1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to the new DBSTalk community platform. We have recently migrated to a community platform called Xenfono and hope you will find this change to your liking. There are some differences, but for the most part, if you just post and read, that will all be the same. If you have questions, please post them in the Forum Support area. Thanks!

Yanks, Teixeira agree on 8-year deal

Discussion in 'Sports Programming and Events' started by DCSholtis, Dec 23, 2008.

  1. DCSholtis

    DCSholtis Up The Irons!

    5,775
    6
    Aug 7, 2002
  2. Jimmy 440

    Jimmy 440 Hall Of Fame

    1,667
    1
    Nov 16, 2007
    Monmouth...
    I wonder now if they can still afford those .25 cent seats now during spring training ?
     
  3. ARKDTVfan

    ARKDTVfan Icon

    626
    7
    May 19, 2003
    0-162 would still be too good a record for those spend happy scumbags
    baseball has a real bad economics problem
     
  4. DCSholtis

    DCSholtis Up The Irons!

    5,775
    6
    Aug 7, 2002
    Ah but there is of course a catch, Jimmy:

    http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3789673&campaign=rss&source=MLBHeadlines
     
  5. CapeCodder

    CapeCodder Legend

    117
    0
    Mar 19, 2008
    Baseball and its incompetent commissioner have a real problem. If they don't get a handle, via either a salary cap or a tax for overspending that really have some bite, teams like KC, Minnesota, etc. will forever be relegated to near-minor-league status. Not to speak of the fans - who can afford those $2000 per game seats the Yanks are selling in the new stadium (retorical question, obviously someone can)? $250m for A-Rod, 180+ for Jeeter, 180+ for Tex, $170+ for Sabathia - it's crazy. I say, let's have congress hold hearings and offer a bailout to the small market teams in the interest of keeping them competitive and in business!
     
  6. Steve

    Steve DIRECTV A-Team

    23,031
    147
    Aug 22, 2006
    Lower...
    Baseball does have an economics problem, but at least the Yankee owners aren't lining their own pockets with riches like other club owners are. They're investing their profits back on the field.

    That said, I find it embarrassing they can do this, and I detest Boras and the union for what they've apparently been able to do to successfully escalate salaries. As we saw in the A-Rod to Boston case a few years ago, the union will not allow a player to accept less money to play where they desire, even if the player is willing.

    The NFL so has it right, IMO. I'm hopeful some day all sports leagues will have similar competitive balance. /steve
     
  7. tsmacro

    tsmacro Hall Of Fame

    2,364
    54
    Apr 28, 2005
    East...

    While I generally agree that sports stars are way over-rated and very definitely over paid thanks in no small part to teams like the Yankees, i'm not sure how much I agree with the whole "the smaller market teams just can't compete" rant & whine you always hear. I mean the Yankees always spend like there's no tomorrow and sometimes it works out for them, other times not so much. Meanwhile for example last year you have the Tampa Bay Rays, who's payroll was what? So spending all sorts of money isn't necessarily the answer. There's ways to put together a successful team with a smaller budget just as there's ways to put together a lousy team with a Yankee-sized budget.
     
  8. JACKIEGAGA

    JACKIEGAGA N.Y. FOOTBALL GIANTS

    5,617
    91
    Dec 11, 2006
    Long Island, NY
    I hope they still do not make the playoffs. I hate the Yankees
     
  9. Laker44

    Laker44 Godfather

    284
    0
    Jun 18, 2008
    That's correct do it the old fashion way...build from within and trade to fill the missing pieces.I don't buy the "small market"crap.Everyone of the owners are among the richest people in the country,but they choice not to but there money into improving the teams.
     
  10. trowlison

    trowlison Cool Member

    18
    0
    Sep 28, 2005
    I think I read somewhere where the money saved on not resigning Andy Pettite, Bobby Abreu and especially letting Jason Giambi go has offset the majority of the cost in signing Sabathia, Burnett and now Teixeira. If that is true, why do the Yankees take the hit by the fans and the media for spending 423 million over the last few weeks? With the money saved the cost is not nearly that much. I am far from a Yankee lover, but common sense tells me, there is a ton of money being saved and they are spending it where they need it. Starting pitching and a big bat. Makes perfect sense, baseball wise and economically to me.

    Of course it is just my two cents worth and go Chisox !!!

    Merry Christmas to all !!!
     
  11. jacestone40

    jacestone40 Cool Member

    12
    0
    Apr 22, 2005
    Everybody pisses and mourns about how the Yankees do this and the Yankees do that if you're a fan of the team you like to see the ownership doing what is needed to keep the team as a contender...and if you remember it wasn't the Yankees that originally paid A-Rod that outrageous amount it was the Texas Rangers
     
  12. DCSholtis

    DCSholtis Up The Irons!

    5,775
    6
    Aug 7, 2002
    The problem as far as I'm concerned is that the Yankees go spending all that money, and no I do not care about $88 million coming off the books. but to me the main problem is them spending all this money then having to go back to the City, State etc for MORE money for their already overpriced stadium. That's what galls me.
     
