Quote:
Originally Posted by VonErichLives
if I was a pro athlete I'd want Borus...
His job is to do what's in his clients best interest, which is up to the player and most of them say "get me the most you can" and thats what he does.
Should baseball have a cap? I dunno about that, on one hand you may level the playing field on the other what right does someone have to tell a company "you cant spend your profits on making your team better". Plus, you have the steinbrenner argument against the luxury tax.
His issue always was he's fine paying it, however the teams that get the money should be required to increase their payroll by that amount or lose the funds because otherwise it defeats the purpose.
if the Royals have a 20mil payroll and from the luxury tax get another 5mil but keep payroll at 20mil, that what good has it done?
|
What right therefore do they have in saying "You have to spend your luxury transfer cash on the team?" You can't argue they have no right telling someone they can't spend lots but then say you can't spend little. If it's going to be free marketed then it has to be free marketed. The consumer will walk away if the product isn't good enough. That's the whole gist of free market.
Now baseball is a hybrid of this free market stuff. They do penalize teams when they reach a certain threshold, the transfer does go to all the other teams, those teams
should be spending it on the product. What's saying they don't? Maybe (using your example) they'd have only spent 15 million instead of 20 in the first place.
Where I see baseball needing controls is with these rookies. Hughes should never have been a Yankee. Other teams passed him up because they couldn't sign him to the type of cash he was commanding. Therefore he falls to the rich team. I'd argue draft eligible players are basically slaves until they prove themselves in the big leagues.