Headlines

  • Yordan Alvarez To Miss Time With “Pretty Significant” Ankle Sprain
  • Giants To Promote Bryce Eldridge
  • Mets Moving Sean Manaea To The Bullpen
  • Blue Jays To Promote Trey Yesavage For MLB Debut
  • Dodgers Place Will Smith On Injured List
  • Dipoto: Mariners Interested In Re-Signing Josh Naylor
  • Previous
  • Next
Register
Login
  • Hoops Rumors
  • Pro Football Rumors
  • Pro Hockey Rumors

MLB Trade Rumors

Remove Ads
  • Home
  • Teams
    • AL East
      • Baltimore Orioles
      • Boston Red Sox
      • New York Yankees
      • Tampa Bay Rays
      • Toronto Blue Jays
    • AL Central
      • Chicago White Sox
      • Cleveland Guardians
      • Detroit Tigers
      • Kansas City Royals
      • Minnesota Twins
    • AL West
      • Athletics
      • Houston Astros
      • Los Angeles Angels
      • Seattle Mariners
      • Texas Rangers
    • NL East
      • Atlanta Braves
      • Miami Marlins
      • New York Mets
      • Philadelphia Phillies
      • Washington Nationals
    • NL Central
      • Chicago Cubs
      • Cincinnati Reds
      • Milwaukee Brewers
      • Pittsburgh Pirates
      • St. Louis Cardinals
    • NL West
      • Arizona Diamondbacks
      • Colorado Rockies
      • Los Angeles Dodgers
      • San Diego Padres
      • San Francisco Giants
  • About
    • MLB Trade Rumors
    • Tim Dierkes
    • Writing team
    • Advertise
    • Archives
  • Contact
  • Tools
    • 2025-26 MLB Free Agent List
    • 2026-27 MLB Free Agent List
    • Contract Tracker
    • Transaction Tracker
    • Agency Database
  • NBA/NFL/NHL
    • Hoops Rumors
    • Pro Football Rumors
    • Pro Hockey Rumors
  • App
  • Chats
Go To Pro Hockey Rumors
Go To Hoops Rumors

Rob Manfred Downplays Salary Cap Dispute With Bryce Harper

By Leo Morgenstern | August 2, 2025 at 10:59pm CDT

An altercation between MLB commissioner Rob Manfred and Phillies star Bryce Harper made headlines in July, with the two-time MVP reportedly standing “nose to nose” with the commissioner and telling him he could “get the [expletive] out of our clubhouse” if he was going to talk about implementing a salary cap (per ESPN’s Jeff Passan). Manfred was holding his annual meeting with the Phillies’ players at Citizens Bank Park.

Reports from Passan and the New York Post’s Jon Heyman and Joel Sherman differ on when the confrontation occurred. Passan writes that Harper sat quietly for most of the meeting, which lasted over an hour, before tensions boiled over and he approached the commissioner. In contrast, Heyman and Sherman write that his comments came “about five minutes into” Manfred’s opening remarks. Regardless of certain discrepancies, what’s clear is that, while Manfred never directly mentioned a salary cap, Harper believed it was implied. He felt strongly enough to claim that players “are not scared to lose 162 games” in their fight against a cap (per Passan). He also questioned what Manfred has ever done “to benefit the players” (per Heyman and Sherman). Despite Harper’s comments, Manfred stayed to finish the meeting, doubling down on the importance of talking about, in Passan’s words, “threats to MLB’s business and ways to grow the game.”

Afterwards, Harper’s teammate Nick Castellanos described the ordeal to ESPN as intense and passionate, and he seemed to confirm it went both ways. “The commissioner [was] giving it back to Bryce and Bryce [was] giving it back to the commissioner,” he explained.

Afterwards, Manfred declined to comment to ESPN or the New York Post, while Harper later told reporters (including Bob Cooney of NBC Sports Philadelphia): “You guys saw what was in the article. But I won’t be getting into the details of what happened or how I felt or anything else like that…I’m just trying to worry about baseball…Everybody saw the words and everything that happened. I don’t want to say anything more than that.”

Harper continued: “I’ve talked labor and I’ve done it in a way that I don’t think I need to talk to the media about it…I’ve always been very vocal, just not in a way that people can see.”

Yesterday, however, Manfred spoke at Wrigley Field to announce that the Cubs would host the 2027 All-Star Game, and he finally addressed his dispute with Harper, claiming: “It was an individual picking a particular way to express himself, and I don’t think you need to make more out of that than that” (per Patrick Mooney of The Athletic).

Perhaps that’s true. Yet, there is no denying it would be in Manfred’s best interests to downplay his altercation with one of the most influential players in the league. It’s also in his best interests to believe this was an isolated incident of an “individual” expressing himself rather than a reflection of how many players feel across all 30 teams.

With the current collective bargaining agreement between MLB and the MLBPA set to expire on December 1, 2026, it’s no secret that several owners are interested in instituting a salary cap. Indeed, according to ESPN’s Jorge Castillo, the MLBPA believes Manfred is pushing for a cap in his clubhouse meetings this year – even if he isn’t using those exact words. Unsurprisingly, the players association is strongly against a cap, arguing it would primarily serve to artificially suppress player salaries rather than increase parity around the league or help to grow the game.

Speaking to reporters ahead of the All-Star Game last month, MLBPA executive director Tony Clark described a salary cap as “institutionalized collusion” (per Castillo). “A cap is not about growing the game,” he said. “A cap is about franchise values and profits. That’s what a cap is about.”

What’s more, while Manfred might not be willing to say “salary cap,” he has already mentioned the possibility of a lockout. Back in March, Clark said that he is expecting a work stoppage after the 2026 season, and many around the league are concerned about the possibility of contentious CBA negotiations eating into the 2027 campaign. It’s not hard to guess what the sticking point in those negotiations might be.

Castellanos told Hannah Keyser and Zach Crizer of The Bandwagon (who first reported on the “heated” meeting between Manfred and the Phillies) that the commissioner was “very eloquently speaking around” the idea of a salary cap. He later said to ESPN: “Rob seems to be in a pretty desperate place on how important it is to get this salary cap because he’s floating the word ’lockout’ two years in advance of our collective bargaining agreement [expiring].”

Manfred began holding annual meetings with each team’s players three years ago, following the lockout that lasted much of the 2021-22 offseason and delayed the start of the 2022 campaign. One reason for these meetings? He wants to communicate directly to the players rather than have his messages go through the MLBPA. During a recent investor event held by the Braves, he said: “The strategy is to get directly to the players. I don’t think the leadership of this union is anxious to lead the way to change. So we need to energize the workforce in order to get them familiar with or supportive of the idea that maybe change in the system could be good for everybody” (per The Athletic’s Evan Drellich).

One way to read those comments? Manfred knows the MLBPA is staunchly opposed to a salary cap. It certainly seems as if he’s hoping to pit the union’s membership against the union’s leadership, in an effort the push through changes that would, in Clark’s words: “add to the owners’ profits and franchise values, while prohibiting clubs from fully competing to put the best product on the field for the fans and limiting player compensation, guarantees and flexibility” (per Drellich).

If Harper’s reaction is any indication, Manfred might not be having as much success connecting with players as he hoped, even as he has, at times, been accompanied at his clubhouse meetings by respected former players in the Commissioner’s Ambassador Program (CAP). But at least for now, the commissioner insists it’s not that serious: “I think more has been made out of this than needs to be made out of it. Bryce expressed his views. At the end of the meeting, we shook hands and went our separate ways. Not all that significant” (per Andrew Seligman of the Associated Press).

Photo in article courtesy of Bill Streicher, Imagn Images.

Share 0 Retweet 0 Send via email0

Newsstand Philadelphia Phillies Bryce Harper Rob Manfred

Minor MLB Transactions: 8/2/25
Main
KBO’s KT Wiz Sign Andrew Stevenson
View Comments (427)
Post a Comment

427 Comments

  1. blueboy714

    2 months ago

    Hopefully, the rest of the teams and some players will give Manfred a piece of their mind as well

    48
    Reply
    • Teamspirit

      2 months ago

      Manfred and some of the owners (Moreno) extended the last lockout by not bargaining in good faith. The players are right not to trust him.

      37
      Reply
      • Halo11Fan

        2 months ago

        And there were players that did not bargain in good faith.

        Both sides have people who want to break the backs of the others. How’d did that negotiation work out for both sides? pretty darn good.

        That said, no way will the players allow a salary cap, and on that, I support them 100%.

        Manfred is like just about anyone else. Part good, part bad.

        10
        Reply
        • rct

          2 months ago

          imo, Manfred is mostly bad with a little good sprinkled in to try to forget how he’s mostly bad. Just like Goodell and many other sports commissioners.

          19
          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          2 months ago

          He’s done some really bad things. Moving the All-Star game out of Atlanta. The Ghost Runner starting the 10th. Why not the 12th. The entire covid (lockdown) mess, which everyone screwed up.

          But the three batter minimum. Pitch clock. Two pickoff moves. Bigger bases. The way the draft is now conducted. Play every team. More balanced schedules.

          That stuff is great.

          Let’s see how this year negotiations go. But I give him a solid grade.

          12
          Reply
        • ChuckyNJ

          2 months ago

          The ghost runner was put in as a time-saving measure during the pandemic. PUSH.
          The pitch clock is why baseball is watchable again. MAJOR WIN.
          Balanced schedule downgrades traditional rivalries. MAJOR, MAJOR LOSE.

          9
          Reply
        • coldgoldenfalstaff

          2 months ago

          Pitch clock is why pitchers are getting hurt more than ever – Lose for players

          4
          Reply
        • Sadface

          2 months ago

          I agree with the play every team part. Two pick off moves opens the door for more steals but isn’t it better to see a real speedster steal 50 bases rather than so so runners who couldn’t get home from second on a triple have 10? More balanced true but there is an actual way to balance the schedule by adding or cutting games which they don’t want to do either. Bigger bases don’t really seem to add much.

          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          2 months ago

          There is just no Dara to support that opinion.

          Spin rates and velocity have a lot more to do with pitcher injuries.

          10
          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          2 months ago

          People will have different opinions.

          I like most of this stuff. It’s great if not everyone feels the same way. N

          1
          Reply
        • Sadface

          2 months ago

          We need less traditional rivalries. That way fans who don’t know teams outside of NY and California might actually watch the game. Ghost runner is a stupid rule. Games should end in a tie after so many innings. And the DH should be considered a regular position not just the guy who bats for the pitcher as far as a team switching a DH to the OF or catcher late in a game should not lose their DH.

          3
          Reply
        • rct

          2 months ago

          “He’s done some really bad things. Moving the All-Star game out of Atlanta.”

          Hard, hard disagree on this. Part of his job as commissioner is to maximize profits. There was a ton of outrage at the time over the Georgia voter issue. He gauged the political winds and did the prudent thing for business. When people stopped caring about the Georgia voter issue, he brought the All-Star game right back to Atlanta. In each situation, he did what was best for business at that exact moment in time. I don’t think you can fault him for that. Agree or disagree with what he did, but he did it for business reasons.

          15
          Reply
        • ChuckyNJ

          1 month ago

          The traditional rivalries bring out the strongest interest. Yankees and Red Sox used to play each other 18 times a season. Now it’s 12 or 13.
          Ask a Cubs fan whether he’d watch more games against the American League or more games against the Cardinals.

          4
          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          1 month ago

          There was manufactured outrage based on a total lie. A 100 percent fabricated story based solely on political manipulation to the clueless.

          The commission gave in to a political lie.

          11
          Reply
        • bwmiller79

          1 month ago

          Why didnt he say, “you can get the F out of our clubhouse if you’re here to convince us that ABS is a good thing for the sport.” “Why dont you get the F out of our clubhouse if you are going to cheapen the game with pitchers challenging the umpires call with a tip of their cap to a BS computerized strike zone!”

          Bryce Harper and his 40M / year salary says, “Hey, get the F out of our clubhouse with your Krispy Kremes, we already got a bunch of fancy pastries.”

          If you let that damn robot ump in its all over

          Reply
        • Sadface

          1 month ago

          because fans pay their money to see umpires umpire, right?
          Not some robot that will accurately read the strike zone 100% of the time.

          8
          Reply
        • Ignorant Son-of-a-b

          1 month ago

          13 instead of 17 games against your division rivals?? I think 13 is just about right. Could you imagine the uproar if every AL Central team got to play the White Sox for 17 games last year???

          4
          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          1 month ago

          I’m very much in favor of robo-umps. Umps have decided games. They have decided playoff teams. They have decided playoff winners. They have decided World Series winners.

          I’m much more in favor of players and fate deciding those things than umpires.

          14
          Reply
        • Bart Harley Jarvis

          1 month ago

          Careful of what you wish for…
          youtu.be/mvrva8NoMLM

          1
          Reply
        • bwmiller79

          1 month ago

          That is also a loss, the departure from division rivalries also cheapens the game. Soon enough all the teams will be corporate owned, corporate sponsors, so it won’t matter much anyways.

          As far as the umpires go, yeah, they do pay to see the umpires ring a guy up on a 3-2 pitch. And they like to gripe about it and they like to cheer about in the moment, not five seconds later after the robot ump overturns the call and everyone sits their in complacent saying to themselves, “oh, I guess it was a ball” (the crowd erupts in a synchronized golf clap)

          Reply
        • DaveyJ is a little bitch

          1 month ago

          It’s great that a pitcher can only attempt a pick off 3 times before the runner can walk to get the stolen base? It’s great that we no longer get plays at home plate? Or how about banning sniffs so horrible offensive players can have better stats? Don’t even get me started on the horrible ghost runner rule. Manfred is ruining baseball one rule at a time. He has done NOTHING good for the game. He’s a fraud

          2
          Reply
        • luckyh

          1 month ago

          It seemed like every other week they were playing each other. Very watered down. Prefer this, and am grateful the games aren’t 6 hours long anymore. Overall I like what he’s done. I am for a salary floor which is what the union should be pushing. Teams shouldn’t be allowed to cheap out and pocket revenue sharing. Instead they act like the spoiled brats they are and have a tantrum.

          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          coldgold,

          Is there any data to support your theory? I think it’s from pitchers needing to throw max effort every pitch, either top velocity or crazy spin, to reach and stay in the majors.

          1
          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          bwmiller,

          Harper’s contract has an AAV of $25.4M, we’ll below the $40M you mentioned. He spread his salary over a longer period to lower the AAV to help the team bring in more talent and reduce the CBT penalty.

          He got his money and is pushing to make sure others have the same opportunity.

          2
          Reply
        • tiger9

          1 month ago

          Exactly….as a Tiger fan where is the rivalry that I had with Toronto?? But sure…let’s make sure we play Colorado and other teams we don’t know and don’t see at all. The World Series used to be two teams that were strangers to each other. It was fine. Please don’t get me talking about the sickening runner at second base. Embarrassing to say the least.

          4
          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          tiger9,

          Counter-arguments are:

          1) now you get to see and know every team and get to learn more about them over time

          2) getting into the playoffs is more fair now that everyone plays everyone vs. a team in the AL East (as an example) having to play four other good teams a bunch vs. a team in the AL Central getting to stomp on the White Sox a bunch of times.

          2
          Reply
        • toddk-2

          1 month ago

          To me it sounds like he’s done alot more good than bad from your pov

          Reply
        • toddk-2

          1 month ago

          In the usa we don’t settle for ties even if its the best outcome

          Reply
        • toddk-2

          1 month ago

          Does the 5 gms help eyes on the game or the 10 vs pirates and reds hurt more. Basically its 20 if vount both cubs and cards

          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          toddk-2, lots of U.S. hockey and soccer teams – an occasionally NFL squads – would disagree.

          Reply
        • Fever Pitch Guy

          1 month ago

          Halo – No, Manfred is all bad.

          Do you allow 30 greedy owners to control everything you say and do?

          Manfred is the owners’ puppet. As soon as you realize that, you’ll understand how bad it is for him to be in a position of authority that is supposed to act in the best interest of the game but instead acts in the best interest of only the owners.

          2
          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          1 month ago

          GBs, a salary cap is a non-starter. They have players will die on that hill and the players need to make that clear.

          1
          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          FPG,

          The commissioner has always been a puppet for the owners and never should be viewed otherwise. The ” best interests of the game” concept is BS marketing spin to push ownership’s agenda.

          2
          Reply
        • bhambrave

          1 month ago

          Atlanta small businesses, many of them minority owned, lost about $100M because the game was moved. That was not right.

          1
          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          Halo, I totally understand the players’ full opposition to a cap. Manfred’s statement that players would have made $2.5B more over the last whatever period (10 years?) is completely disingenuous.

          Where would that money have come from? The owners’ pockets, and they’re not interested in giving their money away. If they were, they could create a $2.5B pool and distribute the funds to former and current players. Of course, that would never happen.

          1
          Reply
        • Fever Pitch Guy

          1 month ago

          gbs – I’m old enough to remember Fay Vincent, Bart Giamatti, Pete Ueberroth and Bowie Kuhn. Those guys were far from puppets, they truly had baseball’s best interests as a priority.

          Plenty of owners have been disciplined by those guys.

          And since Fay was forced out? Not one single owner disciplined.

          3
          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          FPG,

          I’m old enough to remember those guys, too. Well, I don’t recall specifics regarding Kuhn, but I’ve read he was a mixed bag. (Aren’t we all?) Vincent was fired as soon as owners realized he wasn’t their puppet. I liked Giamatti. Ueberroth led the collusion efforts, so I can’t say I’m a fan.

          2
          Reply
        • Fever Pitch Guy

          1 month ago

          gbs – Can you please clarify what you mean about Pete? Are you saying he was responsible for the collusion? Or are you saying he led the efforts to discipline the owners for it? I honestly don’t remember much about his tenure.

          1
          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          FPG,

          Ueberroth called owners stupid for giving players big contracts and said they shouldn’t compete against each other for free agents.

          1
          Reply
        • Fever Pitch Guy

          1 month ago

          gbs – Thanks, yeah that wasn’t smart of him. Commissioner should be impartial, like a referee or umpire.

          2
          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          1 month ago

          It’s the way of life. Everyone is looking out for their self interest.

          In the ball Ball Four, Jim Boutain wrote that Marvin Miller is our Bowie Kuhn.

          Manfred works for the owners. Owners are not benevolent overseers.

          I don’t know what fans expect.

          1
          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          1 month ago

          Fever Pitch. Read Ball Four. The players thought Kuhn was a puppet.

          Owners hire commissioners to represent their needs. Always have.

          Reply
        • Fever Pitch Guy

          1 month ago

          Chuck – Ghost runner sucks, pitch clock is great, but you’re way off on the schedule.

          First of all, it’s NOT a balanced schedule. Teams play their divisional rivals 13 times, down from 19 times but still double the number of games they play against the other two divisions in the league (6-7 games each).

          Second, you think the fans enjoyed their team having to play 19 games a year against each crappy divisional rival? Do you know how many Rays and Orioles games at Fenway I had to give away tickets because nobody wanted to see them?

          Third, when it was 19 games per division rival that was extremely unfair how teams in weak divisions had a major advantage on winning a WC and teams in strong divisions were at a major disadvantage.

          If there was no WC, then I could live with 19 games per division rival …. but the days of no WC are long, long gone and are never coming back.

          4
          Reply
        • Joemo

          1 month ago

          You’re right. Having pitchers throwing at max effort before they feel they are ready (due to the pitch clock) has no affect whatsoever.

          Try lifting weights and decreasing the time between reps. As you get more tired, and having to repeat the motion again before you’re ready, you have a much greater chance of injury.

          It’s just common sense. It’s both of them, and they both play a major role.

          Reply
        • California Halo's

          1 month ago

          No. Pitch clock has not caused most of the arm injuries. Trying to throw every pitch as hard as they can has. Most of the Pitchers are throwers. Pitching use to be about changing speeds and pinpoint accuracy. Players need to get back to pitching and stop trying to throw the ball to the moon all the time.

          1
          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          1 month ago

          There just isn’t data to support that.

          Reply
        • Tigernut2000

          1 month ago

          Tigers/Cubs and Chisox/Cubs are great draws. I’m sure Yanks and Bosox sell well. Not sure if the others are of any interest.

          Reply
        • Dock_Elvis

          1 month ago

          Pitchers in the day were TAUGHT to pitch fast and didnt need the 20 second clock. I loathe Manfred mostly. But the clock has been in amatuer baseball since the early 90s on some level. Clock is nothing besides young Pitchers growing up max effort to light up radar guns.

          Reply
        • Ignorant Son-of-a-b

          1 month ago

          And pitchers are lazy these days and don’t run constantly anymore to build up their legs and lower half. That’s how Nolan Ryan and Jamie Moyer lasted so long. Ran their asses of before starts , after starts. Takes pressure off the arm if you have a lower half that does most of the work. Max Scherzer is another guy who swears by jogging.

          1
          Reply
        • Dock_Elvis

          1 month ago

          Ignorant – Ryan and Moyer were both outliers in their OWN generations.

          2
          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          Joemo,

          We can all speculate, and there’s probably some truth to all of these factors, but pitchers have gotten hurt forever. The specific reasons are very difficult to pin down or teams would be making changes to address the problem.

          1
          Reply
        • TunaNoCrust

          1 month ago

          Atlanta was ready for that all star game and every seat was going to be filled. Nobody was boycotting the game because of politics. Manfred was wrong to take the AS game out of ATL.

          2
          Reply
        • WhenMattStairsIsKing

          1 month ago

          * His handling of the Astros’ sign-stealing scandal was botched, especially for not punishing any players involved.

          * Due had the audacity to call the World Series trophy just a “piece of metal.”

          * Ghost runners suck and so does trying to automate the strike zone.

          * Labor negotiations are tense AF again and he’d be the reason why there’d be a strike in 2027 with no CBA.

          * I honestly think he’s purely an owner-biased businessman who does not love baseball. I didn’t like Selig either but at least he was passionate about the game.

          * Expanded playoffs make a long season even longer and waters down the season.

          I’m not a fan.

          1
          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          1 month ago

          1) Good point on the Houston situation, but blame the player’s Union more. He didn’t have the power.

          2) I think too many teams make the playoffs.

          3) I think it’s high time for the automated strike zones, most fans agree.

          And if there is a strike, especially about a cap, I’ll revise my opinion.

          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          MattStairs and Halo,

          There won’t be a strike. The owners will implement a lockout.

          1
          Reply
        • Fever Pitch Guy

          1 month ago

          When – Without immunity, MLB had no case. They needed the cooperation from players.

          2
          Reply
        • Teamspirit

          1 month ago

          If enough fans write their local newspapers/sites showcasing how dishonest the Commissioner and the Owners are,it might put some pressure on them to end it sooner.

          Reply
      • 99Captain Judge99

        1 month ago

        A clown and an idiot. So really never really surprised in regards to the antics.

        1
        Reply
      • tuck 2

        1 month ago

        So the players signing $700 million contracts are being treated unjustly? And the small market owners that at best hope to break even are the villains? I just want to understand your logic.

        At the current trajectory MLB will need to follow the path of European football and break up the leagues into first and second divisions.

        Every other major sport has salary caps and spending rules – only baseball is headed to self destruction. .

        1
        Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          tuck,

          One player signing a true $700M contract with a large-market team with an owner willing to spend like crazy isn’t a trend, though multiple teams being willing to top $700M indicates the amount of money (some) teams are bringing in.

          How many small-market owners are barely breaking even? A Pittsburgh journalist using Pirates-sourced info showed they lost a little money recently while an independent source showed their player payroll is covered before they sell a single ticket, beer, or t-shirt. I’ll always put more trust in the independent numbers, even if they’re not 100% correct.

          No super wealthy person or company is going to willfully invest in a business that is losing money, but they keep buying baseball teams, which tells me teams are good investments.

          1
          Reply
        • SportsFan0000

          1 month ago

          MLB Franchises are along term investment.

          Padres were sold for 84M a few decades ago.

          Then, for 700M+

          Now, they are worth at least double that price.

          Owners are not losing money.

          If they disagree, then open up their books to prove it.

          1
          Reply
        • Dock_Elvis

          1 month ago

          SportFan0000. They definitely will be longterm for new owners. The last generation of owners saw both the new stadium boom and streaming/internet resources appear. I don’t think it’s wrong of someone wants to conclude the next 20s years might see MLB slide into the market recognition of a PGA. As boomers pass…they simply can’t be replaced domestically. MLB owners very much need growth in the Asian rim, and Europe. But it’s hard to imagine with the competing entertainment market that theres going to be the same growth as we saw over the past 20-30 years.

          I live in the Midwest. Very blue collar traditional sports environment. Was juat in Arizona for a week. The number of pro soccer jerseys I saw on young people and children was astounding.

          Baseball being a burgeoning “wealthy” sport isn’t probably doing it any favors. And MLB has a weird hankering to keep altering what made it strong to behind with…tradition..to try and please crowds that dont really NEED it. Ends up pleasing no one.

          Reply
    • Butter Biscuits

      2 months ago

      I’m curious see if the players reps from the union will get a chance to speak with individual owners on why a salary cap is not good for baseball see if any owner gives them the time of day

      2
      Reply
      • Halo11Fan

        1 month ago

        A salary cap is good for baseball. Performance, not tenure is good for education,

        Since when do Unions care about a product? Never, they care about their employees.

        The Union will never go for it….NEVER.

        Reply
        • octavian8

          1 month ago

          Halo, if you say Unions don’t care about a product you have to also business doesn’t care about employees. True leaders care about both because each is needed to be successful.

          2
          Reply
        • DaveyJ is a little bitch

          1 month ago

          Halo you’re a joke a manfred puppet. Muted

          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          It’s always amusing when someone replies and gives zero indication of who they’re replying to…

          2
          Reply
        • DaveyJ is a little bitch

          1 month ago

          Gbs42: perhaps the word halo at the start of my comment can give you some kind of indication who I was talking to

          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          123kid,

          Bad timing on my part to follow your comment, as it was more of a generalized comment about several posts here and everywhere on this site. You’re one of the few who addressed the specific individual you’re replying to.

          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          1 month ago

          They should care about their employees health of the company, but Unions don’t.

          I’m not a big fan of pencil pushing bureaucrat who micro manage costs either. I’ve been employed by too many of those.

          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          1 month ago

          GBs, the weasel blocked me, I can’t reply to him,

          It’s a very common response for someone who can’t discuss a topic with civility.

          On the internet, that’s called a Tuesday.

          1
          Reply
        • gbs42

          1 month ago

          Halo, like anything, unions (and owners) can be helpful and harmful. Ownership often is interested in largely the near-term results so they can profit by boosting performance and then selling the team/stock options/whatever before moving on to the next venture.

          Reply
        • bhambrave

          1 month ago

          Teachers’ unions. I don’t have a problem with Police unions.

          Reply
        • Halo11Fan

          1 month ago

          I’m just saying that Union heads don’t care about the product. They care about their members.

          I don’t get upset about it.

          Reply
        • bhambrave

          1 month ago

          In Alabama, the teacher’s union doesn’t even care much about the members. It’s mostly just a fundraising apparatus for politics. The union heads make about 10 times more than the average teacher.

          1
          Reply
    • Jcant

      1 month ago

      So you’d rather MLB not play games instead of just having a cap.

      You’re a fan of baseball, right?

      Reply
    • VegasSDfan

      1 month ago

      Not the fans problem

      1
      Reply
  2. Hagar

    2 months ago

    Really NOT looking forward to the war between the players union and the owners.

    17
    Reply
    • bigjonliljon

      2 months ago

      I agree with you. But I have a feeling this next CBA is going to be a major fight and it will last into the season. Games will be missed and who ever blinks first will be the difference. Owners don’t like missing profits but can afford too much easier than the majority on players.

      4
      Reply
      • Mets Era Thumping Soto

        2 months ago

        If either side is stupid enough to miss games then they will deserve what they get when they try to come back. People will find other forms or entertainment and as bud light found out many customers won’t return.

        2
        Reply
        • Reggie Smith

          2 months ago

          That argument has been made for 50 years. Its not true. People come back.

          Bud Light is a bad comparison:
          A) Bud never stopped producing their product.
          B) Their product has tons of competition, there’s not another baseball league.
          C) Politics are very divisive now.

          18
          Reply
        • Mets Era Thumping Soto

          2 months ago

          It’s not 1974. There are a lot more entertainment options out there. No one better be running a business like 50 years ago or they will be out of business. If I take me money and decide to do to do two more cruises a year then spend it on baseball I might not stop and I’m a hard core baseball fan. What will the average or fair weather fans going to do?

          6
          Reply
        • DarrenDreifortsContract

          2 months ago

          There’s a lot more entertaintment options these days than there was 50 years ago.

          Baseball has a lot of steam right now. It would be absolutely terrible for there to be a strike.

          It took 12 after the 94 strike to regain the same attendance.

          4
          Reply
        • Reggie Smith

          2 months ago

          So youre saying people who quit Bud started going on cruises instead? No, they switched to competing beers of which there are hundreds. MLB has no direct competition, and people cannot go on a Saturday afternoon cruise, instead of visiting a ballpark. You are full of terrible comparisons.

          12
          Reply
        • DarrenDreifortsContract

          2 months ago

          I’m afraid your comparisons are terrible my friend.

          Comparing an addictive substance to watching a sport.

          I’ve never heard of anyone going to rehab because they couldn’t go to a baseball game on a Saturday afternoon.

          3
          Reply
        • Blue Baron

          2 months ago

          Dreifort: This will be a lockout, not a strike.

          The last one was a strike, but it was instigated and extended by the owners being unwilling to bargain in good faith.

          3
          Reply
        • LonnieB

          2 months ago

          To add to your point bud light has made a come back and I still see it at rodeos and it’s still drank by kid rock and rednecks…..I’ll still watch baseball even with a salary cap but Manfred needs to retire or be forced out. He’s worse than a lifer politician.

          3
          Reply
        • kcmark

          2 months ago

          These days it’s easier to find other forms of entertainment than it is to find what channel the game is on.

          9
          Reply
        • Reggie Smith

          2 months ago

          “Comparing an addictive substance to watching a sport”

          Are you talking to me? I didnt bring up Bud, someone else did, by saying its a similar situation if theres a work stoppage. Im saying they’re nothing alike. Learn how to follow a conversation.

          Reply
        • Mets Era Thumping Soto

          2 months ago

          They gave their customers an opportunity to try another product. Baseball has plenty of competition for entertainment dollars. You are sadly thinking it’s baseball or nothing and that’s not even close to being accurate.

          4
          Reply
        • Reggie Smith

          2 months ago

          Where did I say “it’s baseball or nothing”?

          You are sadly trying to reinterpret my words to nonsense. Sorry youre mad cause I schooled you in the other thread. Dont take things so personal.

          1
          Reply
        • Mets Era Thumping Soto

          2 months ago

          You said they had no competition. You haven’t schooled anything. Thinking you have is funny.

