Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27

Thread: Yankees and Tigers get money stolen from them.

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    31,171

    Yankees and Tigers get money stolen from them.

    Last edited by Tyler Durden; 12-23-2008 at 12:43 AM.

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    10,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyler Durden View Post
    I love how all the small market people ***** about the big markets spending money but say nothing about their clubs getting all this luxury tax money and spending it on personal ****.....it sure as hell doesnt go into player salaries.

  3. #3
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockland, New York
    Posts
    5,359
    Quote Originally Posted by K-Met57 View Post
    I love how all the small market people ***** about the big markets spending money but say nothing about their clubs getting all this luxury tax money and spending it on personal ****.....it sure as hell doesnt go into player salaries.
    +1 The Luxury tax is an overall poor idea. It's basically a subsidy for these teams and they have little incentive to do anything else except pocket the money. And even if you forced them to spend the money on salary, they would end up just spending less out of their own pocket and end up spending the same on salary anyways.

    Honestly, if they want to make a league competitive while holding salaries down, a salary cap would be the best, but that would never happen. The player's union would never let it happen.

    Also, small market teams don't complain when big market teams come to play on the road and the fan attendance is mysteriously higher.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    15,550
    While I don't agree with luxury taxes - it's hardly stealing since the Yanks agreed to the deal. If you want to witness stealing, look at your paycheck.

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    18,349
    Kinda a poor title Sean, in that a certain NY sports team owner recently actually got money stolen from him, and his name isn't Steinbrenner.

    I'm not really a fan of the luxury tax system anyways, since we've seen it doesn't really prevent the Yankees from spending, and it doesn't seem to do much to encourage other franchises to spend. I still think a hard salary cap is the way to go, with both a set maximum and a minimum.

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    15,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Ven0m View Post
    Kinda a poor title Sean, in that a certain NY sports team owner recently actually got money stolen from him, and his name isn't Steinbrenner.

    I'm not really a fan of the luxury tax system anyways, since we've seen it doesn't really prevent the Yankees from spending, and it doesn't seem to do much to encourage other franchises to spend. I still think a hard salary cap is the way to go, with both a set maximum and a minimum.
    I don't see why players' salaries should be artificially lowered simply because of other teams lack of spending. If they can't compete - contract them. If they won't spend their cash - let them fail.

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    18,349
    Quote Originally Posted by BrooklynBound View Post
    I don't see why players' salaries should be artificially lowered simply because of other teams lack of spending. If they can't compete - contract them. If they won't spend their cash - let them fail.
    I don't think Salaries would really be lowered at all, just re-distributed in order to attempt to keep some semblance of a level playing field.

    Even if your salary cap is between 50 and 150 million (A huge range, mind you), that's a range that only affects 5 franchises, and the only ones not within a couple million of complying are the Yankees and the Marlins.

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    15,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Ven0m View Post
    I don't think Salaries would really be lowered at all, just re-distributed in order to attempt to keep some semblance of a level playing field.

    Even if your salary cap is between 50 and 150 million (A huge range, mind you), that's a range that only affects 5 franchises, and the only ones not within a couple million of complying are the Yankees and the Marlins.
    Players across the board would be hurt. Elite would players would get the max, but so would more very good players who go to teams with cash. That will mean less cash for middle tier and lower tier players. You'd see a higher percentage of players making the minimum and non-guaranteed contracts as well.

    If it doesn't go to the players, it goes to the owners. Might as well go to the players, especially if the owners are willing to give it to them.

  9. #9
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In transit
    Posts
    6,192
    Quote Originally Posted by K-Met57 View Post
    I love how all the small market people ***** about the big markets spending money but say nothing about their clubs getting all this luxury tax money and spending it on personal ****.....it sure as hell doesnt go into player salaries.
    If you are going to have a luxury tax, you need to have a spending minimum.

  10. #10
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,537
    Given your politics, this has to be the most ironic post in JI history.

  11. #11
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Electric Avenue
    Posts
    26,683
    Quote Originally Posted by K-Met57 View Post
    I love how all the small market people ***** about the big markets spending money but say nothing about their clubs getting all this luxury tax money and spending it on personal ****.....it sure as hell doesnt go into player salaries.
    That's what you take out of that article?

