Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 14:11 pm
Long term it seems like MLB will combine local tv rights into one pool so they can sell them together rather than each team selling them. If that’s the case I’d assume tv revenue would be shared more evenly than it currently is which fixes the revenue disparity issue. Salary cap isn’t the answer.
In the meantime there’s no reason why the cardinals can’t spend in the 8-12 place payroll range which is enough to put together playoff teams regularly with a competent front office. That last part is what’s missing but that change is a month away.
So….the Dodgers and Yankees are going to share their enormous T V revenue with small markets?
Not going to happen…..but, I am interested is hearing what their motivation would be.
It won’t happen anytime soon. Most teams are already on board with combining tv rights because the belief is they can make more that way and can eliminate blackouts which is a priority for the league. Manfred has told teams not avoid extending tv deals beyond a certain year for this reason but everyone signed long tv deals during the height of cable so we are stuck for awhile. For obvious reasons the dodgers and Yankees are deeply opposed to it but they are vastly outnumbered so they might not have a choice in the matter. That fight won’t happen for awhile so they might change their tune once they can no longer profit from the cable model.
shebashab wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 09:56 am
Baseball is broke and it's not getting fixed. The days of doing development better than the big clubs is gone as all the big clubs took notice and invested accordingly. The only teams really in contention are leading their respective division in payroll. Same as last year and will be the same next year. Tampa is the best at small market competition and even they are struggling the last two years. At this point the Cardinals are in no mans land, they can't spend enough to compete and the market they live in will demand competitive teams... not sustainable in todays landscape.
NL East Top payroll Mets & Phillies . First place Phillies followed closely by Mets.
NL Central top payroll Cubs First place Cubs
NL West top payroll Dodgers (followed by Giants) first place Dodgers (followed by Giants)
AL East top payroll Bluejays & Yankees (both top 5) first place Bluejays followed by Yankees
AL Central top payroll tie Tigers and Twins first place Tigers
AL West top payroll Astros first place Astros.
The smoke and mirrors of adding another wildcard to make teams think they are competitive doesn’t do it for me. Baseball just continues to run the sport without the fans in mind. Sad, I’ve been a lifelong baseball fan but I can’t get myself to care much anymore. Ownership has no real chance to have a consistent winner unless you are in a large market. The Dodgers can pay its whole ridiculous payroll with the difference in revenue between the Cardinals and Dodgers. I wish I could just hate DeWitt... instead I hate how baseball is run. Sad
You are right. However, the cardinals admitted they wrongly stopped investing in development. They let the rest of baseball catch up to, then pass them. Combine that with the money they do spend has been far too often been on bad contracts. Third, they have been unable to identify high value windows of time to trade players they don’t intend to extend. It’s amazing they’re above .500
Exactly right. Trouble is, they admitted to stopping investment on development AND signed bad contracts AND made bad trades….and everyone kept their jobs! And they wonder why the fans are (upset) and stay away from the ballpark. It’s mind-boggling.
Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 14:31 pm
It won’t happen anytime soon. Most teams are already on board with combining tv rights because the belief is they can make more that way and can eliminate blackouts which is a priority for the league. Manfred has told teams not avoid extending tv deals beyond a certain year for this reason but everyone signed long tv deals during the height of cable so we are stuck for awhile. For obvious reasons the dodgers and Yankees are deeply opposed to it but they are vastly outnumbered so they might not have a choice in the matter. That fight won’t happen for awhile so they might change their tune once they can no longer profit from the cable model.
You’re dreaming…..the Yankees and the Dodgers are the premier franchises in MLB…
If Manfred wants to keep his job he better not cross them…..
The Dodger's make more in local TV money than the Cardinals do from all sources. And yes, a Salary cap is the issue. All a cap means is that the players will not all sign with the big market teams. They still get their money, but the locations may be Seattle or St.Louis.
I'm tired of watching the same teams go to the WS every year.
Players would never agree to a cap so it’s a non starter. We just had the rangers and diamondbacks playing each other in the WS 2 seasons ago, not exactly WS regulars. My biggest complaint is teams that refuse to spend. We need a luxury tax system for low spenders similar to the one we have for high spenders. Maybe then teams will stop giving away solid players to the dodgers for minimal return to avoid paying them.
Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:01 pm
Players would never agree to a cap so it’s a non starter. We just had the rangers and diamondbacks playing each other in the WS 2 seasons ago, not exactly WS regulars. My biggest complaint is teams that refuse to spend. We need a luxury tax system for low spenders similar to the one we have for high spenders. Maybe then teams will stop giving away solid players to the dodgers for minimal return to avoid paying them.
A salary floor or tax is inflationary…….and penalizes the followers of small market teams..
Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:01 pm
Players would never agree to a cap so it’s a non starter. We just had the rangers and diamondbacks playing each other in the WS 2 seasons ago, not exactly WS regulars. My biggest complaint is teams that refuse to spend. We need a luxury tax system for low spenders similar to the one we have for high spenders. Maybe then teams will stop giving away solid players to the dodgers for minimal return to avoid paying them.
If the owners hang tough a cap will happen. They might lose an entire season but it will happen.
Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:01 pm
Players would never agree to a cap so it’s a non starter. We just had the rangers and diamondbacks playing each other in the WS 2 seasons ago, not exactly WS regulars. My biggest complaint is teams that refuse to spend. We need a luxury tax system for low spenders similar to the one we have for high spenders. Maybe then teams will stop giving away solid players to the dodgers for minimal return to avoid paying them.
If the owners hang tough a cap will happen. They might lose an entire season but it will happen.
Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:01 pm
Players would never agree to a cap so it’s a non starter. We just had the rangers and diamondbacks playing each other in the WS 2 seasons ago, not exactly WS regulars. My biggest complaint is teams that refuse to spend. We need a luxury tax system for low spenders similar to the one we have for high spenders. Maybe then teams will stop giving away solid players to the dodgers for minimal return to avoid paying them.
If the owners hang tough a cap will happen. They might lose an entire season but it will happen.
They might agree to it……but delayed significantly
Very likely -- they'll have to solve contracts like Ohtani and Soto.
Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:01 pm
Players would never agree to a cap so it’s a non starter. We just had the rangers and diamondbacks playing each other in the WS 2 seasons ago, not exactly WS regulars. My biggest complaint is teams that refuse to spend. We need a luxury tax system for low spenders similar to the one we have for high spenders. Maybe then teams will stop giving away solid players to the dodgers for minimal return to avoid paying them.
If the owners hang tough a cap will happen. They might lose an entire season but it will happen.
With the game increasing in popularity at all levels right now this would be the most short sighted thing the league could possibly do and it wouldn’t even save them money. It would just force poor teams to pay more than they can afford and for the rich teams to be more profitable than ever assuming the players get 50% of revenue. Won’t happen.
Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:01 pm
Players would never agree to a cap so it’s a non starter. We just had the rangers and diamondbacks playing each other in the WS 2 seasons ago, not exactly WS regulars. My biggest complaint is teams that refuse to spend. We need a luxury tax system for low spenders similar to the one we have for high spenders. Maybe then teams will stop giving away solid players to the dodgers for minimal return to avoid paying them.
A salary floor or tax is inflationary…….and penalizes the followers of small market teams..
Every team gets over $110 million in revenue sharing. There’s no excuse for the Marlins to be spending $69 million this year. I’m not saying we should make the floor $200 million or something, just have them spend the money they receive in revenue sharing.
Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:01 pm
Players would never agree to a cap so it’s a non starter. We just had the rangers and diamondbacks playing each other in the WS 2 seasons ago, not exactly WS regulars. My biggest complaint is teams that refuse to spend. We need a luxury tax system for low spenders similar to the one we have for high spenders. Maybe then teams will stop giving away solid players to the dodgers for minimal return to avoid paying them.
If the owners hang tough a cap will happen. They might lose an entire season but it will happen.
With the game increasing in popularity at all levels right now this would be the most short sighted thing the league could possibly do and it wouldn’t even save them money. It would just force poor teams to pay more than they can afford and for the rich teams to be more profitable than ever assuming the players get 50% of revenue. Won’t happen.
The poorest team can afford a lot more if they go with the NFL revenue sharing model.
