’re willing to spend money on, but not TOO much.
swatski wrote: ↑01 Nov 2025 23:35 pm
Unless owners institute a salary cap, I’m outta here. I’ve been a fan since 1960. I won’t watch, read or discuss the game ever again. It is a travesty that Dodgers can just buy the best team. So I really enjoyed being a part of Cards talk and wish all of you guys and gals the best going forward. God Bless.
swatski wrote: ↑01 Nov 2025 23:35 pm
Unless owners institute a salary cap, I’m outta here. I’ve been a fan since 1960. I won’t watch, read or discuss the game ever again. It is a travesty that Dodgers can just buy the best team. So I really enjoyed being a part of Cards talk and wish all of you guys and gals the best going forward. God Bless.
That's too bad. Your posts are sometimes timely.
Safe travels.
I leave you with a quote from Bhudda: "Holding a grudge is like drinking poison and waiting for the other person to die."
