Baseball Contracts

Goot

Maybe it's just me, but is anyone else fed up with the money baseball players are getting? Obviously not if you are a Yankees or Red Sox fan, but for the rest of us out there it has to be getting to some people. I'm not even referring to anyone on a team by team basis, more from a social stand-point.

It's just been on a gradual upswing and getting more ridiculous every year. Jayson FREAKING Werth making $18 million a year for 7 years ...Cliff Lee getting offered a reported $25 million over 6 years....Crawford now getting $142 mill over 7... Derek Jeter complained about his contract situation when he has already made more than enough in his career and living in the nicest house in Tampa. Oh yeah, how about Carlos Pena, the same guy that hit .196 last year just got $10 million for a one year deal from the Cubbies. These types of figures used to be "A-Rod money" but now it's seemingly the going rate for the typical all-star.

I know we, the sports fans, are to blame for buying tickets, merchandise, etc, but this is really getting out of hand. Maybe it has always been like this and I am just getting to the age where I realize just how much money $20 million dollars is. When you're a kid you just think of it as monopoly money and hope your team will pay whatever it takes, but now that I'm nearly 20 myself, having had jobs and being a college student, it's tough to know that what I will probably make per year after graduating is what CC Sabathia likely makes for every inning pitched. It's not like things are great economically right now either... it's tough to watch areas take a hit, and see budget cuts everywhere then watch ESPN and see these salaries get reported and then celebrated.

These guys truly are exceptional at what they do, they deserve to live comfortably, but $20 million a year to play a game is beyond living comfortably. I know it's good ole fashioned American capitalism, and I can understand a few guys making that kind of money, like I said "A-Rod money", but now it's becoming the norm. My dad refers to it as "sickening".

I know I'll likely get responses saying "life's not fair" and what not, but I could really care less. And no, this isn't just sour grapes over Crawford, or the fact that I am a Rays/Braves fan (two teams without huge budgets). I can't blame Crawford, if somebody offered that deal to me I'd take it, that's his prerogative. However, I truly believe the system is flawed and not sustainable. I've been thinking about this ever since the baseball off season and bidding wars began.

I'm just someone that truly loves the GAME of baseball but is slowly beginning to dislike Major League Baseball and what it is evolving in to. I'm wishing I was still 14 so I could keep the blinders on.

Boopotts

Sorry to say, but this system is absolutely sustainable. Look at European soccer. In virtually all of the major leagues over there- Serie A, La Liga, the EPL, the Bundesliga-- you have at most two or three teams that can reasonably expect to win every year, with the rest of the league simply fighting not to get relegated. Yet despite this, the popularity of soccer (at least overseas) I don't think has ever been higher.

The problem that faces sports fans in situations like this is that there just isn't any alternative. Look at MLB, for example. For all it's flaws- and they are myriad-- the fact remains that if you live in the U.S. and you want to watch sports in the summer you're stuck with baseball. You can rail on about payroll inequality and so forth, but what else are you going to watch? Baseball is what you've inherited for the summer months, and there's nothing you can do about it. There simply isn't another option.

No matter your level of disgust, the fact remains that you'll be watching on opening day, you'll be watching through June and July,and you'll watch through most of the postseason. MLB knows this, so there's no true incentive to fix the system, no matter how flawed it may appear to be. And I do say 'appear', because the research I've read on this topic suggests that the relationship between team payroll and team wins is, at best, very very weak, and may not exist at all. So if it's any consolation you can go to bed tonight knowing that all the drunken-sailor spending going on in the Northeast may not actually get those teams any closer to a W.S. berth than they already are.

Goot

<< <i>Look at European soccer. In virtually all of the major leagues over there- Serie A, La Liga, the EPL, the Bundesliga-- you have at most two or three teams that can reasonably expect to win every year, with the rest of the league simply fighting not to get relegated. . >>




Oh trust me I understand that. I spent about 6 months in Scotland when I was younger and saw first hand Rangers/Celtic literally own the SPL.

Boopotts

<< <i>

<< <i>Look at European soccer. In virtually all of the major leagues over there- Serie A, La Liga, the EPL, the Bundesliga-- you have at most two or three teams that can reasonably expect to win every year, with the rest of the league simply fighting not to get relegated. . >>




Oh trust me I understand that. I spent about 6 months in Scotland when I was younger and saw first hand Rangers/Celtic literally own the SPL. >>



If Red Sox/Yankees ever became 1/10 as intense as Rangers/Celtic I wouldn't care one bit about the payroll disparity in MLB! Say what one will about the payroll inequality in the SPL between the 'Old Firm' and the rest of the league, but at least the average fan gets their money's worth twice a year when Rangers and Celtic take the pitch.