          1
          Reply
        • Reggie Smith

          2 months ago

          Changing words again “no DIRECT competion” as in “no other baseball league”. Now youre just straight lying. Youre not funny, more sad.

          2
          Reply
        • Mets Era Thumping Soto

          2 months ago

          They do have direct competition. No one is obligated to watch baseball. I can spend my money on a million other things. You need help. Worried about schooling people and being ignorant.

          2
          Reply
        • Paleobros

          2 months ago

          I think Bud Light’s gonna be okay

          4
          Reply
        • Bart Harley Jarvis

          1 month ago

          Hey, don’t underestimate the amount of degenerate gambling currently going on with baseball. The Gamblers Anonymous hotline number is provided in the fine print of the between-innings Fan Duel commercials.

          1
          Reply
        • smuzqwpdmx

          1 month ago

          To say that MLB has no direct competition is frankly silly. I’m a baseball-only fan who doesn’t watch any other sports, unlike most baseball fans. But when MLB wasn’t there in 2020 it took me about a week to become a Rakuten Monkeys fan. This year, when MLB TV prices went up again, I downgraded to radio for a while and watched Savannah Bananas games instead until the price came down to something I could justify. And in person I go to AAA games instead of MLB games to save money. When MLB makes itself unpalatable to fans in any sense, the vast majority of us can pivot to alternative ways of enjoying baseball.

          Reply
        • Hagar

          1 month ago

          I prefer Miller Lite

          1
          Reply
      • bwmiller79

        1 month ago

        They get everybody talking about salary cap and then they sweep in a couple line items like ABS and weaker divisional play like they are no big deal, it’s misdirection. The ratify automated balls and strikes.

        They take away 16 division games, those are the best games of the regular season.

        They get some other rule changes in that they want and in the end the players, whom would likely benefit as a majority, avoid a salary cap.

        Players have any issue with ABS?

        The worst part is all you ever read in the media is how players like the ABS, and “it’s not that bad” and you never get any media on the players who see it as I do, who see it as a system that can be gamed, as a system that works against many approaches to hitting that have added a special wrinkle to the game, who see it as a infringement on the fairness of the game which is the charge and duty of the umpires, it’s an infringement on the umpires sense of purpose.

        Sure they all say this ain’t so bad, we can live with this, but it’s a interruption in the game that may only take five seconds, but breaks the spirit of the game every time it’s used. The umpires resent it, their spirit erodes. Every time those five seconds are invoked, a few fans lose interest. When the fans lose their hearts, the players won’t care either it don’t matter how much they get paid.

        Reply
    • CleaverGreene

      2 months ago

      Who would be?

      Reply
    • Sadface

      2 months ago

      I think we fans are tired of this war between millionaires and billionaires over how to spend our money. The funny thing is (and I am guilty too) is that fans say they don’t want this or that but when changes are made that they hate, they just generally go along with it. Don’t want a National league DH, but now we got one it adds an extra hitter!

      Reply
      • JuanUribeJazzHands

        1 month ago

        “Sadface
        August 2, 2025
        I think we fans are tired of this war between millionaires and billionaires over how to spend our money. ”

        What?

        1) The war isn’t over how anyone SPENDS that money. It’s about how much labor deserves vs how much capital deserves.

        2) It ain’t your money. You voluntarily chose to spend it on baseball.

        1
        Reply
    • Sadface

      1 month ago

      I’m with you, Sammy., only the press would look forward to a players’ union = owners war and then only to have something to write about.

      Reply
    • beknighted

      1 month ago

      I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m looking forward to more Savannah Bananas telecasts in 2027.

      Reply
  3. Cubs Kev

    2 months ago

    Couldn’t care less for either one of them.

    7
    Reply
    • braveshomer

      2 months ago

      Me neither but good for Harper, I can’t stand Manfred way more. Worst commissioner in all of sports imo.

      8
      Reply
      • MeowMeow

        2 months ago

        This comment is way too kind to the commissioners of the other three major US sports.

        11
        Reply
        • braveshomer

          2 months ago

          the bar is very low let’s be honest lol

          1
          Reply
        • ChuckyNJ

          2 months ago

          Make that “the other FOUR or FIVE major US sports”.

          Reply
      • Blue Baron

        2 months ago

        braveshomer: I think Bud Selig was worse. He promised the owners that he would break the union and get them a salary cap, which led to the cancellation of the 1994 postseason.

        Now he talks out of the other side of his mouth about how sad he was about that happening.

        What a BS artist.

        6
        Reply
      • Sadface

        2 months ago

        I like mostly how Harper plays the game. He should not run his mouth so much, but it’s okay in this situation. Manfred works for the owners not really for MLB which does include its players association.

        Reply
      • sad tormented neglected mariners fan

        1 month ago

        I would say good for manfred for standing up to one of the stars of the game

        Roger goodell and Adam silver would’ve cowardly backed down to a star player

        Reply
      • toddk-2

        1 month ago

        Why cause he’s trying to bridge the gap in payroll. Yes there are the bottom team that should be at 120-150 and I don’t know a number where the top teams should be 300-350. Not sure if 3x the payroll is good enough. But all I know feel the gap is to big

        Reply
      • DaveyJ is a little bitch

        1 month ago

        Roger Goodell is worse than Manfred. He had the Ray Rice tape for 9 weeks and as soon as TMZ runs that story… SUSPENSION + kicked out of the league. If you’re going to do that great but don’t do it only to please the public.

        1
        Reply
  4. DarkSide830

    2 months ago

    “That’s a clown comment, bro.”

    21
    Reply
  5. IHLgulls

    2 months ago

    I don’t care if we lose multiple seasons, MLB needs a salary cap (and floor)

    25
    Reply
    • larkraxm

      2 months ago

      No it doesn’t. I don’t care if we lose every season. Salary cap will ruin baseball.

      20
      Reply
      • 66TheNumberOfTheBest

        2 months ago

        …by giving more than a few teams the chance to have good players for more than 4 years at a time?

        How will a salary cap “ruin” baseball?

        26
        Reply
        • falconsball1993

          2 months ago

          Teams are already capable of signing free agents. The only thing stopping it is teams owners not willing to invest in baseball, instead of their other ventures.

          19
          Reply
        • pray4mojo

          2 months ago

          A chance at good players. So we can watch them get passed around more than a bong, a la Kevin Durant.

          7
          Reply
        • Luis_Fazenda

          2 months ago

          @66TheNumberOfTheBest

          On paper, you’re right….and I wish that were the case.

          However, in reality, the stingy owners will utilize a salary cap to simply pay their players that much less, and thusly, pocket even more profit. The fans will still come to the park in droves no matter how much or little the players are making, and ticket prices will remain at an obscene high.

          A lockout is the very LAST thing both sides should want to happen. It took a long time for the ballparks to have full stadiums the last time we had stoppages.

          11
          Reply
        • Chicago Expat

          2 months ago

          How low does the salary cap have to be to get Bob Nutting to pay to keep Paul Skenes? And will a salary cap actually motivate Nutting to invest in the team to make them a winning franchise or will he keep puttering along like he always has but now he has an outside chance of keeping a star player on the cheap?

          8
          Reply
        • Reggie Smith

          2 months ago

          You guys want to say its stingy owners, but the Dodgers blow that argument up. They sign a multi-billion dollar TV deal, then systematically buy most every player they want. There’s no way a KC, StL or Pitt can compete with that. Soft cap does not work.

          13
          Reply
        • Chicago Expat

          2 months ago

          But that speaks to a problem of the team owners’ own making and how they handle tv/media rights team-by-team and regionally. Because MLB teams have these media fiefdoms carved out, some are better able to fund their operations than others, and that’s how the team owners set it up. It’s actually a market-based approach, one team doing better than others by leveraging their potential fan base. Some of that, too, is the result of a team’s past success leading to a larger fan base than another team who hasn’t invested in their team historically and has a losing culture and thus not as many fans.
          If owners and Manfred were so concerned about leveling the playing field on team spending ability, they would do away with the regional approach to media rights and go with a collective effort by all teams as one entity to negotiate deals with national and local media. But that would require sharing and fairness between team owners, and they’d rather, instead, try to level the playing field by simply taking money away from the players.

          8
          Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          2 months ago

          Around 50% of media revenues are pooled and shared. So while those large-market media contracts certainly provide an advantage, it isn’t as large an advantage as it might appear.

          The current financial system in baseball works for all owners, in large and small markets. Due to revenue sharing and the CBT, every franchise is virtually guaranteed to be profitable. They have the financial system they want.

          Beyond this, what they want is for their bottom-line profits to increase faster than the game’s top revenue. They do not really care about competitive balance. Their goal is to take a larger share of the growing revenue pie, and the players (as their primary expense) to get a smaller one. Any talk about “stingy” or “greedy” is just emotionalizing an issue that comes down completely to numbers.

          7
          Reply
        • Reggie Smith

          2 months ago

          Too funny. So there is just as many people capable of being fans in Kansas City and Cincinnati as there are in New York and Los Angeles. They just dont come out of their mud huts to support their fiefdom. Who knew.

          5
          Reply
        • CleaverGreene

          2 months ago

          That Dodger TV deal is revenue shared. The small market teams are better off letting their age 30+ stars go elsewhere, Long term deals rarely work out.

          Do small market fans truly want overpaid 36 yo faded stars? Maybe, they enjoy booing them because they’re not earning their millions?

          1
          Reply
        • Reggie Smith

          2 months ago

          “Do small market fans truly want overpaid 36 yo faded stars?”
          Ohtani, Betts, Freeman, Yamamoto are “overpaid 35 yo faded stars”? Everyone of those deals will work out, if you look at the whole picture. High ticket prices, jersey sales, memorabilia, not just baseball stats vs salary.

          2
          Reply
        • Chicago Expat

          2 months ago

          If you think that’s a comedy routine, then you didn’t do an honest job of reading what I said or spend time thinking about it.

          What percentage of the total population of Kansas City or Cincy are actual fans of the team and pay money to support it via tickets or tv subs? If Kansas City’s or Cincy’s owner invested more in building a winning culture, wouldn’t they raise their team revenues by bringing more fans in? If Cincy’s owner didn’t spend his time insulting the fans by telling them they should be happy he’s even keeping the team there and not moving away, is he building a fan base- and the revenues that follow- or is he decreasing his team’s earning potential? Did John Fisher maximize team revenues by cratering player salary spending and making the A’s a cellar-dweller and turning fans off from showing up and paying?

