Buffalo News (New York)
December 13, 2009 Sunday
Dear Editor,
For those who have been anti-New York Yankees the last few weeks, get a life.
Boston and the Mets have been spending a lot of money over the last few years, but I have never heard anybody hate them. Just the Yankees.
If you remember, Boston was going after A-Rod also.
Also, nobody brings up this fact: The teams that pay the luxury tax. This money goes to other teams like Kansas City or Washington so they can invest in their team. But, what the owner does with this money is a different story. Boston and New York are good for baseball. I believe in the 2007 season, Boston and New York made up a third of Baltimore's home ticket sales. Fans want to see these teams.
By the way, whatever happened to the free enterprise system? You have to spend money to make money.
Gary Levulis
Eden
Dear Editor:
Over the past six years the average Yankees' payroll was over $70 million a year more than the Mets or Red Sox, even though those teams draw from more lucrative areas, charge premium ticket prices and cable fees. Owner George Steinbrenner reinvests back into the on-field product even though he is penalized for it. Revenue sharing and the luxury tax have required the Yankees to spend millions of dollars to promote youth leagues and player development overseas, thus benefiting ALL major league teams.
According to Peter Handrinos, in his book, "The Truth about Ruth and More," the Yankees were forced to contribute no less than 39 percent of locally generated money into a pool for teams like Milwaukee and Pittsburgh. He adds, "in a typical year, the Yankees must hand over more than $75 million to smaller-market frenchises . . . with no real strings attached." The Yankees are unequaled in merchandising but they are allowed to keep only 3 percent of the profits."
Since 1980, the Yanks have fueled an unprecedented increase in interest in the MLB. Home attendance has grown from 1 to 4 million a year and when the Yankees come to town, the average increase in attendance is 13,000 fans per game, further enriching the other teams and their billionaire owners. Yes, the Yankees win and baseball benefits.
Vito Perricelli
Lancaster
Dear Editor,
The Yankees have an unfair fiscal advantage. Is it fair that the Yankees have $201 million payroll while the second-highest payroll is the Mets' $149 million? Take $50 million off the Yankees roster and they do not win the World Series. Is it fair that 21 teams have less than half the Yankess' payroll?
They can sign any free agent and any homegrown player they want. Most teams would not have been able to keep Jeter, Rivera, Posada or Pettitte. Since 1997, the only above average players they developed are All-Star second baseman Cano and Soriano. It's easier signing other teams' all-stars than drafting and developing players. Of course the Yankess did make it hard with the likes of Knoblauch, Pavano, Brown, Johnson, Giambi, Contreras, Wright and Igawa. After signing three All-Stars in their prime last season, it would have been hard for them not to win the World Series.
Yes, the 1993 Blue Jays had the highest payroll. There were also seven teams with 75 percent or more of their payroll to compete with them. The Mets, with the second highest payroll, have less than 75 percent of the Yankees' payroll. Yes, the Yankess had one more homegrown player than the Phillies. But what about the quality of free agents and trades? The Yankees acquired All-Stars A-Rod, Teixeira, Burnett, Sabathia, Damon and Matsui. The Phillies acquired Pedro (past his prime), Lee, Ibanez and Werth (Phillies version of Scott Brosius). Advantage Yankees.
MLB needs revenue sharing and a minimum and maximum salary levels to ensure some sort of fairness and balance.
Michael J. Nemeth
Orchard Park
December 13, 2009 Sunday
Dear Editor,
For those who have been anti-New York Yankees the last few weeks, get a life.
Boston and the Mets have been spending a lot of money over the last few years, but I have never heard anybody hate them. Just the Yankees.
If you remember, Boston was going after A-Rod also.
Also, nobody brings up this fact: The teams that pay the luxury tax. This money goes to other teams like Kansas City or Washington so they can invest in their team. But, what the owner does with this money is a different story. Boston and New York are good for baseball. I believe in the 2007 season, Boston and New York made up a third of Baltimore's home ticket sales. Fans want to see these teams.
By the way, whatever happened to the free enterprise system? You have to spend money to make money.
Gary Levulis
Eden
Dear Editor:
Over the past six years the average Yankees' payroll was over $70 million a year more than the Mets or Red Sox, even though those teams draw from more lucrative areas, charge premium ticket prices and cable fees. Owner George Steinbrenner reinvests back into the on-field product even though he is penalized for it. Revenue sharing and the luxury tax have required the Yankees to spend millions of dollars to promote youth leagues and player development overseas, thus benefiting ALL major league teams.
According to Peter Handrinos, in his book, "The Truth about Ruth and More," the Yankees were forced to contribute no less than 39 percent of locally generated money into a pool for teams like Milwaukee and Pittsburgh. He adds, "in a typical year, the Yankees must hand over more than $75 million to smaller-market frenchises . . . with no real strings attached." The Yankees are unequaled in merchandising but they are allowed to keep only 3 percent of the profits."
Since 1980, the Yanks have fueled an unprecedented increase in interest in the MLB. Home attendance has grown from 1 to 4 million a year and when the Yankees come to town, the average increase in attendance is 13,000 fans per game, further enriching the other teams and their billionaire owners. Yes, the Yankees win and baseball benefits.
Vito Perricelli
Lancaster
Dear Editor,
The Yankees have an unfair fiscal advantage. Is it fair that the Yankees have $201 million payroll while the second-highest payroll is the Mets' $149 million? Take $50 million off the Yankees roster and they do not win the World Series. Is it fair that 21 teams have less than half the Yankess' payroll?
They can sign any free agent and any homegrown player they want. Most teams would not have been able to keep Jeter, Rivera, Posada or Pettitte. Since 1997, the only above average players they developed are All-Star second baseman Cano and Soriano. It's easier signing other teams' all-stars than drafting and developing players. Of course the Yankess did make it hard with the likes of Knoblauch, Pavano, Brown, Johnson, Giambi, Contreras, Wright and Igawa. After signing three All-Stars in their prime last season, it would have been hard for them not to win the World Series.
Yes, the 1993 Blue Jays had the highest payroll. There were also seven teams with 75 percent or more of their payroll to compete with them. The Mets, with the second highest payroll, have less than 75 percent of the Yankees' payroll. Yes, the Yankess had one more homegrown player than the Phillies. But what about the quality of free agents and trades? The Yankees acquired All-Stars A-Rod, Teixeira, Burnett, Sabathia, Damon and Matsui. The Phillies acquired Pedro (past his prime), Lee, Ibanez and Werth (Phillies version of Scott Brosius). Advantage Yankees.
MLB needs revenue sharing and a minimum and maximum salary levels to ensure some sort of fairness and balance.
Michael J. Nemeth
Orchard Park
No comments:
Post a Comment
Members of the blog can comment. To receive an e-mailed invitation, write to johnandsuzyn@gmail.com. And check spam if it doesn't show up. (Google account required.)
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.