With Arod opting out from the Yankees to pursue a 300 hundred million dollar contract, and players saying they would leave if their manager wasn't brought back......Has the control shifted to the players now more than the franchise? Is it time for a salary cap to be implemented? Owners who want to win will maximize their spending and owners (hmmm, hmmm Pittsburgh Pirates) who could care less about putting a good product on the field will spend the least. It seems to keep players a little more grounded with football. It's hard to root for these guys when they're in and out so fast because of money or because they're unhappy about an administartive decision. If Steinbrenner took orders from these players, Mattingly would probably still be at first base and Bernie Williams would be batting clean up.
2007-10-30 06:49:46 · 4 answers · asked by Personal Insult 3 in Sports ➔ Baseball
I think some of them are definitely becoming bigger than the game, but I'm not sure if the answer will come from a salary cap or any other measure.
It's tough to feel bad for the owners, though, since their actions led to this mess. If they had worked more with the players' union and Marvin Miller back in the 1970s, they may have ended up with a system similar to that of the NFL, where everything is done for the benefit of the league and revenues are evenly shared. However, they instead fought the players for every inch, and ended up losing. Not only did they bring free agency on with the whole Finley-Hunter mess, but they didn't realize either what a bonus they gave the players when they agreed to arbitration hearings.
It would be nice to see more competitive teams, although I don't think I'd like complete parity in baseball. Again, I'm not sure how this more levelled playing field would be achieved, but I do think it would help the game. I have no problem with teams like Boston and New York being good year after year, but I'd like to see some of those bottom-feeders rise up a little more often.
2007-10-30 06:59:03 · answer #1 · answered by Craig S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If that's happened, I think the Fans have the responsibility.
When the strike was happening and the possibility of 'scab' players could become a reality, I said "Bring it on"
I couldn't care less.
If fans think that without the ML players would be significantly different, I disagree. The only think missing would be 'names'. Someone would still hit 40 hrs, 120 rbis, 20 wins, 225 K's.
Some fans may give the teams cause that players have control, then they do.
If Bonds didn't play, if Pujols didn't play, if Santana didn't play, someone else would be there to take their place.
Even Mike Lamb.
2007-10-30 07:05:46 · answer #2 · answered by brettj666 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is kind of funny that a lot of references you bring up are about the Yankees, and no one has done more to create this environment than George Steinbrenner. Overpaying a lot of players and driving up salaries for the superstars, paying players to win at any cost. The Yankees are one of the biggest reasons that sports are in the shape they are in right now. Right up there with Nike and peive of crap agents.
2007-10-30 08:18:09 · answer #3 · answered by The Lorax 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Owners did this to themselves! They didn't have to stupid, they chose to be stupid.
There are still team-oriented franchises out there that are successful.
2007-10-30 06:55:47 · answer #4 · answered by pricehillsaint 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