Owners want more profit. It’s being run like a business be the small makers and like a fan by the big ones. The only fix is 100% revenue sharing and the top 10 markets will not give up the TV $shebashab wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 11:00 amIts like people on this forum only know one thing... and dont even read anything that anyone else writes. Top payroll teams are also the top revenue teams, and those are the only ones that are competitive. This is no longer MLB of 2005Youboughtit wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 10:29 amThe proven formula for the Cardinals is top 5 farm and top 10 payroll. That is $215m. Do that and they will get their 3.4m fans and make as much profit as this $135m payroll and what I suspect will be 1.5m fans. Boras reported the General fund alone paid out $100m to every team last year and Forbes has the cardinals at $340m from baseball only revenue. That does not include ballpark village parking the apartments etc because Dewitt has them under a separate business. Claiming poverty for a franchise that has appreciated from 150m when purchased to 3.4b now is absurd. Dewitt is the problem.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
Sorry it's not on the ownership
Moderators: STLtoday Forum Moderators, Cards Talk Moderators
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 4019
- Joined: 06 Oct 2020 15:45 pm
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 4019
- Joined: 06 Oct 2020 15:45 pm
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
The floor is a percentage of cap. The cap will be over 300m and the lowest floor in professional sports is 80% so the As and the other teams will need to spend $200-$240m. How is that possible without full revenue sharing?45s wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:08 pmA 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.
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 4019
- Joined: 06 Oct 2020 15:45 pm
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
Compete for a playoff spot or WS? No one cares about the last WC spot. That is not a WSAlex Reyes Cy Young wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:11 pmExactly. You can compete with a low payroll that’s total [nonsense].
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 4019
- Joined: 06 Oct 2020 15:45 pm
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
Yep. Go convince the top 10 markets to cut their profit in half and all gooddesertrat23 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 16:18 pmThe poorest team can afford a lot more if they go with the NFL revenue sharing model.Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 16:00 pmWith 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.desertrat23 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:15 pmIf 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.
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 1531
- Joined: 28 May 2024 18:12 pm
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
I agree it's going to be tough. It will be Armageddon in baseball. No 2027 season. Maybe half a 2028 season. But if they don't fix it this time the sport will die.Youboughtit wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 17:08 pmYep. Go convince the top 10 markets to cut their profit in half and all gooddesertrat23 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 16:18 pmThe poorest team can afford a lot more if they go with the NFL revenue sharing model.Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 16:00 pmWith 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.desertrat23 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:15 pmIf 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.
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
Ok…so you want Miami to spend 110 million…Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 16:04 pmEvery 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.45s wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:08 pmA 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.
Well no one wants to go there….so there’s no Kyle Tucker contract to get them there..
What to do…? Well, there is a broken down, old shortstop looking for a job….lets sign him for 20 million and we are there…
It just so happens that Masyn Wynn is up for arbitration that year….so his agent looks around the league for comparables…
Hey that bum in Miami is getting 20 million…….my guy is younger and better…as least twice as good as him…
The arbiter says….you are right …Masyn, congrats on your 40 million..
An overpaid guy in Miami….and an overpaid guy in Stl…
Too much money chasing too little talent….inflation…
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 1531
- Joined: 28 May 2024 18:12 pm
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
OK, so how do you fix it? (Note: if your answer is ‘you don’t,’ I think that’s a perfectly reasonable if sad answer.)45s wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 18:40 pmOk…so you want Miami to spend 110 million…Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 16:04 pmEvery 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.45s wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:08 pmA 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.
Well no one wants to go there….so there’s no Kyle Tucker contract to get them there..
What to do…? Well, there is a broken down, old shortstop looking for a job….lets sign him for 20 million and we are there…
It just so happens that Masyn Wynn is up for arbitration that year….so his agent looks around the league for comparables…
Hey that bum in Miami is getting 20 million…….my guy is younger and better…as least twice as good as him…
The arbiter says….you are right …Masyn, congrats on your 40 million..
