NFL

VirtualSmitty · 03-13-2011, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Revenue sharing is much more a Socialist idea than a salary cap in which baseball participates in, and has done so for over a decade (even longer in other forms).

Not exactly. How the owners spend the money they receive is up to them, baseball doesn't force them to reinvest it on the team. Teams like the Royals and Pirates collect this and are extremely profitable, despite not putting much effort into theirs teams until lately. It is in no way nearly as socialist an idea as capping what a team can spend. Penalizing a team based on where they play and how big their fan base is just seems wrong.

Bruins Fan · 03-13-2011, 01:41 PM

The Sox owner was just fined a half million for saying revenue sharing Suxed.
Some small market teams take the money and do nothing with it but put in their pockets.
True they can't chase the big money free agents,but at least they could build up the scouting and farm systems with all the high draft picks they get.
Look at the twins small market and field good teams.

loki · 03-13-2011, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VirtualSmitty

Not exactly. How the owners spend the money they receive is up to them, baseball doesn't force them to reinvest it on the team. Teams like the Royals and Pirates collect this and are extremely profitable, despite not putting much effort into theirs teams until lately. It is in no way nearly as socialist an idea as capping what a team can spend. Penalizing a team based on where they play and how big their fan base is just seems wrong.

the pirates do nothing with the money they're given other then pocket it.

kelmac07 · 03-13-2011, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loki

the pirates do nothing with the money their given other then pocket it.

And they have 18 consecutive losing seasons to prove it.

VirtualSmitty · 03-13-2011, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loki

the pirates do nothing with the money they're given other then pocket it.

Exactly. It's a shame too, the Pirates are older than even the Yankees, but hey the fans keep coming.

Stephen · 03-13-2011, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VirtualSmitty

Not exactly. How the owners spend the money they receive is up to them, baseball doesn't force them to reinvest it on the team. Teams like the Royals and Pirates collect this and are extremely profitable, despite not putting much effort into theirs teams until lately. It is in no way nearly as socialist an idea as capping what a team can spend. Penalizing a team based on where they play and how big their fan base is just seems wrong.

So would you be against a salary floor, or something stating that a certain percentage of shared revenues be reinvested in salary or other operating expenses?

VirtualSmitty · 03-13-2011, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

So would you be against a salary floor, or something stating that a certain percentage of shared revenues be reinvested in salary or other operating expenses?

Yea I would be against it. It's their business, let them run it into the ground if they want. If the fans stop coming it's their own fault. If the fans don't care and just keep going, what does it matter. Not all teams abuse the system, while I don't care much for revenue sharing, what they choose to do with it is up to them.

Stephen · 03-13-2011, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VirtualSmitty

Yea I would be against it. It's their business, let them run it into the ground if they want. If the fans stop coming it's their own fault. If the fans don't care and just keep going, what does it matter. Not all teams abuse the system, while I don't care much for revenue sharing, what they choose to do with it is up to them.

That's the rub for me. If you're going to share revenue, then it needs to be regulated. Otherwise, why share in the first place?

VirtualSmitty · 03-14-2011, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

That's the rub for me. If you're going to share revenue, then it needs to be regulated. Otherwise, why share in the first place?

But why? Most teams do use the money on themselves, there are only a handful of teams that abuse the system. As it stands it certainly helps a great deal of teams and outside of the teams located in the large markets who have to pay, no one is complaining. It's by no means a perfect solution, but regulating the business operations of small market team just because they are a small market team wouldn't be right.

Stephen · 03-14-2011, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VirtualSmitty

But why? Most teams do use the money on themselves, there are only a handful of teams that abuse the system. As it stands it certainly helps a great deal of teams and outside of the teams located in the large markets who have to pay, no one is complaining. It's by no means a perfect solution, but regulating the business operations of small market team just because they are a small market team wouldn't be right.

That's why.

03-13-2011, 01:41 PM	#2
Bruins Fan Hooper drives the boat. Join Date: May 2009 First Name: John Location: Cape Cod Posts: 1,359 Trading: (0)	Re: NFL The Sox owner was just fined a half million for saying revenue sharing Suxed. Some small market teams take the money and do nothing with it but put in their pockets. True they can't chase the big money free agents,but at least they could build up the scouting and farm systems with all the high draft picks they get. Look at the twins small market and field good teams. __________________ Here's to swimmin' with bow-legged women.