Major League Baseball’s thirty teams have approved a proposal for handling labor relations in a truncated 2020 season. But initial efforts to sell the concept to the Major League Baseball Players’ Association are off to a rocky start.
Union chief Tony Clark expressed general opposition to the MLB plan in comments to Ken Rosenthal and Evan Drellich of The Athletic (subscription link). He argues that tying pay to revenue — as the team side intends to propose — effectively constitutes the imposition of a “salary cap.”
The MLBPA has long fought against efforts to impose a salary cap. Clark accuses the league of “trying to take advantage of a global health crisis to get what they’ve failed to achieve in the past.” From Clark’s perspective, the focus shouldn’t be on salaries to much as “finding a way for us to get safely back on the field.”
The union continues to insist that the sides’ late-March agreement fully resolves the question of 2020 player salaries. There’s an ongoing dispute over the interpretation of that recent pact.
It remains to be seen whether the league and players will be able to negotiate out their differences. Public opinion is sure to play a role in how things shake out, which explains the recent run of reporting and public statements.
Big surprise. There will be no season. These suits will be squabbling throughout the fall.
Owners have the upper hand here. If there’s no games and no revenue, there will be no expenses. Players would lose out a lot more than owners. It makes absolute sense to reduce salaries by the same percentage as the reduction in revenue. If the union won’t accept that reasonable compromise, then let the players sit all year. They are the ones most opposed to playing anyway.Hard to feel sympathy for them when millions of everyday workers were forced to either continue working or lose their job. Maybe if the players spend a few weeks working in restaurants, grocery stores etc they will think differently.
Get off these billionaires side lmao. You’re nothing to them. They could give 0 care about you and your family. You’re part of the problem.
He is not part of the problem. He is right. Fine to disagree but fans who cannot relate to people unwilling to sacrifice like we have to are not the problem.
What does the number of cares they about Fever Pitch Guy’s family have to do with anything? Do you think that owners just have a giant dolphin tank full of Sacagawea dollars and that huge portions revenue disappearing isn’t important? MLB players get about half of the league’s revenue in payroll, whereas most of the time employees get about a quarter of the total revenue.
ioh2710, Tony Clark admits that owners want to tie pay to revenue.
Not, profit. But revenue.
I don’t know how not to be on the side of an employer who that wants to tie pay based on something as clear cut as revenue.
That works both ways. Player could give 2 squats about health, as they should, and getting paid.
Please explain his owners are sacrificing…
And how do you know that ????
The owners have refused to open their books countless CBAs so you don’t know how much of a percentage players get
Players greedy pigs, owners much the same, but rightfully so? If I was an owner, I would scuttle the season. Going to suck anyway! let people give their money to the healthcare provides. They are far more necessary and heroic than a bunch of entitled athletes.
And none of you complaining on this site can do what these players can do so get off your high horse and focus on the problem – the greed and avarice of the owners. Enough of the pity wagon.
No they don’t. The teams refuse to disclose how much they are worth and how much they get from
Tv. There’s no profit sharing in baseball. It’s the only major sport without it. If the owners want to have the players take a pay cut, they can fully disclose their books and agree to share all profits from baseball including the postseason with the players.
Heck of a time to start wanting players to split 50/50. I wonder what motivated that change. Open the books and let’s see these owners numbers, then they can talk woe is me.
@Halo11Fan Thats a decent argument if they were proposing to tie it to revenue in the future, but this is a one year proposal. They’re only trying to tie it to revenue when revenue is going to be a fraction of normal levels. Basically they want to privatize the profits, but then socialize the losses, which is a raw deal for the players.
Not only that, but they already reached an agreement in March that they are now trying to renegotiate.
steelerbravenation
Revenues are not hard to calculate. Expenses are hard to calculate.
The players could care less about you and your family too.
I don’t think this is taking a billionaire side, it’s a fair question. There are half as many games and for some teams, 1/4 of the revenue without fans. TV isn’t going to pay more just to broadcast. There are broadcast deals based on 162 games. That revenue will be cut in half in most cases. Take that and the revenue lost from fans and it’s a lot less than 51% of this season’s players contracts.
