The CT Philosophical Divide

[Goldfan]

Big market teams are spending more. That’s why I support not only a ceiling on spending but also a floor.

However that has absolutely nothing to do with the Cardinal issues. ITS POOR DECISIOM MAKING!!! Poor talent evaluation. Poor development. Poor spending habits. Poor revenue management, ie TV deal. Poor planning. Poor focus.

Well stated. This teardown/rebuild would've been completely unnecessary with a just reasonable level of competence.

Unfortunately DeWitt Jr. hitched his wagon to the idiotic buffoon John Mozeliak.

After flushing $450,000,000 down the drain on overpriced mediocre or bad FA’s, mind-numbing extensions for over-the-hill players, and completely inept development of the horses Mozeliak mistakenly kept while trading better players away,
here we are.

How about in 2024 when Mozeliak was forced to sign 3 starting pitchers just to have 5 warm bodies in the rotation.
The narrative was “this is to tide us over just until our young pitchers are ready”. lol
2 years later and exactly 1 “youngster”- McGreevy - has joined the rotation.

The damage done to this organization by John Mozeliak cannot be overstated.

But Bloom brings hope.

Amen Bomber…..at the end of that season Miles and Matz were the starting rotation. Its been wait for the YOUTH for awhile now. Wait for Bader, TO, Carlson, Walker, Gorman….now Scott
Wait for all the arms received from the SP pitching selloff that left Miles and Matz…..where is that batch of saviors??
Wait for Hence, wait for Mathews, wait for Thompson
Wait for the SEASON of YOUTH last year to give all the same terrible youngsters a FULL YEAR to show they suck
Now it’s selloff any vet talent within a 10 miles of the arch……AND WAIT for the bountiful RETURN…..
While BDW pockets the 80=90mil that used to be in Payroll
All the while CT posters cheer the effort on…..the only thing you’re cheering for will be a terrible team and BDW’s back account
Either TANK like your life depends on it and don’t give say the fans “we’re competing” [nonsense]…..OR spend the money and put a competitive team on the field. This half (donkey) one foot in one foot out is OLD

[Goldfan]

Based on a lot of recent threads, there continues to be the CT philosophical divide which revolves around the notion that the Cardinals not only have to win, they have to win "the right way."

We know the Cardinals are a middle market team. They aren't the Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, etc. on one end. Nor are they the Rays, Pirates, As, etc. on the other.

I think this is partially where we are not aligned. I think the Cardinals are now a small market team which is why they have to behave like one.

I will defer that question until we see what they do after they have rebuilt the foundation of young, cost controlled players.

Like other teams (Houston, Atlanta, Philadelphia), I think they are backing off on spending, but will renew spending - to at least some higher level - when they think the rebuild is complete.

#5 US Metro - Houston
#8 US Metro - Philadelphia
#9 US Metro - Atlanta

#20 US Metro - St Louis

I didn't say they would spend to those teams' levels. I said, "but will renew spending - to at least some higher level".

Houston, Atlanta, and Philadelphia - even with THEIR resources - all dropped to between 20th and 30th in MLB payroll as part of their rebuilds - and then bounced back.

1. It's not a rebuild. They're resetting to a small market model
2. Those teams could spend because of their revenue. The Cardinals won't have the revenue. They have no cable deal and their market isn't worth all that much.

Mets 496mil
Braves 476
Rangers 446
Angels 398
12. Cards 395
Mariners 383
Jays 386
….

The Cardinals are closer to the Brewers than the Mets in revenue.

And why did you omit the really large market teams?

Why are the large markets relevant? You know they’ll double Cards Payroll. Their PEERS on in this grouping and they all somehow manage to have a viable competitive MLB team. The Mariners and Jays were the last 4 standing in ‘25.
Matt wants you to believe STL belongs down with the 20 something’s…..

[Red Bird Classic]

Based on a lot of recent threads, there continues to be the CT philosophical divide which revolves around the notion that the Cardinals not only have to win, they have to win "the right way."

We know the Cardinals are a middle market team. They aren't the Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, etc. on one end. Nor are they the Rays, Pirates, As, etc. on the other.

I think this is partially where we are not aligned. I think the Cardinals are now a small market team which is why they have to behave like one.

I will defer that question until we see what they do after they have rebuilt the foundation of young, cost controlled players.

Like other teams (Houston, Atlanta, Philadelphia), I think they are backing off on spending, but will renew spending - to at least some higher level - when they think the rebuild is complete.

#5 US Metro - Houston
#8 US Metro - Philadelphia
#9 US Metro - Atlanta

#20 US Metro - St Louis

I didn't say they would spend to those teams' levels. I said, "but will renew spending - to at least some higher level".

