524A484F4F58494E535244210 wrote: Doc: The small market owners have little impact on what's decided. They survive because the big market teams have agreed to share revenues with them.
Skinny: Wow, you talk about aristocracy, this is how the elites think and talk. Trouble is there are a lot more of us than they are the ultra-rich. I’m sure that’s how some of the Super Star players feel about the other players. Stand your ground smaller market teams and players you are a lot more powerful than the elites think.
Doc: Super star players don't "rip off" anyone. It's the owners who offer or agree to their high wages. They're not required to do so. They do it willingly.
Skinny: How Many Super Stars that haven’t reached free agency do the Pirates, Rays, Athletics, Orioles, Royals, Twins, Marlins, Tigers, Indians, Nationals have. If any have, they are the lower tier free agents. There’s a reason, they don’t have the fan base to support these exorbitant salaries. Which makes my point, the fans of these franchises are the wealthier fans.
Skinny: Viewership last season is up compared to the 2020 season; MLB has seen its league-wide household average fall 12% when comparing the 2021 and 2019 seasons. Of the 29 markets, 12 saw drops in TV viewership’s across households. This spells trouble for MLB and it’s time the Owners and the Players recognize it and do something to stop this trend. The reasonable thing to do would be to reduce ticket prices and TV contracts so more fans would have access to the game. That of course would require Owners and players especially Super Star players to agree to a few less millions in income. I’m pretty sure that’s not going to devastate eithers life styles.
This has nothing to do with an aristocracy. It’s reality. The larger markets are in control because of the wealth they have as a result of the size of their fan base, which leads to larger television and radio contracts. It will always be that way unless, as I’ve said, all of the owners agree to spend the same amount on payroll. But there’s no reason for the large market owners to do it since their circumstances give them an advantage when competing to win the World Series.
Large market franchises not only have the advantage of a wealthier fan base, but they have far more fans. Again, those large population sizes are what lead to larger TV contracts, which might be the most significant difference between the revenues collected by the big markets compared to the small markets. The TV contract the Pirates have is so meager compared with those of the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc, that it’s laughable. If the Pirates had that kind of money at their disposal, and a real owner, they could and would be competitive in the free agent market.
Good luck in getting the players to agree to pay cuts. Only something catastrophic will make that happen, like shutting down the game for a year or two. There’s too much money being made right now by both parties for that to happen. Once people start making any amount of money, especially large amounts, they never want to go backwards.
The next CBA and the future of MLB
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
WildwoodDave2
The next CBA and the future of MLB
095F495D524858535E497B5C565A525715583B0 wrote: Doc: The small market owners have little impact on what's decided. They survive because the big market teams have agreed to share revenues with them.
Skinny: Wow, you talk about aristocracy, this is how the elites think and talk. Trouble is there are a lot more of us than they are the ultra-rich. I’m sure that’s how some of the Super Star players feel about the other players. Stand your ground smaller market teams and players you are a lot more powerful than the elites think.
Doc: Super star players don't "rip off" anyone. It's the owners who offer or agree to their high wages. They're not required to do so. They do it willingly.
Skinny: How Many Super Stars that haven’t reached free agency do the Pirates, Rays, Athletics, Orioles, Royals, Twins, Marlins, Tigers, Indians, Nationals have. If any have, they are the lower tier free agents. There’s a reason, they don’t have the fan base to support these exorbitant salaries. Which makes my point, the fans of these franchises are the wealthier fans.
Skinny: Viewership last season is up compared to the 2020 season; MLB has seen its league-wide household average fall 12% when comparing the 2021 and 2019 seasons. Of the 29 markets, 12 saw drops in TV viewership’s across households. This spells trouble for MLB and it’s time the Owners and the Players recognize it and do something to stop this trend. The reasonable thing to do would be to reduce ticket prices and TV contracts so more fans would have access to the game. That of course would require Owners and players especially Super Star players to agree to a few less millions in income. I’m pretty sure that’s not going to devastate eithers life styles.
This has nothing to do with an aristocracy. It’s reality. The larger markets are in control because of the wealth they have as a result of the size of their fan base, which leads to larger television and radio contracts. It will always be that way unless, as I’ve said, all of the owners agree to spend the same amount on payroll. But there’s no reason for the large market owners to do it since their circumstances give them an advantage when competing to win the World Series.
