GatewayRedbirds.com

So in the Cards case, playoff runs caused the payroll to jump the next year, but the Brewers decided to wait a year before cashing in on that revenue?

I usually root for the team that beats you - thinking that it helps justify being beat. I can't say that I'll be rooting for the Reds to win the WS (unless they're playing the Yanks), but I hope they would put in a good showing. No getting swept in the LDS.

Definitely rooting for the Twins and Rangers from the AL. I'd like to see the Braves send Bobby Cox out a winner.

Gashouse wrote:I usually root for the team that beats you - thinking that it helps justify being beat.

NFL even NBA a bit, I see this.

But does anyone think LAD were actually a better team last year? The playoffs in baseball are such a crap-shoot I don't think the end result really says much about either team. The Reds could get swept in the first round by the Astros, you never know.

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:So in the Cards case, playoff runs caused the payroll to jump the next year, but the Brewers decided to wait a year before cashing in on that revenue?

I have no idea. Read this again as it is the crux of my point:

Given the choice between your rival getting millions of extra revenue pumped into their system because of postseason success and your rival not getting millions pumped into their system because they bow out early (or don't make it), I'll always opt for option 2.

The Reds will make about $1.5-$1.9 million for every home playoff game (link). I don't know about road games, but they'll make some cash there too. If you win the WS, you're going to play at least 6 home games (with a max at 10 games). That's an extra $6-$19 million that they'll earn + the money from road games.

That also doesn't factor in the increase in ticket sales in the regular season that successful teams experience. Right now the Reds are drawing 6000 more fans per game than last year. That number is only going to continue increasing over the next month. That's more revenue than they would be receiving if they were losing -- probably in the neighborhood of 20 million (avg. ticket price os around $40 * 6000 more fans * 81 home games).

All in all, for a team like the Reds who were accustomed to losing, they could earn as much as $40 million in extra revenue just this season. Sustain that for a couple years and it's not hard to imagine the Reds payroll looking more like the Cards...

And that wouldn't possibly be bad for the Cards? Or the Cubs for that matter? The weaker the teams in our division are the better for us.

vinsanity wrote:

Radbird wrote:

ghostrunner wrote:rooting for the Midwest, the NL and a good baseball city. I'll just have to hold my nose about Phillips and Cueto getting rings. I'd like to see Rolen and Edmonds get another.

I agree with this. If the Rockies make it, I'd root for them as the local team. In the AL, I'll probably root for the Twins, which is a lot easier now that they play in an actual ballpark.

So if the Cubs or Brewers or Stros made the series you'd pull for them?

You guys are [expletive] nuts.

Well, I'd draw the line at the Cubs, but I've lived in both Milwaukee and Houston, so pulling for the Brewers or Astros would not bother me.

But you're not the first to call me [expletive] nuts.

Fat Strat wrote:

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:So in the Cards case, playoff runs caused the payroll to jump the next year, but the Brewers decided to wait a year before cashing in on that revenue?

I have no idea. Read this again as it is the crux of my point:

Given the choice between your rival getting millions of extra revenue pumped into their system because of postseason success and your rival not getting millions pumped into their system because they bow out early (or don't make it), I'll always opt for option 2.

The Reds will make about $1.5-$1.9 million for every home playoff game (link). I don't know about road games, but they'll make some cash there too. If you win the WS, you're going to play at least 6 home games (with a max at 10 games). That's an extra $6-$19 million that they'll earn + the money from road games.

That also doesn't factor in the increase in ticket sales in the regular season that successful teams experience. Right now the Reds are drawing 6000 more fans per game than last year. That number is only going to continue increasing over the next month. That's more revenue than they would be receiving if they were losing -- probably in the neighborhood of 20 million (avg. ticket price os around $40 * 6000 more fans * 81 home games).

All in all, for a team like the Reds who were accustomed to losing, they could earn as much as $40 million in extra revenue just this season. Sustain that for a couple years and it's not hard to imagine the Reds payroll looking more like the Cards...

And that wouldn't possibly be bad for the Cards? Or the Cubs for that matter? The weaker the teams in our division are the better for us.

Yes, obviously it's better for the Reds or Brewers or Astros or Pirates to not get additional millions of dollars. The rub is that you're way overstating 1) the immediate impact that revenue has and 2)the extreme difficulty in "sustaining that for a couple years".

Before BP's comments and the little broo-ha-ha at GABP a few weeks back I would have had no trouble pulling for the Reds. Except for the Cubs (and the Stros w/ Clemens), I'll pull for any NLC team if the Cards are out. Now, I'm not sure. We'll see how the rest of the season goes (especially this weekend) but right now I'd probably still pull for them.
That being said, it's shaping up to be a postseason in which I like most of the teams involved. Apart from the Yanks I can't think of another team I'd hate to see win it. Maybe the Twins, but this isn't the same group that stole our rings in '87. Other than that I would be happy for most fanbases involved. Or in the case of Philly, at least that's a fun team to watch.

I'll watch without rooting for anyone.

The rub is that you're way overstating 1) the immediate impact that revenue has and 2)the extreme difficulty in "sustaining that for a couple years".

Go back and look at my posts. Have I said anything about "the immediate impact that revenue has" or implied that it was easy to "sustain that for a couple years?"

Some of my "way overstated" statements:

The Reds finding postseason success could be dangerous for us. Postseason revenue can pump a lot of money into an organization and that would be bad for the Cards. We really needed that windfall this season, but instead, our chief rival is going to get it.

Given the choice between your rival getting millions of extra revenue pumped into their system because of postseason success and your rival not getting millions pumped into their system because they bow out early (or don't make it), I'll always opt for option 2.

All in all, for a team like the Reds who were accustomed to losing, they could earn as much as $40 million in extra revenue just this season. Sustain that for a couple years and it's not hard to imagine the Reds payroll looking more like the Cards...

The weaker the teams in our division are the better for us.

And my personal favorite:

I have no idea.

I'm very clearly suggesting that the Reds are going to raise payroll by $40 million next week. They're going to dominate the NL Central for the next 300 years. And it's going to be so easy that it's virtually guaranteed to happen.

EL OH EFFIN EL, Fat. That's some ownage.