An idea to improve mlb, contract ten teams.

[Guest Some Guy]

My idea to improve Baseball is to contract ten teams.  Disregard job loss, the Player’s Association, and the Owners when reading this please and judge it for what it is, an idea (which is unfeasible do to the three things listed) to better the play and competition in MLB. If your team is cut don't take it personally.

 

Teams to be eliminated, and reasons:

1. Tampa, Very low attendance (the only games with more than 10,000 are when the Red Sox or Yanks are there), No $, extremely bad team, never should have been added.

2. Tor, low attendance, little $, don’t compete, play on Astro Turf

3. KC, See Tam

4. Ana, see above

5. Oak, little $, very poor attendance for a competitor, and they play in a Football stadium

6. Mon, No $, they never compete, worst attendance in MLB, no radio deal, play on Astro Turf, never should have been added

7. Fla, No $, un-competitive, crappy stadium, poor attendance, never should have been added

8. Mil, See Tam, but they do have a new stadium, plus this would mean the Commissioner was no longer an owner

9. SD, See Tam

10. Col, un-competitive, relatively low attendance, play in a purely hitters park, never should have been added

 

Teams to be kept and reasons:

1. Bal, Tradition, have $ but aren’t spending right now, pretty good attendance

2. Bos, 101 years of tradition, have $, always competitive, always sell out (considered to be the 2nd best Baseball city in the country)

3. NYY, Do I need to explain this one?

4. Chi Sox, Tradition, competitive

5. Cle, Tradition, $, good attendance

6. Det, Tradition, new park

7. Min, Tradition (dating back to the Washington Senators), competitive despite spending little $, draw very well when contending

8. Sea, they won 116 games last year, new stadium, great attendance

9. Tex, Newish park, have $, will draw when more competitive

10. Atl, tradition (dating back to Boston), $, constantly a play off team

11. Cin, tradition (1st team in the MLB), new park next year, good young talent coming

12. Phi, tradition, can draw with a good team

13. Pit, tradition, new ballpark

14. Chi Cubs, tradition, sell out every game

15. Hou, great attendance, new park, always a contender

16. LA, tradition (dating back to Brooklyn), $, contender

17. St. Louis, Tradition, great attendance (considered to be the best Baseball city in the country)

18. SF, Tradition (dating back to NY), new park, great attendance, contender

19. NYM, good attendance, $, contender

20. Ari, $ (sort of), won the World Series last year, (I don’t think they should have been added but since I’m dropping Col I thought I should leave a team in that general are of the country).

 

Now that ten teams are gone realignment is necessary.  I would drop the Central divisions and the Wild Card, making an AL East & West and a NL East and West and going back to one 5 game playoff series and the 7 game World Series.

 

New Division set up:

 

AL East     AL West              NL East      NL West

1. Bal    6. Ari (moved to AL)         1. Atl           6.Chi C

2. Bos        7. Chi Sox                       2. Cin           7. Hou

3. Cle         8. Min                            3. Phi           8. LA

4. Det        9. Sea                            4. Pit           9. SF

5. NYY       10. Tex                           5. NYM       10. St Lou

 

 

There would be a contraction draft of all the non-free agent players, with the worst team in MLB getting the 1st pick and so on.  There would be 250 Major League players available and countless Minor Leaguers.  The contacted teams have enough All Star level players that every team would be able to get at least one.  Also I would forbid draft # trading or buying, you get what you get, and then you can trade players.

 

The pitching and quality of teams would be greatly increased, there is another team within the same region as every team contracted so fans can potentially start following what ever team is closest to them, and the talent level of teams would be leveled off some what.

 

 

What do you think?

 

EDIT: I don't know why the division list aren't lined up right, they were when I posted and I can't fix it, sorry.

[Guest alkeiper]

Ugh.  Contraction in all its forms is a pox upon baseball.

 

"Teams to be eliminated, and reasons:

1. Tampa, Very low attendance (the only games with more than 10,000 are when the Red Sox or Yanks are there), No $, extremely bad team, never should have been added.

2. Tor, low attendance, little $, don’t compete, play on Astro Turf"

If astro turf is the problem it can be replaced.  Besides, the Blue Jays are well on their way towards a winning team.  Give them 2 years.

 

"3. KC, See Tam"

Give them competant management instead

 

"4. Ana, see above"

Competitive, they just play in a tough division.

 

"5. Oak, little $, very poor attendance for a competitor, and they play in a Football stadium"

Yeah, but 9 WS titles is a hell of a lot of tradition to piss out the window.