          You’re looking at total population of each city and acting like that’s the ultimate measuring stick. What matters is the percentage of the population that the team gives reason to be fans. A city with a small population but a large percentage of paying fans means more than a city with a large population but a small percentage of paying fans.

          Not sure what the mud huts reference was. That was weird.

          3
          Reply
        • 66TheNumberOfTheBest

          2 months ago

          “Teams are already capable of signing free agents. The only thing stopping it is teams owners not willing to invest in baseball, instead of their other ventures.”

          That and the richer teams offering more money?

          If the Pirates double their payroll, the Dodgers will triple theirs…now what?

          3
          Reply
        • Reggie Smith

          2 months ago

          2025, attendance, population, percentage

          Dodgers:
          LA: 3.9M population, 2.8M attendance, 71% ratio
          Royals:
          KC: 500k population, 1.2M attendance, 240% ratio
          *And if we expand the map from city population to region, the numbers get far worse for the Dodgers.
          ————-
          KC has far far more loyalty than LA to their team, yet they still cant compete in attendance, viewership or any other way. Its an joke to think that the Dodger fans are somehow much more loyal to their team than other regions of the map.

          7
          Reply
        • Chicago Expat

          2 months ago

          But you began this conversation by talking about the Dodgers’ tv/media deal and the revenues it brings them. Your numbers don’t address that at all. What percentage of a team’s revenues are from ticket sales? 25%? 30%? Of the tv-media revenues the Dodgers are bringing in, what percentage of that is due to the Dodgers having significant fan base beyond their city borders and causing an increase in team revenues because more people outside of L.A. want to pay for access to the team?

          Again, this gets back to point about MLB letting teams do individual deals regionally rather than as a collective. If MLB handled media rights collectively, then split those funds equally among all teams, that would go a long way to evening the playing field. But that’s not what all owners want, because the higher earning teams would have to give up a lot of revenue to lower earning teams. So, instead, rather than some team owners making less, they have Manfred go with a salary cap approach and just make the players earn less.

          1
          Reply
        • Reggie Smith

          2 months ago

          “But you began this conversation by talking about the Dodgers’ tv/media”

          Then YOU changed the subject. I didnt bring up fandom you did. From your first comment:
          “one team doing better than others by leveraging their potential fan base. Some of that, too, is the result of a team’s past success leading to a larger fan base than another team who hasn’t invested in their team historically and has a losing culture and thus not as many fans.”
          ——————–
          Youre just changing the subject because you know youre wrong. LA has much better financial position, bigger pool of fans and a better TV deal. They have financial and logistical abilities other teams dont and the playing field needs to be leveled so that every region can win a championship or have a few superstars. Whether its done by Salary Cap or other means, it needs to happen.

          3
          Reply
        • Van Lingle Mungo

          2 months ago

          St louis population – 200K – 2024 attendance – 2,878,115
          Seattle Population – 780,995 – 2024 attendance – 2,555,813

          Reply
        • O'sSayCanYouSee

          2 months ago

          @ BlueSkies_LA — 💯‼️

          (Although, those that would seek to ensure further (rather than continued) Profit at the expense of customers and employees can arguably be called greedy. Easier to change the money spicket flow than pay for investments to grow markets, you know, the old fashion way of increasing profit).

          Reply
        • Luis_Fazenda

          2 months ago

          @Reggie Smith
          Regarding your head count, Dodger fans come from all over the greater LA area (20 million strong), and not just LA proper.

          1
          Reply
        • goob

          2 months ago

          spicket..?

          1
          Reply
        • Sadface

          2 months ago

          The owners have effectively marketed the agreement that the players are greedy when they already make way more. He was only making 10 million before, now he wants to triple that just cause he had a good year. Meanwhile they have been underpaying him for years.

          1
          Reply
        • Sadface

          2 months ago

          Of course since they all are on the wrong side of 30, they may all regress at the same time. But you’re right. Even though owners and players always talk championship all they really care about are ticket and jersey sales.

          Reply
        • Sadface

          2 months ago

          True but the Pirates would not defer those contracts, the Dodgers would. In 5 to 10 years Dodgers may try to file for bankruptcy.

          Reply
        • Sadface

          2 months ago

          And the Dodgers have more fans outside of California and internationally. Ohtani brings in major capital just on jersey sales to his Japanese fans.

          Reply
        • Sadface

          1 month ago

          Yep. The owners only want more of the profits and they already make too much. I wish they would not use the press to try and convince the fans that they are right. The players should not either. Also they should stop telling the press how much they players sign for. It has nothing to do with the fans, The owners use this as an excuse to say “that’s why ticket prices are high” or “we really are trying”.

          Reply
        • Sadface

          1 month ago

          Cheap owners never spend and probably should be run out of MLB especially those that just collect the revenue sharing.

          1
          Reply
        • octavian8

          1 month ago

          Well written!!!!

          Reply
        • toddk-2

          1 month ago

          A cap has a floor and ceiling

          Reply
        • toddk-2

          1 month ago

          Imo the nfl got lucky that NY la chic didn’t realize how big tv would make their sport and signed a national deal. While mlb and nhl big markets knew there would be an advantage and kept the local tv rights

          Reply
        • DaveyJ is a little bitch

          1 month ago

          So we need better owners who actually want to invest in the game.

          1
          Reply
        • Dock_Elvis

          1 month ago

          Reggie – KC is a regional team period. Few of their fans % wise are coming from Jackson County even in the basic KC metro. Its why they had turf for decades…to avoid rainouts for farmers from south central KS, etc.

          Reply
        • Dock_Elvis

          1 month ago

          I think we need to understand city demographics before locking attendance down to city limit population. A very small % of Busch attendance comes from STL proper.

          1
          Reply
        • larkraxm

          1 month ago

          Every owner is a billionaire. They can all afford hundreds of millions in player salary. They just don’t want to. They should sell their team if they aren’t a rich enough billionaire. We are tired of billionaires crying about not being as rich as other billionaires.

          Reply
        • Jdt8312

          1 month ago

          I guess the Pirates should look into the way the
          Dodgers do business, and copy the business model.

          Reply
        • larkraxm

          1 month ago

          Or the Rays, or the Mariners, or the Brewers, or the Padres… You can’t try nothing and be all out of ideas like the Pirates, and then want to cap the spending of other teams. How did the Scherzer/Verlander $90 million dollars for two pitchers that are a combined 90 years old prevent the Pirates from becoming a better team???? I can see how stopping that from happening helps the Mets, but not the Pirates.

          Reply
      • bigjonliljon

        2 months ago

        Every other major sport has a salary cap and it didn’t ruin them.

        14
        Reply
        • Chicago Expat

          2 months ago

          Every other major sport has a salary cap and it didn’t ruin the owners. That’s the correct way to phrase that.

          Rob Manfred isn’t out there advocating for the health of the sport. He’s out there on behalf of team owner wealth.

          3
          Reply
        • 66TheNumberOfTheBest

          2 months ago

          “Every other major sport has a salary cap and it didn’t ruin them.”

          AND the players in those sports make a higher % of their sports revenue than baseball players, to boot.

          BUT, the richest of players would have to give a little for everyone else to make more and they don’t want that.

          And the union is built to serve the interests of the richest players so they don’t want that.

          And the league and TV networks want NY or LA not podunk TB or CIN in the playoffs and World Series for the ratings and merchandise sales so they don’t want it.

          And fans of big market teams (the 10 biggest markets have more total fans than the bottom 20) don’t want it because they like the league’s finger being on the scale for their teams.

          4
          Reply
        • GASoxFan

          2 months ago

          The other sports also generally implemented a fixed revenue split with the players to go with the salary cap.

          That split means, for example, the NFLPA sees open books for all the NFL team finances to ensure they’re getting their piece of the pie.

          No way MLB owners open their books to the players with a mandated share of revenue to player contracts in that manner

          3
          Reply
        • Blue Baron

          1 month ago

          66: “…the richest of players would have to give a little for everyone else to make more…”

          The problem with a salary cap system is that it creates a fixed pie for player compensation such that EVERY player would have to give for others to make more, and that would result in players competing with each other for compensation.

          It would be unfair for players to have a fixed amount of collective compensation while owners exclusively and unilaterally benefit from revenue growth.

          1
          Reply
        • 66TheNumberOfTheBest

          1 month ago

          OK, in theory. Maybe.

          Here’s the reality.

          In the NFL and NBA and NHL, the players are guaranteed to get a specified portion of the revenue (all roughly just a bit under 50%). So, the owners do NOT unilaterally or exclusively benefit from revenue growth. The EXACT opposite.

          In baseball, because they don’t want to be “limited” in their ceiling, there is no such guarantee. MLB players get about 40% of MLB revenue.

          So, for all the talk of greedy owners, pocketing money, etc. it is the current system that is allowing that to happen.

          Caps come with floors.

          Reply
        • Blue Baron

          1 month ago

          66: Caps don’t automatically come with floors.

          1
          Reply
        • 66TheNumberOfTheBest

          1 month ago

          Feel free to correct me but I cannot name any league that has a cap with no floor.

          In fact, the only thing close to that is MLB with a luxury tax but zero floor.

          Reply
        • GASoxFan

          1 month ago

          Baron – most sports tie the salary cap to prior season revenues.

          I’m actually unaware of any salary cap league that doesn’t guarantee the players a fixed portion of income – when it goes up, the amount goes up. When it’s down, the amount goes down. But the portion of the pie is always consistent.

          What you describe would be setting a fixed amount, not a percentage of revenue. I’m not aware of any league who sets a fixed amount, independent of revenue. Perhaps the wnba which simply loses money every year.

          Reply
        • Blue Baron

          1 month ago

          GASoxFan: But a cap in any form puts players in competition for compensation with other players.

          1
          Reply
        • Jdt8312

          1 month ago

          Baseball isn’t like the other sports. There are no small market football teams. Millwaukee Brewers=small market baseball team. Green Bay Packers=football team. Cincinnati Bengals= Football team. Cincinnati Reds=small market baseball team. The revenues by football, and Basketball teams is comparable city to city. Not the same in baseball. That is why we do revenue sharing. The other reason why we do revenue sharing is for the reasons I stated below. The tax situations in certain states, and cities create an advantage for small market teams in the value of contracts., It IS a drawback for football, and basketball. A salary cap appears to work for those sports. But when certain markets can’t compete, it’ll be a problem. What players have the Knicks not been able to sign because of the tax situation, and cap situations put together? How about the Jets? The largest sports market in the country, and 2 of it’s teams haven’t sniffed a championship in over 50 years. It may not have ruined them, but it has sure put certain teams at a disadvantage.

