Return to Baseball Leftovers

My Salary Cap & Revenue Sharing

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

My Salary Cap & Revenue Sharing

Postby davidmarver » Tue Apr 19, 2005 8:45 pm

A brilliantly built salary cap and revenue sharing plan (I was way bored in Calc today):

Revenue sharing presents many uncertainties. With full-scale revenue sharing, there is little incentive to attract fans both through advertising and through the product of the field. If a team only retains 1/30th of what it brings in, a little over 3%, why should it spend millions in advertising or player contracts? In this plan, each team would forfeit 40% of its profits to the league pool, which would then be re-distributed based on the team’s performance. A portion of that money re-distributed to each team would be added on to the team’s salary cap allowance. This would solve many problems.

First of all, naysayers of a salary cap claim that dynasties no longer exist when a salary cap is put into place. By allowing teams to competitively drive up their salary cap space, there will be some differentiation between teams. The difference between a cap allowance of 95 and 100 million between two separate teams allows teams to have an edge in some sort of position, whether that’s investing $10,000,000 in a #1 starter instead of $5,000,000 in a borderline #2 starter.

Second, by allowing a team to keep about 61.33% of its original revenue (the 60% kept plus the near 3% of its other 40% after re-distribution) a team will field a competitive team, will advertise, and will attract fans whole-heartedly.

Teams who want to spend over the salary cap, will be allowed to, but at a price. For each % they go over the cap, they forfeit that % to the league pool. For example, if the Yankees spent 131 million on a 100 million cap, they’d forfeit 31% of their revenue to the league pool. They would still retrieve a portion of the money (around 3%) through re-distribution, but they also would lose salary cap allowance…10% of the percent they were over the existing cap. So the Yankees would lose 3.1% of their cap for the next season, meaning their cap the following season would be 96.9 million (plus whatever figure the cap changed by for each team). This means the next season, if the Yankees kept the payroll at 131 million, they’d forfeit 35.2% of their revenue, and drive their cap figure down 3.52%. This is good for many reasons. By allowing teams to go over the cap, they can gear up at the trade deadline for a decent price, while at the same time, discourages teams from exceeding the cap for numerous seasons at a time, since it would significantly hinder their profits.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?.
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 ChampionLucky Ladders Weekly WinnerTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 5826
(Past Year: -328)
Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: 5.5 Hole

Postby Madison » Tue Apr 19, 2005 11:19 pm

I dislike the whole salary cap idea and I also dislike revenue sharing, so I'm the wrong person to give a good comment on this. B-)

No, I'm not a Yankees fan either, Rangers all the way! ;-D
Yes doctor, I am sick.
Sick of those who are spineless.
Sick of those who feel self-entitled.
Sick of those who are hypocrites.
Yes doctor, an army is forming.
Yes doctor, there will be a war.
Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
ExecutiveEditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 48715
(Past Year: -5140)
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Taking Souls...

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 20 guests