I thought the title said "MTA gives ticket prices a serious cut" and got all excited.

Ah well :(

Dem cowboys, please stop your botching and drink some cranberry juice. Let's go mets! 2011 will be the year.

The year they win fifth place?

The year Bloomberg asks them to move to New Jersey?

The year they finally give paperbags to the remaining fans to spare them the shame?

The year Metsmania is finally recognized as a disease by the AMA?

you could literally show up at the stadium and get a free upper deck ticket if you asked around

What?

Yep, true. I had the 15 game package, and I was unable to make the las 2 games of the season. When there were no buyers for my tickets on Stub Hub and Ebay at less than half face value, I gave them to a friend of mine who lived near Citi field. He couldn't go to the games either so his son stood outside the 7 train entrance to give the tickets away. Guess what, of the 4 tickets across the last 2 games, he was able to give away 1 and threw away the rest. And these weren't even upper deck tickets. Caesars Club, face value was about $60.00. I couldn't get rid of them for $10.00 each! That's sad. And yet, I'm still going buy them next season. FML

Baseball sucks, thanks to the Yankees and their ridiculous payroll. Until that problem has been dealt with, it will continue to suck ad infinitum.

Don't the mets have the 2nd highest payroll? I know it doesn't show.

If you want to complain about a high payroll, then work to have the MBA set a cap like the NFL. It's within the rights of any team under the league rules to spend as much or as little as they want on their players. In this situation, there will always be one team paying more than the others.

If the situation were reversed and the Cubs payed their team 206 million and the Yankees spent 146, would you then complain about the Cub's ridiculous payroll?

Basically, I think your argument (not just your own, many people take this stance) sound like a child, whining about the kid down the street who has more toys. "Waaaaah, they have more and the world won't be right until they don't or I have the same."

And it doesn't account for how a team that spent 206 million was beaten in the post season by a team that spent 55. If the payroll was the only factor in winning a game, then perhaps your argument would fly. But as Texas proved, that ain't all that matters.

Yes, I would still complain about the Cubs ridiculous payroll. It's silly to pay grown men that amount of money to play a game, no matter what team they play for. I don't care that the kid down the street has more toys or has more money or whatever bullshit you're peddling. I care that the sport itself is suffering because of the actions of a few. That's all.

The fact that the rules allow them to spend whatever they want doesn't mean it is good for the sport long term.

And the team that spent $55 million will in all likelihood suck in a few years as their players' contracts expire. How many teams made it to the post-season nine out of 10 years between 2000 and 2009? I could be wrong but only the Red Sox and Yankees come to mind. Who has the two highest payrolls? People like to point out that almost every team made the playoffs at least once in the 2000s and that that somehow means parity. What it tells me is every team peaked at least once and then lost their players. Not surprisingly the teams that didn't make the playoffs include the Orioles and Blue Jays who have to compete with the Red Sox and Yankees.

But, Tampa Bay is in the same division as The Yankees and The Red Sox and still went to the post-season in the past few years.

The fact they won the division this year and played against Philly in The World Series 2 years ago undermines your argument.