 

"6. Mon, No $, they never compete, worst attendance in MLB, no radio deal, play on Astro Turf, never should have been added"

Worst attendance because they have no radio deal.  They won divisions in '81 and '94.  Give them a owner who cares.

 

"7. Fla, No $, un-competitive, crappy stadium, poor attendance, never should have been added"

Again, un-competative because of poor ownership.

 

"8. Mil, See Tam, but they do have a new stadium, plus this would mean the Commissioner was no longer an owner"

I'd love to stick it to Selig I admit.  But it'll never happen.

 

"9. SD, See Tam"

Once again, San Diego WILL compete very soon.  They have EXCELLENT pitching prospects and a solid lineup.

 

"10. Col, un-competitive, relatively low attendance, play in a purely hitters park, never should have been added"

They had bad luck last year.  Besides, they've made the play offs before.

 

You say that contraction will help ease the dearth of pitching.  What about the excess of great hitting?  We'd have respectable hitters in the minors.  If you want to improve the pitching pool, simply convince managers that they can get by with 6 relievers instead of 7.  Right there you've removed 30 bad pitchers.  Besides, fans get extremely pissed off when their teams leave.  If two teams created such a big stink, what would ten teams do?  Should baseball have contracted after 1912 because the hitting sucked?  Should baseball have contracted teams after 1930 because the pitching sucked?  Should baseball have contracted teams after 1968 because the hitting sucked?

 

What baseball SHOULD do is stop whining about their business and start trying to attract fans.  Encourage kids to come out to the games, lower ticket prices, and PLAY OFF YOUR HISTORY!!  Take a page from the NFL and make up a bunch of shows about great games from the past.  Get people interested in baseball again.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

MLB pisses on the fans.  That's why attendance is so bad.

[Guest]

I kind of like baseball the way it is.  My only gripe is owners that do not have the money to compete.  Contraction blows but it will probably happen.  People just need to support their home teams.  I remember when my mets in mid 90's had todd hundley and joe viscaino, and that was it.     they pulled through and now have a very high salary and a competitive team.  I think the problem is selig personally for not even mentioning the brewers cause his daughters wons the team.  He is the worst commishiner ever.

 

--Rob

[Guest Vern Gagne]

This is a more viable option.

 

Montreal moves to Washington-Blame Managment but Montreal is a hockey town and people just don't seem to care one way or another.

 

Oakland moves to San Jose-Despite two strait playoff appearnace no one went to the games until the post season started.

 

The only two teams that should be considered being contracted are the Devil Rays and Marlins. The Marlins are getting no one to show up for their games this year.One problem is alot of people in Miami aren't from Miami originially so there's not loyalty to the team. Has for Tampa they won't be contracted because they have a long term lease on there so called Stadium.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

The only two teams that should be considered being contracted are the Devil Rays and Marlins. The Marlins are getting no one to show up for their games this year.One problem is alot of people in Miami aren't from Miami originially so there's not loyalty to the team. Has for Tampa they won't be contracted because they have a long term lease on there so called Stadium.

 

Them and the Brewers.

[Guest Bruin]

What ever happened to such simple ideas as revenue sharing? I can see contracting certain teams, mainly the Flordia teams, but c'mon, Oakland?

[Guest]

oakland has too much historic value to be contracted.  

 

--Rob

[Guest Some Guy]

I chose Oakland because SF is right next to it and they draw flys even when they win 102 games.  If people in that town can't support a team who wins 102 games then they don't deserve a team.  It was the toughest choice.  It was between them and Arizona, but since they won the WS and people actually watch their games, I chose Oak.

 

"If two teams created such a big stink, what would ten teams do?  Should baseball have contracted after 1912 because the hitting sucked?  Should baseball have contracted teams after 1930 because the pitching sucked?  Should baseball have contracted teams after 1968 because the hitting sucked?"

 

I said it would never happen at the beginning of my original post because of the "big stink" it would cause.

To answer all of the other questions, no, but they shouldn't have added so many teams in the first place.  Col, Fla, Tampa, Ari, Mon, and Tor never should have been added in the first place IMO, the teams have 3 World Series titles between them and Fla's was a fluke.

 

"What ever happened to such simple ideas as revenue sharing?"

 

Why should one team have to pay for it's competiton's players?  It's counterproductive to how a business is run.  I hate Steinbrenner as much as anybody (I'm a huge Sox fan) but I certainly don't hate him because he has money and finnaly figured out that he should let Baseball people spend for him.  I hate the guy because he is an arogant prick and because he owns the Yankees, my least favorite team, followed by Atlanta and the Mets, all of which I kept, so you can't accuse me of dropping teams because I don't like them.

