Baseball's perfect financial setup vs. the dreaded NFL

[Simon_Cowbell]

Yeah, that's me... making up Steinbrenner's dementia.

That was awesome.

Alas, this is going to nuke the detente Simon and I have enjoyed, so...it's been nice, pal. See you on the other side, when we wax poetic about Freaks and Geeks or something.

But the Yankees were the only team in baseball to make a repeat trip to the playoffs this year. Every other league has had a repeat champ since the Yankees won their third in a row in 2000. I was rooting for the Indians to win the ALCS so that it would assure a seventh different champ in as many years. No other league has had as many teams in its championship round since the 2000 season as baseball (13 in MLB, 12 in the NFL, 8 in the NBA, 9 in the NHL). Only the NFL has a chance this season to match or exceed baseball's total. And how about that salary cap leveling the playing field? The same week the 7-0 Colts played the 8-0 Pats, the 0-8 Dolphins and 0-8 Rams took a week off from their pursuit of reverse perfection.

The Yankees' dynastic run was a hiccup. As we've noted before, the only other team prior to the Red Sox to win multiple titles since the strike were the Marlins, who cry poverty every year.

Baseball certainly needs a salary floor. It does not need a salary cap.

The disavowing that a cap levels the playing field is the most incredible thing I have ever heard.

It's like you are this intelligent kid, who randomly blurts, Tourette's-like, when given this one single stimulus.

Major League Baseball teams who have made the postseason since 2000 (eight per year):

19 of 30 teams.

NFL teams who have earned one of the top four seeds (a home playoff game) since 2000 (eight per year):

26 of 32 teams

 

[Flying Headbutt]

WTF?

 

[KYSportsWriter]

And you needed a separate thread for this why?

 

[buckweaver]

Leave him alone. If he wants to whack off to the NFL's superiority for the thousandth time, better here than anywhere.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

And you needed a separate thread for this why?

Because some whiners were complaining on the other thread... probably rightfully so.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

Leave him alone. If he wants to whack off to the NFL's superiority for the thousandth time, better here than anywhere.

You and BYH disavowing it is simply incredibly beautiful theater.

Little seam lemmings.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

Yeah, that's me... making up Steinbrenner's dementia.

The Yankees' dynastic run was a hiccup.

What was the hiccup?

12 consecutive trips to the playoffs (the accomplishment that is most indicative of overall talent than anything)?

Or 26 WS titles?

One hell of a flipped epiglottis.

The four titles in five years, my friend. I don't consider playoff runs without multiple titles as dynasties (sorry Bucky).

As for the 26 titles...20 were won in a 40-year span prior to expansion and, mostly, before the days of west coast baseball. A remarkable run, a brilliant run, a once-in-a-century run that was enjoyed in another time. I'm not sure it's germane to this discussion.

However, if you want to go beyond the immediate...Since 1963, the Yankees have won six titles. Their championships occured within two concentrated runs: 1977-78 and 1996-2000. Again: mighty impressive, but it's not like they've dominated the landscape and left everyone else fighting for scraps for 45 seasons. The Yankees are the most successful team of the expansion era, but not by a wide margin. Nineteen teams have won at least one title in the last 45 years and 13 have won multiple crowns:

Yankees: 6 titles
Dodgers: 4
Cardinals: 4
Athletics: 4
Orioles: 3
Reds: 3
Tigers: 2
Mets: 2
Pirates: 2
Twins: 2
Blue Jays: 2
Marlins: 2
Red Sox: 2
Phillies: 1
Royals: 1
Braves: 1
DBacks: 1
Angels: 1
White Sox: 1

For comparision's sake, the NFL has had 18 champs in the same time frame (using the NFL champ from 1963-65 and the Super Bowl champ thereafter). Twelve teams have won it at least twice and seven have won it three times (one fewer than MLB):

49ers: 5
Steelers: 5
Cowboys: 5
Packers: 4
Raiders: 3
Redskins: 3
Patriots: 3
Bears: 2
Colts: 2
Dolphins: 2
Giants: 2
Broncos: 2
Browns: 1
Chiefs: 1
Jets: 1
Rams: 1
Ravens: 1
Buccaneers: 1

For all the criticism flung baseball's way, its championship club is no more exclusive than football's...and in many ways, even less so.

The fact that 98 percent of MLB teams finish within a mere 15 percentage points of .500 in any given year damns you. Despite the predisposition of baseball teams to be so bunched together, their number of champions is merely close to the NFL's. Within that, baseball boasts the Yankees and Dodgers with 10 titles, while the NFL can crow about Pittsburgh and Green Bay having nine.

With five-game baseball playoff series such a crapshoot, and seven-gamers only slightly less so... the NFL's proximity with baseball on the titlist front is incredible.

But, we know that making the playoffs is really the thing year after year.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

With five-game baseball playoff series such a crapshoot, and seven-gamers only slightly less so... the NFL's proximity with baseball on the titlist front is incredible.

But, we know that making the playoffs is really the thing year after year.

