So...what happens to MLB in 2027?

[ForeverRoyalKC]

Lots going around about the 2027 going down the toilet if the Dodgers won the Series because it reaffirms a bought team and owners pushing harder for salary cap.

Dodgers won. Could again next year.

Then what??

[Cobra Mgr]

Players should push equally for a salary floor.

[Westheim]

If they cap salaries, they also have to cap hot dog prices and parking.

[dsvitak]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Players should push equally for a salary floor.

Agreed. It is my contention that profits in MLB are VASTLY understated.

Media rights, ALONE way more than pay for many MLB team's entire payroll.

[low]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Players should push equally for a salary floor.

This 100%.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoyalKC

So...what happens to MLB in 2027?

According to this author, dire straits. He pulls no punches:

Dodgers Repeat Guarantees 2026 Lockout, 2027 Season Possibly Being Canceled

There is no doubt there will be a lockout at the end of next year as they hammer out a new deal. But with the issue being so serious and the future of the game heading to a bad place, there is a real possibility the 2027 season could be canceled. Many MLB owners have wanted a salary cap for a long time, and the Dodgers’ buying their way to two titles proves more than ever that they must take a very strong stance that could cost fans another season.

The reality is, the Dodgers came within one game of losing the World Series to the scrappy Blue Jays. But since they did win, that does not matter. The bad optics are firmly in place and they will be used to reshape this sport, if this author is correct.

[ForeverRoyalKC]

I dont know the financials of all this, so I have a question....I read how small market teams dont want to pay for big name free agents and get better because of the money they make from the bigger teams. How do they get richer from other teams? Can someone explain that in simple terms?

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoyalKC

I dont know the financials of all this, so I have a question....I read how small market teams dont want to pay for big name free agents and get better because of the money they make from the bigger teams. How do they get richer from other teams? Can someone explain that in simple terms?

I think the CBA says teams that go over a threshold are taxed and that $ is distributed among teams that don't exceed it.

The dirty secret of team ownership is that losing is more profitable. That is why I say distribution of a portion of shared revenue should be contingent on where teams finish in the standings. There needs to be an incentive for franchises to try to win. Because giving fans what they pay for, real competition, isn't a large enough carrot for owners.

[JackOnAMacYT]

Originally Posted by Westheim

If they cap salaries, they also have to cap hot dog prices and parking.

I agree

[Hrycaj]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoyalKC

I dont know the financials of all this, so I have a question....I read how small market teams dont want to pay for big name free agents and get better because of the money they make from the bigger teams. How do they get richer from other teams? Can someone explain that in simple terms?

Here is a simplistic explanation. Revenue sharing. In the days before the R.S. Teams kept about 80% of the home gate. That includes parking and merch sold from what I understand. That percentage is now down to about 48%. So if you are a large market that is trying to be competitive you are funding the other markets that sit on their hands. Those markets do not have to work so hard, or not at all, to be competitive because the DoDgers, Yankees, Mets, Phillies etc. are funding that club.

[pilight]

Originally Posted by dsvitak

Agreed. It is my contention that profits in MLB are VASTLY understated.

Media rights, ALONE way more than pay for many MLB team's entire payroll.

As they are for most successful sports leagues. They have every incentive to downplay their profitability for the sake of collective bargaining leverage, and unlike publicly held companies they have no compelling reason to report high profits.

[lightgrenade07]

As a now-former Oakland A's fan, I question the "Dodgers buying a championship" narrative. I don't see how it hurts baseball to have billionaire owners spending money to build a winning team. The real problem is the other billionaire owners refusing to spend money to build their team, because why bother when you can just sit back and earn a profit collecting those revenue sharing checks?

After spending too much of my adult life on a franchise run by a billionaire owner who pocketed his revenue-sharing checks, I say God bless the Dodgers for using their resources to build the franchise - both as a winner and as an asset. Many of these smaller-payroll teams are not locked into smaller markets; they are low-budget by choice, because their owners have chosen to take the cheap, easy, disingenuous way to make a buck off the earnings of MLB.