Large market franchises not only have the advantage of a wealthier fan base, but they have far more fans. Again, those large population sizes are what lead to larger TV contracts, which might be the most significant difference between the revenues collected by the big markets compared to the small markets. The TV contract the Pirates have is so meager compared with those of the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc, that it’s laughable. If the Pirates had that kind of money at their disposal, and a real owner, they could and would be competitive in the free agent market.
Good luck in getting the players to agree to pay cuts. Only something catastrophic will make that happen, like shutting down the game for a year or two. There’s too much money being made right now by both parties for that to happen. Once people start making any amount of money, especially large amounts, they never want to go backwards.
The key question is: If the Pirates had that kind of money available, would Nutting spend it? Guess we will never know :'(
Skinny: Wow, you talk about aristocracy, this is how the elites think and talk. Trouble is there are a lot more of us than they are the ultra-rich. I’m sure that’s how some of the Super Star players feel about the other players. Stand your ground smaller market teams and players you are a lot more powerful than the elites think.
Doc: Super star players don't "rip off" anyone. It's the owners who offer or agree to their high wages. They're not required to do so. They do it willingly.
Skinny: How Many Super Stars that haven’t reached free agency do the Pirates, Rays, Athletics, Orioles, Royals, Twins, Marlins, Tigers, Indians, Nationals have. If any have, they are the lower tier free agents. There’s a reason, they don’t have the fan base to support these exorbitant salaries. Which makes my point, the fans of these franchises are the wealthier fans.
Skinny: Viewership last season is up compared to the 2020 season; MLB has seen its league-wide household average fall 12% when comparing the 2021 and 2019 seasons. Of the 29 markets, 12 saw drops in TV viewership’s across households. This spells trouble for MLB and it’s time the Owners and the Players recognize it and do something to stop this trend. The reasonable thing to do would be to reduce ticket prices and TV contracts so more fans would have access to the game. That of course would require Owners and players especially Super Star players to agree to a few less millions in income. I’m pretty sure that’s not going to devastate eithers life styles.
This has nothing to do with an aristocracy. It’s reality. The larger markets are in control because of the wealth they have as a result of the size of their fan base, which leads to larger television and radio contracts. It will always be that way unless, as I’ve said, all of the owners agree to spend the same amount on payroll. But there’s no reason for the large market owners to do it since their circumstances give them an advantage when competing to win the World Series.
Large market franchises not only have the advantage of a wealthier fan base, but they have far more fans. Again, those large population sizes are what lead to larger TV contracts, which might be the most significant difference between the revenues collected by the big markets compared to the small markets. The TV contract the Pirates have is so meager compared with those of the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc, that it’s laughable. If the Pirates had that kind of money at their disposal, and a real owner, they could and would be competitive in the free agent market.
Good luck in getting the players to agree to pay cuts. Only something catastrophic will make that happen, like shutting down the game for a year or two. There’s too much money being made right now by both parties for that to happen. Once people start making any amount of money, especially large amounts, they never want to go backwards.
The key question is: If the Pirates had that kind of money available, would Nutting spend it? Guess we will never know :'(
-
skinnyhorse
- Posts: 926
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:19 am
The next CBA and the future of MLB
Doc: The small market owners have little impact on what's decided. They survive because the big market teams have agreed to share revenues with them.
Skinny: Arrogant, arrogant, arrogant. It's only because of the large market teams in New York and Los Angeles generosity we are allowed to exist. Gee thanks Doc, for your opinion, I'm not buying it, the Yankees and Dodgers, etc. don't give a rip about baseball in Pittsburg, Miami, Oakland, etc. They want to keep us around so we can bring up great young talent for them, while they wait around like vultures. That's a apt description of the Large market teams.
Skinny: Arrogant, arrogant, arrogant. It's only because of the large market teams in New York and Los Angeles generosity we are allowed to exist. Gee thanks Doc, for your opinion, I'm not buying it, the Yankees and Dodgers, etc. don't give a rip about baseball in Pittsburg, Miami, Oakland, etc. They want to keep us around so we can bring up great young talent for them, while they wait around like vultures. That's a apt description of the Large market teams.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
The next CBA and the future of MLB
744A4F47544C4C476742554611230 wrote: Doc: The small market owners have little impact on what's decided. They survive because the big market teams have agreed to share revenues with them.
Skinny: Wow, you talk about aristocracy, this is how the elites think and talk. Trouble is there are a lot more of us than they are the ultra-rich. I’m sure that’s how some of the Super Star players feel about the other players. Stand your ground smaller market teams and players you are a lot more powerful than the elites think.
Doc: Super star players don't "rip off" anyone. It's the owners who offer or agree to their high wages. They're not required to do so. They do it willingly.
Skinny: How Many Super Stars that haven’t reached free agency do the Pirates, Rays, Athletics, Orioles, Royals, Twins, Marlins, Tigers, Indians, Nationals have. If any have, they are the lower tier free agents. There’s a reason, they don’t have the fan base to support these exorbitant salaries. Which makes my point, the fans of these franchises are the wealthier fans.
Skinny: Viewership last season is up compared to the 2020 season; MLB has seen its league-wide household average fall 12% when comparing the 2021 and 2019 seasons. Of the 29 markets, 12 saw drops in TV viewership’s across households. This spells trouble for MLB and it’s time the Owners and the Players recognize it and do something to stop this trend. The reasonable thing to do would be to reduce ticket prices and TV contracts so more fans would have access to the game. That of course would require Owners and players especially Super Star players to agree to a few less millions in income. I’m pretty sure that’s not going to devastate eithers life styles.
This has nothing to do with an aristocracy. It’s reality. The larger markets are in control because of the wealth they have as a result of the size of their fan base, which leads to larger television and radio contracts. It will always be that way unless, as I’ve said, all of the owners agree to spend the same amount on payroll. But there’s no reason for the large market owners to do it since their circumstances give them an advantage when competing to win the World Series.
Large market franchises not only have the advantage of a wealthier fan base, but they have far more fans. Again, those large population sizes are what lead to larger TV contracts, which might be the most significant difference between the revenues collected by the big markets compared to the small markets. The TV contract the Pirates have is so meager compared with those of the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc, that it’s laughable. If the Pirates had that kind of money at their disposal, and a real owner, they could and would be competitive in the free agent market.
Good luck in getting the players to agree to pay cuts. Only something catastrophic will make that happen, like shutting down the game for a year or two. There’s too much money being made right now by both parties for that to happen. Once people start making any amount of money, especially large amounts, they never want to go backwards.
The key question is: If the Pirates had that kind of money available, would Nutting spend it? Guess we will never know :'(
I don't know that we're asking the best questions.
I say- concede LA money. Concede NYC money. Concede Chicago money. Concede Boston money. I know of no one who expects the Pirates to be in that highest of payroll echelons, and it doesn't matter much because we play only one of those teams often enough to matter.
It's better to ask about Brewers money, Reds money, maybe Cardinals money, and some other towns. We won't get the answer unless there's a legal obligation to. But, it's a fair question to ask.
Skinny: Wow, you talk about aristocracy, this is how the elites think and talk. Trouble is there are a lot more of us than they are the ultra-rich. I’m sure that’s how some of the Super Star players feel about the other players. Stand your ground smaller market teams and players you are a lot more powerful than the elites think.
Doc: Super star players don't "rip off" anyone. It's the owners who offer or agree to their high wages. They're not required to do so. They do it willingly.
Skinny: How Many Super Stars that haven’t reached free agency do the Pirates, Rays, Athletics, Orioles, Royals, Twins, Marlins, Tigers, Indians, Nationals have. If any have, they are the lower tier free agents. There’s a reason, they don’t have the fan base to support these exorbitant salaries. Which makes my point, the fans of these franchises are the wealthier fans.
Skinny: Viewership last season is up compared to the 2020 season; MLB has seen its league-wide household average fall 12% when comparing the 2021 and 2019 seasons. Of the 29 markets, 12 saw drops in TV viewership’s across households. This spells trouble for MLB and it’s time the Owners and the Players recognize it and do something to stop this trend. The reasonable thing to do would be to reduce ticket prices and TV contracts so more fans would have access to the game. That of course would require Owners and players especially Super Star players to agree to a few less millions in income. I’m pretty sure that’s not going to devastate eithers life styles.
