Quote:
Originally posted by Jason Moyer
I have no problems with players making a lot of money. If the teams are generating a lot of money then invariably the players are going to make a lot of money.
My problem with the last strike is that it was over the distribution of TV contracts, and nothing was really resolved - except that the gap between poor teams and rich teams was widened further. I seriously wish the Royals or the Twins or another poor team would boycott all of their games against the Yankees until the Yankees agreed to divide their broadcast revenue 50/50 with whomever they're playing.
Baseball is still profitable, but only for a small percentage of the teams. If something isn't done to redistribute broadcasting money more fairly, the contraction of the Twins and Expos will be the tip of the iceberg.
Jason
|
George Steinbrenner has said he's against revenue sharing as there are a lot of morons out there who call themselves baseball owners, yet have no idea how to run an organization. And, I believe he's right. I can see his point, but somehow baseball has to develop into a single entity, where baseball teams are only "branch offices" of the corporation. Guys like Steinbrenner, who has developed into a sports world financial genius, need to realize that without the entire product, there is no place else to sell their team. The Yankees are doing extremely well financially, but if the rest of the league fails, where are they going to get the other nine players to play against?
Major League baseball just may very well die off and lead the way to the re-birth of semi-pro and minor league baseball. Wouldn't you know it, most of the things that we all love about the sport lie in those smaller leagues anyway.