The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

The problem is not that there isn't a salary cap.

The problem is that there isn't a salary floor.

I can't even find the last year when a $40 million payroll would have been the average. If that's all you're laying down in today's MLB, you have no intention of being competitive.

(02-07-2021 01:38 AM)crex043 Wrote:  The problem is not that there isn't a salary cap.

The problem is that there isn't a salary floor.

I can't even find the last year when a $40 million payroll would have been the average. If that's all you're laying down in today's MLB, you have no intention of being competitive.

Its both. The NFL has a salary cap and a floor. They want parity so all teams can, in theory, compete on a regular basis. They also have a huge national TV contract that allows for this. When they have negotiated in the past, players wanted a floor and owners wanted a cap. They have both. The big financial differenced between nfl and mlb is that the nfl tv contract is national and equal for each team while each mlb team negotiates their own and they are far from equal, preventing them from competing in equal footing. It is the way it is and I have no clue how MLB gets around that aside from somehow shopping a national contract. Maybe they should do something in the summer months with national TV on Saturdays or Sundays like how the NFL owns fall Sundays...all teams are shown on tv and all teams are paid the same amount, but it would be a fraction of the total games and eyes aren't on tvs or, frankly baseball, in the summer. Maybe all games go to the MLB Network but good luck getting the big market teams to agree to this if they have to take a financial hit. Its a big problem for the MLB and especially teams like the Reds who, after years of rebuilding get some momentum one year and then take a step back the next. There are other issues with baseball that need to be worked on such as viewability and quality of play but I really think the bottom line is there is no finacial parity in the league (at cap or floor) which creates a chasm between the haves and have nots.

(02-06-2021 10:53 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  I'm not suggesting a salary cap is the end all, be all or is the only option for MLB. They haven't done anything to address the situation with the exception of the minimal CBT. I would also say that no two owners are alike. They have different motivations and different philosophies on winning vs. turning a profit. They have different levels of wealth/financial capital and revenue sources. Some, like New York and Los Angeles, get an incredible advantage in television markets/money relative to markets like Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, etc. But let's not act like the players are paupers in this mess and don't take advantage when they can. One just signed a $102 million deal over three years. Again, show me any other professional sports league where there is a $200 million payroll gap between the haves and have nots. There is none.

They have some revenue sharing too. But I feel like you let your true feelings out a bit with the paupers comment. I don't even understand what you mean by "take advantage"?

And again, the reason there is a $200 mil. gap is because of the teams on the bottom who refuse to spend money to compete despite being cash-flow positive and seeing above-market returns to their franchises values (not to mention getting taxpayers to fund their stadiums). But no the players are also at fault! I seriously can't believe a single person thinks this, yet it's actually the view of a huge majority of fans.

There's gotta be some UC econ prof on here or a PhD or something: should the owner of a sports team even expect to make market-level returns, given all of the non-financial benefits that come with ownership (power, status, entertainment, etc.)?

No DH this year is really going to hurt the Reds....

(02-09-2021 09:36 AM)CincyBro Wrote:  No DH this year is really going to hurt the Reds....

It puts a squeeze on finding playing time for some guys for sure, but that's probably the case with all NL teams. Reds could barely find one consistent hitter last year, so maybe it's a comparative blessing that they don't need to try to find 9 again this year. It's unfortunate that their one good hitter last year, Winker, has DH as probably his best position, but that's life as a Reds fan.

I hate losing Bauer and to a lesser extent Iglesias, but I do love what the Reds seem to be doing pitching-wise in the organization. Hitting? Well that's a different story...

(02-07-2021 10:55 AM)levydl Wrote:  There's gotta be some UC econ prof on here or a PhD or something: should the owner of a sports team even expect to make market-level returns, given all of the non-financial benefits that come with ownership (power, status, entertainment, etc.)?

I'm close enough.

My answer is that politics and negotiating power always trumps economics. Everyone does what's in their own self-interest.

I guess I'll fly down this weekend to see if I can grab the SS spot, since no one else wants it.

Trying to verify exactly where the Fox Sports Regional situation stands. If I have Hulu Live I’m assuming I will not be able to watch any games this year...correct?

(03-10-2021 10:24 PM)Billy_Bearcat Wrote:  Trying to verify exactly where the Fox Sports Regional situation stands. If I have Hulu Live I’m assuming I will not be able to watch any games this year...correct?

Don't quote me on this, but iirc I heard that AT&T is the only legal way to watch Reds' games this year for cord-cutters as it now stands. But there's still a possibility something will be worked out with another provider(s) before opening day. I can't find the link, but that's how I remember it anyway.

Reds will not be on Fox Sports?

(03-11-2021 08:40 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Reds will not be on Fox Sports?

They’ll be on Fox Sports Ohio like always, but all Fox Sports Regional broadcasts have been sold to Bally’s. So if you’re a cord cutter with Hulu or YouTube TV you’ll not be getting them on your streaming device. Bally’s wants to sell you their bundled gambling app.

If you have cable you’re fine.

Oh well. I’m not jumping through other hoops to watch them.

(03-11-2021 08:46 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Oh well. I’m not jumping through other hoops to watch them.

Same. I can live without.

(03-11-2021 08:42 PM)Billy_Bearcat Wrote:  

(03-11-2021 08:40 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Reds will not be on Fox Sports?

They’ll be on Fox Sports Ohio like always, but all Fox Sports Regional broadcasts have been sold to Bally’s. So if you’re a cord cutter with Hulu or YouTube TV you’ll not be getting them on your streaming device. Bally’s wants to sell you their bundled gambling app.

If you have cable you’re fine.

Bally's has the Reds broadcasts, but Pete's still banned from baseball. Mercy.

(03-11-2021 09:02 PM)levydl Wrote:  

(03-11-2021 08:42 PM)Billy_Bearcat Wrote:  

(03-11-2021 08:40 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Reds will not be on Fox Sports?

They’ll be on Fox Sports Ohio like always, but all Fox Sports Regional broadcasts have been sold to Bally’s. So if you’re a cord cutter with Hulu or YouTube TV you’ll not be getting them on your streaming device. Bally’s wants to sell you their bundled gambling app.

If you have cable you’re fine.

Bally's has the Reds broadcasts, but Pete's still banned from baseball. Mercy.

Not exactly what I was looking for but:

Why Can't Reds Fans Watch FSO On Hulu, YouTube Or Other Streaming Services?

(03-11-2021 08:46 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Oh well. I’m not jumping through other hoops to watch them.

Baseball is better on radio anyway. Can you catch any signal from 700 up that far north?

Hitting a baseball is hard: