@ChongGaming23@dgasper24 He came back from a hand injury a month ago. It wasn’t some hamstring issue he has to work back into. It’s Murphy punting a game due to a clear pitching mismatch. It’s lame. Fans want to see our star play daily.
@yakir1972@chrisstlmo@burziyech Yes, I agree. It can’t be perfectly fair. I agree.
But the advantages in a competition CANNOT be financial. Then it’s no longer a competition on the field it’s just who has larger pockets. Sports are ruined when you get to that point.
@yakir1972@burziyech@chrisstlmo Once again, how haven’t they? The brewers are my example. They’re doing everything right. They operate at a breakeven.
Yet they still can’t retain their top talent and can’t afford to improve their roster outside of the farm. What more can they do to get a ring? Nothing
@yakir1972@chrisstlmo@burziyech I didn’t say they cheated. I said they broke the system. They found a loophole that only THEY can abuse with a $330M annual TV deal (10x the size of Milwaukee and KCs)
The patch is to cap them and close deferrals.
@chrisstlmo@yakir1972@burziyech It’s more likely they win 8 in a row than any of the small markets winning 1. Yes. I believe that. Only way they won’t win 8 straight (6 more from now) is injuries. 100% yes.
@chrisstlmo@yakir1972@burziyech I’ll bet YOU however much you want a bottom 10 market size team won’t win a World Series in the next 8 either without a cap.
Dodgers will get 3-5, Yankees 1-2 and maybe a Houston/Atlanta grab 1. That’s the future with this system. Very fun. All paid to win
@yakir1972@burziyech@chrisstlmo Force cheap owners to gamble. Rephrase it. Force a guy worth less than the dodgers payroll to dig into his personal net worth to compete with a team of 8 hall of famers. Yeah. Smart business move for sure.
@chrisstlmo@yakir1972@burziyech They have more deferred money than the net worth of 16 owners. They have a new private equity conglomerate ownership worth $60 billion. They have broken the system. Now it needs to be fixed.
They will win the next 8 without a cap.
@chrisstlmo@yakir1972@burziyech The chiefs drafted the right guy and add extremely well coached. They aren’t a dynasty because they have more money to spend on every single top player on the market.
@chrisstlmo@yakir1972@burziyech No. You don’t get it. It’s SO easy to follow…
I want a league that isn’t won/lost based on financial advantages.
If the dodgers win the next 15 in a row but every team has a fair starting point financially, then bravo. Right now that is not even remotely the case.
@yakir1972@chrisstlmo@burziyech The royals won when? 2015? Exactly my point. Over a decade since a small market team won.
Raising the bottom isn’t solving shit. It’s gonna make the bottom barrel shit players get paid more. It’s not going to make big name FAs sign with small markets. This is simple to follow
@yakir1972@burziyech@chrisstlmo I agree the BARE MINIMUM is to disband corrupt local TV deals and share all TV revenue equally as every other sport does. But this still leaves the door open to allow LA to pay everyone.
FAs aren’t magically signing with the brewers without a cap to stop them going to LA
@yakir1972@burziyech@chrisstlmo The Brewers conservatively profit around $3 to 5M per year after opex. They literally cannot retain Burnes, Freddy, etc in free agency without operating at a loss.
And no, they don’t win with low payroll. Every year they come up against the big $ teams and look like AAA players
@chrisstlmo@yakir1972@burziyech Except when half of the league, at least 33% of it, is completely incapable of ever winning due to financial restrictions.
Fun sport! At least NFL/NBA can see OKC, Milwaukee, Green Bay, Kansas City, San Antonio markets win with the right organizational decisions. MLB will never
@yakir1972@burziyech@chrisstlmo Do the Brewers made bad organizational decisions? Are they a bad team? They destroy 90% of the league every year on a low payroll and the lowest TV rev deal in the MLB.
Yet they die when they face a $1 billion roster. They would dominate a cap era.
@yakir1972@burziyech@chrisstlmo So riddle me this. Should your kid get a higher allowance simply because your house has increased in value?
The “valuation” isn’t liquid money they just have available to spend. Almost every team already operates at breakeven at best. You ignore operating expenses