- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Should MLB players agree to a Salary Cap?
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:27 pm
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:27 pm
LINK
The main points:
It would guarantee players a certain % of the revenue,usually 50%, teams would have to hit a salary floor which would be 90% of the cap. Goes into how players percentage of revenue has been falling and how the luxury tax threshold hasn't gone up as revenue has exploded. What say you
The main points:
It would guarantee players a certain % of the revenue,usually 50%, teams would have to hit a salary floor which would be 90% of the cap. Goes into how players percentage of revenue has been falling and how the luxury tax threshold hasn't gone up as revenue has exploded. What say you
19
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:30 pm to LokoMoko
No /thread
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:32 pm to LokoMoko
I like the current system as is. I'm sure that won't be a popular opinion on this board where baseball sucks and is dying, but plenty of small market teams succeed very well under it
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:33 pm to LokoMoko
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:33 pm to LokoMoko
Hell no. No cap is what makes baseball awesome. Rich teams can suck and poor ones can succeed. I love it. Baseball has more parity than the NFL and NBA.
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:35 pm to Srbtiger06
The parity has more to do with the randomness of the sports, pitchers playing every 5 games, hitters parks and pitchers parks,etc but i'm talking about this benefiting the players and their percentage of the revenue, this would limit the dodgers,yankees and redsox but atleast teams like the marlins,brewers,etc would be forced to spend real money and not 50-60 million on payroll, not every player can play for a large market team
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:37 pm to LokoMoko
quote:MLB currently has something like this, to curb spending teams have to pay a penalty, also teams are not allowed to cut as much now.
this would limit the dodgers,yankees and redsox but atleast teams like the marlins,brewers,etc would be forced to spend real money and not 50-60 million on payrol
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:38 pm to LokoMoko
Not at all. How about deduct revenue sharing from teams that have three consecutive tank type seasons.
Don't change the rest of the system.
Don't change the rest of the system.
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:38 pm to LokoMoko
Owners would have to make otherworldly concessions in other areas for the players assocation to ever agree to institute a salary cap. Eapecially a players association with a player like Harper, who is certainly on the cusp of the largest contract in MLB history.
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:39 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
quote:
I like the current system as is
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:40 pm to LokoMoko
frick no. They have the strongest Union. They should ride that gravy train until the whole thing burns.
Posted on 3/22/16 at 6:42 pm to tduecen
Luxury tax punishes high salary teams but they can't force teams to spend money on payroll, its ridiculous that a sport which made 9.5 billion in revenue and local tv contracts for teams that go into 9 figures yearly has teams spending less than 75 million in salary
Posted on 3/22/16 at 7:07 pm to Fun Bunch
MLB players get 43% of revenue as opposed to 47% for nfl players and 49-51% for nba players
Posted on 3/22/16 at 7:12 pm to LokoMoko
I believe they're paid fairly
Posted on 3/22/16 at 7:14 pm to Rig
All athletes make bank but MLB players make less than they should based on revenue
Posted on 3/22/16 at 7:21 pm to LokoMoko
No.
They should get rid of revenue sharing too.
They should get rid of revenue sharing too.
Posted on 3/22/16 at 7:22 pm to BCMCubs
Obviously this would be bad for Harper but there are 15 other guys that would benefit for every Harper. Unions in general are bad for the exceptional employees but prop up the mediocre masses.
As for the OP, the majority of the players would benefit so the union should do it if they're working in the best interest of their players. I don't really see how that is debatable. Whether or not it is good for baseball is another story entirely.
As for the OP, the majority of the players would benefit so the union should do it if they're working in the best interest of their players. I don't really see how that is debatable. Whether or not it is good for baseball is another story entirely.
Posted on 3/22/16 at 7:26 pm to LokoMoko
They should redo the rookie scale and the arbitration process. Guys only start making big money later in their careers, then its based off of past accomplishments and they can't live up to the numbers. It would even out the money and guys wouldn't have to hang on forever..
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News