Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 27 of 27

Thread: Financial Windfall for MLB

  1. #16
    Maple SERP savafan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    17,584

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    Quote Originally Posted by dfs View Post
    Yeah...George? We're going to take 3/4 of the value of your team in the best interests of baseball.

    Exactly how do you suppose the back half of that conversation will go?
    George? Steinbrenner?

    I imagine the back half of the conversation would include lights flickering and the seance table levitating.
    My dad got to enjoy 3 Reds World Championships by the time he was my age. So far, I've only gotten to enjoy one. Step it up Redlegs!

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    Member Nasty_Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    1st Place... Finally
    Posts
    1,191

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    Quote Originally Posted by VR View Post
    Or improve drug testing.
    The testing seems to be working doesn't it? In what ways are you wanting to improve it? I'm curious because when I see guys getting busted then it leads me to believe the system is working.
    I know a lot of people are talking about his on-base percentage (.308 in 2008), but I like to think more in terms of him his in-scoring position percentage. - Our Beloved Manager

  4. #18
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,629

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    Quote Originally Posted by Nasty_Boy View Post
    The testing seems to be working doesn't it? In what ways are you wanting to improve it? I'm curious because when I see guys getting busted then it leads me to believe the system is working.
    I don't understand why the talking heads on ESPN and elsewhere are suggesting that the testing isn't working either. Until we see two guys hitting 60+ HRs in one year, I'd say it's working

  5. #19
    Score Early, Score Often gonelong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,139

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus View Post
    Yep. I've been saying this for a few years. The continued emergence of revenue from MLBAM will create an equal playing field as teams are equal partners in the investment. The national contracts will eventually be kept by Major League Baseball primarily, so that money will flow rather evenly as well.

    The local revenues will continue to differ, but as MLB has a greater chunk of revenue distribution, baseball will be very healthy.

    I'd still like some sort of salary threshold, but the need for it is diminishing by the year.
    I remember thinking this was the path to true revenue sharing in 2000? or so when it was announced. Unfortunately, I think that was lost in the archives, but the discussion did resurect a bit later.

    In 2000 I was perplexed that people couldn't see this coming and it was roundly ignored then.

    GL

  6. #20
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,549

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    Quote Originally Posted by gonelong View Post
    I remember thinking this was the path to true revenue sharing in 2000? or so when it was announced. Unfortunately, I think that was lost in the archives, but the discussion did resurect a bit later.

    In 2000 I was perplexed that people couldn't see this coming and it was roundly ignored then.

    GL
    I guess what I'm not getting is why the TV rights - both local and national - keep skyrocketing when it seems more people are watching games via the Internet. Although I suppose you do need someone to broadcast the games in order for people to watch it online but I would think that teams might bypass the TV and put those games online. Then that would mean all revenue gleaned from that is shared equally with all the teams. Perhaps that's why they aren't doing it.

    Another question I have, would anyone watch an internet game with no announcers? You still have all the production values and graphics but no announcers. That might be something more attractive to someone on the go who is interested in looking at the game but isn't really into the announcers.
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rally-...24872650873160

  7. #21
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,345

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    Quote Originally Posted by bucksfan2 View Post
    IMO Selig has been fortunate with the boom of technology that he couldn't screw up.
    I don't really like Bud, but there's plenty of executives that could've screwed this up.

    Another commisioner could've tried yet again to "Break the players union". At least Bud realized it's a lot more profitable for both sides not to have a strike.

    The latest draft slot setup was a huge step towards helping parity. A lot harder for a early first round talent to slip to a wealthy team at the bottom of the first round.

    Heck, we are seeing a resurgence of many small/medium market teams.
    Pittsburg, Cincy, and the Nats are all competitive this year. (Even though Washington is really a large market, they were struggling, and the system helped make them competitive).
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  8. #22
    Score Early, Score Often gonelong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,139

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip R View Post
    Another question I have, would anyone watch an internet game with no announcers? You still have all the production values and graphics but no announcers. That might be something more attractive to someone on the go who is interested in looking at the game but isn't really into the announcers.
    I occasionally watch the innings/games muted. (This occurs more frequently when Thom is around.) The announcers generally add very little to the game and some of them (*cough* Thom *cough*) detract from it. I can always rewind (DVR) if I missed something.

    What I really want is the ability to select/change my camera angle for the game. Eventually the players will wear cameras as part of their uniforms. I'd say give it another 15-20 years.

    GL

  9. #23
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    43,297

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    Quote Originally Posted by gonelong View Post
    I occasionally watch the innings/games muted. (This occurs more frequently when Thom is around.) The announcers generally add very little to the game and some of them (*cough* Thom *cough*) detract from it. I can always rewind (DVR) if I missed something.

    What I really want is the ability to select/change my camera angle for the game. Eventually the players will wear cameras as part of their uniforms. I'd say give it another 15-20 years.

    GL
    UNBELIEVABLE... I can NOT believe that YOU could say THAT!!

  10. #24
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,549

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    Quote Originally Posted by gonelong View Post
    I occasionally watch the innings/games muted. (This occurs more frequently when Thom is around.) The announcers generally add very little to the game and some of them (*cough* Thom *cough*) detract from it. I can always rewind (DVR) if I missed something.

    What I really want is the ability to select/change my camera angle for the game. Eventually the players will wear cameras as part of their uniforms. I'd say give it another 15-20 years.

    GL
    What I've been thinking is that eventually you should be able to point your remote - if watching on TV - or touch the screen on a player and the player's stats would pop up. Not all of them, since there are so many, but sort of a line like you would get on Baseball Reference.
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rally-...24872650873160

  11. #25
    Vampire Weekend @Bernie's camisadelgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    11,492

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    Quote Originally Posted by westofyou View Post
    UNBELIEVABLE... I can NOT believe that YOU could say THAT!!

  12. #26
    Member Tom Servo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    7,913

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    Quote Originally Posted by westofyou View Post
    UNBELIEVABLE... I can NOT believe that YOU could say THAT!!
    Now, with all due respect, I'm not saying this to be confrontational but, in the views of some people, some say that maybe, in certain cases, that because of the circumstances...
    "Since I've been with the Reds in 1989, we've never had a farm system this loaded," Bowden said. "If we were the New York Yankees and had unlimited dollars, we could have traded for Colon, (Jeff) Weaver, Rolen, (Cliff) Floyd, (Kenny) Rogers and Finley and gotten them all -- and still held onto our top five prospects. That's an amazing statement."

  13. #27
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    43,297

    Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

    http://www.boston.com/sports/basebal..._new_deal.html

    FYI:

    When ESPN televises a game on Monday or Wednesday, that game will no longer be blacked out in the markets of the two teams. In other words, you can choose to watch the Red Sox on NESN or ESPN on those nights.

    In New York and Boston, that’s a pretty significant concession. NESN and YES can’t be too pleased with that.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25