+- CDIH (https://www.cdih.net/cdih)
+-- Forum: General Discussion and Entertainment (https://www.cdih.net/cdih/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: SportsCenter (https://www.cdih.net/cdih/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: The Official 2005 New York Yankees Thread - Kill all Red Sox and Twins (/showthread.php?tid=10215)
- Galt - 04-05-2005
those salaries are also a year old. A year in which the average salary decreased in baseball, while the Yankees' payroll increased by 20%
- diceisgod - 04-05-2005
My shit luck in Fanytasy baseball continues....i had pavano and Foulke going today
- lush - 04-05-2005
Everyone hears about how much the Yankees spending money on player but no one hears the other side. Over the past few years, George Steinbrenner has been writing checks to level the playing field. Last season alone, he wrote out a check for $53 million, to do this. I believe that some of the larger payroll teams are doing the same.
So go ahead bash the Yankees for having such a large payroll but at the same time, they are making it better for the smaller teams.
- Keyser Soze - 04-06-2005
the yanks have the money and they rightfully spend it. i dont blame them, if i had their revenues, i would spend it on the best players too. but to say they have a ridiculously unfair competitive advantage is being insincere.
- Arpikarhu - 04-06-2005
Keyser Soze Wrote:the mets have the money, they just choose not to spend it on the team. dont blame the yankees for playing by the rules. blame the mets organization who is more concerned with lining their pockets rather than fielding a winning team for the fans.2 tired 2 give N F Wrote:2004 MLB Team PayrollsGive the Mets another $90 million and put them on the same playing field as the Yanks and then we can talk.
Based Upon 2004 Season as of April 9, 2004
1 New York Yankees $184,193,950
2 Boston Red Sox $127,298,500
3 Anaheim Angels $100,534,667
4 New York Mets $96,660,970
5 Philadelphia Phillies $93,219,167
If spending money means making the playoffs than these 5 should have been in the playoffs last year. But only the top 3 were. With the bottom two finishing no where near the wild card with the Phillies and Mets being 10 and 25 games respectively behind the Braves(#8 in payroll $90,182,500) in their division and 8 and 21 respectively behind the wild card Astros (#12 in payroll with $75,397,000). Not to mention that in terms of wins and losses both teams were also behind the Twins (#19 in payroll with $53,585,000) who had the same record as the Astros. Money is very imporatant but the spending thereof is of even greater importance. I wish people would stop talking about the payrolls because the team that spends the most hasn't won for the last 4 years and the team that is second, third, and fourth in spending in 2003 didn't make the playoffs and two of them (Mets and Rangers) finished last in their respective divisions.
I agree that 200+ mil payroll is a little rediculous considering there are like 5 teams still under $50 mil but it's a business and if you're small market teams can't make enough money to compete with the higher salery teams then you have two choices really...1 - change venue ala the Expos or 2 - bulid a strong talent base for as little as possible ala Oakland the last few years. Otherwise you're simply going to always be the Brewers.
$90 million should be enough to buy a bullpen.
- Keyser Soze - 04-06-2005
are you trying to tell me the mets have the same revenues as the yankees.
- Arpikarhu - 04-06-2005
no, but what i am saying is that:
1. with better management they could certainly increase revenues. their marketing sucks!
2. they certainly have alot more money that they could be spending on the team but choose not to.
- Keyser Soze - 04-06-2005
i agree with both statements however i dont think they have nearly the same financial flexability the yankees do. not by a longshot.
- Galt - 04-06-2005
So the Mets have always been second fiddle to the Yankees for the last 100 years because they always have bad marketing while the yankees have always had good marketing?
- The Jays - 04-06-2005
Yankees field the better teams, have the longer history, have access to a huge fanbase, and suceeded in making sure they are cemented into the history of the game. That's better marketing.
You've been fighting about this for three years. Get over it, and enjoy the game.
Mariano is old, I get it. The Red Sox can beat him. I get it. Still doesn't change the fact that his entrance into the game is one of the great thrills of being at the stadium, no matter how many stats and facts you try and throw at me to try to dissuade me from liking an aspect of the game.
Seems like Tom Gordon at it under control today. Seems like Jeter had the clutch hit, as per usual. Also seems like the left side is pretty decent after all.
- Keyser Soze - 04-06-2005
theres nothing to argue about. you cant compare the mets and yankees pre 1962 because the Mets didnt exist before then. the Yankees will always have a leg up if you want to compare history.
- Arpikarhu - 04-06-2005
my point is that met management has done next to nothing to change the marketability of the team. they also have lots of money, not yankee money, but lots of money. there are plenty of teams with less revenue that have been consistently better than the mets over a long period of time.
- Arpikarhu - 04-06-2005
my point is that met management has done next to nothing to change the marketability of the team. they also have lots of money, not yankee money, but lots of money. there are plenty of teams with less revenue that have been consistently better than the mets over a long period of time.
- Keyser Soze - 04-06-2005
diamondbacks, marlins, and blue jays but not due to marketing. i dont think its marketing, its just a awful front office that doesnt spend money wisely.
- 2 tired 2 give N F - 04-06-2005
Don't forget Oakland, Texas, Atlanta, Houston, SF, LA....
- Keyser Soze - 04-06-2005
Those teams have been around longer except for Houston and Houston has not been as successful as the Mets over their history.
- Galt - 04-06-2005
No matter what any team in the league does marketing-wise in regards to fielding a team, they won't have a fraction of the Yankees' revenues. It's a matter of the size of the market that just dwarves everyone else.
Too bad for everyone else, that's the way things are. But for people to point to Steinbrenner or the Yankees marketing, or some other reason is just bullshit.
- Keyser Soze - 04-06-2005
Oakland and Minnisota are two examples of teams that almost always put a competitive team on the field with a limited payroll. That doesn't change the fact that having a payroll double the size of the second highest payroll gives you a signifigant competitve advantage.
- The Jays - 04-06-2005
Why can't we just bring Tom Gordon in?
And why did A rod fuck up that play?
- The Jays - 04-06-2005
Which has won more world series championships since the wild card has been in effect?
The Yankees? Or Wild Card teams?