This has nothing to do with an aristocracy. It’s reality. The larger markets are in control because of the wealth they have as a result of the size of their fan base, which leads to larger television and radio contracts. It will always be that way unless, as I’ve said, all of the owners agree to spend the same amount on payroll. But there’s no reason for the large market owners to do it since their circumstances give them an advantage when competing to win the World Series.
Large market franchises not only have the advantage of a wealthier fan base, but they have far more fans. Again, those large population sizes are what lead to larger TV contracts, which might be the most significant difference between the revenues collected by the big markets compared to the small markets. The TV contract the Pirates have is so meager compared with those of the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc, that it’s laughable. If the Pirates had that kind of money at their disposal, and a real owner, they could and would be competitive in the free agent market.
Good luck in getting the players to agree to pay cuts. Only something catastrophic will make that happen, like shutting down the game for a year or two. There’s too much money being made right now by both parties for that to happen. Once people start making any amount of money, especially large amounts, they never want to go backwards.
The key question is: If the Pirates had that kind of money available, would Nutting spend it? Guess we will never know :'(
I don't know that we're asking the best questions.
I say- concede LA money. Concede NYC money. Concede Chicago money. Concede Boston money. I know of no one who expects the Pirates to be in that highest of payroll echelons, and it doesn't matter much because we play only one of those teams often enough to matter.
It's better to ask about Brewers money, Reds money, maybe Cardinals money, and some other towns. We won't get the answer unless there's a legal obligation to. But, it's a fair question to ask.
-
skinnyhorse
- Posts: 926
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:19 am
The next CBA and the future of MLB
635641414A7341414A4D41240 wrote: Doc: The small market owners have little impact on what's decided. They survive because the big market teams have agreed to share revenues with them.
Skinny: Wow, you talk about aristocracy, this is how the elites think and talk. Trouble is there are a lot more of us than they are the ultra-rich. I’m sure that’s how some of the Super Star players feel about the other players. Stand your ground smaller market teams and players you are a lot more powerful than the elites think.
Doc: Super star players don't "rip off" anyone. It's the owners who offer or agree to their high wages. They're not required to do so. They do it willingly.
Skinny: How Many Super Stars that haven’t reached free agency do the Pirates, Rays, Athletics, Orioles, Royals, Twins, Marlins, Tigers, Indians, Nationals have. If any have, they are the lower tier free agents. There’s a reason, they don’t have the fan base to support these exorbitant salaries. Which makes my point, the fans of these franchises are the wealthier fans.
Skinny: Viewership last season is up compared to the 2020 season; MLB has seen its league-wide household average fall 12% when comparing the 2021 and 2019 seasons. Of the 29 markets, 12 saw drops in TV viewership’s across households. This spells trouble for MLB and it’s time the Owners and the Players recognize it and do something to stop this trend. The reasonable thing to do would be to reduce ticket prices and TV contracts so more fans would have access to the game. That of course would require Owners and players especially Super Star players to agree to a few less millions in income. I’m pretty sure that’s not going to devastate eithers life styles.
This has nothing to do with an aristocracy. It’s reality. The larger markets are in control because of the wealth they have as a result of the size of their fan base, which leads to larger television and radio contracts. It will always be that way unless, as I’ve said, all of the owners agree to spend the same amount on payroll. But there’s no reason for the large market owners to do it since their circumstances give them an advantage when competing to win the World Series.
Large market franchises not only have the advantage of a wealthier fan base, but they have far more fans. Again, those large population sizes are what lead to larger TV contracts, which might be the most significant difference between the revenues collected by the big markets compared to the small markets. The TV contract the Pirates have is so meager compared with those of the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc, that it’s laughable. If the Pirates had that kind of money at their disposal, and a real owner, they could and would be competitive in the free agent market.
Good luck in getting the players to agree to pay cuts. Only something catastrophic will make that happen, like shutting down the game for a year or two. There’s too much money being made right now by both parties for that to happen. Once people start making any amount of money, especially large amounts, they never want to go backwards.
