Lex L.
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 21, 2010
- Posts:
- 2,301
- Liked Posts:
- 253
This is what people do with this. They often fail to see when you mention both a salary floor and a cap because for whatever reason the salary cap is what gets their sole focus first. Why would the union be against a floor? Lets just look at it as it is right now. You have a handful of large market teams spending whatever they want and then you have everyone else sitting on a pile of money. Under the current system, you're not going to get much of an incremental increase from the big market teams since they are spending whatever they want already. You'll be making them spend less (but not in all cases necessarily). And depending on what the cap is, you might only be restricting the Yankees. Meanwhile you'd be requiring the other 80% of the teams in your league to spend more. So, lets say you make the salary cap at 150 million (subject to some kind of indexing), you'd be cutting 60 million off of their payroll. Now lest say you make the small market teams spend 60 million (as a floor), you can easily get back the 60 million for the players that you trimmed from the Yankees payroll.
And it can be toyed with but this is really the problem that they're trying so hard to not address, that they're willing to make a mockery out of their sport.
The problem in all likelihood is not the union but the owners. The small market owners have largely become content sitting on a pile of money while letting the big market teams spend whatever they want. You have piece of crap franchise like the Marlins who dont want to be told what to spend so they can hide their profits and leverage their fanbase for another stadium based on some lie that they're not profitable.
These are the people Selig needs to stand up against.
Last edited:
