Pay-Rod being offered $27.5 million a year seems ridiculous to me. Maybe a player cap of $15 to $20 mill per season?
$27.5 mill to bat .093 in the playoffs........
2007-11-15 06:59:11 · 13 answers · asked by puff_the_dragon 3 in Sports ➔ Baseball
They need to change their policy and sign contracts based on performance. Screw the Players Association and Agents. You play good you get paid good, you play like crap, you get paid like crap. Smaller markets need to get off their asses and stop raking in money that doesn't belong to them. This is one reason why I support those fans that would rather stay home and watch or listen to their team lose.
2007-11-15 08:48:54 · answer #1 · answered by rdrssuk 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Did you seriously just use the NBA as your example? Last 10 Champions from MLB, NBA, NHL and NFL MLB: Cardinals (2) Red Sox (2) Giants (1) Yankees (1) Phillies (1) White Sox (1) Marlins (1) Angels (1) NBA: Lakers (3) Spurs (3) Mavericks (1) Celtics (1) Heat (1) Pistons (1) NHL: Red Wings (2) Bruins (1) Blackhawks (1) Penguins (1) Ducks (1) Hurricanes (1) Lightning (1) Devils (1) Avalanche (1) NFL: Patriots (2) Steelers (2) Giants (2) Buccaneers (1) Colts (1) Saints (1) Packers (1) So in the past 10 years, there have been 8 different World Series Champions, 6 different NBA Champions, 9 different Stanley Cup Champions and 7 different Super Bowl Champs. My point is the NBA has the least parity in North American sports. This is because they have a soft cap, that allows teams to go over in order to retain players. The NHL and NFL have hard caps, and as you see there is the most parity in the NHL and 3rd most in the NFL. However, the MLB does have a fairly significant amount of parity. The only teams that really require a salary cap are teams in divisions with large market teams, such as Toronto and Baltimore. That being said, Tampa was still able to create a contender with low salary while competing with the Yankees and Red Sox. I think a salary cap would help create more parity, but it's not like the Yankees and Red Sox are winning every year.
2016-04-04 02:59:07 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO and NO.
Baseball is like no other game you could be the best player and have a bad year or be the worst player and have an amazing year. The Red Sox who won the World Series still had 66 losses last year. In 2004 the Pats finished with a record of 14-2 that equivalent to 20 losses in one season. In football they need a salary cap because the better team will win 95% of the time.
2007-11-15 07:54:55 · answer #3 · answered by Eaglesfan19 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
What it needs more is complete revenue sharing. Give every team the same starting wallet and I think you'd see alot of changes.
I don't think Big Stein would be signing some of these contracts if the money were truely coming out of his wallet instead of the teams.
Which is what annoys me more then anything when I hear how the Yankees are great because they spend 200 million a year on their team. Easy to do when your pulling in 3 to 4 hundred million a year.
2007-11-15 07:31:26 · answer #4 · answered by Shawn C 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It won't work in baseball. Right now all the small market teams are pocketing the money given to them by the big market teams called the luxury tax. The large market teams are charged a luxury tax if they spend more than a certain amount, and that money is distributed to the small market teams. They're suppose to use that money to improve their teams but the owners are just pocketing it. The salaries in baseball are so out of wack and the players union is too strong to allow a salary cap. Donald Fehr (Players union head) is basically the guy ruining baseball and our esteemed commish (Bud Selig) is letting him. Bud's just a figure head for the owners. He used to own the Brewers and now his Daughter runs them.
2007-11-15 08:27:14 · answer #5 · answered by ego_maniac 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yea...it's unfair because teams like the Devil Rays lose because they can't pay big money for good players, and when they lose, they don't earn money, etc. etc. In other words, without a salary cap teams like the Devil Rays are screwed.
Yea...not to mention that instead of paying a mediocre baseball player 20 million is totally more helpful to society than spending the money on say, stopping world hunger?
2007-11-15 07:09:48 · answer #6 · answered by mikezcim 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yep MLB, NFL, NHL they should all have salary caps why should someone make more money playing a game for less than half a year 365 days when doctors teachers police firemen and EMTs make so much less and works atleast 200 days of the year. And keeping in shape by going to the gym when your not playing is not work alot of people work out and aren't paid to do so.
2007-11-15 07:25:27 · answer #7 · answered by topgunpilot22 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I really think they should because It is so unfair to smaller market teams like the Tampa Bay Devilrays who will never see a world series just because they cant bring high profile players in
2007-11-15 07:06:42 · answer #8 · answered by Mars 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No.
And you would say the same thing too if you made a lot of money like A-Rod.
Its part of the game, let them make their living off their talent, not put a salary cap because their too good.
Lets say youre a construction worker who makes $100,000 a year but then you're too good and they put a salary cup and then you can only be paid $40,000 a year.
See my point? Let 'em be.
2007-11-15 08:32:52 · answer #9 · answered by #1 New York Yankees Fan 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It does not matter because Bo Sox and Yankees would just ignore it.
2007-11-15 07:18:48 · answer #10 · answered by dfa 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