Many of you have probably heard a couple accounts repeating the pernicious lie that the Mets low revenue is an excuse for their mid-to-small market payrolls. It’s only a handful of guys who keep saying it and you should ignore them.

The Mets split the largest market in baseball. Even as a second-class franchise in NY, they are undoubtedly a team that should be Top 5 in payroll each year (like they always have been historically)

Yet some people insist that it’s appropriate for the Mets to be a mid-market team (smaller than SF or the Braves!) because of a highly dubious “revenue” stat which is based on bad numbers and reported only on reddit and statista. Not real sources.

The Mets bottom-line revenue figure appears lower because they get less cash from their regional sports network (RSN) than some other teams get from their deals. This does not take into account that Sterling Equities OWNS SNY and therefore SNY profit is Mets profit.

Even so, Forbes reports that the Mets were #6 in revenue last year. The Mets are making money hand over fist despite being below .500 in eight of the last eleven seasons. They’re printing money, and some fools on here are giving them a smokescreen to do so.

Logic and history both show that the Mets should be a big market team. They have a beautiful new stadium in the largest market in the highest population and richest city. They own their RSN and the land around the stadium was sold to them for a dollar.

If the Mets were consistently good, they would probably be the third or fourth richest franchise. Even in their current state of stupid, bad, and broke, they should be in a group with Chicago, Houston, Philly- all smaller, less affluent cities.

I know this is not a particularly “sexy” thread but we as a people must agree to put that revenue argument behind us once and for all. It is bunk. Thank you.