The players don’t get a percentage of revenue under normal circumstances. The owners shouldn’t be asking for that now. The players should be paid a pro-rated portion of their CONTRACT.
Open the books so an unqualified person like Tony Clark can review? No, the players should get Boras and his organization to take charge of the MLBPA. And until they get a serious business leader like Boras to be in charge of their affairs, the players will continue to take stupid positions.
What does that have to do with anything? Can these ball players work in manufacturing? Farm? Even do real work?
That’s about the funniest type of post continually see here lately. Many of these kids, especially from 3rd world countries have been grabbed by buscoes since pre teen days and groomed as baseball players and nothing else!
Would do many good to get knocked off that high horse they and many here and other places have put them upon, even if only for a short time.
Ej, No way Scott Boras would take that job and give up all his clients
lol your kidding right? have you seen baseball economics?
fine. include a cap too and save the game.
stop man your making too much sense. many out here think the players should be paid in full or at least half. it’s comical to me that it’s ok for the owners to lose money as long as the players get paid.
Exactly Halo
It’s a mistake to look at this from only one perspective, immediately wanting to judge players or owners as greedy or “wrong”. Each side has its own self interests, and points of view that are valid.
To characterize the players as greedy is very one sided. As much as they make, they are millionaires. The owners are billionaires. The players made one point that deserves consideration, and that is, in any season if the owners make a lot more than expected, the players don’t get anything additional. And in general, that is the case, the owners make a lot more than the players, or salaries would not keep rising.
If you have a billion or more dollars, losing revenue from one baseball season is not going to compromise your life one bit. I feel like the owners can afford to accept that the season is going to be one that loses money. Perhaps the players might be willing to accept some form of reduced per game salary, but not entirely based on revenue. The owners would look very cheap if they insist on revenue based salaries, in my opinion. They would get plenty of tv revenue certainly, probably a lot more people watching than normal. But even if they fully honor players salaries for half a season, it’s not going to bankrupt the owners.
It’s complicated and not worth a lot of discussion really… we’ll see how it all turns out. I just hope that to give the country an emotional lift we get to see some games in July!
I agree with most of your points, but I will put out that most owners/organizations are asset rich and cash poor. They’ve always managed their salaries based off their gate, concessions, and merchandise. With all three of those revenue streams non existent because of an unplanned hardship, it put them in a pickle.
And not all owners are created equal. What the Red Sox, Yankees, and Dodgers can absorb is different than what the Royals, Rays, Marlins of the world can.
I saw someone say there isn’t revenue sharing which is technically incorrect. Many small market teams get money from teams vis the CBT, that they are supposed to invest into the product, but almost always bury it in some other operational cost.
By no means am I siding only with the owners. At the same time, the owners and the players should be taking care of the lcd within their organizations. Rather than fighting in public over millions of dollars for already wealthy people. They should be setting up deferred compensation for the players, while using those deferred funds to support many people who are essential staff that will not easily be able to recover their losses.
As for the MLBPA, Clark is a poor leader who was outflanked several times during negotiation and is now crying foul because the clock is ticking on his leadership. He wants to make this his personal battle in order to look strong to his constituents. He only cares about his power, and veterans. He will gladly throw minor leaguers and younger players under the bus if it suits his agenda. Hard to root for him knowing how myopic the union’s protections are for up and comers for the great benefit of veterans of the league.
So far the younger players have benefitted the most from any of these agreements. The players were advanced $170 million and guaranteed a full year of service even if a single game isn’t played. Younger players are making a decent chunk compared to what they would’ve made on league minimum salaries or even first year arb when compared to some of these older guys set to make 10,20, 30 million with no need for additional service time.
