MLB = BS

[Tyler Durden]

Aren't I right? If your team doesn't have the $$$, your team has zero chance of winning the World Series. Watching the Yankees make the playoffs each year is sickening. Red Sox fans have become what they despised. Sox ownership just opened up the wallets in recent years and now they can't point to the Yankees as being the franchise that buys a championship. When was the last time the Brewers were decent?

That's why the NFL is better. Salary cap. Every team has an equal chance. More parity makes for a more exciting season.

No doubt the baseball playoffs were exciting this year. But who wants to see the same ten teams contend each year?
Not I, said this guy.

Major League Baseball is bullcrap till they remedy this situation by implementing revenue sharing and a salary cap.

[bugstud]

you can compete, you just need to use your resources effectively. I don't think paying 50M for Giambi Brown and Bernie are effective uses of payroll.

Anyone with about ~80M and a savvy front office can get deep into the playoffs and hope to get the bounces to win. Less if you're Oakland.

[BullChip]

Yes, you're correct in the broadest sense.

However, what about when the Marlins won? They were an expansion team loaded with talent but the players weren't getting paid THAT much. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they were even half of what the Yankees were spending...

Even when they won the 2nd time, I bet their payroll was a little above average...

I'm too lazy to google the facts but I can't be that far off.

[eric5148]

It's RIGGED!

[cab4656]

[ QUOTE ]
That's why the NFL is better. Salary cap. Every team has an equal chance. More parity makes for a more exciting season.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. The NFL has become lame now. Teams can't afford to keep their best players.

Dynasties are exciting. I care tons more about the WS if there's a chance I'll get to see the Yankees lose.

Though personally I think the NBA's system of a soft cap is probably the best. It lets there be some regulation without being too restrictive.

[cepstrum]

In the last 10 years, 40% (11) of the teams in the league have been to the world series, and 20% (6) have won it. In the same period, nearly 80% of the teams have made the playoffs. Florida won the world series with a tiny payroll in 03, and with a big one in 97. Oakland has been a perennial contender on a small payroll for several years.

In the NFL, 15 teams have made the super bowl over the same period. That's 46% of the league. Hardly a big difference.

cepstrum

[M2d]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone with about ~80M and a savvy front office can get deep into the playoffs and hope to get the bounces to win. Less if you're Oakland.

[/ QUOTE ]
deep in the playoffs?

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
Aren't I right? If your team doesn't have the $$$, your team has zero chance of winning the World Series.

[/ QUOTE ]

Any team that makes the playoffs has a decent chance of winning it all in baseball. Over the last few years, small and medium market teams like the As, Twins, Marlins, Cards, Astros, and D-Backs have gotten there, with two of the above taking it all.

So your statement is just factually wrong.

Addendum: Try comparing baseball to the NBA. Which league has more competitive balance?

[bugstud]

less deep and less payroll /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, you're correct in the broadest sense.

However, what about when the Marlins won? They were an expansion team loaded with talent but the players weren't getting paid THAT much. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they were even half of what the Yankees were spending...

Even when they won the 2nd time, I bet their payroll was a little above average...

I'm too lazy to google the facts but I can't be that far off.

[/ QUOTE ]

The first year the marlins won it, they had a HUGE payroll, and jettisoned almost all of it the following year.