Houston, Atlanta, and Philadelphia - even with THEIR resources - all dropped to between 20th and 30th in MLB payroll as part of their rebuilds - and then bounced back.

1. It's not a rebuild. They're resetting to a small market model
2. Those teams could spend because of their revenue. The Cardinals won't have the revenue. They have no cable deal and their market isn't worth all that much.

Mets 496mil
Braves 476
Rangers 446
Angels 398
12. Cards 395
Mariners 383
Jays 386
….

The Cardinals are closer to the Brewers than the Mets in revenue.

And why did you omit the really large market teams?

Why are the large markets relevant? You know they’ll double Cards Payroll. Their PEERS on in this grouping and they all somehow manage to have a viable competitive MLB team. The Mariners and Jays were the last 4 standing in ‘25.
Matt wants you to believe STL belongs down with the 20 something’s…..

Here's the entire list:

Rank, Team, 2024 Revenue
1 New York Yankees $705M
2 Los Angeles Dodgers $701M
3 San Francisco Giants $533M
4 Chicago Cubs $528M
5 Philadelphia Phillies $528M
6 Boston Red Sox $514M
7 Houston Astros $499M
8 Atlanta Braves $476M
9 San Diego Padres $468M
10 New York Mets $446M
11 Texas Rangers $446M
12 Los Angeles Angels $398M
13 St. Louis Cardinals $395M
14 Toronto Blue Jays $386M
15 Seattle Mariners $383M
16 Chicago White Sox $343M
17 Washington Nationals $330M
18 Baltimore Orioles $328M
19 Milwaukee Brewers $320M
20 Colorado Rockies $318M
21 Detroit Tigers $316M
22 Minnesota Twins $312M
23 Arizona Diamondbacks $310M
24 Pittsburgh Pirates $309M
25 Cleveland Guardians $305M
26 Tampa Bay Rays $301M
27 Kansas City Royals $292M
28 Cincinnati Reds $285M
29 Oakland Athletics $241M
30 Miami Marlins $235M

Just a quick glance shows that despite their rank (13th here), the Cardinal's revenue is much more similar to Milwaukee's than to big-market teams like the Yankees, Giants, and Phillies.

[CorneliusWolfe]

Do some research before you place Cards at bottom of Revenue pile and expect them behave like the bottom
2025 MLB Revenue CNBC

Mets 496mil
Braves 476
Rangers 446
Angels 398
12. Cards 395
Mariners 383
Jays 386
….
….
21.Mil 337
25. Clev336
27. Pitts 329
29. Rays 304

Stop with your excuses and nonsense. Cards sit at 12 where they’ve been for at or near for the last 25yrs. The Braves, Rangers, Angels, Mariners, Jays are more than able to spend on FA and not act the bottom quartile where Mil, Cleve, Pitts, Ray live.

Again:

...a "heavy" version of Milwaukee, Cleveland, Tampa Bay, etc. - with an emphasis on a foundation of young, cost controlled players and less dependence on expensive veterans, but still able to spend more on such veterans than teams like Milwaukee.

And yet Cornelius thinks you're minsconstruing "the opposition's" take?

Make no mistake, he's all about tanking. There hasn't been one free agent possibility mentioned that he hasn't written a filibuster post in opposition.

And that is fine, but what makes him full of [shirt] is the 10-mile long posts where he lists how we all think and how we're totally against the farm development system being a critical element to the turnaround. I hate when people put words in other mouths.

LOL - talk about putting words in people's mouths.

I've always said that I'm simply ambivalent about how many games they win or lose in 2026. If the win 60, fine. 70, fine. 80, fine. There could be advantages in the 2027 draft if they win fewer in 2026, but in no case have I said anything about trying to throw games.

In fact, I've consistently said that I expect them to sign multiple FAs to short 1 or 2 yr. contracts. I said the May signing was good - significant upside where they may be able to deal him for more prospects in 2026. I know I've said - if they trade one or more LH 1Bs/OFs, Ryan O'Hearn as a potential target. I've noted Austin Hays as a RH OF possibility.

But none of that fits your agenda.

The only thing I'm against is signing high AAV players to long term contracts this offseason.

Your agenda is pretending to know things you don’t. (Insert stupid laughing face). Real men don’t need emojis.

[mattmitchl44]

Do some research before you place Cards at bottom of Revenue pile and expect them behave like the bottom
2025 MLB Revenue CNBC

Mets 496mil
Braves 476
Rangers 446
Angels 398
12. Cards 395
Mariners 383
Jays 386
….
….
21.Mil 337
25. Clev336
27. Pitts 329
29. Rays 304

Stop with your excuses and nonsense. Cards sit at 12 where they’ve been for at or near for the last 25yrs. The Braves, Rangers, Angels, Mariners, Jays are more than able to spend on FA and not act the bottom quartile where Mil, Cleve, Pitts, Ray live.

