Main Sections:
Main Site
Discussion Forum
    All Topics
    New Messages
    Search
    Last Day
    Last Week
    Tree View
    Edit Profile
    Create Login
    Guidelines
    Help
Game Chat
Fund Raiser:
Order Merchandise!

Suggested Reading:
(click cover for info)

cover

Contraction is wrong,wrong, wrong...but Selig and Co. wants it and why...

OAFC BBS - All Topics: Archive: Contraction is wrong,wrong, wrong...but Selig and Co. wants it and why...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Thursday, May 16, 2002 - 05:31 pm:

this is a good read:

http://www.sportznutz.com/mlb/special_editions/contraction/wrong.htm

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By darth2900 on Friday, May 17, 2002 - 08:00 am:

interesting read indeed... the only thing I do not like about it is the fact that while the author correctly points out flaws in the logic of contraction, he also doesn't offer a solution.
He just says salary caps are bad because it is designed so the owner makes money... what was the problem with owners making money again? The players make money even if the owners don't, so what is wrong with an owner wanting to make money? He also says salary caps do not improve competetive balance which also is not true in my opinon, and based on looking at the NFL playoffs before and after the salary cap. Let's see in the 80's there were 5 super bowl winning teams that I can recall. In the early 90's there was one team besides those 5 that one... so in 15 years 6 teams won a superbowl... in the last 6 years, 5 teams have won the superbowl and non of them won a superbowl in 80's or early 90's.
But even if it was true that salary caps don't encourage competetion, than what does he recommend to fix the problem? Nothing.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Friday, May 17, 2002 - 08:19 am:

I say if they are going to set a salary cap, they have to set a mininum floor to spending on team payroll tied into a revenue sharing plan based on winning percentage. Then you would really encourage competition rather than rewarding the bottom line.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By darth2900 on Friday, May 17, 2002 - 09:10 am:

I agree with the floor and ceiling principle... revenue sharing should not be just as a measure to increase the bottom line directly. It should also aim to increase the bottom line by putting more fans in the seats across the country

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By darth2900 on Friday, May 17, 2002 - 09:21 am:

That is in the seats, watching on TV, rooting for a team because they can a. know there team is going to have a shot, or b. remember a year with the last 2-3 years that the team had a shot.


Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.


 

Questions? Comments? Corrections? Please contact info@oaklandfans.com.