Quote:
Originally Posted by Goody
It wouldn't be easy...because of the point its gotten to. Its so outlandish to have one team spending 200 million while another is less than 30 m.
|
Except that those two teams are not directly competing against each other thanks to the division structure.
The only clubs who have a genuine complaint are the Blue Jays, Orioles, and Rays, because they're the clubs stuck in the same divsion as the Yankees and Red Sox.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yankeesrule
only way the union agrees to a cap is if theres a minimum also, and teams like the pirates, marlins, royals ownership will never agree to this because they enjoy pocketing their $$$ rather than putting it back into the team
|
Actually, not long after revenue sharing was brought in, the clubs which usually were net payors in the system quickly realized that a salary floor was desirable. This was because they saw clubs which were net recipients from revenue sharing usually just pocketing the income as profit and doing little to improve their teams.
The net payor clubs thus wanted a salary floor. The MLBPA was steadfastly against the idea of a salary floor, with the reason being they feared that by allowing a salary floor it would open the door to allowing a salary cap, and they absolutely do not want a salary cap. So the idea of a salary floor was nixed.