Clark has guaranteed the younger players get the best end of this deal (so far)
It’s funny how people don’t understand that billionaires don’t actually have a billion dollars in the bank. They have assets worth a billion dollars. That is like saying that there are millions of millionaires in California. Many people own houses that cost over $1 million and you know what? If they lose their job they will lose their house in just a few months. Billionaires are working with much larger amounts of money, but they can go broke as quickly as any of us can. I would not be surprised at all if the Mets go into bankruptcy for instance. They have huge debts, and if they aren’t making money they can go under very quickly.
financial risk. players have none.
Many of these players worked in jobs like stores, restaurants and other entry level jobs when in college or minor leagues.
Maybe if the *owners* spend a few weeks working in restaurants, grocery stores etc they will think differently
Fixed it for you
I know heaven forbid you started a business and made a lot of money and now because you won’t give it away, you should work at Walmart, as a lesson…
Sure we want you to come back to work, but you have to take a pay cut to do it.
I promise you that there are significant costs to owning a baseball team even if no games or played. Owner’s have access to significant liquidity in capital markets. They also don’t have a short shelf life like a major league athlete but there’s absolutely no way that the owner’s don’t want baseball. It hurts them a whole lot.
I think a great deal has to do with the fact there has been no answers on anything related to COVID19- what happens if there is an outbreak ect. i also think the fact the schedule would be so off and the additional health risks also play a role. The likelihood of injury will be high- no real Spring Training and with no minor league games for rehabbing.
I think the money will be an excuse for no season but the reality is the players have so many concerns the majority would rather sit out until things are back to normal.
I have not posted in a while- not because of a ban either. I want to wish all the best to everyone out there. Stay safe from the virus and best of luck dealing with the aftermath. Things won’t be normal for a period of time- for you young guys in your 20s- it is ok to have a tough time dealing with it.
I agree with Fever Pitch
The players will give in. No season means they get almost nothing.
and no season means no revenues for the owners. its a two way street.
but the owners have way more money than the players.
except the Mets
lol – that’s funny stuff…
They still have a revenue stream in royalties and they still have season ticket money that they are investing. They will come out ahead of the players if there is no season
these guys didnt get rich by saying “i can chill out a bit because i already have more money than most people.” that logic doesn’t get you billions.
Let’s be honest most of them probably got rich cause they were born to the right family though.
Not to mention that owners make money when they lose money – operating expenses losses are a tax benefit they can carry forward and set aside against other business gains. Players- nothing to fall back on, since as wage employees they’re out income without a corresponding benefit. Not to mention getting a year older. So the owners have infinitely more leverage.
They protect their health, which is something.
The owners and players need to work something out. Everyone loses if there is no season.
Theres no reason for the players to take a paycut, they are employees with signed contracts. Revenue shortfalls are the responsibility of ownership.
you should take a gander at paragraph 11 of the Uniform Player Contract. ownership has every right to invoke it and not pay the players at all. it is evidence of good faith, and – wise choice to avoid instigating any extreme action from the players by not doing so and trying instead to negotiate.
Agree with Padres here, and others who cite the Contract. From a numbers perspective, the parties agreed in march to a prorata reduction in salary relative to games played. Owners are now attempting to renegotiate to a 50/50 split which looks good in principle, but essentially leaves the players forced to take at most 30% of the original pie, if you assume zero revenues from gate and a 50% reduction in TV revenues with an 82 gm season (TV makes up 60% of MLB revenue). And thats assuming MLB will actually get a prorata share of TV, and not actually have to give more money back for a ‘diminished product’. From the players persoective- they’ll have to determine which is better- 50% of salary or 50% of the diminished revenue stream. Think it’s pretty clear the former.
OMG JUST PLAY. America needs you. You greedy f CKs
to be honest this narrative is overplayed. most people who arent baseball fans probably don’t care that much at all. and its not a matter of greed when its about previously guaranteed money.
The owners still stand to profit $6 billion EVEN IF THERE IS NO SEASON. But they want players to agree to salary cuts. So it’s pretty clear who exactly is being greedy here.
Why do the owner get $6B if there is no season? I haven’t heard this before. If it’s accurate then forget the season, they have no incentive to work out a deal.
