Thread: Derek Jeter
View Single Post
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 08-24-2004, 02:20 PM
BuckStocksHere's Avatar
BuckStocksHere BuckStocksHere is offline
Semper Fi!
 

Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,014
Points: 1,274.15
Bank: 7,803.86
Total Points: 9,078.02
BuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout teamBuckStocksHere is on the scout team
Actually, the exact total is $191 million. The main problem with baseball is that there's no revenue sharing. Steinbrenner makes $250 million off the YES Network alone, and that's not counting tickets, shirts, etc.

And even if the Players did agree to it, a cap would never work without revenue sharing. You can't force the Milwaukee Brewers and Kansas City Royals to spend $70 million on payroll when they're not making that much.


I think revenue sharing is needed too, but even if the cap was at say 70 - the yanks and sox yada yada yada would be at 70 every year. The crew and royals and what not would probably be around 40-60. That is still better than the way it is now, because the yanks wouldn't be able to have a jeter, a rod on the same team and still pay for 23 other spots ya know? I think it would divy up the talent farther and attendance would rise at the lower end teams because now "we feel we have at least a chance". don't think it will happen in my day though... a cap that is.
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.08537 seconds with 9 queries