Should baseball have a salary cap?
As much as Phillie fans will whine at the words, Sheridan states matters correctly in his column. Anyone who doesn't have his or her head stuck up the butts of Philly or New York will realize that most Americans see this Series as an example of how wealth and not spiritual will or determination decides championships.
the countless millions and unbelievable salaries thrown around by that team just adds to the "slay the dragon" mentality.....makes it all that much sweeter to beat them with a payroll nearly 1/2 of theirs.....and ours is considered quite high right now as well.....the 3 players they bought last off-season was merely upping the bid and throwing millions upon millions on top of the deals by the 3 or 4 other teams involved,.....lets put all the dollars asside and beat these guys playing baseball
one of the most tiresome arguments in sports.
last year's series pitted the phillies (12th-ranked payroll at the time) against tampa (no. 29). in 06, the tigers went to the series with the 14th highest payroll. in 09, they had the 5th highest and didn't make playoffs. they lost their division to the twins, with the 24th-ranked payroll.
do the richer teams tend to perform better? as a rule, yes. but the rule has more than enough exceptions to make the hand-wringing over payroll disparity seem absurd.
Twocents2much,
In the short-term, small market teams can get by, and maybe make a run at the title for one season. In the long run they can't compete, hence you see most small market teams trading all-star players before they are up for free agency. The Yankees, RedSox, and other large market teams can keep their teams intact for the long haul, and take chances on free agents who may or may not work out. Small market teams have to maximize every dollar, and you will notice are never involved in the free agency bidding every winter. What baseball risks is becoming like Hockey, where you have huge, dedicated fanbases in cities where teams can compete, and then small market cities like Pittsburgh and Kansas City, where no one cares because they know they don't have a shot on day one. That is why the Yanks/Phils will be such a great ratings winner for the MLB and the Rays/Phils was a ratings bust. If Baseball doesn't have the Yanks or Sox in the championship, nobody really cares outside of the big markets.
The argument is appropriate because despite the one-seaso exceptions (like Tampa or the Marlins) there is virtually no chance of one of those teams sustaining a high level of success. Dollars do matter, and the huge payroll disparity is indeed hurting this sport.
Put a good team on the field. People will come. Problem solved.
Florida is proof that a smartly run small-market organization can be competitive year after year. They are consistently in the bottom 3 of MLB team salary, yet they are usually in the playoff hunt until the end. This is a far cry from cities like Pittsburgh, KC, and SD, where the teams are out of the playoff hunt by May and ownerships manipulate baseball's revenue sharing system like a welfare mom trying to get pregnant with her 15th kid. Until MLB ties organizational performance and responsibility to revenue sharing compensation, there will continue to be a great chasm between MLS's haves and have nots..
a good discussion (refreshing!). I really do not know what the answer is BUT i do know that the answer is NOT wage controls (i.e. salary caps). proefessional sports careers can end at any moment without warning. a blown knee or elbow, damaged hip can happen anytime. the salary cap in footbal is creating a generation of football players, done after 7-8 years, going bankrupt within 10 unless they are the crema of the crop.
wage controls never work in ANY industry and i think that they will at some point end in football.
in baseball, the high payroll puts a tream in a position to make the playoffs, the rest is really situational.
in terms of the phillies, if they have any hope of retaining cliff lee, their 122 mil payroll will become 150 mil overnight. either that our he goes to the Sox or Halos.
what about tampa bay? This article is hog wash...sell it to the mlbpa and get a hard salary cap. Get a new excuse loving soap box too...Yanks in 5...can't wait for the "WHOOOOOSE YOUR DADDDY Pedro" chants tomorrow night!
co---not clear on your point about rays-phils ratings last year....are you arguing that because the rays were perceived to be short-term winners, rather than a pending dynasty, no one tuned in? i'm not sure i buy that. and i'm definitely not sure that's what you're even arguing.
it seems you want the small-market teams to have a chance to thrive, so they can be relevant to all baseball fans. but when one of them did thrive and reach the world series, it produced ratings you considered to be a problem. that complaint would seem to be an argument in favor of dominance by big-market teams, which can generate huge ratings.
for people stuck on the theme that baseball has a financial crisis -- all evidence of lower-payroll teams succeeding is written off. but the evidence exists. it's pretty compelling.
Duh. That's what this column deserves: duh. Of course payrolls are skewed in baseball. Of course it effects outcomes and sustained success. Of course it is a disgrace that a team which produces two Cy Young winners can't sign either of them. But the problem here is the players' union - THEY are the roadblock to any payroll sanity. And of course, even when their entire membership is millionaires, the writer can't bring himself to find fault with unions (the crooks who brought you The Steroid Era), so he is left with the mundane, and with nothing interesting to say, Lieutenant Obvious reports for duty. I am Oppressed.
Maddy nailed it
BBK...You are feeling sorry for football players who play 7-8 years and then go bankrupt after they're done? Even the 53rd man on the roster makes a nice $200,000 or so a year. Besides, don't they have college degrees that should get them something decent. The problem is all players need more financial dicipline and preparation for post-football life, and there is such a thing. After a 7-8 year football career puts them at about age 32-34, not quite Social Security age but still young enough to embark on a second successful career. Salary caps and payroll budgeting are part of a lot of business practice so why shouldn't baseball? Especially now when unproven minor leaguers are getting millions in bonuses even before stepping foot on a single A field. Football and Hockey, who now have caps, give all the teams an equal opportunity to compete and thus attract a wider fan base. Case study: Pittsburg. A very small sports market that boast 2 champions, one each in sports that have a salary cap and the third team that plays in a non-cap sport has little chance to add to the respective national fan base because the team cannot financially compete, even with a new stadium.
Nice column, Phil, on a topic that does need to be brought up and again and again until something is done about it. Other sports have. And we Phillies fans may not like to think that OUR team is part of the same problem as the Yankees, but it is. #5 in MLB. Nucleus intact BECAUSE of spending. Postseason appearances three years in a row and likely to continue. Tampa Bay last year was an anomaly, an exception that, indeed, proves the rule that money matters--and matters a lot. Phils fans need to be reminded just as much as Yankees fans. But we can still enjoy our team being in the World Series in consecutive years. I know I am!
Yes we need a salary cap and not for disparity reasons. We need one to get a control on the greed of the players and owners.
21 comments | View All Comments | View All By Latest
