RealGM

Do you believe Rogers will spend when the time is right on the Blue Jays?

I'm not asking when they should spend, be it now or later, but when the time is right can you actually see Rogers injecting a good amount of money in the team?

Also, are you worried that if Rogers buys MLSE that the Blue Jays will no longer be the owners main focus? What happens when the Leafs money starts rolling in?

Yes they will. They did in '06 even thou that turned out bad.

Since the two seasons don't really overlap much I don't see why they would be in conflict for resources. The Raptors haven't been affected much, and I think the Blue Jays would be affected even less.

Before this thread get Mustard'd, I say yes. They ve been extremely vocal about spending when the time is right. Beeston has even brought up the 140-150 million payroll as an example. AA has repeatedly said it too. They ve already increased money for scouting and are spending money on international players. If they were in a position to win and they didnt spend they would be skewered. I dont think they would say it publicly if they weren't serious.

Enter Randle :|

they better..or you know what will happen

Absolutely. They've already done it. People seem to forget that JP went out and get the two biggest pitchers on the market a few years back in AJ and BJ. For a year or two there the Jays payroll was just a hair shy of 100mill.

I know sometimes we like to think of these corporations as greedy supervillains (which is basically accurate) but the thing is that these moves can be justified as investments. A team with a $130m payroll that's competing for the pennant is a much better marketing tool than a team with a $40m payroll that's **** the bed.

Yeah, after the 2006 signings I don't blame them for being gun-shy, but I think AA has established his financial bona fides with ownership. The strong Canadian dollar helps, as it did back in 1992-93.

Strong CDN $ should help tremendously.

But yes as others have said, Rogers already has spent money before. No reason to think they wouldn't do it again..

I think they will. And I think if they do acquire MLSE, they'll be even more inclined to spend, since by then the NBA and NHL will both be under hard cap. So essentially, the profits from the Leafs and Raptors can be funneled to the Jays. And even if the Jays and Raptors aren't as profitable as they can be, the money Rogers saves on their TV deals should ensure the capability of spending on a higher payroll when necessary.

In the 10 years that they've owned the team, they've only had an above-average payroll in one of those years.

Rogers could very well spend a lot of money (they're capable of it), but there's no reason for anybody to expect it from them. It's wishful thinking.

Reading through this thread...why is there this myth that Rogers has spent money before? Sure, they got AJ and BJ, but that didn't even get them in the top 15 in payrolls (except for 2008). Even when they were supposed to be contending, Rogers didn't spend enough to put them in the upper echelon.

http://www.stevetheump.com/Payrolls.htm

Rogers may not be David Glass, but they're pretty cheap.

I'm cautiously optimistic. As much of a meddler Godfrey was, he seemed genuine in wanting the team to succeed, and Rogers upped payroll as promised in 2006-08. But when did the payroll undercutting start? When Godfrey left and Ted died. The new regime in charge will have to prove they can keep their word as Godfrey's regime did. Regardless, I trust AA managing a $70M payroll more than I would Ricciardi managing $120M, so even if the payroll remains low I think AA can still make good use of it. Whether it leads to the playoffs remains to be seen.

Randle McMurphy wrote:In the 10 years that they've owned the team, they've only had an above-average payroll in one of those years.

Rogers could very well spend a lot of money (they're capable of it), but there's no reason for anybody to expect it from them. It's wishful thinking.

The expansion of the playoffs does change the math a bit though, and if we maintain decent (for us) attendance and television viewership, it will suggest that the upside is there.

Like all of baseball's owners (save Detroit, apparently) Rogers is in the profit-generation business. They won't spend themselves into the red, but if they see the opportunity to make more money, the odds are that they will ratchet up spending. Not an instant jump to $150m, but a big splash or two to test the waters, and more beyond should that succeed.

Schadenfreude wrote:

Randle McMurphy wrote:In the 10 years that they've owned the team, they've only had an above-average payroll in one of those years.

Rogers could very well spend a lot of money (they're capable of it), but there's no reason for anybody to expect it from them. It's wishful thinking.

The expansion of the playoffs does change the math a bit though, and if we maintain decent (for us) attendance and television viewership, it will suggest that the upside is there.

Like all of baseball's owners (save Detroit, apparently) Rogers is in the profit-generation business. They won't spend themselves into the red, but if they see the opportunity to make more money, the odds are that they will ratchet up spending. Not an instant jump to $150m, but a big splash or two to test the waters, and more beyond should that succeed.

That same opportunity was there 3-5 years ago (in fact, it's there every year, it's a potentially huge baseball market) and they didn't take it. Why would they do it this time? Because of an extra playoff spot?

You know just as well as I that without a change to the unbalanced schedule, the Jays' playoff hopes are still very slim from year to year.

Randle McMurphy wrote:That same opportunity was there 3-5 years ago (in fact, it's there every year, it's a potentially huge baseball market) and they didn't take it. Why would they do it this time? Because of an extra playoff spot?

What happened is that they ratcheted up payroll in 2006, didn't realize the sort of immediate return that they had hoped for (attendance did jump by about 15% that year, but it wasn't an increase in line with the spending), and when the team failed to vault into the race they got cold feet and shut it down.

You know just as well as I that without a change to the unbalanced schedule, the Jays' playoff hopes are still very slim from year to year.

