The best team money can buy: does that feel right to you?
First it was the Yankees, then the Red Sox, and now the Phillies. These are baseball teams in the United States for those of you who are not familiar with the teams. They spent a lot of money for players and won championships. This year, I think they are currently the three best teams in baseball. Also, they have been or are turning into perennial powers.
I suppose it takes some talent to acquire that talent, but somehow, it feels unfair to me. It used to be that teams grew their own talent. They had to guess many years in advance if someone would be good. Now, if you have the money, you can buy a player when they have proven talent.
If you have money. That advantages teams in the biggest markets who can generate the most income. The League tries to limit this advantage by capping the amount a team can spend. So an added component in building a good team is having a general manager who can use money wisely. The wealthiest teams can buy the best general managers.
If the same teams win year-in, year-out, doesn’t that take some of the fun out of it (unless you are in a winner’s town)? Are you more proud of team that uses home-grown talent? Does this situation take away some of the fun for you? Do you look at a team like the Phillies and dismiss them because out of 4 aces, only one was home-grown? Does it seem like cheating?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
10 Answers
From what I’ve seen sometimes (maybe much of the time) the most expensive players don’t perform like the players who play for as much less money. Plus the team has to work together.
That being said, the amount sports figures get paid is obscene.
I’m not a sports fan, although it does seem unfair, but whatever, I guess that’s how the game goes. Although until recently haven’t the Yankees lost throughout the years even though they had the ‘best’ players?
Im not a sports fan so I may be off here but I believe quite a few good players refused making more money with other teams in order to be able to play with the phillies.
Though honestly all around sports players make far farrrrrrrrr to much money.
@uberbatman So what does that mean in terms of the moral status of the team?
Being the best that money can buy doesn’t mean you will win.
Take a look at Real Madrid [soccer team from Spain]. They have some of the best players in the world but aren’t winning all competitions.
@Hibernate No, but look at the Yankees and the Red Sox. What portion of titles have they won in the last quarter century? How often have they gotten to the playoffs compared to others?
@wundayatta not sure. I just took it as that player or players would rather play with a team they felt good about and had a chance of making into a great winning team instead of just making more money.
It true, not only in major league sports, but at the high school level as well. Parents who want their sports children to succeed will choose a home in a school district that will best showcase their talents.
Since people are willing to pay the price to see the events, I see nothing wrong with the teams paying the players.
I dislike the fact that there is so much publicity generated, when there are tens of thousands more visitors to museums and zoos than follow sports.
No, but look at the Yankees and the Red Sox. What portion of titles have they won in the last quarter century? How often have they gotten to the playoffs compared to others?
7 titles out of the last 25. Compare that to other games like basektball, soccer, and football and it doesn’t seem that out of line.
In the last 10 years, 9 different teams have won the world series, the only repeat was Boston, who hadn’t won for over 80 years before that.
If you consider Chicago a large market, then their high profile team (the Cubs) hasn’t won in longer than that despite having a high average payroll.
As far as the Phillies go, they traded for some of those pitchers and made a team around them. And they won a title before all but one of the top 4 (Hamels) were signed. Arguably the other three would all be ranked ahead of that one (Halladay is probably the best pitcher in baseball, Oswalt and Lee have to the in the top 10).
Which is all to say there’s no guarantee that a high payroll brings you anything other than excitement at the prospects of your team. Excitement fills seats. The seats pay the bills.
@funkdaddy I understand the economics of this. What I’m asking about is the righteousness of it. It’s like you can work hard to build your strength and stamina for the Tour de France, or you can take performance enhancing drugs as part of your training. We consider the taking of performance enhancing drugs to be unfair. It unlevels the playing field.
Well, isn’t money the same thing for professional sports? The more you have, the more you can have. A level playing field would be more fun, right?
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
