jad
-
Posts
4,486 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by jad
-
What the goal is and what it does are two different things, no? It was supposed to bring 'competitive balance'. But what it actually does is allow a few teams to invest the minimum in their business and collect pure profits from higher-spending teams. The teams that insist on the lower threshhold are the ones whose bottom line depends on it, and as long as they are not required to re-invest that (e.g., in player salaries), they will continue their intransigence and put that tax money right into their wallets. Thus, the tax doesn't accomplish its goal at all, and keeps the investment of better teams lower than it would be otherwise, and doesn't allow players to negotiate for what the market says they're worth. A lose/lose situation. (or win/win if you're a scumbag owner)
-
I'm pretty sure the owners have already calculated the financial consequences of missing April. Not paying workers is on the plus side of the ledger, just like not paying players is.
-
Yeah, back before free agency. Back when owners were KING! and back when you could walk up to the gate and get a ticket game-time because no one went. Although yeah, it must have been hard to see desegregation (1959 for the RS), but at least you didn't have to put up with all this player union nonsense. Those were the days!
-
That's EXACTLY how Manfred hopes you feel.
-
Thanks! So it sounds as if for the players to seriously threaten the value of a franchise, they not only have to sit this season out (or threaten that), but demonstrate a willingness to do it again!
-
My questions: small market teams are obviously delighted--they can put out a crappy product and the worse it is, the more pure profits they get from big market teams, profits they don't even have to invest. Don't the big market teams eventually get p.o.'ed at this? And if so, what can they do? Or are they like NCAA D-1 teams: you don't want competitive balance; you're happy to pay crappy teams to come in so that you can build up your record and shellack them in front of a sold out stadium. And maybe you accountants can help with this: at what point does the lock-out really hurt owners? or are they figuring they can just manipulate these paper losses into massive tax breaks?
-
Part of me hopes (as in all sports owner/players conflicts), that the players form their own league. The other part reminds me that owners don't give a f*ck about their product, only about the money, and that they would immediately (as they have proven in the past) form a league of scabs.
-
If the owners really have 'another offer' in mind and are just withholding it for now, then they are both dumber and bigger scumbags than I thought (which would be difficult)
-
Agreed. The players in fact have shown a willingness to lose salary. So maybe it's time for them to call the owners' bluff, who might be more moved when they see the value of their franchises suddenly plummet. As for us, we've done without baseball before and didn't die. And by the time basketball and hockey are over, it will be almost football season.
-
Don't bother Old Red with facts. He's on a roll.
-
You can take a stand any time you want. Go ahead. But don't ask me to join you. I am hardly going to enjoy baseball more if the players make less money! Why would I? Do I enjoy the SeaDogs more than the RS?
-
His ads with Steinbrenner were epic!
-
I of course agree with all of this, except the last sentence: the length of career of an NFL player is 3.3 years (MLB, I'm told, is 5.6) and despite the risk of injury, the money is not guaranteed (NFL also has a tax-payer funded minor league in which players can spend 5 years or more and for which they earn 0).
-
https://www.dodgersnation.com/dodgers-justin-turner-reacts-to-derek-jeter-leaving-miami-marlins/2022/02/28/
-
Yup. Why anyone sides with them is beyond me. If corporations are your thing, then why not see if you can sit in on corporate board meetings (wow! the drama!), or maybe offer to caddy for these a-holes at their country club.
-
I think in whatever you call that sport with the octagonal ball, one must distinguish the atmosphere in the stands from whatever it is one would call the 'action'? on the field.
-
Exactly who is it that you are directing this complaint to? Fans and concert-goers willing to pay that price?
-
I DO love sports-teams owners, I do I do I do. I DO love owners, I do I do I do ...
-
There is no better way (besides cancelling the season) to prove you don't give a f* about your fans than to get rid of popular players.
-
But 'taking some off the top' surely means a salary cap, does it not? MLBPA is pretty clear they won't go for this.
-
How many times do fans have to be reminded that ticket prices have nothing to do with player salaries, but only with the bean-counters' calculus of what will bring in the highest gate?
-
At least the players actually work for their money. (I don't regard bribing politicians, screwing over your employees, and hiring accountants to cheat on one's taxes 'work'.)
-
Some people SAY they are doing that; but do not. It's more or less like the hysterical flag-waving far-righters who claimed they would never watch another NFL game after Kaepernick.
-
The analogy isn't that great. The reason movie makers like shorter movies is that each individual theatre can put on more of them in a day, no? You get a greater number of admissions.
-
Two different questions. Yes, there is 'money to be made' at these games. My question is 'who gets it' and 'how much' of it is there. Although MLB owners like to extort every nickel out of their employees and from their host cities, are they losing enough by dropping pre-season games to care about them or to start negotiating seriously.
