 |
|||||||
|
By Stephen A, Section MLB
Steroids is just one factor that threatens the integrity of baseball. Sports is supposed to be a game of fair play. One major issue that needs to be addressed is a salary cap in Major League Baseball. This article gives hard-nosed facts to prove my point about the need for a salary cap.
When professional sports leagues began, a cap was not necessary because players were earning salaries similar to that of the common working class. As sports grew in popularity with the American people, sports leagues started bringing in such high revenues that sports eventually became a multi-billion dollar industry. As players demanded higher salaries, the only teams that could pay them were the ones in large television markets because they brought in the most revenue. This enabled those powerhouse teams to dominate the league. An example of a team like this is the New York Yankees. Three of the four sports leagues now have salary caps. The National Football League, the National Basketball Association, and the National Hockey League all realized the benefits of a salary cap. One of these benefits is that it causes greater parity amongst teams. Major League Baseball is currently the only major professional sports league without a salary cap. There are different kinds of salary caps in each of the three major sports with a cap. The National Football League (NFL) has a so-called "hard cap," which means that no team can exceed the limit set by the cap without receiving penalties from the league. The amount of the cap has increased each year since its inception in 1994. It began at nearly thirty-five million dollars per team and it now stands at eighty-five million dollars. This just goes to show how popular the NFL is, considering the cap's increase of more than fifty million dollars in just eleven years. Revenue primarily comes from three sources: television contracts; license fees for selling NFL products such as jerseys; and the "gate", which is the money people pay for seats to watch the games. The salary cap also makes sure that teams keep their operating costs down. The more they spend, the less revenue the league makes and the less they can spend on players. It is a very efficient system that has helped to make the NFL the most financially stable of the major professional sports leagues. The cap's effect can be seen when you look at the dominant teams in the NFL over a long period of time. Rarely is a team able to stay dominant for any extended period of time. The Patriots have been dominant in recent years because they have been able to bring in role players who work as a team as opposed to selfish superstars. Even that is starting to catch up with them, as they are becoming an average team in the league. The cap clearly promotes better competition. The National Basketball Association (NBA) has a so-called "soft cap" meaning that teams can go over the cap limit to retain players who have been on the team. Most teams do go over the cap. While there is no direct penalty for going over the limit, teams who do exceed the limit cannot sign free agents for more than the league minimum. The league also has something called a luxury tax, which is implemented when a team's average payroll exceeds a certain number higher than the cap. When this happens, the team has to pay a large tax to the league. This tax is spread amongst the teams with lower payrolls. The NBA has also initiated a maximum salary for any given player considering the massive increase of salaries in the mid-nineties. The average salary is still around five million per player, the highest in professional sports. Since the National Hockey League went through a process of changing its cap, many thought that the NBA would take advantage of this momentum and change to a "hard cap," but NBA commissioner David Stern was content with the current "soft cap." Teams are more likely to stay dominant since the cap isn't as strict, but it's certainly better than no cap at all. The National Hockey League (NHL) realized the need to implement a salary cap just two years ago because the league was losing money. Unfortunately, the players went on strike for an entire year to figure this out, but eventually a compromise was reached. Before the compromise, nearly seventy-five percent of league revenues went towards player salaries and the remaining twenty-five percent was not sufficient for the operating costs of the league. After more than a year of negotiations, the players association and the league agreed on having a hard salary cap. This hard cap contains many more restrictions than those of other leagues, but they are thought to be beneficial. The salary cap not only contains a maximum that a league can spend (thirty-nine million dollars for the 2005-06 season), but a minimum also. No player can earn more than twenty percent of a team's revenue either. This stipulation makes sure that teams don't overvalue superstars so much that it results in contract arguments with players on the team who make less. There are many other beneficial rules set forth by the NHL's salary cap that should be capitalized on by other leagues. All three of these professional leagues have greatly benefited from a salary cap. The one remaining league, Major League Baseball (MLB), should definitely install a cap now. This is because the benefits from the other leagues along with the negative affects of not having a cap are hard to ignore. Without the cap, dominant teams can stay dominant because they are in larger markets or because their owners have more money to spend on players. The New York Yankees are a prime example of a dominant team taking advantage of not having a salary cap. They are a perennial playoff team and they have been world champions twenty-six times. This is because their owner, George Steinbrenner brings in almost anyone he feels will make the team better. The Yankees payroll this past year was an astounding 205 million dollars. The lowest payroll in MLB belongs to the Kansas City Royals with less than thirty-seven million. The Yankees have eight players who make more than ten million dollars per year. The Royals have just one. The Yankees only have two players who make less than one million. The Royals have only two players who make more than one million. While it's probably true that the Yankee players aren't necessarily worth the price they're getting paid compared to other players, it's definitely true that payroll has an effect on the performance of a team. All except one of the six MLB division winners this past year have a payroll in the top half of the league. All except one of the six last place teams in divisions are in the lower half of the league payrolls. Even teams that have low payrolls but a good farm system struggle (A team's farm system is simply the minor leagues where the team's young recruited players are developed into professional level players.). Often times, a good minor league player will come up to the major leagues and continue to perform well. When teams with higher payrolls see this, they simply offer more money for the player than the player's original team can pay, and they take that player. They essentially take advantage of the scouting done by other teams. Teams with high payrolls can both afford to bring new players in, and to develop a good farm system. It is very unfair to teams in smaller markets. Losing teams generally have a smaller fan base that brings in less revenue also. Fans will usually support a good team, and if a team is always good, it will always generate good revenue. This means that nothing major changes. Some teams improve, but others continue to be bottom-feeders and others continue to dominate year in and year out. The evidence clearly shows that baseball should have a salary cap just like the other professional sports. With a salary cap, there are still good teams and bad teams. The only difference is that with the cap, the good teams are the ones with a better emphasis on teamwork, better coaching, and better player scouting so they can develop younger players. Baseball teams are basically good because they have a lot of money to spend on better players. A great example of a team under a salary cap that is still having success is the Detroit Red Wings. The Red Wings had been dominant for years in the NHL and they had the highest payroll. Since the salary cap has been installed, they have had to drop veteran players and pick up younger players who haven't proven themselves to drop their payroll under the cap`s limits. They are still 16-5-2 this season. It just goes to show that they have great scouts who saw some great potential in the younger players and they are now reaping the benefits. The work pays off as opposed to the money paying off.
Players are told from a very young age to play fairly. The only way to make things fair in professional sports is for there to be a salary cap. I would feel much more proud of a team that was able to make the most of what they have than to just go out and get the best there is without having to work hard for it. I also think that more equal competition makes for more exciting sports. The more exciting a sport is, the more fans want to watch it, and the more revenue the leagues make. It's a revolving circle that ultimately means more fairness, better competition, more money for the sports industry, and more fun for the fans. The salary cap has an affect on everyone who enjoys sports and it is clear that Major League Baseball needs a salary cap.
Story writing contestLog in or create an account to vote for this story!
All trademarks and copyrights are owned by their respective leagues and associations. The Rest © Sportscolumn.com / Cow Hollow Media, LLC. Please read our Terms of Service. Sportscolumn.com is powered by Scoop.
|
Related Links |
||||||
