Excess Profit rule

[bigmark]

So it's been around since inception but I honestly don't agree that your max profit can only be 20 million. Why should a financially sound team not in the negative be punished?

For those that don't know. If you're team is in the positive for the season by more than 20 mill ... It's considers excess profit ...now if your stadium fund isn't full...it'll go there but if not...it just disappears forever

This especially effects the small market teams who can't roll in the big money each season.

Essentially only having allowed 50 mill in cash on hand will keep any team from over profiting anyways

[Boston Red Sox]

I think stadium funds should be only excess of 50 mil cash at the end of the year

[bigmark]

Aug 20, 2019 12:05:40 GMT -5 Boston Red Sox said:

I think stadium funds should be only excess of 50 mil cash at the end of the year

Agreed but teams can add more to it..if they like maybe?

[Boston Red Sox]

Aug 20, 2019 12:06:24 GMT -5 bigmark said:

Aug 20, 2019 12:05:40 GMT -5 Boston Red Sox said:

I think stadium funds should be only excess of 50 mil cash at the end of the year

Agreed but teams can add more to it..if they like maybe?

Something like choosing to divert 10-15 mil a year max if you want seems fine to me.

[Spencer]

I dont like this rule either tbh. If i make 22 million and my stadium fund is 100 million i just lose 2 million? Seems unfair.

Firstly i should be able to keep all my earned cash.

Secondly if i go over 50 million send it to the stadoum fund regardless of the amount there. No reason why stadium fund needs to be capped.

[jahallstar]

I actually like the rule. I've seen a lot of times that when teams tank after a run of good seasons they use the high fan interest and low payroll to make tons of cash that first season. In actuality it is a little flawed. In real life if a team flat out put no effort into the season they would not have a high attendance figure that year no matter how well they did in years past. This way teams can't take advantage of that.

[Deleted]

I think the solution is doing away with the 100 mil stadium account cap. That part makes no sense to me.

[jahallstar]

I don't disagree with that.

[dougiejays]

Aug 20, 2019 13:28:49 GMT -5 jahallstar said:

I actually like the rule. I've seen a lot of times that when teams tank after a run of good seasons they use the high fan interest and low payroll to make tons of cash that first season. In actuality it is a little flawed. In real life if a team flat out put no effort into the season they would not have a high attendance figure that year no matter how well they did in years past. This way teams can't take advantage of that.

I dunno, I think the game does a decent job of reflecting this...if you start tanking your FI bottoms out pretty quick. And even big league teams take a couple years to go from sellouts to empty stadiums.

[dougiejays]

I voted no because I’m always over budget and I’ve never come close. I do think there’s a middle ground...30 is fine. 50 just leads to people hoarding cash.

[bigmark]

Aug 20, 2019 13:52:37 GMT -5 dougiejays said:

I voted no because I’m always over budget and I’ve never come close. I do think there’s a middle ground...30 is fine. 50 just leads to people hoarding cash.

What about the trans who don't go over budget and stay financially sound? I feel this should be looked at as a league dude issue.. not based on what your team does. Though often that's the way votes transpire here lol

[jahallstar]

If a team simply puts no effort into their major league team then their attendance drops incredibly fast.

[dougiejays]

Aug 20, 2019 13:58:27 GMT -5 bigmark said:

Aug 20, 2019 13:52:37 GMT -5 dougiejays said:

I voted no because I’m always over budget and I’ve never come close. I do think there’s a middle ground...30 is fine. 50 just leads to people hoarding cash.

What about the trans who don't go over budget and stay financially sound? I feel this should be looked at as a league dude issue.. not based on what your team does. Though often that's the way votes transpire here lol

Based on the price of points lately I’d say that more teams are in my position than not.

[Matt]

I think there's too much cash floating around the league anyway. Too many teams have enough excess to trade to the teams who can't figure out how to be financially sound and still field a successful team.

[dougiejays]

Aug 20, 2019 14:06:49 GMT -5 jahallstar said:

If a team simply puts no effort into their major league team then their attendance drops incredibly fast.