          Reply
      • Braveraider

        2 months ago

        No mandfred letting the dodgers sign everyone and defer the contract, getting a salary will make it a even playing field.

        1
        Reply
        • Steinbrenner2728

          1 month ago

          @Bravesraider, it must be tough to have Freddie Freeman in LA, huh?

          Reply
      • stymeedone

        2 months ago

        Yeah, it sure ruined football.

        2
        Reply
      • cman

        1 month ago

        Yes it does, sorry

        Reply
    • Blue Baron

      2 months ago

      IHLgulls: How would it benefit you and other fans?

      If you believe that a salary cap would lead to lower ticket and concession prices, you’re too naive to function as an adult.

      2
      Reply
    • Mets Era Thumping Soto

      2 months ago

      So teams are completely reconfigured every year. No thanks. Baseball has never had a more competitive balance than now.

      2
      Reply
      • Braveraider

        2 months ago

        They do not have a competitive balance because the dodgers are making it worse.

        2
        Reply
    • DarrenDreifortsContract

      2 months ago

      Why? Because billionare owners of small market teams don’t want to spend money to win?

      1
      Reply
    • Jdt8312

      2 months ago

      That is the dumbest thing I keep seeing repeated. The more I see it repeated, the more I am sure that the people repeating it have no idea what they are talking about regarding baseball economics.

      The big market teams are usually in states, and cities that have very high tax rates, especially on high wage earners, and corporations, like sports teams. It costs more to operate in LA, NY, than in TX, MN, WI and FLA, By instituting a salary cap, you are hampering the biggest money making franchises in the sport. $1 mil in TX, or FLA is worth a lot more than $1 mil in NY or LA. For the Mets, Yankees, Dodgers, Angels, et al to sign a player, they have to pay a lot more to make the value of the contract equal to what a contract in TX, or FLA et al, is worth. A salary cap also hampers what the players can make, and than is anti labor.

      A salary floor is the most idiotic idea in the history of economics, period. A salary floor will raise the pay scale for the lowest wage earners, and offset the entire system. A team like the Marlins needs to reach the salary floor. They are 10 mil away from the floor with 1 roster spot left to fill. So they then have to overpay for a player that should be making 2 mil. Juan Soto then says to his agent, well, if that dude is worth 10 mil, I’m opting out of my contract, and asking for more. Then Bryce Harper does the same thing. Then Aaron Judge….et al. So now, no one can afford to fit these players into their payroll, and have 25 more spots filled. A salary floor is the absolute fastest way to drive up baseball costs for the customer. Because, in the end, you’re going to be the one who needs to afford to go to games, buy hot dogs, merch, souvenirs, caps, shirts….et al. A salary floor also makes a team trying to be fiscally responsible have a harder time doing it. When a team realizes it’s time for a rebuild, and let’s all of it’s high priced FA’s go in order to bring up the next generation, they will still have to meet a salary floor. And that, in all likelihood, means a kid in AAA, who deserves a shot, doesn’t get it because his team needed to sign a player to meet the salary floor, or they have to overpay the kid to meet the salary floor, and then re-read this paragraph.

      Have a nice day.

      4
      Reply
    • freddiemeetgibby

      2 months ago

      I never understand why fans would side with billionaires instead of the players they love to watch?

      12
      Reply
      • Jdt8312

        2 months ago

        It’s not siding with one side or the other. I am for the sport, not the owners or the players. In the past, the players have been wrong about issues too. We are the customers here. We should be interested in the sport functioning well. And I’ll be damned if I let some cheap owner in FLA, or Anywhere else, tell me that my team has to spend less now that I have an owner who can do it. These small market teams should be doing things to promote the sport in their areas of influence. They don’t do enough of it. You build a business. You don’t sit back, and assume customers will just keep coming. You promote the sport in the offseason.

        1
        Reply
      • nstale

        2 months ago

        so what happens when they’re all billionaires?

        Reply
        • Jdt8312

          2 months ago

          Well then good for all of them. For them to do that means that WE all have got to be doing much better with our money. We are the customers. If we can’t afford it, they stop getting paid.

          2
          Reply
      • larkraxm

        1 month ago

        Those fans have been told that a salary cap will make their owner suddenly care more about winning and less about throwing their revenue sharing portion on their dragon’s pile. The real goal is to protect owners from themselves. The idea is to make all teams as bad as the Pirates.

        Reply
    • amk1920

      2 months ago

      Will never happen. You don’t go from the most powerful PA to the NHL agreement. Delusional

      Reply
      • 66TheNumberOfTheBest

        1 month ago

        True, but that’s what the sport needs.

        Xerox the hockey deal and change the words to MLB.

        Reply
    • ChuckyNJ

      2 months ago

      Monfort in Denver has been pushing hard for both a cap and a floor. Last time I looked, the Rockies have become bottom-feeders.

      1
      Reply
    • sad tormented neglected mariners fan

      1 month ago

      I would trade the 2027 season in return for everyone spending the same, and I’m a mariners fan with an ok payroll team

      Reply
  6. Unclemike1526

    2 months ago

    I’ve said it before. A lockout would be maybe a sport killer for baseball. Young fans are already moving away from baseball and into other sports. It wouldn’t take much for them to disappear completely and never come back because the younger generations have limited attention spans when it comes to sports. Both sides would be morons to even consider another lockout.

    6
    Reply
    • Joe says...

      2 months ago

      Somewhere along the way, compromise became a dirty word.

      16
      Reply
      • Unclemike1526

        2 months ago

        Not just for sports either.

        10
        Reply
      • Soto should bat first.

        2 months ago

        Compromises mean nobody’s happy.

        Reply
        • Unclemike1526

          2 months ago

          Young fans today think life is a video game. They’ll seek out sports with constant action like Football, Basketball, Even MMA, Wrestling and such things. There are Football and Basketball Leagues playing almost year round with even the WNBA making huge inroads. They were already fading away from baseball and it mostly appeals to old timers like me. Heck I even watched the Chicago Sky last year and when Caitlin Clark came along it was interesting to me. Then they fired the Great Coach for no reason at all and hired Urkel and now they’re boring and lost all their appeal. Fired the coach, traded the #3 draft pick for 2 later picks 1 of which isn’t even playing. That’s a guy that should be up for executive of the year. Anyway they need a lockout like I need a hernia.

          2
          Reply
        • raylando

          2 months ago

          Football does not have constant action.

          12
          Reply
        • Unclemike1526

          2 months ago

          Compared to baseball it does.

          Reply
        • Joe says...

          2 months ago

          “Football combines the two worst things about America: it is violence punctuated by committee meetings.”
          George Will

          14
          Reply
        • ChuckyNJ

          2 months ago

          And those who drool over Caitlin Clark while ignoring soccer are those that think like Dirty Old Men.
          Next summer is a men’s World Cup summer and the US is hosting most of the matches, including the final.

          Reply
        • GASoxFan

          2 months ago

          And it will be pretty boring, as per usual…

          No offense to those who enjoy it, but, soccer is fairly boring to sit and just watch. It’s slightly better with a crowd of friends plus drinking, but, then again the crowd and drinking can be made better by introducing other activities than watching a match

          1
          Reply
        • Unclemike1526

          2 months ago

          I love the Womens National Team in soccer. I have ever since Mia Hamm came over and taught them how to play. I watch them every chance I get.

          1
          Reply
        • Unclemike1526

          2 months ago

          Not when it’s played right. The men suck but the women know how to play.

          2
          Reply
  7. Acoss1331

    2 months ago

    So is Manfred going to be going to every clubhouse in MLB? The dude is not liked at all by the majority of players, I really don’t think he thought this out. Also, is he bringing his sports betting friends along, Fan Duel and Draftkings? Can’t go anywhere without some broadcast booths telling me the odds every five seconds.

    Regardless, there will be a lockout and both sides will be slinging mud at each other, but neither side is dumb enough to not play by the time the 2027 should start.

    13
    Reply
    • Joe says...

      2 months ago

      I think he’s always visited each team. It’s just now the owners are more united in a salary cap and Manfred is planting a seed with the pre-arb players that they could make more money with a cap. In a way he’s not wrong. Many players never reach arb and fewer still reach FA. It’s actually a smart move on his part. Not saying that I side with the owners on this.

      3
      Reply
      • MuleorAstroMule

        2 months ago

        The union should just state that if their issue is with younger players not making enough they are fully willing to negotiate an increase in pre-arbitration and arbitration salaries. Not sure why they need a salary cap to raise salaries when every time in the past they raised salaries they didn’t need to implement a cap.

        4
        Reply
        • Joe says...

          2 months ago

          AstroMule think about it from the owner’s side. Even if that is the end result, you don’t begin your negotiation handing out raises. Remember the cap is what they most want even if they don’t get it in the end. The players union just survived a coup attempt and the biggest issue was the haves and the have nots. The union board was all Boras guys. I’m willing to bet the reason Harper was so mad is because he was worried that Mandred was getting to the pre-arb guys.

          3
          Reply
        • MuleorAstroMule

          2 months ago

          Joe: Oh I know Manfred is just being disingenuous. He’s presenting a fake solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. What Manfred and the owners think about salaries is that of any owner: The lower the better which is purely the reason they want a luxury tax. If they cared about competition a few deadbeat owners wouldn’t have teams.

          I think we can both agree that in the last few agreements the union hasn’t done much to protect new players. Newly drafted players got a lot of their earning potential stripped with the draft slots and then they went after international free agents the next time round so I can see how pre-arb guys might bend an ear. But anything Manfred gives them will be guaranteed to benefit the owners because that’s his job.

          4
          Reply
        • Joe says...

          2 months ago

          No argument there AstroMule. Though I do think it would have been better for the players union if the attempted coup would have worked because what Manfred is doing is pure Union Busting 101. With all the Boras clients on the executive board and clown Tony Clark in charge they’re just going to get screwed again and again.

          3
          Reply
      • stymeedone

        2 months ago

        Two things you just won’t see. The MLB teams sharing revenue equally, and non superstar players on the negotiating team. Its all about the big markets signing the big money FAs, and making Boras rich.

        4
        Reply
    • Unclemike1526

      2 months ago

      They’re dumb enough. Their Egos make them think everybody loves them and fans will come running back again. You can only test people so far before they make you pay.