Again:

...a "heavy" version of Milwaukee, Cleveland, Tampa Bay, etc. - with an emphasis on a foundation of young, cost controlled players and less dependence on expensive veterans, but still able to spend more on such veterans than teams like Milwaukee.

And yet Cornelius thinks you're minsconstruing "the opposition's" take?

Make no mistake, he's all about tanking. There hasn't been one free agent possibility mentioned that he hasn't written a filibuster post in opposition.

And that is fine, but what makes him full of [shirt] is the 10-mile long posts where he lists how we all think and how we're totally against the farm development system being a critical element to the turnaround. I hate when people put words in other mouths.

LOL - talk about putting words in people's mouths.

I've always said that I'm simply ambivalent about how many games they win or lose in 2026. If the win 60, fine. 70, fine. 80, fine. There could be advantages in the 2027 draft if they win fewer in 2026, but in no case have I said anything about trying to throw games.

In fact, I've consistently said that I expect them to sign multiple FAs to short 1 or 2 yr. contracts. I said the May signing was good - significant upside where they may be able to deal him for more prospects in 2026. I know I've said - if they trade one or more LH 1Bs/OFs, Ryan O'Hearn as a potential target. I've noted Austin Hays as a RH OF possibility.

But none of that fits your agenda.

The only thing I'm against is signing high AAV players to long term contracts this offseason.

Your agenda is pretending to know things you don’t. (Insert stupid laughing face). Real men don’t need emojis.

I do know exactly what I have said - which your claims about what I have said NEVER get right.

[11WSChamps]

Another day another thread by the OP defending his position without realizing any thought of time frames or fan apathy.

The history of Cardinals attendance shows no evidence of long standing "apathy" when the team wins. It the team is bad for a while, attendance drops. But as soon as the team starts winning again, attendance rockets back up again.

The Cardinals were bad in the 1970s. But as soon as they bounced back in the 1980s, attendance rose rapidly to 2 (1982), 2.5 (1985), 3 (1987) million.

The Cardinals were bad in the early 1990s. But as soon as they bounced back, attendance rose rapidly to 2.5 (1996), almost 3.5 (2000), etc. million.

That was then this is now.

The team always at least gave the appearance they were trying to win. That is no longer the case.

This isnt 50 or even 30 years ago. Fan interest wanes with teams that don't compete.

In those times it was wait til next year not let's rebuild for 3 to 5 years and hope.

[Goldfan]

Based on a lot of recent threads, there continues to be the CT philosophical divide which revolves around the notion that the Cardinals not only have to win, they have to win "the right way."

We know the Cardinals are a middle market team. They aren't the Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, etc. on one end. Nor are they the Rays, Pirates, As, etc. on the other.

I think this is partially where we are not aligned. I think the Cardinals are now a small market team which is why they have to behave like one.

I will defer that question until we see what they do after they have rebuilt the foundation of young, cost controlled players.

Like other teams (Houston, Atlanta, Philadelphia), I think they are backing off on spending, but will renew spending - to at least some higher level - when they think the rebuild is complete.

#5 US Metro - Houston
#8 US Metro - Philadelphia
#9 US Metro - Atlanta

#20 US Metro - St Louis

I didn't say they would spend to those teams' levels. I said, "but will renew spending - to at least some higher level".

Houston, Atlanta, and Philadelphia - even with THEIR resources - all dropped to between 20th and 30th in MLB payroll as part of their rebuilds - and then bounced back.

1. It's not a rebuild. They're resetting to a small market model
2. Those teams could spend because of their revenue. The Cardinals won't have the revenue. They have no cable deal and their market isn't worth all that much.

Mets 496mil
Braves 476
Rangers 446
Angels 398
12. Cards 395
Mariners 383
Jays 386
….

The Cardinals are closer to the Brewers than the Mets in revenue.

And why did you omit the really large market teams?

Why are the large markets relevant? You know they’ll double Cards Payroll. Their PEERS on in this grouping and they all somehow manage to have a viable competitive MLB team. The Mariners and Jays were the last 4 standing in ‘25.
Matt wants you to believe STL belongs down with the 20 something’s…..

