Quote Originally Posted by BigMacFU
No Baka, salary cap is a result of player's unions, not owner's groups. So, blame the players for huge payrolls. Blame the owners for not being willing to pay even though they couldn't lose money if they tried. Finally, let us agree then that for sports without salary caps, the solution to the problem is a League Minimum Salary Floor. Seriously, if you want to play with the big boys of wealth, then you gotta ante up, and so, why not make a minimum baseball salary of 100 Million per season. That would be so awesome, you know you'd get good teams in all cities then because contraction would be sure to follow, and so the diluted player pool wouldn't exist. OOooooh, somebody make me commissioner of baseball.

I disagree, then even with teams paying $100 million in salaries, the few teams that can afford a $203 million dollar payroll would be outspending their rivals and have a huge advantage in buying talent. I think as a result of accepting a franchise, owners should be subject to paying no more than X amount in salaries. The game the way it is is far less competitive than it could be, are you saying you like to stifle competition and let those teams with owners with billion dollar pockets spend their way to victory? Cause no matter what, resources in a competion DO matter, so do many other things such as talent, will and ingenuity, but resources are a key part of winning.