Quote:
Originally Posted by Isryion
There are, by my count 6 teams with less than 10M available. 3 teams with just over $10M and everyone else has at least $25M available to sign FA (15 teams). Of those 15, 5 have over $30M, and 5 have $58M-$69M.
|
That actually points out a core issue I have with the game's financial system: real-life clubs don't need cash on hand to sign players (other than perhaps for any signing bonuses which the team has agreed to pay upfront). What stops the Tampa Bay Rays from spending like the New York Yankees is not cash on hand. What stops them is the fact that the club knows it will not be making the amount of revenue during the season needed to cover that amount of player payroll. Why did the Angels pay out as much as they did for Pujols? Because they signed a nice new local media contract which will significantly bump up their future revenue, and thus the club felt it will now be making an income sufficient to pay that salary.
So what clubs in OOTP really ought to be doing is looking at their financial projections for next season and then determine the amount of payroll the anticipated revenue can support, then sign players according to that. Cash on hand should not really enter into it at all.
There ought to be nothing stopping a club from taking on as much payroll as it wants - if the owner is willing to subsidize the loss for a season or two. If the owner expects a profit each season, then payroll will obviously need to be set in accordance with the revenue the club expects to make. (If it winds up doing better than expected then it can take on additional salary; if it's doing worse than expected then perhaps it'll have to dump salary.)
But obviously this topic goes into the more fundamental aspects of the game's financial model...