Here's the entire list:

Rank, Team, 2024 Revenue
1 New York Yankees $705M
2 Los Angeles Dodgers $701M
3 San Francisco Giants $533M
4 Chicago Cubs $528M
5 Philadelphia Phillies $528M
6 Boston Red Sox $514M
7 Houston Astros $499M
8 Atlanta Braves $476M
9 San Diego Padres $468M
10 New York Mets $446M
11 Texas Rangers $446M
12 Los Angeles Angels $398M
13 St. Louis Cardinals $395M
14 Toronto Blue Jays $386M
15 Seattle Mariners $383M
16 Chicago White Sox $343M
17 Washington Nationals $330M
18 Baltimore Orioles $328M
19 Milwaukee Brewers $320M
20 Colorado Rockies $318M
21 Detroit Tigers $316M
22 Minnesota Twins $312M
23 Arizona Diamondbacks $310M
24 Pittsburgh Pirates $309M
25 Cleveland Guardians $305M
26 Tampa Bay Rays $301M
27 Kansas City Royals $292M
28 Cincinnati Reds $285M
29 Oakland Athletics $241M
30 Miami Marlins $235M

Just a quick glance shows that despite their rank (13th here), the Cardinal's revenue is much more similar to Milwaukee's than to big-market teams like the Yankees, Giants, and Phillies.

What is your fascination with the large markets. The point was to compete with our grouping which isn’t Mil, Cleve, TB, Pitt, Cincy
From 9-15…..everyone of those aren’t dumping huge $$$ and acting like they’re the RAYS

[Cardinals4Life]

I don’t think that’s the case at all. The Cardinals made lots of bad decisions that lead to their current demise. It wasn’t because they were trying to keep up with the Jones, it’s because they were paralyzed to make the right move when they realized how far behind the right-ball their front office had become.

1.) Luhnow humiliated them.
Not only did they get caught “hacking” his database in Houston, but they arrogant outed themselves.

Then, Luhnow started winning and baseball became overly interested in what he had to say, like trimming down the farm. So, the Cardinals, who made their nut as a franchise because they basically invented the farm and at one point had THIRTY-THREE teams under their umbrella, followed that philosophy by cutting an entire level off.

2.) The Cardinals refused to offer mega contracts to the 26 Year Old Star Free Agents, instead choosing to… trade asset for older veterans.

So, rather than sign Bryce Harper at 26 (who eventually agreed to a $330M/13), they traded for 31 year old Paul Goldschmidt for $130M/5. Bryce Harper just now turned 33.

3.) They traded 2 OUTSTANDING COST CONTROLLED PITCHERS for a Left Fielder with a shoulder injury and the mental capacity of an 11 year old. Those two pitchers would be in constant discussion for Cy Young. Their LFer was known for a Strip Club brawl and one of the more hilarious blooper plays of all time.

4.) Rather than invest in star players, they overcompensated by overpaying on complimentary players like Dexter Fowler.

5.) They were so paralyzed by their ineptitude, they kept handing out extensions to their own players like Matt Carpenter, Miles Mikolas, Adam Wainwright, etc.

6.) Everyone was fleecing this Front Office because they were so inadequate that they not only couldn’t properly evaluate their own players in-house, but they couldn’t properly develop the ones they had. It became a running joke when players would go elsewhere and thrive.

7.) Choosing Rookie Managers over proven World Series pedigree

8.) Nerds w/access databases unable to evaluate nor develop their own players ousting proven veteran scouts and coaches in the minors

9.) Turning a Strength in something they pioneered (analytics) into one of the worst in the Show

10.) Abandoning the International Market.

Remember that time Legendary Cardinal Fernando Tatis Sr presented his son to them? (drat) that Mid-Market Energy…

Being an “mid-market” team isn’t an excuse for having operational malfeasance in your front office.

BleedingBleu,

This is the post of the decade my friend!!!!!! Spot on on every single point! Clearly breaks down the major mistakes this team has made over the last decade or so and is exactly why this proud franchise has slowly been turned into a pumpkin.

[Red Bird Classic]

Based on a lot of recent threads, there continues to be the CT philosophical divide which revolves around the notion that the Cardinals not only have to win, they have to win "the right way."

We know the Cardinals are a middle market team. They aren't the Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, etc. on one end. Nor are they the Rays, Pirates, As, etc. on the other.

I think this is partially where we are not aligned. I think the Cardinals are now a small market team which is why they have to behave like one.

I will defer that question until we see what they do after they have rebuilt the foundation of young, cost controlled players.

Like other teams (Houston, Atlanta, Philadelphia), I think they are backing off on spending, but will renew spending - to at least some higher level - when they think the rebuild is complete.

#5 US Metro - Houston
#8 US Metro - Philadelphia
#9 US Metro - Atlanta

#20 US Metro - St Louis

I didn't say they would spend to those teams' levels. I said, "but will renew spending - to at least some higher level".

