The Pittsburgh Pirates haven't had a winning season in almost 20 years. In that same span of time, the Pittsburgh Steelers have had winning seasons in all but three of those years and won two Super Bowls. So the question is why the drastic difference in success from teams that reside in the same town with the same rabid fan base? Some could attribute it to management, coaching or work ethic and I'm sure all this plays a part in the equation but when it gets down to brass tacks, there is a far more influential situation that moves these teams in different directions.
The NFL and MLB operate on two very different economic models which impact small market teams much more often than large market teams. In the grand scheme of sports, Pittsburgh definitely falls into the small market bucket. The NFL can be considered the "Socialism Model" (or as Tea Partiers across the land refer to it: "Fascism" - you figure out how they came to that conclusion and you be sure to send me an email and explain it), while the MLB more closely resembles the "Capitalist Model."
Major League Baseball operates on luxury tax model. Teams can spend as much money as they want on any players they want and if they go over the luxury tax threshold, they must kick in to a general fund that is distributed to all the teams. They don’t even kick in the full amount they go over the limit, in most cases it’s less than 25%. The problem is that this threshold so obscene, that small market teams like the Pirates will never be capable of reaching it. As of 2010, only the New York Yankees exceeded the limit. The disparity is so great that the most economically challenged team, Pittsburgh, had a payroll of only 16% of the highest, The Yankees. So what you have is a top-heavy league where the teams in large markets and lucrative media contracts always available able to buy the best players and put together the best teams. Have you ever wondered why you always see teams like The Yankees, Red Sox and Phillies in the playoffs? It's because they can afford to buy their way in there. Other teams like the Royals, Pirates and Indians are left to languish because the capital to build winners is just not there.
The NFL operates on a salary cap. What that means is that teams have a specified amount of money they can spend on players, there’s a cap and a floor, and you must fall within that area. The limits are reachable by any team easily and often the pain comes when teams are trying to stay under the cap, not above the floor. What this does is give every team in the league an equal opportunity to succeed and many of these small market teams do just that. Succeed. The playing field is level. To illustrate, the team with the lowest payroll in 2010, The Tampa Bay Buccaneers spent 54% of what the highest payrolled team spent, The Washington Redskins. And of the top 5 spenders, three were small market teams, New Orleans, Minnesota and Seattle.
In the last five years the NFL has produced championship teams from four small market teams (Green Bay, New Orleans, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis) and one large market team (New York Giants) while the MLB has produced champions from four large market teams (San Francisco, New York Yankees, Philadelphia and Boston) and one small market team (St. Louis). It's no surprise that the NFL enjoys far more popularity and commands the highest prices for advertising. It's anyone's game in the NFL whereas in MLB the spoils always seem to go with the teams with the deepest pockets.
So how can we apply sports to politics?
Since the Supreme Court ruled that corporations and business entities can contribute unlimited amounts of cash into political campaigns and these entities generally tend to donate to Republican candidates, we are seeing a shift in America from the NFL to MLB. In other words, if you got the money, you get elected. What this does is further tilt democracy away from the masses in into the hands of a select few, ultra-wealthy donors. The spoils of political powers now always seem to go to those with the deepest pockets. What this does, in turn, is tilt the economics of America further towards those with the money to buy elections rather than the masses who cannot. Sure we can say that there are far more "ordinary Americans" (and I hate that term, it sounds demeaning to the middle class) so we should have the most money to contribute. There is some truth to that but it's much easier to get a million dollars from one person than it is to organize 100,000 people to give $10. And all the while these "ordinary Americans" are being bombarded with rich campaigns chanting half-truths and sometimes flat-out lies. The money keeps flowing in and the revisionist history keeps flowing out.
As more and more ultra-conservatives are being elected, more and more is being taken away from schools and colleges and given to the ultra-wealthy. As this happens, the dumbing down of America soldiers on. A less educated population is much more easily swayed by a constant barrage of right-wing political advertisements preaching impeding doom for all things "socialized" and in turn you have more an more people voting out of fear and misunderstanding and in many cases based on deliberate misrepresentations.
History shows us that Republicans have always had a cash advantage when it came to political campaigns. Let's be honest, more rich people vote Republican because they are there to serve their needs. But Democrats always campaigned on leveling the playing field. And it worked. Since FDR changed America for the better, we all saw how well it worked. But these days, with the political donations moving from an NFL model to an MLB model, the voice of the "ordinary American" is slowly being drowned out as we are choked with the endless supply of money from the conservative right. In turn, we are losing our Democracy and ceding power to the Plutocracy. And as much as conservative, Republicans and Tea Partiers love to claim that they are on the side of our Founding Fathers, I am certain our Founding Fathers would be sick to see how much of our democracy has been sold to the highest bidder.
No comments:
Post a Comment