The key question is: If the Pirates had that kind of money available, would Nutting spend it? Guess we will never know :'(
I don't know that we're asking the best questions.
I say- concede LA money. Concede NYC money. Concede Chicago money. Concede Boston money. I know of no one who expects the Pirates to be in that highest of payroll echelons, and it doesn't matter much because we play only one of those teams often enough to matter.
It's better to ask about Brewers money, Reds money, maybe Cardinals money, and some other towns. We won't get the answer unless there's a legal obligation to. But, it's a fair question to ask.
You're missing the real point. Baseball viewership dropped last year vs. 2019 the last non lockdown year. I am saying baseball sickness can be improved if baseball was more accessible to all fans. In my opinion you're suggestion that just spending more money on players will fix it. I'm advocating that owners especially smaller market teams need to stick together just like the players union does and quit handing out ridiculous contracts which in the long run limits access to MLB. This is a contract negotiation and letting the Big Market teams and Super Star Player dictate the terms is not good for baseball as it limits access. I love the Pirates and baseball but every new MLB contract makes it harder for the Pirates to compete and I'm sick of it.
Skinny: Wow, you talk about aristocracy, this is how the elites think and talk. Trouble is there are a lot more of us than they are the ultra-rich. I’m sure that’s how some of the Super Star players feel about the other players. Stand your ground smaller market teams and players you are a lot more powerful than the elites think.
Doc: Super star players don't "rip off" anyone. It's the owners who offer or agree to their high wages. They're not required to do so. They do it willingly.
Skinny: How Many Super Stars that haven’t reached free agency do the Pirates, Rays, Athletics, Orioles, Royals, Twins, Marlins, Tigers, Indians, Nationals have. If any have, they are the lower tier free agents. There’s a reason, they don’t have the fan base to support these exorbitant salaries. Which makes my point, the fans of these franchises are the wealthier fans.
Skinny: Viewership last season is up compared to the 2020 season; MLB has seen its league-wide household average fall 12% when comparing the 2021 and 2019 seasons. Of the 29 markets, 12 saw drops in TV viewership’s across households. This spells trouble for MLB and it’s time the Owners and the Players recognize it and do something to stop this trend. The reasonable thing to do would be to reduce ticket prices and TV contracts so more fans would have access to the game. That of course would require Owners and players especially Super Star players to agree to a few less millions in income. I’m pretty sure that’s not going to devastate eithers life styles.
This has nothing to do with an aristocracy. It’s reality. The larger markets are in control because of the wealth they have as a result of the size of their fan base, which leads to larger television and radio contracts. It will always be that way unless, as I’ve said, all of the owners agree to spend the same amount on payroll. But there’s no reason for the large market owners to do it since their circumstances give them an advantage when competing to win the World Series.
Large market franchises not only have the advantage of a wealthier fan base, but they have far more fans. Again, those large population sizes are what lead to larger TV contracts, which might be the most significant difference between the revenues collected by the big markets compared to the small markets. The TV contract the Pirates have is so meager compared with those of the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc, that it’s laughable. If the Pirates had that kind of money at their disposal, and a real owner, they could and would be competitive in the free agent market.
Good luck in getting the players to agree to pay cuts. Only something catastrophic will make that happen, like shutting down the game for a year or two. There’s too much money being made right now by both parties for that to happen. Once people start making any amount of money, especially large amounts, they never want to go backwards.
The key question is: If the Pirates had that kind of money available, would Nutting spend it? Guess we will never know :'(
I don't know that we're asking the best questions.
I say- concede LA money. Concede NYC money. Concede Chicago money. Concede Boston money. I know of no one who expects the Pirates to be in that highest of payroll echelons, and it doesn't matter much because we play only one of those teams often enough to matter.
It's better to ask about Brewers money, Reds money, maybe Cardinals money, and some other towns. We won't get the answer unless there's a legal obligation to. But, it's a fair question to ask.