There are many teams who cry poverty when they have money and are unwilling to spend it, Min I'm looking at you.  They whould either spend money to get better players, which generally creates a winning team and wining teams generally draw fans, except in Oak apparently.

 

"Besides, fans get extremely pissed off when their teams leave"

 

My be they should go watch the team and support them before it gets so bad that they have to be moved or contracted.

 

"What baseball SHOULD do is stop whining about their business and start trying to attract fans.  Encourage kids to come out to the games, lower ticket prices, and PLAY OFF YOUR HISTORY!!  Take a page from the NFL and make up a bunch of shows about great games from the past.  Get people interested in baseball again."

 

I agree that they should market the game better.  They should also make sure that announcers explain why things are happening in the game, people can get very confused who have never watched.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

What do you have against Toronto?  For the first 15 years they were the model expansion team.  It was the strike that killed baseball in Toronto.  They set records for attendance in the early 90s.  Toronto has been a far more successful franchise than their expansion partners in Seattle.

[Guest alkeiper]

Attendance is very much tied to winning in any case.  Montreal CAN attract fans.....

 

              Mon            NYM

1994     1,276,250     1,151,471

1995     1,309,618     1,273,183

1996     1,616,709     1,588,323

 

Yeah, its just 3 years, but it can happen.

[Guest Bruin]

JSYK, I wasn't saying that revenue sharing should come about, I was merely commenting on the fact that nobody brings it up anymore. Anyway, take a look at what Revenue sharing has done for the NFL. In general, the NFL is a much more competitive league year in and year out than the MLB. (I'm not saying that the MLB and NFL are exactly alike, but I'm just putting it in terms of competitiveness)

[Guest Phr33k]

Montreal won't attract fans unless the team is winning. I am a former Montrealer and I should know. Quebecois are very fickle and many are bandwagon-jumpers, so if the Expos start winning again, like right now, they'll jump back on. BTW, today's attendance at the Big O was 11 250 fans, the best for any game that wasn't Opening Day in the last two years. Maybe things are turning around. If they can stay a winning team... here's hoping...

[Guest Mad Dog]

I think baseball needs to consider other parts of the game as well.

 

For one I think attendence would improve if the season was greatly shortened.  I never go to games b/c they don't mean jack shit in the long run.  I think 82 games like other sports is enough then I'd cut pitching rotation to 3 so that would make for better quality pitching and eliminate high prices for terrible pitchers.

 

I'd also expand the playoffs to allow for eight teams to enter from each league.  Again who's going to care if their teams hovering around .500 and can never make the playoffs.

[Guest alkeiper]

Ugh....what's the point of the regular season if more than 50% of the teams make the playoffs.  Baseball's the only sport left where the regular season means anything anymore, and has time to draw itself out.  The way it is now, for 6 months I get to watch baseball every night.  You don't go to a game because it means something, you go to a game because going to a baseball game is a pleasant, enjoyable experience.  16 teams in the playoffs?  Give me a break.

[Guest]

16 team playoffs would blow, I personally make it a point to watch every met game aired in the season in the north eastern pa market, if I miss the game I tape it and watch it.  I also attend at least 5 games a year and I am 2 hours away.  When I lived in flushing I would go atleast 1 day a week.  I know not every fan is die hard about thier team but shortened schedules would absolutely kill the game.  Shit it take a month just for everybody to get warmed up.  Revenue sharing would kick ass, the teams making billions should give back to the pot.  Like someone said earlier, if montreal starts winning for example, they will start drawing money and then they will give back to the pot for a team hard on its luck them.  Well i'm done rambling

 

--Rob

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

MLB really needs a hard Salary Cap, and a new Commissioner.  We never had any of these problems when Fay Vincent was around.

[Guest alkeiper]

I'm firmly against the salary cap, partly because I don't like the player shifting that goes on in the nfl, and part because it'll only put more money in the owners pockets.  Limiting player salaries will NOT reduce ticket prices.  As for the commissioner, I agree wholeheartedly.  Too bad the commissioner is pretty much just the represenative of the owners.  I'd like to see them eliminate the commissioner and watch the owners face the public for all the bullshit moves they try.

[Guest El Hijo Del Lunatic]

BEWARE THE HUGE POST!!!!

