The Rockies are still in the race and if we could just trust that the Monfort's would ante up to assure that this team stays together we might actually get excited about it.
Posted by Drew Litton at 6:00 AM
| Comments (7)
September 21, 2007
tom townsend writes:
If the Monfort's could trust the fans would stand behind the team, they might actually surprise us. Up till now, Rockies "fans" have been less than loyal. Let's ante up and REALLY support our team.
A picture is worth a 1,000 words here Drew. Fantastic.
The chicken or the egg theory. Will fan loyalty bring about a change in the way the owners pay players? or Will the way the owners pay players change fans loyalty?
I'll take the latter. The Monforts have been quite comfortable putting out a medicore ballclub (I believe they have finshed 4th or 5th in the West for the past 10 yrs) while the Rockies fan base has held pretty strong.
In Florida, where the Marlins have won 2 World Series in the past decade, they had about 400 people in the stands on Sept 12 for a scheduled home game. That's a lack of fan loyalty.
For the product on the field, the Rockies draw extremely well. Spend the $$ and show us that this team will be playing meaningful games in September for a number of years to come.
September 22, 2007
The Rockies make money hand over fist as it is.
According to Forbes.com special report on the business of baseball (baseball is a business like anything else and financial analysts are able to predict corporate earnings accurate to a penny a share):
The Rockies only had $1million less in total revenue than the 2006 Tigers team that played in the World Series and had playoff revenue.
The Chicago White Sox team that won the world series in 2005 had lower overall revenues than the 2005 Rockies, even considering playoff income.
The St. Louis Cardinals who lost to the Red Sox in the World Series in 2004 only had $7 million dollars in higher revenues than the Rockies in 2004.
Major League Baseball teams on average spend 48.9% of all revenue dollars on player payroll. The Colorado Rockies spend only 28.1% of revenue dollars on player payroll.
So don't be too frustrated Rockies fans. It could actually be a lot worse. Its not that our team can't compete due to real financial constraints like franchises in KC, Minnesota, or Oakland. Its just that ownership chooses to pocket their revenue millions at a disproportionate rate than other MLB owners.
So the next time Charlie Monfort talks about how playing in a "small market" prevents the Rockies from retaining their players, remember that our beloved franchise actually has the resources to compete. They just choose not to. Obviously the Monforts have better places to deposit club generated revenue than in fielding a MLB quality ballclub.
I would be very interrested in reading where you got that information. I don't seem to have any luck finding it.
I have been hearing the debate on this for quite some time now, but this is the first I have heard that the Rockies spend only about 28% of the revenue on players.
September 23, 2007
Divide the Rockies Player Payroll by the revenues as disclosed in the Forbes annual business of baseball study.
Interestingly, while the Yankees seemingly have more money than any team in baseball, they are at the opposite end of the spectrum as well. Annually spending more than 80% of every revenue dollar directly on player payroll.
There is a huge discrepancy in MLB in terms of the revenenue HAVES and HAVE-NOTS, but the discrepancy in terms of what teams are spending what they do have is even more glaring.
September 24, 2007
They may be frugal when it comes to player payroll, but they haven't neccessarily been pocketing revenues. They're putting huge stock into the farm system, as evidenced by the team they have out on the field now. The majority of their team comes from the farm system, which is the way it should be. Now whether they'll pay those players when contracts come due is another thing. In the ColoradoBiz magazine interview the Monforts said they'll pay the money, but they won't do 7-8 year contracts anymore. They don't want to go past 3-4 years on a contract.
Browse the archives:
Select a month