You're missing the real point. Baseball viewership dropped last year vs. 2019 the last non lockdown year. I am saying baseball sickness can be improved if baseball was more accessible to all fans. In my opinion you're suggestion that just spending more money on players will fix it. I'm advocating that owners especially smaller market teams need to stick together just like the players union does and quit handing out ridiculous contracts which in the long run limits access to MLB. This is a contract negotiation and letting the Big Market teams and Super Star Player dictate the terms is not good for baseball as it limits access. I love the Pirates and baseball but every new MLB contract makes it harder for the Pirates to compete and I'm sick of it.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
The next CBA and the future of MLB
We have more access to MLB today than at any previous time in our lifetime.
I'm 63.
Just yesterday, we had a Game Of The Week on one network.
That's one game. A week.
We had This Week In Baseball.
Today?
We can enjoy EVERY game, every DAY if we want. We don't need This Week In baseball anymore because of it. We can watch the DAY'S highlights. Don't need the newspaper. Don't need the radio. Don't need the television.
We can click a mouse. No! We can watch on our PHONES these days! We have all those options, 24 hours a day.
All we need to do is pay for it. If people aren't willing to pay for something, then they don't deserve it.
Let's live in the past and watch 29 teams wave while they pass. What's bad for baseball is rogue owners who drag the others down.
"Owners need to stick together" is collusion. The owners have already lost three collusion suits. To "save" cheap owners in small markets, you want them to lose a fourth collusions lawsuit? That's not living in reality.
Those owners need to change or leave. The other owners will not lose another court battle for them.
I'm 63.
Just yesterday, we had a Game Of The Week on one network.
That's one game. A week.
We had This Week In Baseball.
Today?
We can enjoy EVERY game, every DAY if we want. We don't need This Week In baseball anymore because of it. We can watch the DAY'S highlights. Don't need the newspaper. Don't need the radio. Don't need the television.
We can click a mouse. No! We can watch on our PHONES these days! We have all those options, 24 hours a day.
All we need to do is pay for it. If people aren't willing to pay for something, then they don't deserve it.
Let's live in the past and watch 29 teams wave while they pass. What's bad for baseball is rogue owners who drag the others down.
"Owners need to stick together" is collusion. The owners have already lost three collusion suits. To "save" cheap owners in small markets, you want them to lose a fourth collusions lawsuit? That's not living in reality.
Those owners need to change or leave. The other owners will not lose another court battle for them.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
The next CBA and the future of MLB
447A7F77647C7C775772657621130 wrote: Doc: The small market owners have little impact on what's decided. They survive because the big market teams have agreed to share revenues with them.
Skinny: Wow, you talk about aristocracy, this is how the elites think and talk. Trouble is there are a lot more of us than they are the ultra-rich. I’m sure that’s how some of the Super Star players feel about the other players. Stand your ground smaller market teams and players you are a lot more powerful than the elites think.
Doc: Super star players don't "rip off" anyone. It's the owners who offer or agree to their high wages. They're not required to do so. They do it willingly.
Skinny: How Many Super Stars that haven’t reached free agency do the Pirates, Rays, Athletics, Orioles, Royals, Twins, Marlins, Tigers, Indians, Nationals have. If any have, they are the lower tier free agents. There’s a reason, they don’t have the fan base to support these exorbitant salaries. Which makes my point, the fans of these franchises are the wealthier fans.
Skinny: Viewership last season is up compared to the 2020 season; MLB has seen its league-wide household average fall 12% when comparing the 2021 and 2019 seasons. Of the 29 markets, 12 saw drops in TV viewership’s across households. This spells trouble for MLB and it’s time the Owners and the Players recognize it and do something to stop this trend. The reasonable thing to do would be to reduce ticket prices and TV contracts so more fans would have access to the game. That of course would require Owners and players especially Super Star players to agree to a few less millions in income. I’m pretty sure that’s not going to devastate eithers life styles.
This has nothing to do with an aristocracy. It’s reality. The larger markets are in control because of the wealth they have as a result of the size of their fan base, which leads to larger television and radio contracts. It will always be that way unless, as I’ve said, all of the owners agree to spend the same amount on payroll. But there’s no reason for the large market owners to do it since their circumstances give them an advantage when competing to win the World Series.