      2
      Reply
      • Bart Harley Jarvis

        2 months ago

        Let go of my Ego! (Apologies, ego with a capital ‘E’ looked too much like Eggo.)

        1
        Reply
        • MuleorAstroMule

          2 months ago

          Hang on to your ego but I know you’re gonna lose the fight.

          1
          Reply
        • Bart Harley Jarvis

          2 months ago

          @MuleorAstroMule,
          I do like the way Frank Black and also Sonic Youth cover the Beach Boys original.

          3
          Reply
        • MuleorAstroMule

          2 months ago

          Yah I really like Frank Black’s version. I’ve never heard the Sonic Youth cover which is odd because I’m huge fan. I’ll have to check it out. Thanks for the tip.

          1
          Reply
    • unpaidobserver

      2 months ago

      No one knows how dumb MLB leadership is.

      1
      Reply
    • SportsFan0000

      1 month ago

      Welcoming gambling into MLB was a huge mistake that will ruin the game,

      1
      Reply
  8. 66TheNumberOfTheBest

    2 months ago

    MLB has become the WWE version of TTO.

    A salary cap could fix one of those flaws.

    2
    Reply
    • sad tormented neglected mariners fan

      1 month ago

      Manfred was acting like Vince McMahon whenever he gets a ring fight

      Reply
  9. 0523me

    2 months ago

    If a cap (and floor) comes with an affordable family experience at the ballpark, I’m in.

    4
    Reply
    • Acoss1331

      2 months ago

      You mean lowering the prices on tickets, food and beverages? Oh no, that’s a non-starter for owners.

      20
      Reply
    • Blue Baron

      2 months ago

      0523me: If you believe anything will lead to lower ticket and concession prices, you’re too naive to function as an adult.

      5
      Reply
      • octavian8

        1 month ago

        If concession prices are too high do like I do and eat before you go.

        3
        Reply
        • Blue Baron

          1 month ago

          Exactly. And there’s no rule requiring one to buy and guzzle beer during the game.

          1
          Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          1 month ago

          We bring our own, partly because the food is so overpriced at the ballpark, but also because it’s so awful.

          Reply
    • amk1920

      2 months ago

      Owners are totally scamming fans into believing they would pass the salary cap savings on to the fans lol

      9
      Reply
    • MeowMeow

      2 months ago

      I honestly can’t see any scenario in which ticket and concession prices go down.

      12
      Reply
    • rct

      2 months ago

      Player salaries have literally nothing to do with ticket or concessions prices. Teams price those things depending on demand. If you want lower prices, people are going to need to stop going to the ballpark and/or stop buying concessions. If profit is maximized by charging $20 for a beer, then owners will charge $20 a beer. The players could be getting paid a fraction of what they’re currently earning and the same would still be true.

      10
      Reply
      • cman

        1 month ago

        BS they don’t

        Reply
    • SportsFan0000

      1 month ago

      You are dreaming!
      Owners are too greedy.
      They want a salary cap at the expense of the players…

      1
      Reply
    • brodie-bruce

      1 month ago

      @0523

      You won’t get that but what you might get is cheaper parking during the days the team isn’t playing

      1
      Reply
  10. CO Guardening

    2 months ago

    Are owners going to make their financials available? Would ticket and concessions go down? The answer is obviously no, so the owners can suck it up and pay these boys what they’re worth.

    10
    Reply
  11. rondon

    2 months ago

    However Manfred wants to portray himself, he is, like commissioners in every other sport, the mouthpiece of the owners, so what he offers hardly represents what’s best for everyone. As an aside, I wonder… Isn’t the luxury tax enough of a cap already? I know several franchises blow by it, but not without penalties. I may be wrong, but wouldn’t a salary cap benefit the small market teams the most?

    6
    Reply
    • Soto should bat first.

      2 months ago

      Yes.

      1
      Reply
  12. matthew07

    2 months ago

    Millionaires fighting with billionaires. Important stuff!

    1
    Reply
    • Steinbrenner2728

      1 month ago

      It’s important because it’s part of the sport you watch.

      Reply
  13. larkraxm

    2 months ago

    It only protects owners from themselves. You will have to explain to me how the Brewers were hurt by the Yankees eating the salary of DJLM and Stroman. All the Twins have to offer is more money. If they can only offer equal money to LA and NY what is the sell to the player? Come here for equal money and no national attention or the endorsements that come with it. LA and NY will say “come here. Its the most you can get on a contract anyway, and you will make triple that in endorsements”. Miami Heat Super Friends Super Teams does not make NBA better.

    6
    Reply
    • unpaidobserver

      2 months ago

      I absolutely believe that parity has been created by letting the big market teams sign ill advised deals that hamstring them later.

      The problem is the floor not the cap.

      7
      Reply
      • sad tormented neglected mariners fan

        1 month ago

        But is it fair to go WAY over the luxury tax and have no penalty because of a tv deal?

        At least in the nba they have the aprons and laws so that you can’t go too high in payroll

        Salary floor is #1 priority, but a cap should be #2 priority because we can’t have the big media markets not be penalized for going above and beyond into the luxury tax

        2
        Reply
        • larkraxm

          1 month ago

          You already know that they are penalized. You can say that the penalty should be increased, but there is a penalty. Teams have to pay a luxury tax for going over certain payroll thresholds, and they pay additional penalties for exceeding those thresholds for consecutive seasons. What I don’t see is the Pirates trying to win at all.

          Reply
  14. mike89 2

    2 months ago

    We’re gonna just push forward Manfred mouthpieces in Heyman and Sherman? They’ve always been pro-ownership and Commissioners office. They are like the “scientists” that said smoking was actually okay

    4
    Reply
  15. Jubilation

    2 months ago

    So the owners want to try and break the union. The owners are going to be surprised (again) when fan opinion goes way against them. There is not the appetite for billionaire welfare

    8
    Reply
  16. At-game6-86

    2 months ago

    Something needs to be done about the disparity in team payrolls, whatever it might be. The luxury tax ain’t it.

    4
    Reply
    • Mets Era Thumping Soto

      2 months ago

      Why? There is never been more parity in baseball than now. The Brewers don’t pay hardly anything and they are probably the favorites to win it all.

      2
      Reply
    • Joe says...

      2 months ago

      A salary cap isn’t going to magically make Pittsburgh, Colorado, the A’s etc. competitive well run teams.

      3
      Reply
      • larkraxm

        2 months ago

        They don’t want to make those teams better… They want to make every team the Pirates so that then they can compete. This will make three fan bases very happy. The rest of us will just go watch minor league baseball at minor league stadiums and save ourselves a lot of money.

        2
        Reply
        • Big Poison

          2 months ago

          That’s a silly take.

          Reply
    • SportsFan0000

      1 month ago

      Force the cheap owners manipulating the system and refusing to spend their revenues on signing their star players

      TO SELL THEIR TEAMS:

      A’s, Pirates, Marlins and others.

      Reply
  17. Karensjer

    2 months ago

    Glad Harper gave that idiot Manfraud a piece of his mind. While I agree that salaries are way too high, Manfraud needs to quit treating the game as a business and look at the bigger picture of getting people to keep watching it. Do away with this silly ‘ghost runner’ and pitch clock crap and let them play. Have 1 or 2 days a year where kids under 12 get in for free. It’s not like they aren’t going to get a 30 dollar drink and a 50 buck hot dog and 80 dollar shirt. They will probably enjoy it so much that they will pay to go back to another game. Grow the game and forget about team and owner profits. They will come if young kids attend games.
    Put free agents into classes (a, b, and c) based on stats, and if a team doesn’t make a reasonable offer to or sign a certain number of type of a and b free agents, then they lose draft picks, roster spots, competitive balance money, or more. Just do something to make parity without having to resort to a salary cap and save 2027 and beyond.

    2
    Reply
    • ChuckyNJ

      2 months ago

      Get rid of the pitch clock, then every game is gonna be 3, 4, 5 hours long. Not acceptable to the Tik Tok generation.

      Reply
    • octavian8

      1 month ago

      Glad Harper told off Manfred also. It was clearly an effort to bypass elected union leadership to spread ownership propaganda. Treating players as if they were children.

      4
      Reply
  18. BlueSkies_LA

    2 months ago

    More out of curiosity than anything else, what information supports the assertion that Harper is one of the most influential players in the game? Each team has one player rep to the union. Those 30 players might be considered more influential than others, but is Harper that player on the Phillies? The point being, if Harper isn’t even the Phillies’ union rep, then he really is just one player speaking for himself and this incident is just a lot of hoo-hah over nothing.

    1
    Reply
    • Bart Harley Jarvis

      2 months ago

      @BlueSkies_LA,
      I’d be all for more hoo-hah in baseball, regardless of the outcome of a labor negotiations/agreement.

      4
      Reply
    • Chicago Expat

      2 months ago

      Harper is one of the best players in the game. That affords him a certain amount of power. He can stand up and speak for players, defend their positions, and tell Manfred to GTFO and not have to worry about repercussions. If a rookie says that to Manfred (who is the team owner representative) or a vet making close to minimum, the team owner can upend that player’s career, send them back down to the minors or to some other team. Harper doesn’t have to worry about that. He’s also made his bag already. In theory, he has nothing really to fight for; his legacy and financial well-being are secure. So, when a player like that stands up and says GTFO to Manfred, he’s showing he cares about all players, and all players will react to that.

      3
      Reply
      • BlueSkies_LA

        2 months ago

        I understand your point, but I think it conflates his veteran/star status with his ability to influence the views of other ballplayers. Any team that penalized a player for speaking out about labor issues would face a grievance from the union. We don’t hear that happening for reasons, those being: The rules are laid out in the CBA, and every team has a player union rep who they expect to speak for the concerns of the players on that team. Maybe Harper is that guy on the Phillies. No idea. If not, the rep for the Phillies is probably feeling kind of steamed right now, having had his toes stepped on by the big dawg. So this cuts both ways.

        Reply
        • Chicago Expat

          2 months ago

          I would be genuinely surprised if anyone in that Phillies clubhouse felt negatively about Harper’s actions, no matter what their union connections were.

          This wasn’t a CBA meeting, but Manfred was talking salary cap. And it wasn’t some neutral site; it happened in the clubhouse, and players get understandably prickly about what happens there. In that context, and as a measure of acceptable etiquette, I’d say Harper’s bluntness was far less a faux pas than Manfred’s. Manfred went onto the player territory and tried to be sneaky talking about the salary cap, and Harper called him out on it. If this had been a CBA meeting between players and team owners, I seriously doubt Harper would’ve been as blunt.