No they don’t. I know where you heard that. It’s impossible to have a profit if theirs no revenue. That’s common sense.
deacs71 Where did you get the 6 billion dollar figure from? If there are no games, the Owners don’t make any money.
No games is not stopping from MLB shop holding sales and still selling merchandise or the amount of Zhits MLB.com is getting everyday
I wouldn’t say 6 billion but don’t act like some money is not coming in during this pandemic just not as much as usual
Clubs are still selling merchandise.
Has anyone heard whether or not teams have to payback their tv revenues if no games are played?
You do realize not all of sports leagues sales come from games right?
@deacs71
They might profit if there are games but no fans, due to tv revenue, but clearly they are not going to profit if there are no games. Their revenues would be zero.
Ummm … last year MLB had a record $10.7 Billion in revenue. That’s for a full, normal season and represents REVENUE ONLY. Now subtract out all the expenses, including the $4.3 Billion in just player salaries, End result, there is absolutely no chance owners would turn a $6 Billion profit with no games played. Nada, zip, zilch.
Point to one legit source that indicates owners would even pull down that much in revenue, let alone the eventual profits. At a conservative $32 per ticket MLB will lose close to $2.2bn in revenues just from ticket sales if nobody pays to see a game in person this season. That doesn’t even take into account additional spending for food, parking & souvenirs that takes the average amount spend closer to $40 per person (probably higher in reality). WIth attendance totaling over 68 million fans in 2019, MLB owners are easily missing out on closer to $2.7 or 2.8 billion in revenues in 2020. The $6 billion profit you claim the owners are guaranteed is a complete fantasy since last year’s $10 bn in revenues is guaranteed not to take place in 2020.
Deacs … how foolish you are to think the owners will profit $6 billion without a season or revenue. Open your eyes and use your brain.
You’re dumb.
The owners are the adult conservatives in the room, and the players are the college-aged liberals who don’t understand how the world works, but their professor tells them they’re entitled to it so they want it. They don’t care how or from where, they just want it.
Perfect analogy.
No. Both sides are greedy jerks trying to maximize their leverage. Fans are never considered more than collateral damage.
Yes that’s an excellent analogy! If the owners lose at least half of their revenue because of the half-season, it’s absurd for the players to expect more than half of their salary despite playing just a half season.
It’s not spoiled to protect your own interest. This is exactly what unions are for. Both sides start at an extreme and they are forced to compromise.
no, they do know how it works. that’s why they are smart enough to know how bad the owners’ first offer will be for them.
Well said
clrrogers, “Right to Work” kinda guy, amirite?
Damn skippy.
That’s idiotic. Anyone with rudimentary math skills and Google Search can find out how much these franchises have appreciated in the past decade alone, and how much revenue has been accrued. Couple that information with the fact that player contracts have not kept up with the trend. Also the TV deals coming in now are absurd.
The entire structure of MLB salaries has worked this way for decades, and owners have never split overall revenues with players, yet that is exactly what they’re trying to do as we speak. There’s a reason for that, and it’s not out of generosity. So here we are, with a non existent revenue stream rife with uncertainty, and owners want to float a revenue split with players. Simplistic nonsense to whittle this down to that asinine analogy.
it amazes me that people flocked to the idea that players weren’t being paid well enough before and now they say they are monsters for not accepting an initial proposal which may be even more unfair. im glad some here are consistent though.
not kept up? you do realize that arod made 500+ million dollars in his career? thats half of what the royals are worth!
Ok Boomer
Lol yeah okay dude
Clrrogers … well said!
Why are unions like women? Can’t live with them, can’t live without them.
why? you are a creep and want women to take it with open arms?
what a disgusting analogy. probably explains your incel life.
I really hate these kind of unions. I’d get it if it were for people working minimum wage or other low paying jobs but this is ridiculous. These guys are making millions of dollars a year so why should salary cuts matter.
