Page 1 of 1

haha, yankees suck

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:24 am
by Jonathan
thought i'd throw that in there.

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:25 am
by Alan
Yes, yes they do.

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:26 am
by VLSmooth
What? They only lost 4-2 (shutout in the last game) and have $100+ million more on their payroll than the Marlins... whatever could you mean? :)

added "+", you have my apologies

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:29 am
by Jonathan
http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2003/0721/1583823.html

$120 million, excuse you.

Goddamn. Is that right? The Yankees outspent the Marlins by more than the Mets, New York's other suckass team, spent on their whole payroll. Which, incidentally, is the second largest payroll in MLB.

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:30 am
by tasheren
kicked their yankee asses!

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:33 am
by Jonathan
So, in conclusion, the Yankees are paying for the equivalent of two top of the line teams. And they get their little dog kicked. In the nuts. By a kung fu master.

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:33 am
by quantus
Shit, the yankees should've just bought the marlins and been done with the world series without even playing.

My crystal ball says, "Pay cuts likely in the future of the yankees for completely sucking." I didn't even watch that much of the series, but I saw way more errors than I'd seen ever in such a small period of time.

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:36 am
by VLSmooth
A couple things I've learned since working:
  1. Baseball doesn't have a payroll cap
  2. The Yankees have tons of fans
  3. Tons of fans == tons of money
iirc, implementing caps would reduce money from the MLB, so it's not a realistic option.

This is indirectly because baseball fans still watch, even if the outcome is predictable most of the time. So there's no benefit to cap, which is supposedly done for team equality and more interesting games.

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:39 am
by Jonathan
VLSmooth wrote:A couple things I've learned since working:
  1. Baseball doesn't have a payroll cap
  2. The Yankees have tons of fans
  3. Tons of fans == tons of money
iirc, implementing caps would reduce money from the MLB, so it's not a realistic option.

This is indirectly because baseball fans still watch, even if the outcome is predictable most of the time. So there's no benefit to cap, which is supposedly done for team equality and more interesting games.
They have the luxury tax now. The Yankees (the only team spending more than $117M) have to pay $10.7 million in luxury tax. Apparently, Steinbrenner operates in some parallel universe where $10.7 million doesn't really matter. I can't imagine that they earn a lot more than 10 million bucks in a season in profit.

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:40 am
by VLSmooth
Also, am I the only one that finds it interesting that the Yankees are the only team hit by the 17% luxury tax above $117 million? (for over $10 million to boot)

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:40 am
by VLSmooth
Heh, exactly!

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:41 am
by VLSmooth
Just to make it known, I dislike baseball since I find it incredibly boring.

Whee.

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:46 am
by Dave
yanks have all the $. they've won a huge percentage of the world series. they're stacked!

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:52 am
by Alan
http://msn.espn.go.com/mlb/news/2002/0329/1360060.html

Yankees made a $18.8 million profit in 2001. Don't know about this year.

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:54 am
by Alan
Manchester United, the English soccer version of the Yankees, made 39.3 million pounds (~$65 or so million I would guess) last year.