Yankees respond to Mark A comments... a feud brewing?

[brewmann04]

http://myespn.go.com/s/co...tions/show/story/5060292

[Invader3K]

The comments from Levine seem really immature and overly vindictive. I guess they reflect the typical New York arrogance.

 

I don't know if Attanasio should necessarily have told USA Today that they are "struggling to re-sign Fielder", though, as it could send a negative message to the fanbase.

[MessiahRp]

Does anyone have a number as to how much the Brewers have received via revenue sharing and how that has figured into the team's finances over the past few years?

 

Obviously I think teams like KC, Pittsburgh, Cincy and the Twins have probably taken more of that money and sat on it considering the Brewers payroll the past few years but I'm curious as to exactly how much Milwaukee has received. I know we don't like to spend or take chances (except on way overpriced sure to fail signings like Suppan was a few years back) and I know our media market is smaller than most but you'd think with the boosts in attendance and merchandise sales and such we could afford at least one big contract.

 

The Packers are in a much smaller market and they make it work for them... and even though the Packers are sacrosanct here in this state I can't imagine a competitive Brewers team wouldn't draw a similarly loyal fanbase to make it work for them.

 

Rp

[TooLiveBrew]

The Yankees & many of their fans in particular seem very thin-skinned about the revenue comments. I agree that it's immature stuff. However, for some organizations (Marlins for one), the beef about revenue sharing money is legit. It's not relevant with regards to the Brewers under Mark A., however.

[Invader3K]

The revenue sharing stuff is one of those things we never get a clear cut answer on, because it's not as if MLB is just going to open up their books and let everyone see where all their money is coming from.

 

I do remember that the Brewers were praised by the union and others this off-season for actually spending all or most of their money on fielding a competitive team, whereas the Marlins and a few other franchises were called out for not doing so.

[And That]

Levine's points would be more valid if the Brewers were suddenly able to negotiate a TV contract that would give the Brewers 1/3 of the revenue that the Yankees get from YES.

 

The Yankees do have unfair advantages, though I also don't think it behooves Attanasio to keep playing this out in public as much as he does. It's not going to change anything, and it does sound a little whiny.

[Invader3K]

Just reading some of the arrogant, self-entitled comments from the Yankees fans on that ESPN article makes my blood boil. They have it on easy street and are completely aware of it, but somehow feel like that still gives them some semblance of perspective on the issue. They make me sick.

[logan82]

We only get around $30M in revenue sharing a year.

 

I am not a fan of a salary cap in baseball but I feel with just revenue sharing teams like the Yankees who own their own TV network would just negotiate a smaller TV contract and put the money into their owners pocket and then into the team circumventing revenue sharing.

[Patrick425]

The Packers are in a much smaller market and they make it work for them... and even though the Packers are sacrosanct here in this state I can't imagine a competitive Brewers team wouldn't draw a similarly loyal fanbase to make it work for them.

Yes, however, the NFL only has a national TV contract and no seperate TV deals for individual teams. Also, I believe the NFL does a lot more revenue sharing than MLB.

 

[Invader3K]

Yes, however, the NFL only has a national TV contract and no seperate TV deals for individual teams. Also, I believe the NFL does a lot more revenue sharing than MLB.

Correct. There is not correlation to the business models the Packers and Brewers operate under whatsoever.

[sheethead]

The Yankees & many of their fans in particular seem very thin-skinned about the revenue comments.

 

This is true, and I think it stems from them knowing the rest of the nation thinks the Yankees just buy their championships, rather than actually earning them.

 

I have not read the comments from Mark A, but it does sound like he is whining a bit with the way the ESPN article was written. I wonder how Levine's attitude would be if he were in a similar position with the Athletics or the Padres. His team is one of 5 or 6 like it, not the other way around.

[topper09er]

The most annoying point that the Yankee fans always make is that they deserve the extra money because they have the best fans and the best owner, but no matter how many times you try to explain it to them they will never accept the fact that they dont have better fans they just have more fans. Just because you were born on an island where 20 million people live does mean you like baseball more than I do, plus in addition to that they have a national TV network (ESPN) that promotes their team to kids across the country who do not live in a major league city so they get even more fans that way as well.

[Invader3K]

This is all Attanasio said in USA Today: "We're struggling to sign (first baseman Prince Fielder)," Milwaukee Brewers owner Mark Attanasio said, "and the Yankees infield is making more than our team."