Large market franchises not only have the advantage of a wealthier fan base, but they have far more fans. Again, those large population sizes are what lead to larger TV contracts, which might be the most significant difference between the revenues collected by the big markets compared to the small markets. The TV contract the Pirates have is so meager compared with those of the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc, that it’s laughable. If the Pirates had that kind of money at their disposal, and a real owner, they could and would be competitive in the free agent market.
Good luck in getting the players to agree to pay cuts. Only something catastrophic will make that happen, like shutting down the game for a year or two. There’s too much money being made right now by both parties for that to happen. Once people start making any amount of money, especially large amounts, they never want to go backwards.
The key question is: If the Pirates had that kind of money available, would Nutting spend it? Guess we will never know :'(
Until Nutting proves it by signing a player to the kind of money even Milwaukee and Cincinnati have spent, let alone the Cubs, Yankees, Dodgers, etc, no one can claim he will.
Skinny: Wow, you talk about aristocracy, this is how the elites think and talk. Trouble is there are a lot more of us than they are the ultra-rich. I’m sure that’s how some of the Super Star players feel about the other players. Stand your ground smaller market teams and players you are a lot more powerful than the elites think.
Doc: Super star players don't "rip off" anyone. It's the owners who offer or agree to their high wages. They're not required to do so. They do it willingly.
Skinny: How Many Super Stars that haven’t reached free agency do the Pirates, Rays, Athletics, Orioles, Royals, Twins, Marlins, Tigers, Indians, Nationals have. If any have, they are the lower tier free agents. There’s a reason, they don’t have the fan base to support these exorbitant salaries. Which makes my point, the fans of these franchises are the wealthier fans.
Skinny: Viewership last season is up compared to the 2020 season; MLB has seen its league-wide household average fall 12% when comparing the 2021 and 2019 seasons. Of the 29 markets, 12 saw drops in TV viewership’s across households. This spells trouble for MLB and it’s time the Owners and the Players recognize it and do something to stop this trend. The reasonable thing to do would be to reduce ticket prices and TV contracts so more fans would have access to the game. That of course would require Owners and players especially Super Star players to agree to a few less millions in income. I’m pretty sure that’s not going to devastate eithers life styles.
This has nothing to do with an aristocracy. It’s reality. The larger markets are in control because of the wealth they have as a result of the size of their fan base, which leads to larger television and radio contracts. It will always be that way unless, as I’ve said, all of the owners agree to spend the same amount on payroll. But there’s no reason for the large market owners to do it since their circumstances give them an advantage when competing to win the World Series.
Large market franchises not only have the advantage of a wealthier fan base, but they have far more fans. Again, those large population sizes are what lead to larger TV contracts, which might be the most significant difference between the revenues collected by the big markets compared to the small markets. The TV contract the Pirates have is so meager compared with those of the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, etc, that it’s laughable. If the Pirates had that kind of money at their disposal, and a real owner, they could and would be competitive in the free agent market.
Good luck in getting the players to agree to pay cuts. Only something catastrophic will make that happen, like shutting down the game for a year or two. There’s too much money being made right now by both parties for that to happen. Once people start making any amount of money, especially large amounts, they never want to go backwards.
The key question is: If the Pirates had that kind of money available, would Nutting spend it? Guess we will never know :'(
Until Nutting proves it by signing a player to the kind of money even Milwaukee and Cincinnati have spent, let alone the Cubs, Yankees, Dodgers, etc, no one can claim he will.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
The next CBA and the future of MLB
10080A0D0D1A0B0C111006630 wrote: Doc: The small market owners have little impact on what's decided. They survive because the big market teams have agreed to share revenues with them.
Skinny: Arrogant, arrogant, arrogant. It's only because of the large market teams in New York and Los Angeles generosity we are allowed to exist. Gee thanks Doc, for your opinion, I'm not buying it, the Yankees and Dodgers, etc. don't give a rip about baseball in Pittsburg, Miami, Oakland, etc. [highlight]They want to keep us around so we can bring up great young talent for them, while they wait around like vultures. That's a apt description of the Large market teams.[/highlight]
We're saying the same thing. The large market teams support the small market teams.