Houston, Atlanta, and Philadelphia - even with THEIR resources - all dropped to between 20th and 30th in MLB payroll as part of their rebuilds - and then bounced back.

1. It's not a rebuild. They're resetting to a small market model
2. Those teams could spend because of their revenue. The Cardinals won't have the revenue. They have no cable deal and their market isn't worth all that much.

Mets 496mil
Braves 476
Rangers 446
Angels 398
12. Cards 395
Mariners 383
Jays 386
….

The Cardinals are closer to the Brewers than the Mets in revenue.

And why did you omit the really large market teams?

Why are the large markets relevant? You know they’ll double Cards Payroll. Their PEERS on in this grouping and they all somehow manage to have a viable competitive MLB team. The Mariners and Jays were the last 4 standing in ‘25.
Matt wants you to believe STL belongs down with the 20 something’s…..

Here's the entire list:

Rank, Team, 2024 Revenue
1 New York Yankees $705M
2 Los Angeles Dodgers $701M
3 San Francisco Giants $533M
4 Chicago Cubs $528M
5 Philadelphia Phillies $528M
6 Boston Red Sox $514M
7 Houston Astros $499M
8 Atlanta Braves $476M
9 San Diego Padres $468M
10 New York Mets $446M
11 Texas Rangers $446M
12 Los Angeles Angels $398M
13 St. Louis Cardinals $395M
14 Toronto Blue Jays $386M
15 Seattle Mariners $383M
16 Chicago White Sox $343M
17 Washington Nationals $330M
18 Baltimore Orioles $328M
19 Milwaukee Brewers $320M
20 Colorado Rockies $318M
21 Detroit Tigers $316M
22 Minnesota Twins $312M
23 Arizona Diamondbacks $310M
24 Pittsburgh Pirates $309M
25 Cleveland Guardians $305M
26 Tampa Bay Rays $301M
27 Kansas City Royals $292M
28 Cincinnati Reds $285M
29 Oakland Athletics $241M
30 Miami Marlins $235M

Just a quick glance shows that despite their rank (13th here), the Cardinal's revenue is much more similar to Milwaukee's than to big-market teams like the Yankees, Giants, and Phillies.

What is your fascination with the large markets. The point was to compete with our grouping which isn’t Mil, Cleve, TB, Pitt, Cincy
From 9-15…..everyone of those aren’t dumping huge $$$ and acting like they’re the RAYS

Matt's point from the start was that the Cardinals need to be a big Milwaukee, rather than a little LA.

If the Cardinals try to do a lessor version of what the Dodgers (or even the Phillies) do, they'll probably end up just where they've been for the last decade or more. But a strategy that works for the Brewers is a plan that the Cardinals can probably replicate and exceed because they have a little more money.

Why we need to look at the whole list:

In order to talk about the different teams with their different revenues, it's important not just to see the ranks but also the relative difference in dollars.

I could say I'm the second tallest person in the building, but if I'm the tallest 5-year old in preschool, I'm still a lot more like the smallest than I am like the teacher.

[An Old Friend]

Based on a lot of recent threads, there continues to be the CT philosophical divide which revolves around the notion that the Cardinals not only have to win, they have to win "the right way."

We know the Cardinals are a middle market team. They aren't the Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, etc. on one end. Nor are they the Rays, Pirates, As, etc. on the other.

I think this is partially where we are not aligned. I think the Cardinals are now a small market team which is why they have to behave like one.

I will defer that question until we see what they do after they have rebuilt the foundation of young, cost controlled players.

Like other teams (Houston, Atlanta, Philadelphia), I think they are backing off on spending, but will renew spending - to at least some higher level - when they think the rebuild is complete.

#5 US Metro - Houston
#8 US Metro - Philadelphia
#9 US Metro - Atlanta

#20 US Metro - St Louis

I didn't say they would spend to those teams' levels. I said, "but will renew spending - to at least some higher level".

Houston, Atlanta, and Philadelphia - even with THEIR resources - all dropped to between 20th and 30th in MLB payroll as part of their rebuilds - and then bounced back.

1. It's not a rebuild. They're resetting to a small market model
2. Those teams could spend because of their revenue. The Cardinals won't have the revenue. They have no cable deal and their market isn't worth all that much.

Mets 496mil
Braves 476
Rangers 446
Angels 398
12. Cards 395
Mariners 383
Jays 386
….

The Cardinals are closer to the Brewers than the Mets in revenue.

And why did you omit the really large market teams?

Why are the large markets relevant? You know they’ll double Cards Payroll. Their PEERS on in this grouping and they all somehow manage to have a viable competitive MLB team. The Mariners and Jays were the last 4 standing in ‘25.
Matt wants you to believe STL belongs down with the 20 something’s…..