  13. trowlison

    trowlison Cool Member

    18
    0
    Sep 28, 2005
    I think the key word is that they don't "have" to. It is that they "can" and they will do whatever they can to save a dime, to put it back into the team. If it means going to the city, county and state and having them help build a new stadium, they will.

    It just appears to me, the general course of threads and sports talk shows are always pounding on the Yankees for putting money into the team. I understand the frustration of tax money being spent on a new stadium, while the owners are spending hundreds of millions on players. If the argument is more that why don't they lay off the free agents for awhile while they pay for the new stadium so the tax payers don't have to, I can understand that. But... to lay into them because they are trying to upgrade a poorly performing team, I don't.

    If I was a Yankee fan, and they didn't try to buy the best free agents possible, I would be awfully ticked off. If they have the money and not put it back into the product on the field and try to improve there would be an outcry that the Steinbrenners are only in the game for the money. It has always appeared to me, they care more about trying to win than they do the money.

    If they can save money by having the taxpayers help build the new stadium, and take the money and buy a Sabathia, Burnett or Teixiera they will. What's wrong with that? It is the business of baseball today. I think most new stadiums are built on the taxpayer dime anyway, and the Yankees are the most visible in the FA market, but other teams are also spending a lot of money while either playing in a new stadium or whining and crying they need a new one.

    The Yankees are just a easy to team to hate. Love 'em or hate 'em they have been this way since the day George took over and will be until the day his great grand kids die. It reminds me of the year of the old Yankee Stadium remodel in the mid 70's. A few years later they go out and buy Reggie Jackson, while the remodel was still being payed for by the taxpayers, if memory serves. It's not the first time they have done this and it probably won't be the last.

    I can see the Cubs doing something similar in the next few years. Wrigley Field is probably on her last leg, and money will be spent on a few big name free agents coming into a new ballpark. I seriously doubt if there will be the same outcry.
     
  14. Steviek

    Steviek Cool Member

    19
    0
    Jun 19, 2008
    I'm not a Yankee fan, but I can't fault them for going out and spending money on free agents. They are playing within the rules and trying to better their team. Meanwhile you have cheap owners in Florida, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh and Kansas City doing nothing to improve their teams. Milwaukee and Pittsburgh even have brand spanking new stadiums that were mostly publicly funded and bring in extra revenue to the team, yet the owners still continue to cry poverty. Not to mention the "poorer" payroll teams also get a large share of luxury taxes paid by the likes of the Yankees, Angels, Cubs, Red Sox and other large payroll clubs. Yet instead of reinvesting those funds into their clubs, the owners line their own pockets.
     
  15. djlong

    djlong Hall Of Fame

    4,343
    57
    Jul 8, 2002
    New Hampshire
    A salary cap, as much as I'd like to see one, won't solve MLB's problems - even the proposals that also include a salary 'floor'. I'll give you the number one reason why:

    - A salary cap that curbs spending by the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, Cubs, Dodgers and Angels does not put so much as a SINGLE PENNY into the checkbooks of the Royals, Pirates, Nationals, Marlins, Padres, Athletics, Reds or Brewers.

    If a team says "I can't afford Manny", stopping the Yankees from buying him via a cap isn't going to mean that the Royals suddenly CAN afford him. It might curb the top price free-agents but it's not going to boost revenues for the lower teams. Only a 'socializing' of local TV revenues would do that. Otherwise, a salary cap would do nothing but allow all those Yankee revenues to go into Steinbrenner pockets. Which would you rather have? Hank & Co. buying free agents or lining their pockets?
     
  16. Pepster

    Pepster Legend

    212
    0
    Oct 29, 2008
    There already is a tax. The Yankees just recently got a tax bill from that incompetent commissioner for $28M.........that's right, $28,000,000, which as a Met fan makes me shake my head.........but then again, they're only spending money from the revenue that they can generate. Remember, despite the spending, they haven't won it all since about 2001. That money in part is supposed to go to the lower revenue generating teams, but how can MLB control how that money is spent once those owners get the money.

    How much has the world changed in about 40 years? My first Met game was in 1970 when my dad was hyperventilating because the upper deck seats he wanted to buy were $2.50 & then I recently read the top seat at Yankee Stadium version III will be $2500.00.
     
  17. braven

    braven Hall Of Fame

    1,033
    0
    Apr 9, 2007
    Until MLB institutes a salary cap, it's hard to take them seriously.
     
  18. hunter65

    hunter65 Guest

    Every sports team who builds a stadium gets a deal from the city they play in. The Mets got money from the city too. It's called business.
     
  19. Pepster

    Pepster Legend

    212
    0
    Oct 29, 2008
    Remembering when George S. was threatening to go to New Jersey. Perhaps they should have been allowed to go after all.
     
  20. hunter65

    hunter65 Guest

    Ya I remember, that's my point. It would have hurt NYC if they were to have left. It's just coffee money to the city(not to the tax payers though).
     

Share This Page