Goot

<< <i>

If Red Sox/Yankees ever became 1/10 as intense as Rangers/Celtic I wouldn't care one bit about the payroll disparity in MLB! Say what one will about the payroll inequality in the SPL between the 'Old Firm' and the rest of the league, but at least the average fan gets their money's worth twice a year when Rangers and Celtic take the pitch. >>




Yeah and that's the problem...it's twice a year that people see an even match. I lived in Livingston, right outside of Edinburgh, and they have a small club that's currently in D-2, but had a few years in the Premiership a little while ago before some economic problems.


Anyways, this really wasn't about any specific teams, just the overall salaries of players involved. Honestly wasn't trying create a Yankees/Red Sox bashing thread.

larryallen73

It's all pro sports. As a Sacramento King fan I know it's going to take a lot of luck to ever compete with the big boys for a championship.

TheVon

I'm just throwing this out there, but it seems to me that it's very hard to be a fan of any team in any sport unless you are okay with rooting for the teams that have the most money and are expected to win every year. It becomes even harder to root for a team when the players come and go so frequently. To me, that's part of the appeal of playing fantasy sports. I don't have to have a favorite football team because I can watch the games and just root for my players and it doesn't matter if those players are loyal to their actual team because the chances are I'll have different players on my team next year anyway. It's less sport, more entertainment. And that is kind of sad but I feed off of it anyway.

PowderedH2O

It just seems so funny that all of the other American sports are clearly battling it out for 2nd, while the NFL remains the unchallenged king. The king has determined that it is good for the league and for the health of the sport to have a salary cap (both minimum and maximum). What has this done? Well... look at the NFC South. For many years, the team that finished last, finished first the following season. There are only a handful of teams that have had long sustained stretches of success or failure in the NFL. Those teams are the best and worst managed, not the teams with the highest and lowest payrolls.

Why doesn't major league baseball see this? MLB will use the Twins or the Reds and say "See? Low payroll teams can win too!". And they can. For a year or two. Maybe. The Pirates are setting records for futility that are unreal. The Rays are the new version of the Montreal Expos: tons of farm system talent, great management, and not enough money to keep the players they produce. How is it possibly healthy to see the same teams feeding the same other teams every offseason? Honestly, why would anyone buy season tickets for the Royals, Pirates, Brewers, A's, Marlins, Mariners, etc... when you know quite well that you have virtually no chance to win anything, and if you do, star players will be picked from your roster until there is nothing but a dead carcass?

This is why I have lost a lot of my passion for baseball. I loved it until the 1980's. Every team had a shot unless they were just totally mismanaged. Yes, even the Pirates could put together a winning lineup. But now, there are at least ten teams that have NO chance of winning the World Series anytime soon. Not because they have no talent. Simply because they won't be able to keep enough of it on the field at one time without the vultures (Sox, Angels, Yankees, etc...) getting their greedy teeth into the lineup. The Reds won their division in 2010. Think they will be there for more than a year or two? Not once the vultures get a chance at Votto, Bruce, Arroyo, etc. I would like to see every team put on a budget similar to the NFL. There is a cap. Nobody goes beyond the cap, and everyone must spend at least 60% of the cap. This keeps the good teams from hoarding all of the talent and it forces the bottom feeders to actually try to better their teams.

OK - done ranting.

lanemyer85

I know Tampa has had a very difficult time in terms of unemployment and all, and the TV ratings are actually pretty decent for Rays games, and it's difficult to draw humans when the population is largely composed of athlete's off-season homes, pro-wrestlers, and NE elderly transplants, but the fact of the matter is the rest of you guys didn't show up for an exciting and winning team over the last few years. It's not just a stadium issue with Miami or Tampa. With 14 spring training teams in FL, the fanbases are diluted and spread out as longtime FL residents already had their spring training parent club affiliations established. I mean they still broadcast Yankee games on radio in Tampa correct? Boston has an entire 6 state region of loyal followers where baseball is the central sport of interest and they live and die with the Red Sox. The Yankees have 8 digits of fans in a 30 mile radius where pro baseball is king. It isn't any different than Arizona. The only time AZ even comes close to selling out games is when the Cubs roll into town and you get all the Mid-Western transplants that live in the Mesa, Phoenix/Glendale, and Scottsdale areas rolling to the yard. It will take a couple generations to establish a loyal following in places like Tampa, and I guess we'll see if MLB has the patience to withstand it. Plus with the way MLB has epic failed in marketing their product to kids, it's going to be even more of a challenge. Even if a soft cap and floor were established in MLB, you'd likely have an NBA-like situation where it's so simple to circumvent the cap, and now you would have all these elite level players (aside from the Durant types) who only want to play in large markets and run with one of their boys or another elite level player. FL had a built in Free Agent advantage with no state income tax, and half of MLB player's off-season homes, and they haven't even been able to use it.

