OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post - Realistic MLB Financials

UKRedsFan · 06-05-2006, 10:10 AM

I have been looking at ways of implementing realistic financials once someone releases an MLB 2006 roster set. Based on what I've seen in my own leagues I don't think the game will be able to accurately model the financial positions of the real MLB teams without some help.

For each club I've taken Forbes' estimate of expenses for 2005, and subtracted the actual 2005 payroll, to get a "off-field expenses" figure. I added $5m to each payroll to reflect the staff costs which are incurred on OOTP2006.

By subtracting this from Forbes' estimate of revenues, I get a maximum budget for the club to use on OOTP.

For example, Forbes estimates the Reds' expenses at $119m. Subtract the 2005 payroll ($62m + $5m staff costs) = $52m off-field expenses.

Reds' revenues were estimated at $137m, less off-field expenses = $84m.

So, we have a budget for players & staff of $84m. Reds' actual payroll for 2006 is $66m ($61m + $5m staff costs), giving them $18m surplus.

So do I believe Forbes, which tells me the Reds (and 24 other clubs) make a healthy profit each year and the owners are pocketing most of it? Or do I believe Bud Selig, who says Forbes' figures are rubbish and assume that the Reds are already at their maximum payroll?

06-05-2006, 10:10 AM	#1
UKRedsFan Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Worthing, England Posts: 83	Realistic MLB Financials - Forbes vs Selig I have been looking at ways of implementing realistic financials once someone releases an MLB 2006 roster set. Based on what I've seen in my own leagues I don't think the game will be able to accurately model the financial positions of the real MLB teams without some help. For each club I've taken Forbes' estimate of expenses for 2005, and subtracted the actual 2005 payroll, to get a "off-field expenses" figure. I added $5m to each payroll to reflect the staff costs which are incurred on OOTP2006. By subtracting this from Forbes' estimate of revenues, I get a maximum budget for the club to use on OOTP. For example, Forbes estimates the Reds' expenses at $119m. Subtract the 2005 payroll ($62m + $5m staff costs) = $52m off-field expenses. Reds' revenues were estimated at $137m, less off-field expenses = $84m. So, we have a budget for players & staff of $84m. Reds' actual payroll for 2006 is $66m ($61m + $5m staff costs), giving them $18m surplus. So do I believe Forbes, which tells me the Reds (and 24 other clubs) make a healthy profit each year and the owners are pocketing most of it? Or do I believe Bud Selig, who says Forbes' figures are rubbish and assume that the Reds are already at their maximum payroll?