And a tournament full of one-game battles isn't a crapshoot?

As for your top four seed thing...football sends 38 percent of its teams to the playoffs every year. Baseball sends 27 percent. I'd certainly hope, given how the salary cap is supposed to create equality, that most teams would host a playoff game in the span you specified. But to say football is more balanced b/c more teams have earned a top four seed--when only four teams make the playoffs in each league each year in baseball--is a disingenious argument.

huh?

same number of teams.

A smaller percentage of NFL teams hosts a playoff game each year than the percentage of MLB teams that play in front of their home fans in the postseason.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

Leave him alone. If he wants to whack off to the NFL's superiority for the thousandth time, better here than anywhere.

You and BYH disavowing it is simply incredibly beautiful theater.

Little seam lemmings.

Thank you, Sean Salisbury.

OK, Rob Dibble.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

With five-game baseball playoff series such a crapshoot, and seven-gamers only slightly less so... the NFL's proximity with baseball on the titlist front is incredible.

But, we know that making the playoffs is really the thing year after year.

And a tournament full of one-game battles isn't a crapshoot?

Not nearly in the same zip code as baseball.

Talk about disingenuous.

If a team is favored big, it wins.

Really? A point spread determines the victor? I had no idea.

Neither did the 1968 Colts, 1996 Broncos or 2001 Rams--just to name three.

Man... you have become a kindergartener on this thread... as you always do. For every upset of a team in football, you can find a half-dozen in baseball.

When was the last time a baseball series had a money line of -300 (a team favored by a touchdown in the NFL) or greater on it? That's right, you have rarely seen it. Because luck reigns in baseball, even in a series of seven games, unlike it does in football. It ain't the NHL, but it's close.

If an oddsmaker thinks a baseball game is lopsided, he will favor a team by 1 1/2 runs. That should tell you about how each baseball game, no matter the matchup, can go either way.

Are you going to argue this?

 

[Clever username]

Leave him alone. If he wants to whack off to the NFL's superiority for the thousandth time, better here than anywhere.

You and BYH disavowing it is simply incredibly beautiful theater.

Little seam lemmings.

Thank you, Sean Salisbury.

OK, Rob Dibble.

Wow. Just wow.

 

[buckweaver]

Leave him alone. If he wants to whack off to the NFL's superiority for the thousandth time, better here than anywhere.

You and BYH disavowing it is simply incredibly beautiful theater.

Little seam lemmings.

Thank you, Sean Salisbury.

OK, Rob Dibble.

See, that's where you're wrong. I have NEVER, EVER argued that baseball's system was superior to football. Frankly, I like both sports. I think they both have flaws, but both are entertaining enough to make following them worthwhile.

I just don't understand why you, OOP or anyone else is so adamant that the NFL's "system" is better, and that it has to be brought up in every. *******. discussion.

Baseball doesn't have a cap -- so the **** what? Teams still have to play, games still have to be won, the Yankees have the most money, and life goes on. Doesn't make it any less fun, at least to me. Same goes with football.

If you have a problem with the system, fine. Doesn't make it inferior, except in your own head.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

Leave him alone. If he wants to whack off to the NFL's superiority for the thousandth time, better here than anywhere.

You and BYH disavowing it is simply incredibly beautiful theater.

Little seam lemmings.

Thank you, Sean Salisbury.

OK, Rob Dibble.

See, that's where you're wrong. I have NEVER, EVER argued that baseball's system was superior to football. Frankly, I like both sports. I think they both have flaws, but both are entertaining enough to make following them worthwhile.

I just don't understand why you, OOP or anyone else is so adamant that the NFL's "system" is better, and that it has to be brought up in every. *******. discussion.

Baseball doesn't have a cap -- so the **** what? Teams still have to play, games still have to be won, the Yankees have the most money, and life goes on. Doesn't make it any less fun, at least to me. Same goes with football.

If you have a problem with the system, fine. Doesn't make it inferior, except in your own head.

Them's some rosy glasses.

 

[BYH]

Dude, I don't get this. Why does this throw you into such a rage? Why do you have to get so angry and violent and profane after we've swapped cordial PMs and had some fun witih the Beckett thing? Why does this deserve the c-and-p treatment on this thread?

I think I'm right. I think my information backs my case up. I thikn the last seven or eight years proves that baseball is more balanced than football. You obviously feel differently. I'm sure there are many people who agree with you. So be it.

I know I've said and flung some crappy things in these debates. That being said, I don't get how you can't agree to disagree.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

Dude, I don't get this. Why does this throw you into such a rage? Why do you have to get so angry and violent and profane after we've swapped cordial PMs and had some fun witih the Beckett thing? Why does this deserve the c-and-p treatment on this thread?

I think I'm right. I think my information backs my case up. I thikn the last seven or eight years proves that baseball is more balanced than football. You obviously feel differently. I'm sure there are many people who agree with you. So be it.

I know I've said and flung some crappy things in these debates. That being said, I don't get how you can't agree to disagree.

Your "information" doesn't back up your case.