Regardless, every sport has it's own issues. In the NHL, the 3 year entry level deals are so galactically flawed and the cap has to be so low to prop up the Islanders/Predators/Jackets types that it's impossible for teams to stay together for more than 2-3 years. Teams now can keep a few "core" players and then it's a revolving door of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th liners every year. Perhaps the NFL has the system closest to working...but it's much more viable to do so when the broadcasting rights & ad sales are so mind-numbingly high, and distributed to all teams equally. So it's just not the salary cap that makes the NFL run. That's not the case with baseball where individual teams (Yankees, Red Sox) have their own networks, or in the cases of those teams affiliated with Comcast Sports Networks, the teams own a portion of the company..ie the Cubs/White Sox/Bulls/Blackhawks each own a 25% share of Comcast Sports Net Chicago. There are already local economists looking at the future network the Cubs org will eventually establish and they're estimating a +$500M influx of cash into the organization. You have to have an overbearingly large fanbase to sustain such an endeavor, and quite frankly the Tampas of the world, don't have it, and likely never will. There should have only been one pro baseball team in FL, and Orlando probably should have been it's home.

lanemyer85

Why doesn't major league baseball see this? MLB will use the Twins or the Reds and say "See? Low payroll teams can win too!". And they can. For a year or two.


Minnesota isn't a low payroll team anymore. The minute Target Field was open for business they jumped into the lower-upper tier of clubs like the Giants, Cardinals, White Sox etc that hover around the $100-110M mark. The Twinks will likely be around $110M in 2011.

2010: $ 97,659,167M
2009: $ 65,299,266M

Goot

Pretty good overview on everything, hard to argue with any of it.




<< <i>You have to have an overbearingly large fanbase to sustain such an endeavor, and quite frankly the Tampas of the world, don't have it, and likely never will. There should have only been one pro baseball team in FL, and Orlando probably should have been it's home. >>





I agree with that. Would have been nice and centrally located for the entire state.

The area down here in Tampa/St. Pete has so many things going on with it and there are so many variables that you can not simply pinpoint it and say "nope, they don't care about sports down there" because that's not true at all. Sports are absolutely huge here, the problem is that not everyone cheers for the same teams... Tampa is one of the great baseball cities, in America producing more talent than most states can even fathom year in and year out, unfortunately it just doesn't translate well to MLB fans.


I could honestly talk about this ad nauseum, but it's a bit of a challenge to do so on a message board. Let's leave it at this for now, the Tampa Bay region is truly one of a kind and to fully understand the situation down here you must spend a considerable amount of time here and with the people. The relatively short history of the city, the economy, the people themselves...it's all extremely interesting and plays a major role in what Tampa is today and the general culture here regarding sports teams. I had no idea until I moved over here for school a little over a year ago, and I'm still trying to wrap my head around it.


BTW, if the Region loses the Rays it will be largely St. Pete's fault, not Tampa's. They are the ones playing hardball with the owners right now, while several groups have popped up in Tampa trying to figure out how to finance a stadium in downtown Tampa. Just want to make that clear....there is a BIG difference between the two cities and how they are handling this situation. You can argue it all you want, but the city of TAMPA (not Tampa Bay) supports it's teams like any other small market does, with obvious exceptions of course like the Packers.

lanemyer85

well the area is what it is, and whether Tampa is a relatively new pro baseball fanbase that is capable of sustainability or a giant pro baseball drain, I do know that when you consider Central and Northern Florida the sports landscape is in any given order 1-3, college football, high school football, pro football depending on when the seasons end. FL is and will always be a football state and like Texas, it's a 365 day a year football state. One other thing that hasn't been brought up about the Rays organization is that aside from the Tropicana Corp. there is very little to any corporate presence with the team because there isn't much in the area to begin with. So that hurts them quite a bit as well as it makes the club rely much more heavily on ticket sales since they aren't bringing in as much as other clubs in broadcasting revenue or corporate sponsorships.

Saberman

The NFL is king for one primary reason...because of the ease and 'natural' way it lends itself to gambling.


That is why Monday night football games between two crummy teams get better ratings then any other sporting event on TV. It has nothing to do with salary caps or anything else... the fact that people are watching is because it has a direct affect on their pocket book and they get their 'fix' by watching it unfold.

Are there other smaller reasons like the violence of it, the simplicity of the 'game day' of it, and that it is actually a good game to play or watch as well? Sure.