Here's the entire list:

Rank, Team, 2024 Revenue
1 New York Yankees $705M
2 Los Angeles Dodgers $701M
3 San Francisco Giants $533M
4 Chicago Cubs $528M
5 Philadelphia Phillies $528M
6 Boston Red Sox $514M
7 Houston Astros $499M
8 Atlanta Braves $476M
9 San Diego Padres $468M
10 New York Mets $446M
11 Texas Rangers $446M
12 Los Angeles Angels $398M
13 St. Louis Cardinals $395M
14 Toronto Blue Jays $386M
15 Seattle Mariners $383M
16 Chicago White Sox $343M
17 Washington Nationals $330M
18 Baltimore Orioles $328M
19 Milwaukee Brewers $320M
20 Colorado Rockies $318M
21 Detroit Tigers $316M
22 Minnesota Twins $312M
23 Arizona Diamondbacks $310M
24 Pittsburgh Pirates $309M
25 Cleveland Guardians $305M
26 Tampa Bay Rays $301M
27 Kansas City Royals $292M
28 Cincinnati Reds $285M
29 Oakland Athletics $241M
30 Miami Marlins $235M

Just a quick glance shows that despite their rank (13th here), the Cardinal's revenue is much more similar to Milwaukee's than to big-market teams like the Yankees, Giants, and Phillies.

Also, 2024 revenues are an afterthought. St. Louis could very well be in the low-mid 20's with there no longer being certainty around a TV/Streaming deal, and regardless, it'll be worth meaningfully less than it was in 2024.

[BleedingBleu]

Do some research before you place Cards at bottom of Revenue pile and expect them behave like the bottom
2025 MLB Revenue CNBC

Mets 496mil
Braves 476
Rangers 446
Angels 398
12. Cards 395
Mariners 383
Jays 386
….
….
21.Mil 337
25. Clev336
27. Pitts 329
29. Rays 304

Stop with your excuses and nonsense. Cards sit at 12 where they’ve been for at or near for the last 25yrs. The Braves, Rangers, Angels, Mariners, Jays are more than able to spend on FA and not act the bottom quartile where Mil, Cleve, Pitts, Ray live.

Again:

...a "heavy" version of Milwaukee, Cleveland, Tampa Bay, etc. - with an emphasis on a foundation of young, cost controlled players and less dependence on expensive veterans, but still able to spend more on such veterans than teams like Milwaukee.

Do you have a very good reason BDW can’t spend $$ this offseason for ‘26 other than he doesn’t want to???? He just dumped 80-90mil and spent 13
Him keeping his MLB payroll $$$ in his pocket helps the Drafting??? Helps player dev??? Walk and chew gun at same time

Be serious. No one can do that…

[Goldfan]

Based on a lot of recent threads, there continues to be the CT philosophical divide which revolves around the notion that the Cardinals not only have to win, they have to win "the right way."

We know the Cardinals are a middle market team. They aren't the Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, etc. on one end. Nor are they the Rays, Pirates, As, etc. on the other.

I think this is partially where we are not aligned. I think the Cardinals are now a small market team which is why they have to behave like one.

I will defer that question until we see what they do after they have rebuilt the foundation of young, cost controlled players.

Like other teams (Houston, Atlanta, Philadelphia), I think they are backing off on spending, but will renew spending - to at least some higher level - when they think the rebuild is complete.

#5 US Metro - Houston
#8 US Metro - Philadelphia
#9 US Metro - Atlanta

#20 US Metro - St Louis

I didn't say they would spend to those teams' levels. I said, "but will renew spending - to at least some higher level".

Houston, Atlanta, and Philadelphia - even with THEIR resources - all dropped to between 20th and 30th in MLB payroll as part of their rebuilds - and then bounced back.

1. It's not a rebuild. They're resetting to a small market model
2. Those teams could spend because of their revenue. The Cardinals won't have the revenue. They have no cable deal and their market isn't worth all that much.

Mets 496mil
Braves 476
Rangers 446
Angels 398
12. Cards 395
Mariners 383
Jays 386
….

The Cardinals are closer to the Brewers than the Mets in revenue.

And why did you omit the really large market teams?

Why are the large markets relevant? You know they’ll double Cards Payroll. Their PEERS on in this grouping and they all somehow manage to have a viable competitive MLB team. The Mariners and Jays were the last 4 standing in ‘25.
Matt wants you to believe STL belongs down with the 20 something’s…..

