Scholarship table
The big market teams with the resources to spend have had it better than the small market teams since free agency. On an ongoing, year after year review of consistently being good. The Padres making it once, or the Marlins winning it all doesn’t erase the big market teams securing the talent more often than not.Attendance is also subject to population growth. The US population has grown every single year, but despite that this year it is down lowest in 15 years, and in 5 of the previous 6 years attendance has declined.
Not unique to baseball
Referring to the players who move up to a better school - isn't that a good thing? Meant rhetorically, of course, as I agree totally with your post. Isn't bettering (or at least trying to better) one's lot in life the reason to attend college in the first place?
Try, but some leagues have grown attendance. NBA four straight years as an example.
But that raises an important evaluation on this. If you look at the complete list of players that left as grad transfers to parity schools or higher profile, I think that is a majority of players on the list. Others are viewing it as those that left for parity or lower profile, which would also be a majority.
But in the end, the school that recruited him, trained him, fed him, coached him, educated him still loses him. Whether they leave for a parity situation or not, that original school is out. Commitment broken.
TAMUI do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.
Yes, but every action has a corresponding reaction. When coaches leave they have to pay a contractual penalty, if players leave should they have some culpability? If the players weren’t receiving all these benefits which have tremendous value, I could see leaving whenever, but that isn’t the case. Middle ground needed
Attendance and television viewership is down almost across the board for sports. For many reasons. To argue that free agency, which has been around for 40+ years, is the cause of MLB 's lower numbers is absurd. But somehow comfortable and expected from that source.
Some fans would disagree with you if you live in a small market and are a fan of a small market team. But your opinion is respected.
NBA is up. Others downI’m not saying attendance is down because of free agency, but responding to other person that made claim attendance is strong because of free agency. Isn’t necessarily the case. My conversation is about competitive balance. The big get stronger, the smaller have to be more creative and that historically the last rip years means less consistent winning.
Largest group is the group the transfers down. Followed by the group that transfers laterally. Smallest group is the ones that transfer up. You might be right that the smallest group + the middle group is larger than the largest group but really this is all goalpost shifting from your original claim that mid majors are being decimated en masse by grad transfers.There is no commitment broken. Vast, vast, vast majority of division 1 players are on 1 year scholarships. They made a commitment to play for 1 year. Unless they are transferring midseason these players are choosing to leave after their commitment is up, and midseason transfers are penalized more than any other kind of transfer. Now if you want to make an argument that a player with a multi-year scholarship should be penalized, I would be willing to hear that argument. You also only focus on how a school is harmed by grad transfers. What about how they are benefited by them? Marquette has certainly benefited from them in the past few years. Mid and low majors also get to replenish their rosters with grad transfers. For every grad transfer that commits to a high major school, there are three that commit to a mid or low major.
Some are harmed and some benefit, I agree. It feels to me that most here are only claiming benefit from player perspective and not the looking at the harm side. My response has been to look at that side, but you are correct it is both. I thought all major conferences, the P5 and the Big East and AAC have guaranteed scholarships multiyear since a few years ago. Is that not the case?
Are the power 6 the majority of Division 1? Also wasnt your concern for mid and low majors?
No they are not the majority, and my concern is for all including mid and low majors. I gave the example of Dwade leaving or being wooed while at MU, he played for a school that is not mid or low major.And though they are not the majority of all schools, they do makeup probably 90% or more of the players that are supposedly somehow exploited to hear some describe the situation when it comes to paying players.Based on your comments earlier, are you supportive then of players at P5 schools or any school that provides guaranteed scholarships a payback to the school if they leave since a coach has to do that? Why should the school be on the hook for all expenses, especially in developing these kids and not be made partially whole in some fashion? We will leave the schools that don’t guarantee scholarships to the side for the moment.
Yes, but every action has a corresponding reaction. When coaches leave they have to pay a contractual penalty, if players leave should they have some culpability?
I’m not saying attendance is down because of free agency, but responding to other person that made claim attendance is strong because of free agency. Isn’t necessarily the case.
In the 47 years prior to free agency the NY Yankees (largest market, richest team) played in 30 world series and won 23 of them. In the 47 years since free agency became a reality the same NY Yankee franchise has played in 11 world series and won 7.Fans who don't think free agency has helped the competitive balance are certainly allowed to stubbornly clings to that uninformed opinion but the facts don't back it up.
Are you seriously suggesting that population growth is the reason for the increase in per game attendance?No one is suggesting that MLB is perfectly level. It isn't. But to say it is at the detriment of baseball is a statement that shows an ignorance of history.
In 1960, Chicago had a population of 3.5 million; the Cubs' home attendance was 809,770.In 1980, Chicago had a population of 3 million; the Cubs drew 1,206,776 fans to home games.In 2000, Chicago had a population of 2.9 million; the Cubs drew 2,789,511.In 2017, Chicago had a population of 2.7 million; the Cubs drew 3,199,562.
More than half of the Yankees World Titles happened when there were only 8 teams in the American League, making it statically easier to get to the championship than it is now. As I have said free agency has been great for some teams, especially bigger markets, or well financed ones. It has also hurt teams that did well before free agency and now have difficult time competing consistently.