MLB Revenue Sharing
Houstonians are familiar with Drayton McLane's regular whine that his Houston Astros need revenue enhancement just to be able to compete with the major-market teams in Major League Baseball. We almost faced a strike, in part, because owners like McLane and Kansas City's David Glass and San Diego's John Moores insisted that greater revenue sharing (especially of the sort that penalizes the New York Yankees, baseball's most successful franchise) was necessary to the survival of baseball.
Given that background, it would probably come as a shock to most Houstonians to know that under the current system, the Astros have actually been paying into the pot (to the tune of about $4.7 million), and under the new system, the Astros will still be paying into the pot (to the tune of about $3.2 million). In reality, the Astros are in the bottom half of the "haves" in the league. Drayton McLane isn't being entirely honest when he lumps the Astros in with small-market clubs and goes to the "woe is me, how will we ever compete" act. But then, I've never thought honesty was characteristic of McLane.
The teams who benefit the most under the new plan versus the old? The perenially mismanaged Milwaukee Brewers and Pittsburgh Pirates. Nothing like rewarding terrible management, eh?
And THIS is supposed to fix Major League Baseball?
[Posted at 08:39 CST on 09/07/02] [Link]