But even if we don't make the playoffs immediately with the extra spot, the chances increase that we can stay in the race longer and thus keep attendance and viewership high through September. And if that happens, the money

I'm not under any illusions that it's a fait accompli, though, and you know that I don't think too highly of Rogers as an owner. But I do expect that they'll do much the same thing as they did in 2006: a sizable but not massive increase in payroll as a test run of the market, after which they'll evaluate the situation and determine whether it makes financial sense (as they conceive it) to spend more. Obviously, there's a significant risk that we **** the bed thereafter, and go back to spending $75m a year and broken dreams. But if we can sustain competitiveness for a season, and Rogers realizes an increase in profits, I would definitely expect them to bump it up again...they would be terrible businessmen otherwise, and whatever one can say about Rogers, they aren't bad at this business thing.

Schadenfreude wrote:What happened is that they ratcheted up payroll in 2006, didn't realize the sort of immediate return that they had hoped for (attendance did jump by about 15% that year, but it wasn't an increase in line with the spending), and when the team failed to vault into the race they got cold feet and shut it down.

They still had a below-average 2006 payroll of $72M, with the backloaded contracts. In the offseasons after that, they didn't spend nearly enough to get the team over the hump. And the money they did have was spent poorly (Frank Thomas).

If realizing an immediate return is the thing that's going to get them to go over that hump now, they're probably just going to keep waiting because the playoffs are going to continue to be incredibly unlikely from year-to-year in this division.

But even if we don't make the playoffs immediately with the extra spot, the chances increase that we can stay in the race longer and thus keep attendance and viewership high through September.

The Jays had high interest late in a couple of those seasons, if I'm remembering correctly, including a double-digit win streak in August/September. To me, an additional playoff spot that will probably go to an inferior AL Central/West team won't change much.

I'm not under any illusions that it's a fait accompli, though, and you know that I don't think too highly of Rogers as an owner. But I do expect that they'll do much the same thing as they did in 2006: a sizable but not massive increase in payroll as a test run of the market, after which they'll evaluate the situation and determine whether it makes financial sense (as they conceive it) to spend more. Obviously, there's a significant risk that we **** the bed thereafter, and go back to spending $75m a year and broken dreams. But if we can sustain competitiveness for a season, and Rogers realizes an increase in profits, I would definitely expect them to bump it up again...they would be terrible businessmen otherwise, and whatever one can say about Rogers, they aren't bad at this business thing.

Rogers does not need to spend a lot on payroll to make money off the Jays, that's the problem. For them, consistently going into the 100M+ range is an unnecessary risk when they can just continue doing what they're doing. It's safe and profitable.

Randle McMurphy wrote:They still had a below-average 2006 payroll of $72M, with the backloaded contracts. In the offseasons after that, they didn't spend nearly enough to get the team over the hump. And the money they did have was spent poorly (Frank Thomas).

If realizing an immediate return is the thing that's going to get them to go over that hump now, they're probably just going to keep waiting because the playoffs are going to continue to be incredibly unlikely from year-to-year in this division.

I should have said salary commitments rather than payroll, yeah; my assumption is that they looked at the money owed down the road (including the Wells and Rios deals), looked at the revenue they were generating in 2006 and 2007, and experienced a significant tightening of their collective sphincter.

The Jays had high interest late in a couple of those seasons, if I'm remembering correctly, including a double-digit win streak in August/September. To me, an additional playoff spot that will probably go to an inferior AL Central/West team won't change much.

Yeah, but we haven't really had sustained interest for an entire season; it's been peaks and valleys depending on play, and the net result is that we never averaged more than 30,000 a game at any point, even though we were clearing 35,000-40,000 a night at various points.

In four of five seasons from 2006-2010, we would have finished within five games of the extra playoff spot at season's end, had it existed, and holding down the spot at different junctures. Last year, we would have been fighting for that spot through August rather than languishing 10 games out. If we're in the race the whole way, even if we ultimately fall short, it should result in greater attendance, and more predictable revenues.

Rogers does not need to spend a lot on payroll to make money off the Jays, that's the problem. For them, consistently going into the 100M+ range is an unnecessary risk when they can just continue doing what they're doing. It's safe and profitable.

Agreed, though our salary commitments are abnormally low at the moment; even shelling out $20m/year in free agency wouldn't take Rogers beyond its typical comfort zone. That's what I'm expecting...they'll pump some money into the club this off-season, probably on one or two big-name players who they think will draw eyeballs and arses, and then cross their fingers that it will work. If we get to the precipice in 2012 and turn a significant profit, I'm hoping that they'll get a profits-boner from the potential revenue streams that a playoff berth would provide, as it would put sponsorship and ad buys on RSN through the roof. I could definitely be wrong, but if we get to a point where our baseline performance and attendance are solid, it makes pushing salaries above $100m considerably less risky.

darth_federer wrote:Before this thread get Mustard'd, I say yes. They ve been extremely vocal about spending when the time is right. Beeston has even brought up the 140-150 million payroll as an example. AA has repeatedly said it too. They ve already increased money for scouting and are spending money on international players. If they were in a position to win and they didnt spend they would be skewered. I dont think they would say it publicly if they weren't serious.

Well that didn't take long...

And yes, I believe they will.