So it will be interesting to see what happens with the salary cap/salary floor debate.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by lightgrenade07

As a now-former Oakland A's fan, I question the "Dodgers buying a championship" narrative. I don't see how it hurts baseball to have billionaire owners spending money to build a winning team. The real problem is the other billionaire owners refusing to spend money to build their team, because why bother when you can just sit back and earn a profit collecting those revenue sharing checks?

Complaining about "buying" a title is nothing but a smoke screen put up by front offices & ownership groups who aren't willing to sacrifice less profit for wins. And fans who buy into that excuse are just biting the hook. That's why I said there should be a salary floor. The Dodgers, Yanks, Mets & Phillies have every right to complain about the A's, Marlins & Pirates. There is no excuse for the Cubs to be willing to spend nearly $200M & the WSox just $82M+. They are in the same market & yet the Cubs payroll is nearly 2.5x's what the Sox are paying. That is just trading wins for profit.

[Amazin69]

What happens? Everybody sobers up and we return to 1991 baseball. (Steroids and free agent collusion banned, but no stupid wild cards.)

It's extremely unlikely to happen (except for the part where the Mets collapse on a "road trip to Hell" and enter a new Dark Age), but let me dream. I've earned it.

[monkeyman576]

I would be ok with a salary floor and no ghost runners.

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Complaining about "buying" a title is nothing but a smoke screen put up by front offices & ownership groups who aren't willing to sacrifice less profit for wins. And fans who buy into that excuse are just biting the hook. That's why I said there should be a salary floor. The Dodgers, Yanks, Mets & Phillies have every right to complain about the A's, Marlins & Pirates. There is no excuse for the Cubs to be willing to spend nearly $200M & the WSox just $82M+. They are in the same market & yet the Cubs payroll is nearly 2.5x's what the Sox are paying. That is just trading wins for profit.

If anything the Sox should be able to make and spend more money, since they can play as many night games as they damn well please.

That being said, me and my lazy European tush love the Cubs' Friday day games, and I hope that ordinance never, never, never changes.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Westheim

That being said, me and my lazy European tush love the Cubs' Friday day games, and I hope that ordinance never, never, never changes.

Heh, you and your lazy European tush deserve a medal. Pinned to your pants, not to your tush, for hanging in there with us.

Near as I can understand it, there is now a SIX hour difference between our times. This is because last week we followed our biannual lunacy of moving our clocks back and forth; this last time, we move our time back an hour ("Spring ahead, Fall back"), so a five-hour difference became six hours relative to your local time.

When a MLB game begins at 7PM on the east coast here, it's 1AM by you if I am figuring this right. Forget about west coast games. How does this work? You must be watching these games on tape.

[Irrelevant Dude]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

The reality is, the Dodgers came within one game of losing the World Series to the scrappy Blue Jays

Those scrappy Blue Jays had the #5 payroll in baseball, only behind the Dodgers, Mets, Yankees, and Phillies. Spending a ton of money in no way guarantees a title in baseball, but it certainly helps. I am torn on whether a salary cap is a good or bad thing, but I think the biggest problem in baseball is at the lower end with the teams who are consistently unwilling to spend money. To that end, if we end up with a generous cap and a substantial floor, that could potentially be good for everyone. Well, everyone except those cheap owners who will actually have to spend enough money now to get to the floor.

[Westheim]

It's almost year round six hours' difference to the East coast, except that the EU and US move clocks at slightly different times, so for most of March and usually right around the time of the World Series, the difference is five hours.

I usually watch everything that starts up until 3:30 ET / 9:30 here, unless I'm already knackered. The last few years I have also started to suck in as many Mets night games from the replay center as I can. If I am exceptionally bored, I'll also watch night games from other teams to pass the time.

This year I watched 258 regular season games (119 Mets games) and 30 playoff games (0 Mets games) through a volatile mix of persistence and stupidity.

I mean, it's up to code for me. I have played my Raccoons save for *13* years now. Persistence. And stupidity.

If we lost a season to a strike, it would probably kill me.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Players should push equally for a salary floor.

I wish there was a like button. This is what is needed. Owners should not be allowed to not be competitive. If you don't care to compete, sell the team to someone that does.