11-07-2019, 12:09 PM
(11-07-2019, 11:23 AM)Catmandude123 Wrote: Ipso Facto the big market teams players make more than small market teams giving the big market teams an unfair advantage.
I mean, if you really wanted to get into it, you need to consider local tax rates.
State tax in California alone (not including city or county) is like 15%. New York City's combined local tax is over 12%. Comparitively, Ohio's tax rate caps at 5.7%. Florida has no state tax. Zero. Which is why so many athletes, namely almost every golfer, reside there.
So start doing the math. Suh's 100 mil deal in Miami would need to be 116+ in California to be equal. Drop in local tax, and higher sales tax in San Francisco, and that number moves into 120+.
As far as endorsements, that's an outdated and tired argument. It belongs in Mad Men.
What athletes are we seeing most in advertisements right now? Well you've got Rodgers and Mahomes in the State Farm ads. And where do they play? Green Bay and Kansas City. Then you got the Mayfield spots that run every other break. Where's he? Cleveland. Peyton Manning got more oppotunities than anyone playing the bulk of his career in Indy and finishing in average market Denver. Polomalu out of Pit doing the Head and Shoulder spots... Joe Green; Coke...
Try as you might, you're not convincing anyone we're at some disadvantage that heeds are ability to spend to cap and sign a certain caliber of player. It's, for whatever reason, self inflicted. Be it cheapness, dated business practices, inferior product, infererior facilities and ammentities, or simply because we choose not to.
Our market size, and Mike Brown's net worth does nothing to explain or forgive our inability to build a capable roster and quality product. Green Bay, Pittsburgh, Kansas City, Indy... How many examples do you want to stop spewing complete nonsense?