 

I'm a numbers guy, and as a numbers guy, I like to see exactly what the numbers say about things of this sort.  So let's start by first of all saying that overall, major league attendance is relatively good.  The average major league baseball game brings in about 30,000 fans a game.  That certainly isn't bad, especially over 80 or so home games.  At $20 a ticket, the average baseball franchise will draw in $48 million dollars in revenue from the home gate alone (20 x 80 x 30000).  That itself isn't going to pay salaries, but I'm thinking that plus advertising revenues, club seating revenues, and parking revenues (about $19 million) will be adequate to cover the average total team salary, about $65 million.  This leaves the local TV/Radio deals, national TV/Radio deals, and concessions to cover everything else (out of a total $117 million or so in revenues, that leaves about $50 million dollars for teams to use to cover other expenses).  

 

By the way, part of the problem with Montreal running a deficit is it's craptacular local TV package, which covers only 48 games on cable (only in French, I believe, as well), and I'd be surprised if they make a million dollars American from it.  They make absolutely no money from this deal whatsoever.  You will have trouble making a profit if you can't count on TV revenues.

 

Anyway, this is where books get screwy.  In my mind, for each team, all other expenses (everything but player salaries) should be about the same - I would think no more than a $10 million difference.  Any kind of hidden cost that a major league team would have to pay would probably not be an isolated cost to only them.  However, when we figure out other expenses, they're nowhere NEAR each other sometimes.  Some teams, like the Dodgers ($94 million), spend an EXORBITANT amount of money on other expenses, while a team like the Brewers ($38 million) spend much much less.   The Dodgers spent $56 million more than the Brewers in other expenses.  The Brewers ran an operating profit of $16 million dollars.  The Dodgers ran an operating loss of $45 million dollars.  That's a $61 million dollar difference.  I firmly believe that if the Dodgers so chose, they could run an operating profit.  But they don't.  (Note that these are operating costs only.  Any interest owed from building stadiums and the like comes out after the operating profit is calculated.)

 

Is there a point to all this?  Sure.  The conclusion that I draw from all this is that the hard salary cap isn't going to solve major league baseball's monetary problems by itself.  It will certainly help, but there is some wasteful spending going on.  My personal feeling is that most of those "other expenses" end up in exorbitant executive salaries.  Why should we contract teams that are trying to break even (but can't) when the teams that could break even don't feel like it?  Fix that problem first, and see where MLB is after that.  THEN worry about contraction.

 

Note 1:  Teams that ran an operating profit last year, with salary rank in parentheses:  Yankees (1), Mariners (8), Giants (10), Brewers (21), Mets (6), Cubs (12), Red Sox (2), Indians (9), Cardinals (13), Orioles (16), Tigers (20).  Relatively spread out among the top twenty or so salaried teams, I'd say.  

 

Note 2:  Isn't it scary that the Brewers were one of the teams that ran an operating profit last year?  

 

Note 3:  Some Guy, just for the record, Colorado last year was fifth in the league in home attendance.  The Pads are going to have an ULTRA-SWANK ballpark ready for use in 2004 that should hold 46,000 people.  This year, National League West teams are all among the top 10 home attendance teams (2, 3, 6, 7, and 8).  Let's step away from San Diego and Colorado in terms of contraction.

 

Note 4:  Most of these numbers came from ESPN.com and a little math.

 

LUNATIC

RobStone, where in NEPA are you watching Met games?

[Guest alkeiper]

Lunatic- If yer interested in that sort of analysis, baseballprospectus.com has done all sorts of articles on baseball's finances.  I maintain baseball is NOT losing money at all.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

Limiting player salaries will NOT reduce ticket prices

 

I know, but it will allow for more competition, which will sell more tickets.

[Guest Some Guy]

I have no problem with TO as a city, Kahran, but the fans were bandwagon jumpers who never came back after the strike.  No offense meant at all, but Caniadians never have seemed to get into Baseball, which is fine but if they won't watch their team then they shopuldn't have it.  I'mm a Red Sox fan, tell me 1 other team (besides the Cubs) who breaks their fan's hearts more.  Being a true fan is about supporting your team through thick and thin, Canada hasn't supported their's.

 

Montreal drew a decent amount for 3 years and then didn't pay their players.  They had Randy Johnson, Pedo, Larry Walker, Tim Raines, Andre Dawson, Moise Alou, and many others who they wouldn't pay them to stay.

 

I am against a Salary Cap and an expanded Play Off system.  That's one of the reasons I don't watch much Football, and almost no Hockey and Basketball.  If a .500 or sub-.500 team has a chance to win it all, tehn it isn't worth watching.  The Salary Cao is stupid on many levels, it hurts teams who have more money, it hurts the players, and it is way to confusing to follow for most fans.