 

While it maybe wasn't the best way to phrase his statement, I still think Levine was way out of line with his comments.

[And That]

The word struggle has two very different connotations, and I think Attanasio meant to use the word in the more positive way. As in, "the Brewers are in a struggle for first place" - not "the Brewers are struggling, and in last place." But yeah, not very well phrased.

[Invader3K]

Levine's comments were just plain disingenuous. He knows damn well that the pittance of money the Yankees are giving the Brewers on an annual basis won't make a hill of beans in allowing them to field a payroll anywhere close to his team's. It's actually fairly disgusting that the president of a major and historic sports franchise would make such idiotic and combative statements.

[brewmann04]

I totally agree with most living here in the Bronx makes baseball season hard but think Attananasio should keep some things to himself.

[RyDogg66]

Since all baseball teams are dependent on one another and in general dependent on the structure of Major League Baseball, I think the teams should have to put all of their television revenue into one pot and then divide it equally. The Yankees could not sell their television rights to YES without the likes of the Royals, A's, Rays, Twins, Blue Jays, etc. In fact, all 162 of the games they play and televise can only be played and shown with the cooperation of the other team and structure of Major League Baseball. That should solve the revenue problems.

[Invader3K]

Maybe, but if he keeps quiet, there's no chance for any effective change either.

[endaround]

This isn't the first time Attanasio has said something specifically about the Yankees

[Invader3K]

No, and I hope it's not the last either. Keep calling them out, and they can keep digging a deeper hole for themselves with their transparently arrogant and selfish comments.

[Funketown]

Levine's just preaching to the choir in New York. They love this kind of crap over there and I'm sure at least a few of the Yankees fans who actually pay enough attention to see this have found a new favorite executive.

[JohnBriggs12]

What Attanasio should have said is "look, I can offer Prince an outstanding contract, thanks in part to the limited amount we receive from revenue sharing but primarily due to an outstanding fan base we have in Milwaukee. But the system allows his agent when the time comes to take our outstanding offer and shop it to a team that has virtually no budget and that can top whatever offer we make, no matter how good it is."

 

Why don't the Yankees ever lose a player to free agency? Simple, the agents know that nobody else has the ability to top the offer they make so it's pointless to even shop a Yankee to other teams.

 

The Yankee fans don't understand that the system diminishes their teams accomplishments. It's like a high school with an enrollment of 2,000 playing in a football conference where all the other schools have under 500 students. Sure they may run up a lot of championships but aren't those basically meaningless due to the built in advantages they have?

[And That]

In order to effect change, Attanasio can't just say "this is what's wrong." He needs to say "this is what's wrong, and here are my ideas about how to fix it." He needs to mention specifics, like TV revenue sharing, if he actually wants to start leveling the playing field. He needs to get a conversation going, not a snark-fest.

[zzzmanwitz]

Levine's comments were just plain disingenuous. He knows damn well that the pittance of money the Yankees are giving the Brewers on an annual basis won't make a hill of beans in allowing them to field a payroll anywhere close to his team's. It's actually fairly disgusting that the president of a major and historic sports franchise would make such idiotic and combative statements.

This is what bothers me the most. Not that he is taking a shot back to defend his team and their policies, but that he words it in a way to make it sound like the Brewers themselves get Millions of dollars to spend on players. It makes the Brewers front office look very bad.

[monty57]

That's an interesting thought, RyDogg. When two teams play, the visiting team gets some of the gate, so it's not unfathomable to believe that TV revenue should be shared as well. Splitting the TV revenue between the teams playing would be a shorter leap than splitting all teams' TV revenue equally amongst all other teams. Teams like the Yankees would still get more TV revenue than others, but the difference would be cut substantially. It would also allow the teams competing most directly with the Yankees and Red Sox (Rays, Jays, Orioles) to receive more of the benefit than teams in other divisions.

 

Let's say the Yankees have a $162MM deal, or $1MM/game, while the Rays have a $16.2MM deal, or $100k/game. When they play, the revenue could be split, so that each team gets $550k. After all, the Yankees couldn't play the game without the Rays there, so why are they paid much more (as a team) to play the game?

 

It's not likely to happen, but fun to think about.

 

Regarding Levine's comments, it would be nice if ESPN would correct him on the fact that Milwaukee does indeed put their revenue sharing money back into the team, and can still only field a salary that's 40% of the Yankees. But then, I never expect the media to take their personal opinions out of the picture.