See: the IRL Blue Jays.

2016 - 41k
2017 - 39k
2018 - 28k
2019 - 22k

Compared to my HOFFBL Jays during the rebuild:
84 - 3M (37k)
85 - 2.6m (32k)
86 - 1.9m (23.5k)
87 - 1.8 m (22.5k)

[jahallstar]

1985 was your worst year by far and you still drew heavy attendance. Blue Jays made the playoffs in 16/17 and had high attendence. Sucked in 18 and it dropped hard right away.

[Boston Red Sox]

Aug 20, 2019 14:26:57 GMT -5 Matt said:

I think there's too much cash floating around the league anyway. Too many teams have enough excess to trade to the teams who can't figure out how to be financially sound and still field a successful team.

Some teams literally don't have the budget to be financially sound while competing without crazy pd luck

[bigmark]

Aug 20, 2019 14:26:57 GMT -5 Matt said:

I think there's too much cash floating around the league anyway. Too many teams have enough excess to trade to the teams who can't figure out how to be financially sound and still field a successful team.

I do the financials every off season there really isn't. And again why should the teams who actually take mind of financials and don't constantly run negative be punished?

[dougiejays]

Aug 20, 2019 15:06:17 GMT -5 bigmark said:

Aug 20, 2019 14:26:57 GMT -5 Matt said:

I think there's too much cash floating around the league anyway. Too many teams have enough excess to trade to the teams who can't figure out how to be financially sound and still field a successful team.

I do the financials every off season there really isn't. And again why should the teams who actually take mind of financials and don't constantly run negative be punished?

I agree money’s pretty tight in this league. But unrestricted financials can lead teams to build up crazy banks which lets them have complete flexibility for like a decade. Nothing wrong with loosening it up a bit year-to-year but letting cash-rich teams hoard over the long term creates competitive imbalance.

[bigmark]

Aug 20, 2019 15:14:46 GMT -5 dougiejays said:

Aug 20, 2019 15:06:17 GMT -5 bigmark said:

I do the financials every off season there really isn't. And again why should the teams who actually take mind of financials and don't constantly run negative be punished?

I agree money’s pretty tight in this league. But unrestricted financials can lead teams to build up crazy banks which lets them have complete flexibility for like a decade. Nothing wrong with loosening it up a bit year-to-year but letting cash-rich teams hoard over the long term creates competitive imbalance.

But they cant hoard past the 50 mill cash limit? We already have a competitive imbalance due to financials. If anything this would help the small teams. they could wait and built up for a competitive run... just like in real life. instead right now they are handcuffed. 

For as much as we go for realism....how would a real mlb owner react if he was told he was making too much money and cant have it. 

[jahallstar]

To be honest allowing for more cash to be saved will just drive up the cost on players and help big market teams. If a team has a lot of cash there will always be one of those teams that will trade that cash to some other team that is spending 120M and needs cash. It will drastically hurt those teams that are responsible because others will out bid them and then get bailed out by rebuilding teams with 50M extra cash laying around.


Team A has 17M in cash and a 24M payroll and is set to make 57M in cash because they were good in years past and still have high FI. Now that team can trade that 17M in cash and have no penalty at all since they would just lose it anyway. Now if they were capped at 20M that they can take in profits..they may think twice.

[Boston Red Sox]

Yes big market teams are soooo limited here...

[bigmark]

big market teams dont save cash...they cant...and i think you misjudge how much fan interest drops when you dont compete. this rule literally only handicaps the smaller market teams who run small payrolls in order to generate money to build to competing. I'm flabbergasted that anyone actually thinks this affects the big market teams.

[jahallstar]

Anytime you add a influx of cash it drives up the cost of players which benefits big market. No question about it. The small market will see the cash to the big market.

[bigmark]

Aug 20, 2019 16:15:04 GMT -5 jahallstar said:

Anytime you add a influx of cash it drives up the cost of players which benefits big market. No question about it. The small market will see the cash to the big market.

if you are only going to look at it that way...we can really through a wrench into the mix and put an end to cash trading.  See how many teams get their finances in order then