12
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
Baseball peeps, a couple of questions regarding the dodgers/league
Posted on 8/2/26 at 1:18 pm
Posted on 8/2/26 at 1:18 pm
1. Why are the dodgers not having to share TV revenue? That seems like it's a major advantage.
2. Why has baseball not had a salary cap when all other major sports leagues do have one? Seems like implementing one shouldn't be too big of an issue.
3. What the heck is with the deferred contracts I keep hearing about with the Dodgers? Are they literally not having to pay the majority of the contract until years later?
2. Why has baseball not had a salary cap when all other major sports leagues do have one? Seems like implementing one shouldn't be too big of an issue.
3. What the heck is with the deferred contracts I keep hearing about with the Dodgers? Are they literally not having to pay the majority of the contract until years later?
Posted on 8/2/26 at 1:22 pm to Civildawg
Yes
Posted on 8/2/26 at 1:24 pm to Civildawg
Posted on 8/2/26 at 1:24 pm to Civildawg
At least two of those points are why we won’t have MLB next year
Posted on 8/2/26 at 1:25 pm to Civildawg
Deferring substantial income aims to reduce current luxury taxes and potentially avoid California’s 14% state income tax if the athlete moves out of state before payouts begin.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 1:29 pm to Civildawg
Dodgers are capped at the amount they have to share. Leaving them with an additional $60-$65 million a year.
There is a cap. You pay a “luxury tax” if you go over it.
In simple terms yes. Deferred money is not against the rules of the current collective bargaining agreement
There is a cap. You pay a “luxury tax” if you go over it.
In simple terms yes. Deferred money is not against the rules of the current collective bargaining agreement
Posted on 8/2/26 at 1:51 pm to CodeName1
quote:
Dodgers are capped at the amount they have to share. Leaving them with an additional $60-$65 million a year.
More than that. This is the result of the league agreeing to a TV market evaluation of $3 billion during the 2011 bankruptcy proceedings. An evaluation they previously rejected because it was comically low.
The Dodgers are operating under a different set of financial rules than everyone else and keeping tens of millions of dollars yearly every other franchise would have to pay as part of the revenue share agreement.
It’s a joke and needs to addressed.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 2:09 pm to CodeName1
quote:
There is a cap. You pay a “luxury tax” if you go over it.
Why they don't increase the "luxury tax" is baffling.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 2:32 pm to lurking
quote:this will almost assuredly still exist no matter what happens this winter lol
It’s a joke and needs to addressed.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 2:42 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
this will almost assuredly still exist no matter what happens this winter lol
MLB has already announced their plan to centralize broadcasting rights and eliminate regional, team specific deals.
Appreciate you admitting the Dodgers are operating at a distinct advantage instead of pretending they’re the model for all MLB teams to follow, though
Posted on 8/2/26 at 2:43 pm to lurking
quote:so we will see them in the late 2030s with the dodgers
MLB has already announced their plan to centralize broadcasting rights and eliminate regional, team specific deals.
What kind of secret, hush hush, deal we think the dodgers get then?
This post was edited on 8/2/26 at 2:47 pm
Posted on 8/2/26 at 2:51 pm to Civildawg
quote:
3. What the heck is with the deferred contracts I keep hearing about with the Dodgers? Are they literally not having to pay the majority of the contract until years later?
Yes. Ohtani is the main example. His contract is $700m for 10 years, but the 10 years he's playing he's making $2m salary then $68m per year for the 10 years after. MLB only counts this as a $46m luxury tax hit in 2026 based on some calculation of the "present day value" of that future payment.
This will definitely be a big argument point in the off-season.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 2:52 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
What kind of secret, hush hush, deal we think the dodgers get then?
Posted on 8/2/26 at 3:13 pm to Civildawg
quote:
What the heck is with the deferred contracts I keep hearing about with the Dodgers? Are they literally not having to pay the majority of the contract until years later?
Google Bobby Bonilla
Posted on 8/2/26 at 3:14 pm to lurking
Im thinking they get like an extra draft pick. Or access to special tax generates revenue!!
Idk what it is but I'll be excited to see what it ends up being
Idk what it is but I'll be excited to see what it ends up being
This post was edited on 8/2/26 at 3:15 pm
Posted on 8/2/26 at 3:20 pm to WestCoastAg
Nothing about any of this was done in secret, dummy.
The opposite, in fact. Guggenheim pointed to the settlement granting the Dodgers evaluation at $3 billion as being a major factor in their decision to purchase.
They knew it would grant them an advantage.
The opposite, in fact. Guggenheim pointed to the settlement granting the Dodgers evaluation at $3 billion as being a major factor in their decision to purchase.
They knew it would grant them an advantage.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 3:23 pm to lurking
quote:that MLB gave them smh!!!!
settlement
Posted on 8/2/26 at 3:50 pm to Civildawg
quote:
1. Why are the dodgers not having to share TV revenue? That seems like it's a major advantage.
Bankruptcy Court in 2012 set a fair market value for dodger media rights which turned out to be lower than what those media rights actually are. It works out to about $80 million per year the Dodgers get to keep which the critics say gives the Dodgers a monetary advantage. But even if the Dodgers were paying that extra $80 million a year it would not have prevented them from paying Ohtani and the other big names they have signed.
quote:
Why has baseball not had a salary cap when all other major sports leagues do have one?
Because the players want a free market and have fought over the years and gone on strike to maintain this free market. The NFL, NBA, etc salary cap favors the owners. The question is why don't NFL and NBA players strike to get a free market system?
quote:
What the heck is with the deferred contracts I keep hearing about with the Dodgers? Are they literally not having to pay the majority of the contract until years later?
Yes but deferred payments have been around a long time and have been used by many other teams. People are crying about it now because its not their team using it.
The lockout that is coming is not because the Dodgers are spending money but because the owners don't want a free market system. They want more money for themselves. frick 'em.
This post was edited on 8/2/26 at 5:01 pm
Posted on 8/2/26 at 3:53 pm to Zappas Stache
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News