They should scrap the season and pay the players nothing more for this season. Baseball without fans seems ludicrous, and full pay to the players without fans seems even more ludicrous. The fact that baseball players think they are above the pain of this pandemic is rather repulsive. Perhaps we as the fans should bear the burden of paying 100% of their contracts by paying double ticket prices next year to cover this year. Ya nah. No thanks
Should player salaries be forcibly increased when revenues and franchise valuations increase over time?
oldoak33 – Your question suggests that the player salaries aren’t increased when revenues and franchise valuations increase over time. Tell me which player’s salary went down when the team value went up? The only time salaries go down if the previous contract was not fulfilled on the field by the player because of age or injury. There is a minimum salary that is consistently increasing for the players. So by including the word “forcibly” in your question you have me confused as the answer without that word is: they do.
Doug
An increase in salary that coincides with increase in revenue in itself doesn’t signify proportionate increase, it just signifies increase. Player salaries have not been proportionate reflections of revenues and of appreciating assets, so why start now? It’s an optic tool for public perception, where most people have no idea how much franchises have appreciated and they have no idea how much operating income has been generated. They see millionaires and billionaires going at it over resumption of baseball, and they simplistically evaluate this feud, often resulting in the opinion that players “make millions to play a kids game”. It’s utter rubbish, and thankfully players know better.
These were agreed upon salaries that have already been essentially cut in half, and again players agreed to this stipulation of pro rata in good faith. Now the owners want to scrap the entire idea of predetermined salaries for 162 games, no 110 games, no 82 games, and now just want to pool all the money together, which by their estimates will be 50% less, and split it 50/50. Gee golly I wonder why that is.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28341983/average-mlb-salary-drops-second-straight-year%3Fplatform%3Damp
Oh boy—let’s not forget that now this money is going to have to be spread among a 30 man roster and potentially a 15 man taxi squad.
*Giancarlo Stanton gets injured again*
Mike Ford and Clint Frazier: Hop in boys
Cool bro, I guess you want get paid this year tony Clark
Embarrassing that under the circumstances the two sides can’t seem to see the big picture. This is unchartered territory and if they can’t resolve these petty differences, it will again be the fans that suffer. Sound familiar? Shame on you
14% unemployed and this is what the 1% is worrying about
Yeah let’s just be flippant with billions of dollars and how they’re spent because Walls17 is overcome with emotion.
MLB is looking at another 1994 if they really allow salary disputes and not the virus to prevent games. It would be a complete disaster for the game.
Billionaires fighting with millionaires….yawn
The players say they want to be “partners” with the owners, but then when it’s time to be partners, they won’t cooperate. They just want the owners to lose money
so not taking the first offer is not cooperating? thats not how negotiatipns work.
They haven’t even been given a first offer yet
I am all for a salary cap permanently. It would be nice to see a team like the A’s afford to bring back some of the core instead of losing them to FA and/or having to trade them for a rebuild.
Salary cap has to include salary minimum. Good luck.
it’s the only way to save the game I have loved since I was 5.
I’m gonna hazard a guess that if the union is pretty much saying “no go” without having seen the proposal, then negotiations could get… testy.
I haven’t got any economic sympathy for the players, the overwhelming majority of them can easily absorb any losses they take this year.
BUT, I completely understand them not wanting to come back while it’s absolutely not safe to do so (and make no mistake, it’s not safe and it’s not going to be) while at the same time subsidizing the owners’ losses.
At the end of the day, the owners need to take one hundred percent of the hit for whatever is lost this year. They’re the billionaires. They’re the ones who are supposed to be so good at business. If they can’t absorb this then they shouldn’t be in the business in the first place.
Most of these “Billionaires” don’t have a billion dollars in the bank. A good chunk of their worth is tied up in their clubs or other business ventures. The only way you can afford to pay these salaries is by charging people to go to games, concessions, advertising, tv deals etc. When you are paying a payroll of over 100 mil and there is little to no money coming in, it is not a sustainable model no matter how rich you think these owners are.