But I thought the original sentiments of this post are not pertaining to salary cap or equal playing fields...but rather to the sheer amount of money these guys are getting while such a large segment of the population struggles.

Goot, you already said it...it is 100% because of us, the fans, why they get paid so much. As long as we go to the games, watch them on tv, and buy their ridiculous fan gear...yes ridiculous(why else do you think they wear throwbacks and different uniforms all the time), they will continue to make an insane amount of money.

If you truly are angry that a guy like Jeter is making all that money, and then actually has the nerve to cry about it, then don't do anything that will give him any of your money. You may still bemoan the fact that so many people still will, and wonder when the day will come when they will 'wise up'. If you wish, you may want to start a campaign to those people to try and get them to put their money into something else more 'important', and maybe you will be successful...and that is your right to do that.

Or, you may just settle for continuing as you are, then get rid of that angst by posting those feelings on a message board.

Pigs

You know what all these huge contracts mean? The Pittsburgh Pirates will never win another world series.

MULLINS5

The reason they are paid so much is because we pay to see them. That makes them worth every penny.

The only time I will watch a baseball game on TV is a game seven, 7th inning...and then maybe I flip the channel to Family Guy or fall asleep.

I'm a hockey guy, always have been and always will - BUT I will say that NFL football has grown on me a lot this season and it has nothing to do with betting (I've never placed one and never see myself doing so) but instead because it really is fun to watch and follow throughout the week. Hanging out with friends on the weekend is a plus too.

jdip9

<<<The NFL is king for one primary reason...because of the ease and 'natural' way it lends itself to gambling. That is why Monday night football games between two crummy teams get better ratings then any other sporting event on TV. It has nothing to do with salary caps or anything else... the fact that people are watching is because it has a direct affect on their pocket book and they get their 'fix' by watching it unfold.>>>

Truest statement in this thread. The NFL and their fans are kidding themselves if they think their sport is the most popular because of min/max salary structures. It's the most popular because millions of people either play fantasy football, do a football pick-em pool, or bet on the games. EVERY GAME means something to most fans every week.

As for the OP's topic, I agree that baseball contracts have spiraled out of control, but like Boo says, the system won't change. The bottom 8-10 teams in baseball that go into Opening Day knowing they have no shot at 75 wins, let alone a division title, are still making money. These teams just pocket the revenue sharing dollars and fatten the bottom line. It's sad.

I root for a team that consistently has the 2nd or 3rd highest payroll in baseball, and I am all for a salary cap. Sure it will make the chances of the Sox winning a championship less likely if the competitive landscape changes, but it will also make that title more rewarding when it happens. The regular season has been reduced to a 6-month "pre-season" for me. I, and a lot of Sox fans, have developed a "wake me up when the playoffs start" mentality. It's not life or death any more, like it was before 2004. So I can't even imagine what it is like in Kansas City, or Pittsburgh, or Baltimore, where Opening Day is likely your last chance to be above .500.

bman90278

I personally hate reading about the big #'s the athletes make..I'd love to see the wealth spread out, but it won't happen. Yes I'd love to see affordable tickets at all venues and see the below the line workers get better salaries and benefits....Not gonna happen!

I think the big contracts really turn off the average sports fan. Yes I'd love to see more realistic contracts, but that would just allow the owners to keep the money in their pockets. So I'm more in favor of seeing the athletes make more money than the owners....that is spreading the wealth better than a small # of owners making more.

Fortunately the highest salary teams aren't guaranteed to win the World Series. Look at what the Giants just did and how the Yankees and the Red Sox finished this year.

-brian

Tabe

<< <i>How is it possibly healthy to see the same teams feeding the same other teams every offseason? Honestly, why would anyone buy season tickets for the Royals, Pirates, Brewers, A's, Marlins, Mariners, etc... when you know quite well that you have virtually no chance to win anything, and if you do, star players will be picked from your roster until there is nothing but a dead carcass? >>


Let's not pretend the Mariners are some destitute franchise along the lines of the Royals or Pirates. They have a great stadium, draw huge crowds when they're even halfway decent, and have plenty of money to spend. They're just incredibly poorly managed.

Tabe

lanemyer85

The Mariners were ranked at #11 in terms of total revenue earned at $191M. Just behind the White Sox ($194M) at #10, and the Cards ($195M) at #9...but yeah Bill Bavasi and his cronies ran the M's & their farm system into the ground.

MeteoriteGuy

In a system where the minority owners make the most money, I never understood why people think the player contracts are too high.

Paying players less would not equal less commericals on TV or lower prices at the stadium.

CEOBIDMC

If a better than average player like Crawford pulls in 20 million, what do you pay someone like Pujols? 30 Mil? foolishness.