Light the Hot Stove fires

I figured there had to be method to madness.

 

Those teams are always buzzing the tower.

 

THAT'S my problem.

Why should some owners HAVE to use their personal wealth to subsidize a losing proposition while others do not have to spend a cent with a $150M roll.... SOLELY because of the location of the franchise?

 

In a sport where winning 3 of 5 games is hall of fame-good, while winning 2 of 5 is hall of fame bad, them winning the division year after year is a damning pummeling of your side of the argument.

You have zero legs.

 

FUCK that. So a guy with billions in his couch cushions needs a salary cap to be competitive?

Fuck him. Poor billionaire, too poor to compete. You don't want to spend and figure out ways to maximize revenues to remain competitive, don't own a team.

You probably think personal licenses on seats are keen.

 

Fuck...I tried...I really tried....

 

I don't care about a salary cap.

But each team MUST have the same team- and league-generated revenue at its fingertips.

THEN, you can freely rip sandbagging owners.

 

Each MLB team has league-generated revenue at its fingertips. And thew whiny billionaire bitches in places like KC also have revenue-sharing money from the Yanks, Res Sox, Dodgers, Mets etc.

What each team doesn't get is an equal cut of locally generated revenue, and the don't get that in the NFL either.

And what does "each team MUST have the same team" mean?

If you want to get excited about a bunch of mediocrity with .500 records, continue to worship at the 100-yard altar every Sunday.

 

I've heard very little about a new manager for the Nats. Is Tony Pena still in the mix? How about Manny Acta. I know Joe Girardi took his name out of it but I heard recently he was rethinking that. Does anybody know anything more?

 

I heard the dark horse is some sportswriter who helps moderate some Internet message board.

 

It's not nearly the same, becuase the tv money is part of that league revenue in the NFL while a large chunk of the TV money in baseball stays with the individual teams.

Also, attendance is a much larger factor in revenue for baseball and football because there are so many games.

I can see the argument that there is enough parity to say baseball doesn't need to change its system. I disagree with it, but I can see it.

But to keep insisting that the high-revenue teams like the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets don't have a huge advantage over the low-revenue franchises is ridiculous.

 

Moron No. 1.

There are NO local NFL TV contracts.

Moron No. 2.

What sport has more teams within 100 points of .500?

When you buy, rent or steal a clue, I will let you know.