Re: Payrolls matter?????
Posted: 21 Oct 2025 13:47 pm
I’m with you and I understand there is an operating cost “nut” that revenue has to cover. I’m for balancing out the revenue sharing. However there are markets such as Miami that I really question as far as support for a major league team. Also there are teams like the Pirates where ownership pockets a large amount of profit. Solution is fix revenue sharing, cap and floor. If the market or owner won’t support a competitive team, move the team.Red Bird Classic wrote: ↑21 Oct 2025 12:57 pmLet's say I'm the Yankees. My cost for other operations (Not including payroll) is $200 million. Since my total revenue is 705 million. I can still spend $490 on payroll (including luxury tax) and make a profit.Jatalk wrote: ↑21 Oct 2025 12:33 pmDon’t mean to harp on this but it’s interesting. As you probably know and I did not, there is revenue sharing but with two big loopholes. When the Dodgers were facing bankruptcy several years ago, MLB capped the revenue that goes to revenue sharing from their TV deal. They have benefited greatly from this. Also if the team is part owner of their TV deal, revenue from that ownership % does not count for revenue sharing. Yankees have benefited from this greatly.Red Bird Classic wrote: ↑21 Oct 2025 11:22 amNo. The Yankees have 2.4 times the revenue of the Marlins for example.
It should be noted regarding the need for a floor that many of the teams with large payrolls are spending a larger % of their revenue on payroll. Mets, Yankees, Toronto, Phillies are all at 70%+. Miami less than 30%. This is based on 2025 payrolls compared to 2024 revenues.
I got all this from several sources so I hope it’s reliable. I’ll shut up now.
If, on the other hand, I'm the Marlins: My operations cost (not including payroll) is say $190-million. Since my total revenue is only 295 million, I can't spend more than 100-million on payroll (34%) and make even a small profit.
When you consider that the Marlins aren't going to win much even if they spend $150-million, it's easy to see why they decide to spend less and pocket the profit.
In a league where some teams have 2 -3 times more revenue than other teams, it's impossible to have a reasonable level of competitive balance. Even teams like the Cardinals, who are in the middle in revenue, can't hope to compete on even terms with big markets like LA and NY.
You're right that revenue sharing will be a difficult lift. There are many complications like teams having cross ownership with their broadcasters, but it has to be done or baseball will become and battle of the Dodgers and Yankees, et.al. with everyone else just serving as punching bags.