Here's the entire list:

Rank, Team, 2024 Revenue
1 New York Yankees $705M
2 Los Angeles Dodgers $701M
3 San Francisco Giants $533M
4 Chicago Cubs $528M
5 Philadelphia Phillies $528M
6 Boston Red Sox $514M
7 Houston Astros $499M
8 Atlanta Braves $476M
9 San Diego Padres $468M
10 New York Mets $446M
11 Texas Rangers $446M
12 Los Angeles Angels $398M
13 St. Louis Cardinals $395M
14 Toronto Blue Jays $386M
15 Seattle Mariners $383M
16 Chicago White Sox $343M
17 Washington Nationals $330M
18 Baltimore Orioles $328M
19 Milwaukee Brewers $320M
20 Colorado Rockies $318M
21 Detroit Tigers $316M
22 Minnesota Twins $312M
23 Arizona Diamondbacks $310M
24 Pittsburgh Pirates $309M
25 Cleveland Guardians $305M
26 Tampa Bay Rays $301M
27 Kansas City Royals $292M
28 Cincinnati Reds $285M
29 Oakland Athletics $241M
30 Miami Marlins $235M

Just a quick glance shows that despite their rank (13th here), the Cardinal's revenue is much more similar to Milwaukee's than to big-market teams like the Yankees, Giants, and Phillies.

What is your fascination with the large markets. The point was to compete with our grouping which isn’t Mil, Cleve, TB, Pitt, Cincy
From 9-15…..everyone of those aren’t dumping huge $$$ and acting like they’re the RAYS

Matt's point from the start was that the Cardinals need to be a big Milwaukee, rather than a little LA.

If the Cardinals try to do a lessor version of what the Dodgers (or even the Phillies) do, they'll probably end up just where they've been for the last decade or more. But a strategy that works for the Brewers is a plan that the Cardinals can probably replicate and exceed because they have a little more money.

Why we need to look at the whole list:

In order to talk about the different teams with their different revenues, it's important not just to see the ranks but also the relative difference in dollars.

I could say I'm the second tallest person in the building, but if I'm the tallest 5-year old in preschool, I'm still a lot more like the smallest than I am like the teacher.

Get back to being the CARDINALS…..the class of the division and NL. You guys have been brainwashed thinking this is impossible because you’ve watched complete idiots run this thing since TLR left. When he left they said they were building from within and then preceded to not fund the MINORS. They gave out stupid FA contracts one after the other. VERY SIMPLY stop being stupid. Draft and develop the CARDINALS WAY. Don’t give all your money to Fowler, Carp, Leake, MIller, Holland, an Old Gray, Miles, Matz, Fedde A catcher that cant catch,
Just stopping being stupid and missing on every player both internally and those brought in …..gets you back to being the ST. Louis Cardinals.
GET a real (bleep) manager and staff!!!! EASY

[BleedingBleu]

Another day another thread by the OP defending his position without realizing any thought of time frames or fan apathy.

The history of Cardinals attendance shows no evidence of long standing "apathy" when the team wins. It the team is bad for a while, attendance drops. But as soon as the team starts winning again, attendance rockets back up again.

The Cardinals were bad in the 1970s. But as soon as they bounced back in the 1980s, attendance rose rapidly to 2 (1982), 2.5 (1985), 3 (1987) million.

The Cardinals were bad in the early 1990s. But as soon as they bounced back, attendance rose rapidly to 2.5 (1996), almost 3.5 (2000), etc. million.

They were good for one season in the 90’s (1996). The rest was carried by Mark McGwire and following something that mattered.

And it just took that season for attendance to jump from 1.7 million in 1995 to 2.6 million in 1996. Attendance then never dropped below 2.6 million until the wonky 2020 and 2021 seasons.

Do you not know what happened that offseason? DeWitt, Jockety & Co went freaking bananas! If anything, attendance jumped because the promise of winning by bringing in LaRussa and (bleep) near flipping roster that offseason.

They traded for 26 year old Royce Clayton & 31 year old Todd Stottlemyre, Dennis Eckersley, and fan favorite Willie MF’n McGee
Acquired Rick Honeycutt as a LOOGY for LaRussa
Signed Gary Gaetti, Andy Benes, Ron Gant, and former Cardinal Luis Alicea
Traded surplus Bernard Gilkey

1995-96 Cardinals Offseason


You cannot simply wave off the impact of adding two Top of the Rotation Starters, 3 New Starting Position Players including a MOB, one of the all-time great Closers, and a revamped Bench & Bullpen would have on the fanbase.

[ClassicO]

Based on a lot of recent threads, there continues to be the CT philosophical divide which revolves around the notion that the Cardinals not only have to win, they have to win "the right way."