So it’s up to the players to solve owners liquidity problem? Ya drunk?
obviously you have no idea how a business is run. or did you have a paper route?
Kreckert obviously has no understanding of amassed values versus available capital. I think most of you would be surprised that “billionaires don’t have as much ready cash as you’d think. The bulk of their wealth is in the value of things owned. No person in their right mind worth that much holds that much cash–you’d lose more of your worth through inflation. Also, since interest rates are no existent there is no place to keep such cash so you put it into equities or hard assets in the hope of a return that beats poor interest rates and inflation. I doubt, for example, Jeff Bezos, who is considered the richest man in the country can get his hands on $100 million immediately. He doesn’t have it. In fact, in 2018 his annual salary was $81,000. His wealth is in the value of Amazon and the other things he owns.
I’d bet you that a number of players have access to more cash than Hal Steinbrenner.
You “I hate the billionaires” guys who want the owners to fork up need to get a better understanding of finance.
I know I would rather be the guy that’s worth $10MM liquid vs the poor guy that can’t get his hands on $100MM in 24 hrs but is worth $800MM. Poor illiquid guy.
The PA needs to wake up and accept a salary cap in the next CBA. Pay should be tied to revenue. Revenue should be 50/50. Works great for the other 3 major sports. If league revenue goes up one year, cap floor and ceiling go up by the same percentage the next year.
The MLBPA will not agree to a salary cap and the Owners will not agree a salary floor. The NBA and NHL Owners locked the players out for a year to get a salary cap.
And I hope it comes to that in MLB
why? the lux tax works fine in the MLB hard caps are just restrictive and hurt players more.
clearly very little understanding of how negotiations work here. I’m sure 99% of offers any union in the world gets are not accepted initially and are tweaked. to expect the players just to accept what they get offered straight off is absurd.
Union hinted at this almost a month ago. It wasn’t clarified in the written agreement when they handed out the 170 million if player salaries would be prorated if no fans were in the stands if a season would be played.
I could see a scenario playing out where they wait this out until the end of the month. Then some players will be sweating and want to make a deal or at least that’s what the owners think.
I think the MLBPA’s whole point is that there was nothing in the March agreement that explicitly allows for the reduction of pay if fans cannot be in attendance. In the MLBPAs mind they already agreed to a pandemic deal with pro-rated pay, regardless of if there are fans in the stands or not, and now the owners are trying to renegotiate and change that deal.
I know there is some ambiguity over the contract itself and its not that easy, but in principle I think the MLBPA is right here in that they already have a deal for pay this season.
That and you never accept the first proposal in any business situation. If the union plays this well, they’ll get a great idea of the true revenue these private businesses generate just in time for the next CBA negotiations.
With negotiations neither side starts with their best offer.
its just simple logic, but people here are too much in a frenzy to be that logical it seems.
15 % unemployment in this nation….and these Millionaire players want to be GREEDY …..see you all back in 2021 !….the Owners rather take a tax write off !
MLB players are showing they are on the 1% crowd !
I seen this movie before., it is called U.S. Congress !
of course he does…sorry I find to make arrangements for a pandemic year it’s a stretch to compare any agreement to a salary cap…too much uncertainty and you can bet there will be a certain amount of guaranteed money MLBPA will want in the agreement whether they play or not
Tony Clark generally opposes everything.
Who cares? Just cancel the season. It would be a farce anyway.
i do, as do a lot of others here.
Which includes me, because no baseball would suck badly, even though it wouldn’t be the end of the world.
We are going to get to a point that nobody will give a crap about any professional sport. I am surprised by how little I miss it. Will never pay an outlandish sum of money for a ticket or pay-per-view ever again.
I already am there. Am fine paying. A penny got any professional sporting anything
I agree it’s old and tired
I am not surprised to see one valid point from anyone here. Nothing but whinny chatter and look at me stuff going on
My industry, real estate and home loans, is driven entirely by revenue splits. The NFL and NHL union contracts are based on revenue splits. IMO, that is the most fair way to run a business. Not perfect, but fair.
