How the Pittsburgh Pirates Could Save Small Market Sports Entertainment
By now many of you know about the Major League Baseball revenue sharing 'scandal' that hit the news last month. The full financial details of the Pirates, Rays, Marlins, Mariners, Angels and Rangers were leaked, and in every case, they showed where those teams were profiting, sometimes hugely, from pocketing revenue sharing dollars... dollars that, one would think, should be earmarked for player salaries.
(The SB Nation baseball sites have picked this up, btw)
The scandal is particularly scandalous in Florida where the Marlins recently received hundreds of millions of dollars in free money to subsidize the building of a new stadium. Apparently the owners said they needed a new stadium in order to create the revenues they would need to be a competitive team. They cried loudly about the poverty they silently endured for their fans, and when prudently asked to open their books to prove said poverty, they cried all the louder. The politicians, hearing their cries, kicked prudence to the curb and forked over the cash.
The cost of kicking prudence to the curb? Some estimate it to be as much as $2.4 billion dollars (once everything is paid off). She's like that I hear.
Now, how scandalous is the scandal?
Well, the MLB revenue sharing provisions are quite accommodating in regards to what constitutes a player expense, so technically, the teams are off the hook as far as MLB is concerned (gonna make for some fun owners' meetings, eh?). Further, in terms of the Marlins travails, well... perhaps their poverty was well earned after all, and the rest of the world just doesn't understand how accounting math works. It's a good thing all those public tax dollars are so well spent.
Not a scandal at all then.
I mean, really, player development expenses ARE THE SAME AS player salaries. THE EXACT SAME. No question. And if a sports team owner needs to use all their profits to pay off previously incurred debt, then they have every right to ask for taxpayer money while they are paying off said debt; it's only right. And if the debt is subsequently paid off, then the profits are the owner's to keep; the taxpayer's money has already been spent by then, so its not really a factor anymore. The taxpayer agreed to spend it, and it's spent, so what does it matter to the team? Besides, you never know when an owner has to incur more debt, right?
Ah well, good thing I don't have to care about that sort of thing. The owner will tell me what's going on. The financial status of a private entity are sacrosanct after all. I best not worry about it.
You know, I have family in Edmonton. I imagine I should thank them for paying for me to watch hockey.
Funny thing. I was just thinking about the days I spent on a farm back in the when. You know, I never saw a pig not go back to the trough. Once they knew where it was, they knew where it was I guess.
So.
How could the Pittsburgh Pirates save small market sports entertainment?
Just get rid of the 'sports'.
Take a read on The Pittsburgh Paradox by Phil Birnbaum (Slate magazine).
Interesting read.
He makes the case, quite convincingly, that it is against the interests of the Pittsburgh Pirates owners to actually make a profit. 'Wins' cost money and a small market team like Pittsburgh simply can't, ever, buy their way to a win.
Think about that for a second.
The best a small market team can hope to do is to get all their prospects and projects to make grade, have their well-paid veterans (the one or two they have) perform to spec, and have their cheap (i.e. washed up) veterans significantly outperform their contracts. If all that happens, and some of the 'real' contenders fall short, then maybe a championship run is possible.
Cool.
If a sports team can get their fans to accept 'that'; 'that' being reality.
'That' being the 'truth'.
Then are fans really going to the games thinking that their team will win?
Or are they just going to go?
Kind of like going to the movies.
It's all just entertainment at that point.
Take away the absolute need to win it all, and all you're really left with is the need to be entertained.
THAT is what I find interesting in all of this. That concept that winning might not be relevant, and that people might still be okay with it. At what point do they stop being, predominantly, fans of the team and become, overwhelmingly, fans of the game?
Sports have always been entertaining by virtue of both spectacle and requirement.
Until.
Perhaps.
Now.
------
To come on later dates: Inflation Effects in the NHL and Why Toronto Loves Giving Money to Phoenix.
Have a great evening everyone.