Skinny: Arrogant, arrogant, arrogant. It's only because of the large market teams in New York and Los Angeles generosity we are allowed to exist. Gee thanks Doc, for your opinion, I'm not buying it, the Yankees and Dodgers, etc. don't give a rip about baseball in Pittsburg, Miami, Oakland, etc. [highlight]They want to keep us around so we can bring up great young talent for them, while they wait around like vultures. That's a apt description of the Large market teams.[/highlight]
We're saying the same thing. The large market teams support the small market teams.
The next CBA and the future of MLB
277167737C66767D7067557278747C793B76150 wrote: Doc: The small market owners have little impact on what's decided. They survive because the big market teams have agreed to share revenues with them.
Skinny: Arrogant, arrogant, arrogant. It's only because of the large market teams in New York and Los Angeles generosity we are allowed to exist. Gee thanks Doc, for your opinion, I'm not buying it, the Yankees and Dodgers, etc. don't give a rip about baseball in Pittsburg, Miami, Oakland, etc. [highlight]They want to keep us around so we can bring up great young talent for them, while they wait around like vultures. That's a apt description of the Large market teams.[/highlight]
We're saying the same thing. The large market teams support the small market teams.
It is funny in that no team owner depends on the team for his primary source of income. In the olden days, Connie Mack, Clark Griffith and the Browns owner had baseball as their primary business (maybe a couple others too which would have be about a quarter of the 16 teams).
The owners who had baseball as their primary business were the small market feeder teams to the big boys.
Skinny: Arrogant, arrogant, arrogant. It's only because of the large market teams in New York and Los Angeles generosity we are allowed to exist. Gee thanks Doc, for your opinion, I'm not buying it, the Yankees and Dodgers, etc. don't give a rip about baseball in Pittsburg, Miami, Oakland, etc. [highlight]They want to keep us around so we can bring up great young talent for them, while they wait around like vultures. That's a apt description of the Large market teams.[/highlight]
We're saying the same thing. The large market teams support the small market teams.
It is funny in that no team owner depends on the team for his primary source of income. In the olden days, Connie Mack, Clark Griffith and the Browns owner had baseball as their primary business (maybe a couple others too which would have be about a quarter of the 16 teams).
The owners who had baseball as their primary business were the small market feeder teams to the big boys.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
The next CBA and the future of MLB
183E3F283E2E5D0 wrote: Doc: The small market owners have little impact on what's decided. They survive because the big market teams have agreed to share revenues with them.
Skinny: Arrogant, arrogant, arrogant. It's only because of the large market teams in New York and Los Angeles generosity we are allowed to exist. Gee thanks Doc, for your opinion, I'm not buying it, the Yankees and Dodgers, etc. don't give a rip about baseball in Pittsburg, Miami, Oakland, etc. [highlight]They want to keep us around so we can bring up great young talent for them, while they wait around like vultures. That's a apt description of the Large market teams.[/highlight]
We're saying the same thing. The large market teams support the small market teams.
It is funny in that no team owner depends on the team for his primary source of income. In the olden days, Connie Mack, Clark Griffith and the Browns owner had baseball as their primary business (maybe a couple others too which would have be about a quarter of the 16 teams).
[highlight]The owners who had baseball as their primary business were the small market feeder teams to the big boys.[/highlight]
Yeah, baseball hasn't really changed much in that regard. Remember how the Yankees used the Indians and the Athletics as if they were their minor league affiliates?
Skinny: Arrogant, arrogant, arrogant. It's only because of the large market teams in New York and Los Angeles generosity we are allowed to exist. Gee thanks Doc, for your opinion, I'm not buying it, the Yankees and Dodgers, etc. don't give a rip about baseball in Pittsburg, Miami, Oakland, etc. [highlight]They want to keep us around so we can bring up great young talent for them, while they wait around like vultures. That's a apt description of the Large market teams.[/highlight]
We're saying the same thing. The large market teams support the small market teams.
It is funny in that no team owner depends on the team for his primary source of income. In the olden days, Connie Mack, Clark Griffith and the Browns owner had baseball as their primary business (maybe a couple others too which would have be about a quarter of the 16 teams).
[highlight]The owners who had baseball as their primary business were the small market feeder teams to the big boys.[/highlight]
Yeah, baseball hasn't really changed much in that regard. Remember how the Yankees used the Indians and the Athletics as if they were their minor league affiliates?