The key is transparency and trust. In my business we all know the dollars changing hands and how much each party takes, we all see the same contracts, the same numbers. This is much more complicated, but can be done.
If I’m the union I look at this as a chance to establish a salary floor. There’s no reason teams like KC and Pittsburgh should be rolling out payrolls less than their take of revenue sharing. Salary floor = higher pay across the board.
100%
What I don’t get about this is why the MLBPA is harping on this being “a salary cap”. Thats terrible branding/marketing of the issue on their part. They should be arguing that the owners are going to lock them out and they should be voicing concern with the players and their families taking the physical health risks. If they focus on those issues and the fact that they already have an agreement for player pay, thats much more compelling than being opposed to a salary cap.
They have some decent arguments against this proposal that they can use to negotiate something better, or to sway public opinion in their favor for keeping the deal that they already agreed to, but I really don’t think labeling this a “salary cap” issue is helping them at all.
This is a great time to sell the players as the good guys. “They want a revenue split now that revenues are down, but what about a revenue split when times are good? The players are the ones risking their health, being away from their families The NFL does it, hockey does it, why not baseball?.”
I’d sell this so hard to the public that come the next CBA negotiations I’d have the overwhelming public sentiment. I’d almost be willing to take a little on the chin in this agreement just to set up the bigger one.
billionaires are what they are because they have been great at separating money from others. most current owners enriched themselves by managing other people’s money. they will not give in to public pressure especially when a lot of poor people are on their side blindly.
The virus is the biggest problem, players must feel safe to return to play. This secondary, they will work it out.
that is the essence and most cannot understand it even if it is written over and over.
Not a chance this season is played purely due to politics
There is going be only one reason why there will be no season and that is the virus. The Money will get worked out, both sides know they cannot afford to not play over money but they will fight it out for a while and eventually make compromises and meet somewhere in the middle.
bingo. it benefits no one to not have a season, and both sides probably know what the magic number is. its just a chess game now to get to that number. few proposals back and forth and we are golden.
This is just an intial offer to get both sides to the table to get the ball rolling, a lot is going to change in the next couple of weeks.
They will work it out.
@MLBTR
All of these posts about opening should have closed comment sections. The last thing this site needs is rightwing and leftwing trolls ruining it.
Censorship happens only in China, Russia, Cuba, North Korea, Iran… That is why United States is so great……Freedom of thought, speech, expression.
that you are suggesting these comments of being so radical doesnt reflect well on you.
The owners will have no capacity revenue. Players, like all of us, need to sacrifice a bit. If this falls through it’s strictly in the players and the union.
I do not disagree with Clark, the owners are trying to use this pandemic to get their way. But without fans in the stands, the owners lose a huge chunk of revenue. Without concessions on salaries by the players, most teams will lose less money by not playing a season. So the players have a decision to make. Take the money they already got, stand on your principles and call it a year, or play, earn more money even if it isn’t what you’d normally make. In either event, the next CBA negotiations are going to get ugly.
Find it interesting that the owners want a partnership with the players over revenues, yet they didn’t include Tony Clark or any players in the negotiations. Would have made more sense to get the players input before approving their proposal
thats the annoying part here. the fact that its always a back and forth instead of a single, open negotiation. it seems like they want to make negotiations like these longer and more annoying.
I just hope we have a season……just let them play……..Baseball is America !
FUCK TONY CLARK!
The MLBPA is going to take baseball from us now and at the end of 2021
Kill the season. I’ll take the KBO over this mess.
Let’s reflect on the fact that South Korea and the US were in nearly the same spot a couple months back in terms of infections and deaths. Korea now at 300~ while the US is near 80,000.
Is this freedom?
If it’s truly tied to revenue… These billion dollar TV contracts… Part of me suddenly thinks Heath Hembree suddenly makes $10 million going back and forth between Pawtuckett and Fenway
I think the yearly max is $250m from the Dodgers. Low end is $20m in Miami. So, not quite.