The reason I am aggressive on the subject is I think that the baseball system will eventually bring the sport to its knees as payrolls continue to skyrocket.

It kills you that my points made have left you Michael Spinks-like in this discussion.

You would never, ever be so conciliatory if you thought you had the goods.

It's an extremely important discussion. I make no apologies for my being so assertive with the facts.

I created this thread only so that, if the discussion persisted, it wouldn't clog the Stove thread.

But I'm happy as a clam to let it die, knowing that, based on my unpopularity here, the silence in the discussion by many prominent posters who usually are engaged in such talks has been very telling.

 

[BYH]

Your "information" doesn't back up your case.

That's nice. My "information" doesn't jibe with YOUR information, so therefore it must not back up MY case.

The reason I am aggressive on the subject is I think that the baseball system will eventually bring the sport to its knees as payrolls continue to skyrocket.

Yeah. Seven different champs this decade...wide-spread parity allowing the majority of teams to hit September still playing meaningful games...the Yankees and Red Sox forking over milliongs per year in revenue sharing...the Royals signing Gil Meche to a five-year, $55 million deal. You're right. Baseball is on its knees, blindfolded and ****ting its pants, as it waits for the executioner to fire the fatal shot.

It kills you that my points made have left you Michael Spinks-like in this discussion.

Care to make this a poll, as you did a while back? Didn't think so.

You would never, ever be so conciliatory if you thought you had the goods.

C'mon dude. Do you REALLY want to dig thru the site and find me flinging **** yous at you over this very topic? Because they're all over the place. I am conciliatory b/c I'm tired of this always turning to a **** you fest, b/c I like bantering with you on other topics and b/c I'd like to keep this free of that stuff. If you were, uhh, someone else who has chimed in on this topic, it would be different.

It's an extremely important discussion. I make no apologies for my being so assertive with the facts.

Fair enough. you are passionate about your side, I am passionate about mine. You can be assertive in your argument without the personal/profane attacks.

I created this thread only so that, if the discussion persisted, it wouldn't clog the Stove thread.

But I'm happy as a clam to let it die, knowing that, based on my unpopularity here, the silence in the discussion by many prominent posters who usually are engaged in such talks has been very telling.

I have no idea what that last sentence means. We've had this discussion a lot, and everytime the tide of public opinion seems to shift my way, you pull out the popularity card. Might it be as simple as more people agree with me than with you? If I'm leading my followers to the Kool-Aid, let me know, because I don't even have a pitcher or plastic cups.

 

[outofplace]

Hmmm...I wonder who that somebody else is.

I agree that it should have its own thread, just to avoid the potentially nasty threadjacks elsewhere.

And to address buckweaver's point above regarding the Arizona Cardinals and the Pirates, yes it would help tremendously if both teams started making better decisions.

But if such a miraculous change were to take place, the Cardinals would be in a much better position to contend because they already have the same resources as every team they compete with in terms of roster-building resources. The Pirates would still be at a disadvantage to the franchises that have more revenue coming in.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

Hmmm...I wonder who that somebody else is.

I agree that it should have its own thread, just to avoid the potentially nasty threadjacks elsewhere.

And to address buckweaver's point above regarding the Arizona Cardinals and the Pirates, yes it would help tremendously if both teams started making better decisions.

But if such a miraculous change were to take place, the Cardinals would be in a much better position to contend because they already have the same resources as every team they compete with in terms of roster-building resources. The Pirates would still be at a disadvantage to the franchises that have more revenue coming in.

The Cardinals will be favored to win their division in 2008.... will the Pirates?

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

I just thought that sports was the arena where a level playing field was supposed to exist, and from there one determines the best athletes and teams.

You, BYH, wouldn't have a problem with an Olympic 100-meter race, where 7 runners had 100 meters to run, and an eighth had only 90?

You want to guess what how much the 2003 Marlins will be paid next year. $150 million? $170 million? $200 million?

The team not being able to keep its players was a travesty. And it was wholly because of the baseball system.

 

[Flying Headbutt]

Hmmm...I wonder who that somebody else is.

I agree that it should have its own thread, just to avoid the potentially nasty threadjacks elsewhere.

And to address buckweaver's point above regarding the Arizona Cardinals and the Pirates, yes it would help tremendously if both teams started making better decisions.

But if such a miraculous change were to take place, the Cardinals would be in a much better position to contend because they already have the same resources as every team they compete with in terms of roster-building resources. The Pirates would still be at a disadvantage to the franchises that have more revenue coming in.

The Cardinals will be favored to win their division in 2008.... will the Pirates?

The Cardinals have drafted guys like Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin, and others who have been good players and contribute in a division that is dreadfully bad.

The Pirates have not drafted well even when given advantageous draft position, have not signed free agents who can help, and prefer to pocket money that would otherwise be spent on improving the team. The entire organization, including the minor leagues and scouting, has been a shame the last few years. Player development isn't something the NFL typically has to worry about. They use the NCAA for that. The Pirates have that additional worry, and thus, one more thing to **** up by being a bad organization.