- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: MLB no salary cap vs NFL hard cap
Posted on 8/4/16 at 11:59 am to FitnessDude
Posted on 8/4/16 at 11:59 am to FitnessDude
quote:
After the revenue sharing model was put in, Having massive payrolls hasn't guaranteed championships and small market teams are more competitive than ever before
Sure the little guys pop up year-to-year but where the consistent success? Who is the Boise St of the MLB? Who is the Patriots of the MLB?
2
Posted on 8/4/16 at 11:59 am to cardboardboxer
quote:
I MUCH MUCH prefer the NFL system. The lack of parity in the MLB is garbage.
Honestly unless you are a fan of one of the teams that spends a crap ton it's not worth even following the MLB. Sure maybe your frugal team might have a good year once in a blue moon, but the very next season the Yankees and their large payroll will come steal every decent value player you had. There is no way to have consistent success if you aren't a big spender.
Meanwhile Dallas and DC spend like drunken sailors in the NFL and it only hurts their situation. I much prefer that.
"He who can spend the most money wins" is a shitty game to play for entertainment value, and is part of the reason (along with the length of games and low scoring) that the MLB is turning into a legacy sport.
The NFL's system hands down superior to the NBA's system and is 100X's better than MLB's.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 11:59 am to FitnessDude
Lack of parity in MLB? Dumbest comment on the MSB in weeks.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:00 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:Cardinals.
Sure but does a small market team have a chance to pull a Seattle Seahawks and have consistent success year-to-year given the fact that the Yankees or whoever can just poach all their diamonds in the rough the next offseason?
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:01 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
Who is the Patriots of the MLB?
Wait, are you saying Boston is a small market?
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:02 pm to StrongBackWeakMind
Wrong, they spend above the average:
They are a have, not a have not.
They are a have, not a have not.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:03 pm to cardboardboxer
You asked for a small market team comparable to Seattle. Seattle is bigger than St. Louis.
This post was edited on 8/4/16 at 12:05 pm
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:03 pm to StrongBackWeakMind
The baseball Giants have to be mentioned as well as far as getting their money's worth
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:03 pm to StrongBackWeakMind
The Royals have had basically the same amount of success as the Seahawks as well over a brief time period. 1 championship, 1 championship loss. They've been ravaged by injuries this year so unlikely they will make it back.
This post was edited on 8/4/16 at 12:04 pm
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:03 pm to lsu31always
quote:
Wait, are you saying Boston is a small market?
It is a top 10 metropolitan area but it's not known for spending big bucks like the Cowboys or Redskins.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:04 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:Wat
but it's not known for spending big bucks like the Cowboys or Redskins.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:04 pm to StrongBackWeakMind
quote:
You asked for a small market team.
Normally small market lines up with the amount of resources the team can spend. Not always.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:06 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
quote:
The Royals have had basically the same amount of success as the Seahawks as well over a brief time period. 1 championship, 1 championship loss.
Fair enough. Maybe there is more parity than I thought.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:06 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
metropolitan area but it's not known for spending big bucks like the Cowboys or Redskins.
There's a hard salary cap though
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:08 pm to Rig
Last year, the correlation coefficient between wins and payroll in MLB was .17 (through August, data from a Fangraphs article). That is very weak.
Also, I think the randomness of baseball is the reason dynasties are more unlikely. Not the lack of a salary cap. A truly dominant football team will likely be a heavy favorite against any other team. It is pretty much impossible for any baseball team to be more than a 60% favorite in any baseball series.
Also, I think the randomness of baseball is the reason dynasties are more unlikely. Not the lack of a salary cap. A truly dominant football team will likely be a heavy favorite against any other team. It is pretty much impossible for any baseball team to be more than a 60% favorite in any baseball series.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:11 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:Winner!
Maybe there is more parity than I thought.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:12 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
quote:
There's a hard salary cap though
That was my point. I was basically saying given the owners in place and in a NFL without a cap the Cowboys would probably have twice the payroll spending of the Patriots. And Tom Brady would have been wearing a star for a decade.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:14 pm to cardboardboxer
The patriots are actually 2nd in revenue IIRC and are #2 in Forbes value at like 2.6 billion, so while the Cowboys have more revenue it's not a massive gap
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:17 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
He who can spend the most money wins"
I think the team with the biggest payroll has one WS championship in the past 10 years, Yankees in '09.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:17 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
The lack of parity in the MLB is garbage.
What the frick
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News