    Wow.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    31,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Guido Monzino View Post
    Given your politics, this has to be the most ironic post in JI history.
    It would be ironic if the luxury tax money actually want to poor people, and not million dollar corporations (teams) who refuse to spend money.

  13. #13
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,314
    wow the Yanks had a payroll of 222 million last year. That is amazing. I am shocked Girardi survived not making the playoffs with a quarter of a billion dollars on the field. I thought the Yanks payroll was just over 200 million, I was way off.

    Well glad to see that have learned from their mistakes and haven't gone the high price free agent route again. Oh wait......

  14. #14
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyler Durden View Post
    It would be ironic if the luxury tax money actually want to poor people, and not million dollar corporations (teams) who refuse to spend money.

    It is the same thing. Socialism is socialism. It is a philosophy. You can't say it is not ok on one side of the curve, but it is just fine in the middle. The same drawbacks apply in both cases.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    31,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Guido Monzino View Post

    It is the same thing. Socialism is socialism. It is a philosophy. You can't say it is not ok on one side of the curve, but it is just fine in the middle. The same drawbacks apply in both cases.
    That's ridiculous, this is wealthy ballclubs forcing to give money to other wealthy ballclubs. I might not even mind if they actually spent it on the team. If you want to talk politics go to the political forum, other than that, I'm not interested continuing this argument, because we won't agree.
    Last edited by Tyler Durden; 12-23-2008 at 11:59 AM.

  16. #16
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Jets Voice of Reason View Post
    +1 The Luxury tax is an overall poor idea. It's basically a subsidy for these teams and they have little incentive to do anything else except pocket the money. And even if you forced them to spend the money on salary, they would end up just spending less out of their own pocket and end up spending the same on salary anyways.

    Honestly, if they want to make a league competitive while holding salaries down, a salary cap would be the best, but that would never happen. The player's union would never let it happen.

    Also, small market teams don't complain when big market teams come to play on the road and the fan attendance is mysteriously higher.
    To be fair, regarding your last line, if the small market teams had the superstars on their teams, they'd get better attendance every night, not just when the Yanks/Mets/Sox come to town. Brewers attendance was very high on nights CC pitched.

  17. #17
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyler Durden View Post
    That's ridiculous. If you want to talk politics go to political forum, this is wealthy ballclubs forcing to give money to other wealthy ballclubs. I might not even mind if they actually spent it on the team.
    There is a difference between trying and not trying. The Brewers tried and failed. The Nats are now trying with Tx and we'll see if they fail too. The system is actually starting to work since these smaller market teams are now making runs at big time free agents.

    "this is wealthy ballclubs forcing to give money to other wealthy ballclubs." Now you know why some of us who work hard, manage our careers well and earn good money are not exaclty gung-ho about being taxed at higher rates than those who don't.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    31,171
    Quote Originally Posted by SINYJets View Post
    To be fair, regarding your last line, if the small market teams had the superstars on their teams, they'd get better attendance every night, not just when the Yanks/Mets/Sox come to town. Brewers attendance was very high on nights CC pitched.
    Then spend your Goddamn money! It's not the Yankees or anyone elses fault that these teams refuse to put the money they make back into the ball club.
    Last edited by Tyler Durden; 12-23-2008 at 12:17 PM.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    31,171
    Quote Originally Posted by SINYJets View Post
    There is a difference between trying and not trying. The Brewers tried and failed. The Nats are now trying with Tx and we'll see if they fail too. The system is actually starting to work since these smaller market teams are now making runs at big time free agents.
    So what if the Brewers tried and failed.. so have the Yankees.

  20. #20
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyler Durden View Post
    Then spend your Goddamn money! It's not the Yankees or anyone elses fault that you refuse to put the money they make back into the ball club.

    Is this a joke? Spending money doesn't have any impact on my tax rate.

    Also, I already pointed out that small market teams ARE attempting to spend big money on big players. This system, as much as I hate it, is actually working.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us