The Baseball Salary Cap: How This Decade Has Proven There is No Need
The idea of a salary cap in Major League Baseball is one that has been hotly debated for some time now. The argument in favor is that the richest owners can afford to buy a champion by outbidding for the best talent. Commissioner Bud Selig has been a strong support of a salary cap. It must never be forgotten, however, that Bud Selig came to the position of Baseball Commissioner from the sphere of ownership. Bud Selig, whether anyone wants to admit it or not, has certain biases on topics that might not necessarily be in the interests of all baseball, but rather for baseball's owners.
It has become an issue of integrity for Selig. At least, that's what he says. A salary cap would serve to create equality and fairness. He is on record as declaring that the real rivalry in baseball isn't between teams, but between rich teams and less rich teams. Naturally, the idea of baseball parity always comes back to George Steinbrenner and the Yankees. Every article on the subject of a salary cap or parity has to include a figure on the payroll of the Yankees. Well, you won't see that figure here. The figure you will see is that the Yankees are a dry run. They haven't won a World Series since the 90s and actually got knocked out by the lowly Detroit Tigers. The Tigers! One of those poster teams for parity. Their recent history of miserable failure has been blamed on their lack of resources and inability to sign the big money stars. And yet they humiliated the loaded Yankees in the playoffs. What gives?
Let's do a Disney version of the potential benefits of a salary cap. First, it would supposedly level the playing field, ensuring that more teams could afford to sign big name players. In turn, this could create more competition and fans in cities like Kansas City and Milwaukee and Arlington would have a more realistic hope of seeing their beloved team still playing in October. No longer would Major League Baseball be dominated by the New York Yankees and other super rich teams.
It has become an issue of integrity for Selig. At least, that's what he says. A salary cap would serve to create equality and fairness. He is on record as declaring that the real rivalry in baseball isn't between teams, but between rich teams and less rich teams. Naturally, the idea of baseball parity always comes back to George Steinbrenner and the Yankees. Every article on the subject of a salary cap or parity has to include a figure on the payroll of the Yankees. Well, you won't see that figure here. The figure you will see is that the Yankees are a dry run. They haven't won a World Series since the 90s and actually got knocked out by the lowly Detroit Tigers. The Tigers! One of those poster teams for parity. Their recent history of miserable failure has been blamed on their lack of resources and inability to sign the big money stars. And yet they humiliated the loaded Yankees in the playoffs. What gives?
Let's do a Disney version of the potential benefits of a salary cap. First, it would supposedly level the playing field, ensuring that more teams could afford to sign big name players. In turn, this could create more competition and fans in cities like Kansas City and Milwaukee and Arlington would have a more realistic hope of seeing their beloved team still playing in October. No longer would Major League Baseball be dominated by the New York Yankees and other super rich teams.
|
|




