No . One Word , Capitalism ............Cannot Run from that Mr. B . The Have , and the Have Nots just have to get Along somehow............

Rich , Poor .................. Nuff Said . Good Day.

It is easy as a Yankee, Met, or even Philly fan to say no to a cap. We do have an obvious advantage and you don't want to give that up. I really believe that a cap is an effective tool to make a league better, but realistically the question is a moot point. I don't think Bud Selig would ever allow it because I truly believe he only cares about big markets playing in the WS. Obviously, it doesn't always work out, but by having the disparity as presently constructed he has a much better chance of having a big market final which = bigger profits and ratings. I don't think capatalism has any thing to do with a cap, the NFL has one and the owners print money. It is a more popular league but having a cap hasn't cost owners a dime. How at this point do you tell the Yankees or any big market they have to cut payroll. The Union is too strong and Selig does not have the conviction or the support to do it. Owners of small marketshave an easy out right now, they can buy a franchise and cry poor thus avoiding raising the payroll which again = more profits. Carl Pohlad was one of the richest men in America but ran the Twins on the cheap, why, becaus ehe could. A cap forces teams to spend money which in the current system they have no obligation to and usually don't if they are a small market team. I don't see it ever happening though, the geanie is out of the bottle and he ain't going back

From what I've heard, the only thing that's being considered for the next collective bargaining agreement is a "level" type structure. In other words, each team would get a certain number of slots where they could pay any amount and then at certain levels after that. These figures are just my own examples, but it would work something like this: 5 spots- no limit; 5 spots $15-20 million; 10 spots $10 - 15 million; 10 spots; $5 -10 million, and so on...i doubt the union will ever go for it...plus ownership will need to try to get HGH testing agreed to and that gives the players even more leverage..

I think baseball could benefit from a salary cap, but we may have already reached a point where it's too late. Unfortunately, the discrepency between the haves and have nots has become too big and the individual contracts are way too big to even think about it.

How bout a super duper cement and rebar reinforced cap-floor that requires all teams to spend the exact same amount every year, this would force owners to draft and trade more efficently....boof you're a great poster, but owners only want a cap so they can pocket more money, and it will do nothing to stop the yanks, just see the WS going back to the early twenties, yanks would have so much money left over if a cap was in place that no other team in baseball would have a scout worth spit because the yanks would just buy them all up like they did for the 50 years prior to FA, then what do we do? cap the number of scouts? they'll just give different job titles, then what, cap the number of employees they can have? they'll just open up 'front businesses', then what? cap the number of businesses an owner can have? they'll just put them in family member names....btw, what number would you set for a cap and who would come off the mets in order to get to that number?

Doe Ray Me ...............RULES

I never thought of that Raz, that is a good point but even if they sign 1000 scouts they can only sign a certain amount of players under a cap. They can't sign every player so what ggod would an army of scouts do?

Major league baseball is still very sucessfull except in some cities where it just doesn't belong. I don't think a cap would change that or make the sport more popular.

That said, I think a cap would prevent the Yankees from buying a world series once a decade which appeals to my sense of fairness. On the other hand, the David and Goliath matchups agains the Yankees or any other highly paid super star packed teams can be pretty interesting. In other words parity can result in a lot of mediocrity.

They only have to sign the best players, like they did in the past.... the rest will have to go through the system, and they can actually pay a minor league player anything they want as he does not hurt the cap....they didn't get all the best players under the old system, just the most

I agree about Selig, he just doesn't have the vision to see the long term with this league. Vision is what David Stern had to develop the NBA in the 80's and 90's, although the NBA is unwatchable at this point because of a horrid cap they have. Selig is a puppet and does what the owners want. Anyone who thinks the winner of the ASG gets home field is a good idea is a buffoon in my eyes.

Baseball is different from football. In football, everybody watches the post season no matter who is in it. In baseball, the ratings are generated by the large market teams. Because of the TV contracts that earn significant revenue for each team, the teams like Pittsburgh actually make more money by having the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers and Mets make the playoffs rather than the weaker teams. Look at the ratings increase this year now that the Yankees are back in it. Salary caps would allow teams like Pittsburgh and Kansas City to make the World Series more often and therby reduce the television ratings so low that the TV contracts would kill the small market teams that need that revenue. The only way around this is to increase the luxury tax and to add one more wild card for each league in the playoffs and give the teams with the best records a bye to increase their chances of making the World Series.

You are right, but it is sad when the league only cares about the big teams and literally has disdain for any small market team who gets to the WS. All you heard last year was how bad the WS was cause no one was watching, they made the Rays feel like 2nd class citizens. Baseball conveniantly left out how they though it would be a good idea to start a game at 10 becaus of rain and how they started a game that never should have been in game 5, they are idiots. Selig honestly hopes the Pirates or Royals never get good because in his eyes it is bad for baseball, which is may be, but it only shows how broken the system is. When ARod makes as much as the Padres roster, there is something wrong. I don't blame any team that spends though because they can and should under current system

to answer your question, abso-freaking-lutely! Even though I'm a die-hard Mets fan, and it would probably hurt the Mets, baseball is in dire need of a cap. How is it fair that the highest team in baseball has a salary structure more the $30 million more then the second top salaried team? Not to mention how some teams can afford to pay MINOR LEAGUE players multi-million dollar contracts when they haven't proven a thing, while other teams can't afford to do this. If the kid that WAS signed turns out to be a bust, they will be screwed for yrs. However, if the Yanks signed him, and he was garbage, they would just write it off and move on.

You know something is wrong in baseball when one team is able to sign the top 2 free agent pitchers and its top hitter in the same off-season, while every other team is signing players on the cheap because of the economy.

While you can't fault the Yankees for playing by the current rules, it isn't fair that Toronto will have to trade Roy Halladay, and Minnesota had to trade Johan because they know that they can't give 1 player over $20 million a yr.

You are absolutely correct here Stem.

As long as the great Nation of America is based on the premise that those that make more money are deemed "more successful", no group in their right minds will do anything that could jeopardize a way to make as much money as possible.

Would any kind of cap make the game more competitive and enjoyable for all? Yes

Will it happen as long as we operate in a society based on Capitalism? no