Cnasty wrote:I am perfectly fine with the high demands and they are realistic. Our budget and ability to keep up with them as fast as they changed in '19 is not.
But should we be able to keep up with them? We all know we have signed superstars and all-stars and even high level starters on super cheap team friendly deals that are not very realistic. I think this will be good as it will be much harder or nearly impossible to form these super teams or at least keep them more than a season or two. To use myself as an example I locked up Ramon Tavares and T-Mart who were both all-stars in early 20s for 9 mil a year and it allowed me to do so much with the space it gave me. If these sweetheart deals are not so common we will have to really think about who we build around and how, like what is happening with Manny Machado now and happens every year with teams.
I think the budgets are just fine, of course some weird things happen and no system is perfect. We just have to change the way we build and expectations we have as to how easy we can keep a core like that together.
Cnasty wrote:Boston's budget should be well over $200million based on our recent success and ability to draw attendance and should be pushing ticket prices into higher amounts as well.
And here we sit with a $164mil budget
I am perfectly fine with the high demands and they are realistic. Our budget and ability to keep up with them as fast as they changed in '19 is not.
But aren't we calculating budgets manually but more like we did previously?
So it's not really the budget, per se, but it's more the revenue streams for Boston that are questionable, and your budget for this season was based on last season's revenus, and that was on '18, so not sure it was a '19 issue?
Yes we should be able to keep some and be in the range to even negotiate with them.
Explain how a team winning 5 titles in the last 7 years has a budget of $164million, media revenue outside the top 10, and teams like Rhode Island and Steel City above us in some financial categories??
I am only using myself as an example as I dont know the specifics of the other teams and such but the budgets need tweaking just like '19 tweaked their financials.
If not, we wait and see how the financials play out in our first free agent crop as it will be loaded this offseason.
Cnasty wrote:Explain how a team winning 5 titles in the last 7 years has a budget of $164million, media revenue outside the top 10, and teams like Rhode Island and Steel City above us in some financial categories??
I am no expert in those different types of revenue and we would need to ask someone like Reign about all of that. These things were in place long before I took over or even joined the league but these weird issues did not start with 19. I have asked about stuff like that since I joined the league because I always pay attention to it and there are things that have no real rhyme or reason to it.
It is not helping myself either. I have made playoffs 12 of last 13 seasons, won the division 11 out of those 12 seasons and have been over .500 14 out of 15 seasons and I still have an average market size and never rank in the top 10 in media revenue.
Not blaming you at all or even complaining but there are settings tied to player asking, how much money is in the league, and what demands are driven at.
Hopefully the guys sitting on a ton of cash become big time players in FA and we see some of the movement of talent across the league.
That is another thing, when I do rollover I have to see everyones finances. I am always shocked at the amount of bad teams or even middle of the road teams that are sitting on 50 million cash and 80 million for free agents. If they signed 1 or 2 top guys they would be division contenders or better. I do not know if its due to lack of interest or just not paying attention to FA but teams sitting on all that money probably does not help our finances out much.
wdoupis wrote:That is another thing, when I do rollover I have to see everyones finances. I am always shocked at the amount of bad teams or even middle of the road teams that are sitting on 50 million cash and 80 million for free agents. If they signed 1 or 2 top guys they would be division contenders or better. I do not know if its due to lack of interest or just not paying attention to FA but teams sitting on all that money probably does not help our finances out much.
We proposed a rule in the past to make them spend it if you will but it never got much off the ground.
Guys shouldn't be sitting on that for any reason other than lack of interest or caring.
wdoupis wrote:
It is not helping myself either. I have made playoffs 12 of last 13 seasons, won the division 11 out of those 12 seasons and have been over .500 14 out of 15 seasons and I still have an average market size and never rank in the top 10 in media revenue.
I've been complaining about that forever. Granted, the last few seasons haven't been great for Cookeville, but prior to that we were one of the top teams year in and year out including winning a title. I'm below average on market size...
We also changed scouting and play dev. baselines which should help. right now if you do averages you get about 20 mil dedicated to player dev, scouting and coaches. Another 5 to the draft, so $25 mil to everything but players.
The average budget in our league is 136 million. So the game is expecting us to spend 110 million on players.
We spend 90.
So until guys spend more money, the game is going to up demands b/c we aren't hitting where we are supposed to hit.
wdoupis wrote:That is another thing, when I do rollover I have to see everyones finances. I am always shocked at the amount of bad teams or even middle of the road teams that are sitting on 50 million cash and 80 million for free agents. If they signed 1 or 2 top guys they would be division contenders or better. I do not know if its due to lack of interest or just not paying attention to FA but teams sitting on all that money probably does not help our finances out much.
We proposed a rule in the past to make them spend it if you will but it never got much off the ground.
Guys shouldn't be sitting on that for any reason other than lack of interest or caring.
But then the same teams complain when we say something about getting a new owner for that team....
Cnasty wrote:Yes we should be able to keep some and be in the range to even negotiate with them.
Explain how a team winning 5 titles in the last 7 years has a budget of $164million, media revenue outside the top 10, and teams like Rhode Island and Steel City above us in some financial categories??
I am only using myself as an example as I dont know the specifics of the other teams and such but the budgets need tweaking just like '19 tweaked their financials.
If not, we wait and see how the financials play out in our first free agent crop as it will be loaded this offseason.
I mentioned a fix on media revenue that I will be posting during winter meetings
We can try to brainstorm different fixes but I would not post a winter meeting with just one specific solution. I do not completely remember yours but from what I remember it started at 50million for winner and trickled down a million per the standings. I would be against that as something like that is not dictated by one season or a flash in the pan team. Sustained success has to be rewarded so a solution based on that is the way to go
