View Single Post
Old
11-14-2012, 12:57 PM
  #37
DL44
Registered User
 
DL44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Left Coast
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,661
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sina220 View Post
Ha, we've been dealing with this for 20 years in Pittsburgh with the pirates.

Pirates, marlins, Astros, padres, royals, rays, etc. All great examples of how a league propped up on revenue sharing kills its integrity, parity, and competitive spirit. Revenue sharing essentially removes the incentive to try or work hard for many owners. Just like welfare does to people. There's no incentive to try harder, compete, or spend more to make more, if youre guaranteed a profit before the year even starts.
And i would argue its a function of there being no hard cap.
The markets listed can not sustain high payrolls yr over yr with the knowledge they will and can always be outbid for talent but the top teams where the soft cap does not matter to them.

I think it's a no brainer that if you throw a cap on that league, those teams listed would be rotating regularly into the postseason as the salary/talent starts to spread across the league...

All revenue sharing does is enable those teams to exist in order to bring in the national tv contracts they need.


So i don't think Revenue Sharing is the evil in baseball... its the lack of a cap...

DL44 is offline   Reply With Quote