An overpaid guy in Miami….and an overpaid guy in Stl…
Too much money chasing too little talent….inflation…
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 3008
- Joined: 23 May 2024 13:35 pm
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
Well actually it partly is on ownership. The horrible contracts,
Roster construction and of course leadership in the dugout.
Tha Cardinals know a work stoppage is coming after 2026 and they are banking on eventually benefitting from it.
So making any major money acquisitions isn't going to happen.
Even if you want to believe a work stoppage brings about a more even playing field the franchise is still woefully short on baseball smarts.
Roster construction and of course leadership in the dugout.
Tha Cardinals know a work stoppage is coming after 2026 and they are banking on eventually benefitting from it.
So making any major money acquisitions isn't going to happen.
Even if you want to believe a work stoppage brings about a more even playing field the franchise is still woefully short on baseball smarts.
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 428
- Joined: 23 May 2024 13:14 pm
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
I have never rooted for a sports League strike before but I'm anxiously awaiting MLB's. There needs to be some serious restructuring and if it takes 3 years of players sitting on their (bleep) because they love the status quo then so be it.
I definitely place plenty of blame on the owners. They're the dumb[ash] that negotiated into the mess they're in now so please don't think I'm defending them
I definitely place plenty of blame on the owners. They're the dumb[ash] that negotiated into the mess they're in now so please don't think I'm defending them
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
The last three WS had six different teams. The last four had seven different.bretto12 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 14:51 pm 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.
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
You could salary cap players that come into the league after a particular date.desertrat23 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:56 pmVery likely -- they'll have to solve contracts like Ohtani and Soto.45s wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:21 pmThey might agree to it……but delayed significantlydesertrat23 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:15 pmIf 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.
Existing players would not be subject to the cap.
It might take 10 years for existing players to retire…but after that the cap would be fully in place..
Re: Sorry it's not on the owner
Install a salary floor……but eliminate arbitration…go back to the days of players holding out and who blinks first.desertrat23 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 19:07 pmOK, so how do you fix it? (Note: if your answer is ‘you don’t,’ I think that’s a perfectly reasonable if sad answer.)45s wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 18:40 pmOk…so you want Miami to spend 110 million…Frontierman wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 16:04 pmEvery 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.45s wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 15:08 pmA 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.
Well no one wants to go there….so there’s no Kyle Tucker contract to get them there..
What to do…? Well, there is a broken down, old shortstop looking for a job….lets sign him for 20 million and we are there…
It just so happens that Masyn Wynn is up for arbitration that year….so his agent looks around the league for comparables…
Hey that bum in Miami is getting 20 million…….my guy is younger and better…as least twice as good as him…
The arbiter says….you are right …Masyn, congrats on your 40 million..
An overpaid guy in Miami….and an overpaid guy in Stl…
Too much money chasing too little talent….inflation…
Not a great solution…but an option…
It would also eliminate those uncomfortable arbitration hearings where the team has to beat up on their own player to win the case.
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 1715
- Joined: 16 Apr 2021 16:53 pm
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
If your second and third largest paid pitching contracts are tied up in a guy that was the worst starting pitcher in all of MLB last year and is the same guy this year, and the other tied up in a guy who failed so miserably he never held on to starting despite giving him a 4 year contract, it most definitely is on front office management and ownership. That is how awful some of MO's contracts are.
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 5841
- Joined: 01 Jul 2021 21:30 pm
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
Mo's tenure is stacked with stupid contracts. Much more than savvy moves.Clubmaker2 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 21:49 pm If your second and third largest paid pitching contracts are tied up in a guy that was the worst starting pitcher in all of MLB last year and is the same guy this year, and the other tied up in a guy who failed so miserably he never held on to starting despite giving him a 4 year contract, it most definitely is on front office management and ownership. That is how awful some of MO's contracts are.
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
Yes bad contracts have been given out....but 135 million for this franchise is a joke...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.
Re: Sorry it's not on the ownership
yanks are a game and a half better than the cards FWIIW,brewers have a better record than the yanks and the same as the mets...