It's not so much a question of having it or not having it. It's a question of where do you allocate your resources. For example, do we take money away from the scouting or player development side to allow more big contracts, raise ticket prices even higher, etc.Water Boy said:
Yeah I understand that. Not sure you read my previous posts asking if this was just a case of not having enough money. My point is if we have the money then spend it. But if going over will be too much of a financial burden and we simply don't have the funds to do so then of course I understand. That's the whole reason I brought up the topic to begin with. Now I know that we just don't have the cash so obviously I'm not advocating for us to spend money we don't have.
The Rangers, just like most every other team, are not going to put themselves in a position to lose money. I'm not sure where the line is exactly, every team has a different situation (market size, TV contracts, etc.)
FWIW we typically are in the top half/top third of the league in player salaries, the last couple of seasons being the exceptions - this season we're 9th in total payroll at just under $200 million.
Jimbo Franchione