 

"Note 3:  Some Guy, just for the record, Colorado last year was fifth in the league in home attendance.  The Pads are going to have an ULTRA-SWANK ballpark ready for use in 2004 that should hold 46,000 people.  This year, National League West teams are all among the top 10 home attendance teams (2, 3, 6, 7, and 8).  Let's step away from San Diego and Colorado in terms of contraction."

 

I don't see Col or SD on your list of teams who made a profit. The Brewers made a profit because of a very low pay-roll and a new stadium, they were an awful team and attendence dwindled as the year went on.

You also mentioned that Montreal had a "craptaculer" tv deal, why do you suppose that is?  Maybe because nobody in Montreal watches the games.  Another inherant probalem with Canaidian MLB teams is thet they have to pay salaries in US $, but all their gate $ is in the far lesser valued Canaidian $.

 

BTW, to further my point about Oakland, they drew 20,088 tonight against a division rival, Anaheim, that's pretty bad considering their stadium holds more than twice that.  They also won the game on a 3-run homer in the bottom of the 9th, put a team as good as that in a city who gives a shit and they'd sell out every game.

 

EDIT: I'm pretty drunk right now so if this post is laden with typos or it doesn't make sense I'll fix it tommorow.

[Guest DrTom]

"I maintain baseball is NOT losing money at all."

 

Of course it's not, at least most of the teams aren't.  Baseball owners cry about player salaries (a situation they helped bring about) and losing money hand over fist, then they refuse to turn over their books.  However, some simple logic applies.

 

Owners say baseball is a money-losing business.  John Henry just sold the Florida Marlins for $150 million, then bought the Boston Red Sox for over $650 million.  So, in an industry whose owners claim it is a money pit, one man willingly spent $500 million just to upgrade the team he owned.  Yeah, I'm sure he'd drop half a billion large if he couldn't get out of the red.

 

Baseball does need fixing, especially in the wake of a labor showdown that looms this offseason.  It's in the best interests of everyone to avoid another strike or lockout.  Here are a few things I think would go a long way toward fixing what ails the game:

 

1. A hard salary cap.  There are two choices for sports landscapes: MLB, where the rich tend to dominate, and the NFL, whose forced level playing field also forces a lot of player movement and salary-related cuts.  Unfortunately, the NFL's system makes a lot more fiscal sense.  I do think MLB should include something like the "Larry Bird rule," where teams can re-sign their own players without having all of the salary count against the cap.

 

2. Tied into the salary cap, a minimum salary that all teams must spend.  This would prevent teams from just pocketing the money they'd be getting from the...

 

3. Revenue sharing.  It's simple.  Take all the TV and radio revenue, add it up, and divide by 30.  Each team, regardless of market size, fan loyalty, etc, gets an equal slice of the pie.  This is another aspect borrowed from the NFL.

 

I'm not saying the NFL's system is perfect, since I don't like to see teams like my hometown Ravens shred their roster to get under the salary cap.  But it's a fiscally responsible system, something baseball, with its runaway economics, has never had.

[Guest]

El Hijo Del Lunatic

 

dude these are poconos listings so bear with me if they are different in your market.  CHannel 24 is WPIX and carries all the weekend games, Channel 42 is MSG or fox sports net, whatever it is.  With those 2 channels will rpobably combined show over 80% of thier games, Infact, they ahve not missed one yet. Hope it helps, good post by the way.

 

Also Dr. Tom you are the man, you always have a well thought post when I read your stuff.  I just wanted to point that out.

 

--Rob

[Guest]

Also if they play the braves they are on tbs, and when interleague comes around they will be on yes for the yankees games.

 

--Rob

[Guest alkeiper]

Rob, don't forget Comcast (Chan. 48) and their ultra-swank collection of Phillies games.  *Thumbs up*

[Guest]

al if you really wanted to get technical the phillies also play on the weekends on channel 18 as well.  Hey since you live in the poconos, has anyone showed you how to steal ppv with the pennies?  Shoot me an instant message and i'll see if you have the right stuff to do so.

 

--Rob

[Guest alkeiper]

That's channel 16.  And BRC carries Phillies games from CN8 on channel 13.  Yeah, I used to partake in the pennie trick, but we don't benefit from a cable box at the present time.  *cries*

[Guest]

the penny trick is the shit, can't live without it

 

--Rob

[Guest alkeiper]

Damn straight, though I still think I should've gotten a refund for the '99 Rumble and Holyfield-Lewis I out of general principle.