If parity exists more in football, explain the Cleveland Browns.

hitler.

btw, i forgot that das already won this thread with the initial reply.

I dont want to turn this into a quote off, but you forced me to do it.

'Steinbrenner turned baseball into a boring heap of high payrolls, ridiculous prices, and little parity.'

This isnt a purely baseball thing. Look at any routinely successful basketball team, football team, baseball team, and you will see the exact same thing 8/10 times. They all have great players that are paid well. The teams at the bottom of the barrel have only themselves to blame. IF the Pirates/Royals/O's didnt overpay for shitty players and draft poorly, then they could be contenders too. The same is true for the Lions/Redskins/Rams.

Just because you do not pay enough attention to baseball to realize how well run of an organization the Yankees are, and how crappily run of an organization the Pirates/O's/Royals are does not prove that there isn't parity in baseball. It does prove that there is consistently shitty/fantastic managing on certain teams, but it does not mean that there isnt parity.

yeah, anyone who follows baseball knows parity doesn't exist.

@ GARY OAK

Bullshit, any sport without a salary cap is going against parity. Sure the Marlins (like $30-40 mil) could beat the Yankees ($200 mil), but its not a level playing field.

Yankees would have like 7 less championships if they had the same payroll as everyone else.

So we can conclude by saying US and franchise sports suck?

Those stats that Gary Oak threw out there are a bit skewed. MLB had 8 different champions in the first 8 years of the 80's. Once the Yankees got their big tv contract, thats when they started to be able to buy championships. The NFL definitely has more parity right now.

don't blame baseball blame capitalism

ohh it woulda been clever if i said salary capitalism

or would it not have been?

hmm

i woulda chuckled