5 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
They may love it in Toronto but I hate sending money to a franchise for mere entertainment !
The reality is I want rivalry! I want passion! I want a game back between a “Mickey mouse operation” and the Oilers. There is so much history between the Jets and the Oilers. They played for the final WHL trophy which they still have in Winnipeg. (That still sticks in my craw when I watch the game.) Then there is the whole #99 Mickey mouse thing. I want the Jets back and a bunch of rabid Oiler hating Winnipegers whom are ready to spit on the statue of Gretzky outside Rexall. Thats Hockey.
BASEBALL always was just entertainment anyway!
by Sheldon Oilers Fan for Life on Sep 7, 2010 6:59 PM MDT reply actions
I agree with this totally, though not the specific teams. Without something on the line, some reason to get invested in the outcome, I have no reason to give a damn about who’s playing. Without being able to call for a player’s head after a late hit, without the hate, I just don’t see why I should care. Without heroes and villains, it’s just watching a bunch of people play shinny at the local rink, and without a team to get invested in, there are no heroes. I’ve watched hockey (and football, both gridiron and association) when my teams aren’t playing, and while I can give it some attention, when a game between the Islanders and Senators (or the Blue Bombers and Ti-Cats, for that matter) ends, I don’t get any satisfaction or disappointment, any high or low, from it. I just don’t care about the outcome. And, quite frankly, I have better things to do than spend 2.5-3 hours watching two teams I don’t care about play a game with an outcome that doesn’t matter to me.
I cheer for 3 teams though, so my “passion” is probably not as rabid as some. In any case, it comes down to being able to get invested in the result of the game. Without that, it’s just background noise. Even in movies, you have to care about the characters, the events, you have to get invested in what’s going on. If you don’t have anyone to pull for, any reason to get interested in events, it’s just moving pictures, and it’s fucking boring. And I sure as hell wouldn’t drop over $100 for shitty tickets to see Michael Bay’s tripe. Those explosions look pretty nice, but unless I care why things are exploding, it’s just visual stimulation for the hell of it.
by despisethesun on Sep 8, 2010 10:56 AM MDT up reply actions
Parity
That is an NHL buzz word. You will never hear that mentioned in baseball circles.
The NHL CBA in place has a cap floor and ceiling to keep team payrolls relatively close.
In baseball, the top spending team (Yankees @ 206 M) has a 6 times larger payroll than the lowest team (Pirates @ 35 M).
To put that in perspective, the lowest spending NHL team right now is the Avs @ 41 M. The top spending team would have a payroll of 240 M to keep the same ratio in the NHL as it exists in baseball. On a 23 man roster, each player would make an AVERAGE of over 10 M dollars per year. Think of the all star team you could put on the ice for that kind of $$.
I am not saying that either model is right or wrong, but trying to compare baseball and hockey is apples and oranges.
Indifference
It works in Pittsburgh because most sports fans in the Western Pennsylvania region are not the most avid baseball fans. Even during their halcyon days of the 70’s into the late 80’s and early 90’s, the Pirates had trouble drawing fans to Three Rivers Stadium. They then lost players like Barry Bonds to free agency, and the bottom fell out. No longer contenders, just another small market franchise.
The current ownership then, correctly, established a business model that made the ‘Buccos’ a source of entertainment rather than a competitive baseball franchise. They kept player salaries at a minimum and weathered the storm until the beautiful PNC Park opened in 2001. They appealed to families with firework nights and tons of giveaways, and the fans have eaten it up (they drew a near sellout this summer for fireworks night when the team was 30 GAMES BELOW .500).
They continue to do this to this day, and make money hand over fist every year in doing so. This scenario is not likely to play out in hockey-mad Edmonton. Baseball is just something to pass the time before Steelers training camp (and recently, Penguins camp) ensues in the Pittsburgh area.
by Sam Crowe on Sep 8, 2010 1:23 PM MDT reply actions 1 recs

by 
