We know the Cardinals are a middle market team. They aren't the Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, etc. on one end. Nor are they the Rays, Pirates, As, etc. on the other.

But there seems to be a consistent CT contingent that gets stuck on the idea that the Cardinals must philosophically think and act like a "light" version of the Dodgers, Yankees, etc. - with an emphasis on spending money and having veteran "stars" - rather than a "heavy" version of Milwaukee, Cleveland, Tampa Bay, etc. - with an emphasis on a foundation of young, cost controlled players and less dependence on expensive veterans, but still able to spend more on such veterans than teams like Milwaukee. It seems like some are fixated on the idea that acknowledging Milwaukee, Cleveland, etc. as models to improve upon is "beneath them."

The simple truth in 2025 is that the Yankees, Dodgers, Mets, Phillies, etc. - the true big market teams - are moving farther and farther away from the middle market teams when it comes to spending. Their advantage over the middle market teams is getting bigger and bigger with each passing year. So the middle market teams - like the Cardinals - have to change their philosophical approach. They have to stop thinking like "light" versions of the big market teams and more like "heavy" versions of the small market teams. That is the Cardinals path if they are ever going to be successful at consistently competing with the likes of the Yankees, Dodgers, Mets, Phillies, etc. going forward.

Thankfully, the Cardinals organization seems to be embracing such a philosophical shift and doesn't believe it is "beneath them" to learn from the likes of Milwaukee, Cleveland, Tampa Bay, etc.

The heavy version of Milwaukee, Cleveland, Tampa Bay, etc.

[ClassicO]

Another day another thread by the OP defending his position without realizing any thought of time frames or fan apathy.

The history of Cardinals attendance shows no evidence of long standing "apathy" when the team wins. It the team is bad for a while, attendance drops. But as soon as the team starts winning again, attendance rockets back up again.

The Cardinals were bad in the 1970s. But as soon as they bounced back in the 1980s, attendance rose rapidly to 2 (1982), 2.5 (1985), 3 (1987) million.

The Cardinals were bad in the early 1990s. But as soon as they bounced back, attendance rose rapidly to 2.5 (1996), almost 3.5 (2000), etc. million.

They were good for one season in the 90’s (1996). The rest was carried by Mark McGwire and following something that mattered.

And it just took that season for attendance to jump from 1.7 million in 1995 to 2.6 million in 1996. Attendance then never dropped below 2.6 million until the wonky 2020 and 2021 seasons.

Do you not know what happened that offseason? DeWitt, Jockety & Co went freaking bananas! If anything, attendance jumped because the promise of winning by bringing in LaRussa and (drat) near flipping roster that offseason.

They traded for 26 year old Royce Clayton & 31 year old Todd Stottlemyre, Dennis Eckersley, and fan favorite Willie MF’n McGee
Acquired Rick Honeycutt as a LOOGY for LaRussa
Signed Gary Gaetti, Andy Benes, Ron Gant, and former Cardinal Luis Alicea
Traded surplus Bernard Gilkey

1995-96 Cardinals Offseason


You cannot simply wave off the impact of adding two Top of the Rotation Starters, 3 New Starting Position Players including a MOB, one of the all-time great Closers, and a revamped Bench & Bullpen would have on the fanbase.

How long did any of those players acquired for 1996 stay and perform? Hint: not long.
The 1997 team finished with a losing record and ranked 4th in the division.
Think long game and WS as the only goal.

[BleedingBleu]

This has become a more, shall we say, “spirited” discussion than I would have anticipated. There are enough angles to this that it’s possible for multiple people to have correct takes. It’s a complicated situation and it won’t be a straightforward, quick fix — not if we desire another continued run of success.

I agree. As the old saying goes, there’s more than one way to skin a cat. HOWEVER, rebuilding the farm happens in AAA, AA, A, RK. Development happens there, too. It’s a luxury in the Majors.

Presently, the Cardinals wish to field a AAA team and market it as a MLB team w/MLB prices.

Some may even consider it AAAA, because there’s a player or two who’ve accumulated games at the Big League Level simply because the Front Office neglected the Roster. Gone are the days of Albert Pujols starting behind Bobby Bonilla. Now we have Jordan Walker accumulating +1,000 PA and producing .680 OPS.

Your 2026 Cardinals (Career OPS+)
Herrera (127)
Nootbaar (109)
Burleson (106)
Gorman (99)
Masyn Winn (91)
Walker (88)
Pages (80)
Victor Scott (64)
JJ Wetherholt (—)



Sure, they might improve. However, assuming Arenado & Donovan are moved, 5 of your 9 Starters are below league average hitters for their careers. Careers whose development was likely rushed because someone sold ownership on a faulty business model