He has an unfair advantage he took drugs the other players didn't. Large market teams have money to buy players that other teams. I know it's different a little but it's still an advantage over everyone else, and it obviously is valid, because look at the teams that have the high payrolls and look how often they are in the playoffs/ the world series.
I'm partly saying this because Yankees fans act like they are so great when the truth is any team could be that good with the salary they have.
Most teams have great players, and then they want more money so they go to the larger market teams, and it's not just the Yankees either. I wanted to say that before they said it was sour grapes, because they know that's not true, I have been making this statement all year.
2007-08-13 04:59:03 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
obviously some of you have no more sense of right and wronng than a jungle animal, even if it's not illegal or against the rules, it's still wrong that was the question. I don't think you can say something isn't wrong just because it won't help you out, because if you do that says alot about you.
2007-08-13 08:11:11 · update #1
yes it is a unfair advantage the large market teams have...But there are no rules against it....Yes the Salary cap needs reworked.....But Bonds is a different story.there are rules against what he has done..When all the cards fall it would not surprise me in the least if he is stripped of the Home Run Title...I believe he has perjured him self and it will all come out....And hope like heck its not A-Rod that breaks it next......GO White Soxs....and if we cant win it then I hope its the Indians...or anyone but The Skankees or Scrubs
2007-08-13 05:17:08 · answer #1 · answered by chubyshady_plays_the_cards 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Interesting, but I disagree.
You say the large market teams don't have the money to buy expensive players. This just isn't the case. Any MLB team can afford to buy any MLB player, all of their owners are filthy rich. It's just that it isn't economically in their best interest for all teams to do so.
It makes sense that teams like the Yankees and Red Sox have high payrolls. When they sign a new big name player, the investment pays off in the amount of new player jerseys they sell and the increased ticket revenue (either by being able to sell more tickets are being able to charge more per ticket).
Teams like the Marlins, however, are not looking to do this. If the Marlins signed a big name player, it would blow up in their face. Few people actually want to wear a Marlins jersey, and the team's fan market is pretty small anyway (and going to stay that way, regardless of new investments).
2007-08-13 06:50:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't see how it's hypocritical? Your making a comparison of an 'alleged' steroid user to a large market 'team'. You may want to rephrase your question but I think I know what you're getting at.
The issue with Bonds is the alleged steroid use which has the obvious physical benefits. Just because he's on a "smaller market team" doesn't mean its right. Can you imagine free reign on steroid use? Everybody be hitting homers.
But to answer the question of payroll, well the only way you could "level the playing field" would be to adopt a salary cap much the way the NFL and now the NHL do. However good luck with that because the players would flip, the MLBPA would cause a lockout and man what a problem that would be.
2007-08-13 05:19:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Good question...
No, I don't think it's hypocritical, because it's two different situations... large market teams bring in more money, so that's why they have more money to spend... Bonds was just flat out cheating if he used steroids.
Luckily, even if a team has tons of money (LA Dodgers), they can flop - and if a team doesn't have a lot of money, they can still do well (The As).. so some of it still comes down to how smart the front office is... hopefully the Yankees don't make the playoffs this year.. just to see them suffer a little bit!
2007-08-13 05:12:04 · answer #4 · answered by Daniel 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The problem isn't that teams with great players lose them to the teams like the Yankees and Red Sox and other large market teams. The problem is they get no immediate return. For example, Oakland over the past 10 years has been able to deal a free agent-to-be and get prospects ready for the Major leagues. Twins were able to deal AJ Piersinsky for Joe Nathan, Liriano and another player. They couldn't afford the big guy so they got two players of better value. Keep in mind that the yankees have most of their money invested in Jeter, Posada, Pettite, Rivera(all home grown). It costs money to keep the guys. Texas is paying for A-rod right now because they agreed to a terribly expensive contract. When a team loses a player to free agency they get draft picks. Those players aren't ready for at least 3-5 years. If you make a trade for higher prospects you can continue to compete. The problem is scouting and investing in value. The yankees also have not won a ring with a payroll over $100 mill. I have more of an issue with owners that have money and choose not to spend it on players worth the money. It's also not illegal to buy a free agent. It is illegal to take steroids!!!!!!!
2007-08-13 05:15:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
San Francisco is a Big Market Team, Oakland isn't that's why the A's move to Fremont closer to San Jose for more Money.
2007-08-13 05:14:02 · answer #6 · answered by tfoley5000 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i individually don't understand your good judgment...the Olympics was newbie only. They replaced the guidelines or maybe then america nonetheless used only college gamers, yet have been unfairly matched against the pros of the different international locations. as quickly as america desperate to deliver their superb, it became a distinctive tale (the Dream team). besides, for what that is nicely worth, i could desire to verify the Olympics substitute back to newbie only additionally, the subject with that, inspite of the undeniable fact that, is that with all the guidance time and dedication it takes to compete on a worldwide classification point...you only would not see the comparable high quality of athletes.
2016-11-12 05:10:47 · answer #7 · answered by olli 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
obviously your question is directed towards the yankees.
you just cant stand that Ohio isnt as big of a market as new york it, and indians losing the series has emotionally disturbed you.
thanks for starring my question. it was a great attempt from you to grab more attention that you otherwise dont.
2007-08-13 09:03:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Bonds was not the only player taking Chemicals X.
He's just the poster whipping boy.
2007-08-13 05:25:40 · answer #9 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no
2007-08-13 05:02:02 · answer #10 · answered by Conor 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