          3
          Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          2 months ago

          Harper wouldn’t be in a CBA meeting room unless he’s part of the MLBPA negotiations team. Is he? Not as far as I know. Ownership is going to continue to bring up the salary cap knowing that it’s a nonstarter with the players. I don’t see where any calling out over this or any other issue changes this dynamic for the better. Just more evidence of the two sides digging in. A bad sign for baseball fans.

          1
          Reply
        • octavian8

          1 month ago

          Harper felt strongly about what was happening in front of him and expressed his opinion. It’s up to the players in the locker room to form their opinions. End of story.

          2
          Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          1 month ago

          More like start of story, and a long, endless sad one for baseball fans. But thanks for the thoughts.

          Reply
    • Huh?

      2 months ago

      I would agree with the others who say that Harper is an influential player simply by the fact that he’s a superstar and one of the highest paid players in MLB history and lots of younger players who have come into MLB recently probably idolized him and the vast majority of them certainly know who he is.

      But to your point about having specific power within the MLBPA, the two players with the most influence currently would be Marcus Semien and Chris Bassit as they are the player reps the group of 30 reps voted onto the executive subcommittee back in December. Their alternates are Jake Cronenworth and Paul Skenes. Also wielding influence are the two reps voted onto the pension committee and those are Peter Fairbanks and Brent Suter. Their alternates are Cedric Mullins and Tarik Skubal.

      I think Nick Castellanos is currently the Phillies player rep.

      2
      Reply
    • highflyballintorightfield

      2 months ago

      The MLBPA agrees internally on only one thing: no cap. Except for that, they really don’t hang together on issues, which the league/owners use to their advantage. In 2022, the union negotiators unanimously (8-0) recommended rejection of the final league offer. The other team reps voted 26-4 to accept, resulting in a 26-12 final vote and an end to the lockout.

      I don’t think union leadership and other players have much influence over how the rank-and-file think. Much less than in most unions.

      Reply
  19. MuleorAstroMule

    2 months ago

    The owner the of Rays, a team that doesn’t draw, just made a billion dollar profit on the team. But Manfred likes to go on about, “threats to MLB’s business…” A business that is a monopoly and that is fully protected from anti-trust laws.

    No wonder a player, or anyone with half a brain, would get infuriated with Manfred’s lies.

    8
    Reply
    • stymeedone

      2 months ago

      What is your source? MLB books are closed, except Atlanta. Does your speculation include that they just lost their stadium? Of all the teams you could have listed, the Rays just don’t fit your narative. Their TV deal is not large. They don’t draw. They are in limbo, but still having to pay on their current stadium upkeep, while renting another teams ballpark.

      1
      Reply
      • MuleorAstroMule

        2 months ago

        And yet, considering all those factors, the franchise is somehow worth a billion dollars more than it was purchased for. My source is the publicly available sale price. If you buy a business and are able to sell it for a billion dollars more than you purchased it for only 20 years later then common sense says it’s a profitable business.

        Or we can look at the sale of the Marlins. Loria purchased the team in 2002 for $158M. He then sold the team in 2017 for $1.2B. Again, the value of the franchise somehow increased a billion dollars in just fifteen years and yet somehow people think these aren’t profitable businesses.

        6
        Reply
      • larkraxm

        2 months ago

        They received $209 million (2018 so undoubtedly higher now) in revenue sharing before the start of the year. They spent $86 million on player salaries. So before they sold one ticket, one parking space, one hot dog, or one commercial, they pocketed $114 million.

        5
        Reply
  20. mlb fan

    2 months ago

    I’m a long-time Bryce Harper fan, but feel he was posturing and posing before his teammates and colleagues.

    Verbally and physically attacking people who disagree with you is the height of entitlement and arrogance.

    4
    Reply
    • DarkSide830

      2 months ago

      Is the “physical attack” in the room with us right now.

      2
      Reply
    • Butter Biscuits

      2 months ago

      He saw how Manfred was undermining the players. Manfred needs to leave that issue to the players rep from each team

      2
      Reply
    • cman

      1 month ago

      I agree and why I don’t side with the spoiled entitled over paid rat athletes either

      Reply
      • Steinbrenner2728

        1 month ago

        Stop watching sports and maybe move to North Korea where they don’t get paid at all, “cman”.

        4
        Reply
  21. Chicago Expat

    2 months ago

    Manfred reps the owners. He’s not some objective, independent mediator between owners and players. He’s not looking out for the health of baseball; team owners simply tolerate the sport as their avenue to make as much money as possible. Manfred sat down with a whole team of lawyers and crafted language to use on his annual tour of clubhouses so he could talk about salary caps and have plausible deniability that he ever broached the topic. Harper was right to tell him to GTFO.

    Manfred is engaging in some very old, very established tactics in union busting by trying to turn one group of players against the other. One very flawed concept he’s trying to push is that the combination of a salary cap and salary floor would only hurt the biggest earners and would, instead, help the players earning the least to make more. That’s flawed logic and no guarantee of it. A salary cap would *definitely* cause the top stars to earn less, because some teams would not have the space to outbid other, lesser-wealthy teams for those top players. But all that would happen is that teams would exceed their salary floor by giving that money to top players they otherwise might not have a shot at. The lower-earning players on the team will continue earning less.

    If Manfred really cared about the rookies and lower-earning players, he would have a history of proposing drastic increases in salary minimums, salary floors, more specific requirements that revenue-share-receiving teams spend directly on player salaries, etc.

    A salary cap helps owners 100% and players 0%. And those are the target percentages for anything that comes out of Manfred’s mouth.

    Every player should tell Manfred to GTFO of their clubhouse with that kind of talk.

    8
    Reply
    • BlueSkies_LA

      2 months ago

      A lot of truth here, but ultimately the players and owners have to come to an agreement that is acceptable to both, and telling the other side to GTFO only works against that goal.

      3
      Reply
      • rondon

        2 months ago

        I don’t think GTFO is the answer either.. Unfortunately, just like the way some NFL players have to stage hold outs or make trade demands to actually get an owner’s attention, I’m not sure, if it comes to it, that baseball owners will respond to anything but an extreme response as well.

        3
        Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          2 months ago

          Both sides have tools at their disposal, which come down to lockouts and strikes. Both of these nuclear options are a result of failures and are unlikely to result in success — just repeated failures. If it’s true that we are headed towards another lockout/strike, then this failure can be traced right back to the previous failure.

          If MLB wants to get out of this failure loop, something new has to be tried. I’ve thought for a long time it was outside neutral arbitrators. This has worked in labor disputes, but it requires both sides to agree to give up some power right from the outset. But when one side believes they have the ability to beat the other side into submission, then they won’t give up anything. This is where we are. Again.

          2
          Reply
        • HatlessPete

          1 month ago

          Blueskies, you’re out of your depth when it comes to talking union bargaining and organizing tactics as well as the systemic parameters and mechanisms of executing a cba. You do not arbitrate contract bargaining, it is the product of negotiation between the representative bargaining teams, full stop.

          Virtually every cba in existence for any union contains a no strike no lockout clause so typically work stoppages only happen when the contract actually expires, which ordinarily is going to happen after bargaining has been underway for some time.

          It is incredibly common for one side or another to reject a bargaining proposal out of hand, especially early on. The owners right now are pre-emptively Saber rattling for a salary cap well before the start of actual bargaining. And not only does Harper’s response contribute to sending a strong signal of the players’ position, it is also entirely reasonable for him to aggressively reject Manfred’s attempt to propagandize to him and his teammates in a captive audience meeting a good year or so before actual bargaining. Bargaining happens at the table and there are rules for how it proceeds. In short this is all very typical labor-management politicking in a union environment.

          Source: I’m a union worker, steward, and an elected member of my union’s leadership committee who just participated in bargaining a new cba earlier this year.

          4
          Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          1 month ago

          You are strangely uninformed on basic facts for one who accuses someone else of being out of their depth. Or maybe attempting to mislead. First of all, any dispute can be mediated if the parties are willing. Second, labor disputes are often mediated. A federal agency is dedicated to this very thing, the National Labor Relations Board. Their services have actually been requested by MLB during labor disputes but the PA vetoed it. In fact, here’s the story:

          mlb.com/news/mlb-requests-federal-mediator-in-nego…

          Of course, the strikes or lockouts occur when collective bargaining agreements expire without a new agreement. Um, duh? Nobody but you suggested otherwise.

          If Harper is one of the MLBPA’s union representatives or a part of the CBA negotiations team, you might be right. But as far as anyone can tell, he is speaking only as a union member. It’s his prerogative, of course, but does it help? Probably not, in my opinion.

          And as a lifelong customer of baseball, I am weary of the “saber rattling” on both sides. We have seen where this leads so many times now that it should be no mystery at all to anyone anymore. Well, some of us have noticed, at least. The constant threat and reality of strikes and lockouts is a symptom of dysfunction, not a normal process. Other pro sports do not have this going on. For the sake of the sport, it needs to be fixed.

          Reply
        • HatlessPete

          1 month ago

          Your link does not contradict my point blueskies. Mediation is not the same as arbitration in a labor context. The mediation services referenced in that article are available on a voluntary basis to parties who mutually agree that these services can potentially help break through an impasse in negotiation, but it’s not binding arbitration. In a labor context these distinctions matter since binding arbitration is typically the final step of a bargained grievance procedure. Again, you are using terms that have specific and meaningful definitions in this context that you do not appear to understand.

          It literally does not matter in the context of the situation whether harper is an elected mlbpa rep or not. Bargaining reps are typically elected in bargaining years in accordance with internal union bylaws and since the cba is not expiring for over a year i would be surprised if the players have even selected their bargaining team yet.

          Whether or not harper holds a title/elected office in the union is irrelevant here for multiple reasons. First of all, union contracts and broader labor law and practice do assign certain duties, prerogatives and roles to elected union reps and stewards, but advocating and speaking on working conditions in a meeting such as this is the right of any union member. Regardless of officer/rep status the nlra includes protections for workplace organizing and “concerted union activity” for any worker. In practice it is quite common for individual workers to act as workplace leaders and union activists and be influential members regardless of whether they seek or hold union office. If we were just talking about harper as a player and a personality in the game/his clubhouse would you doubt for one minute that he’s a leading and influential voice/figure?

          Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          1 month ago

          Actually, it does, and your response does little but talk completely around my point. It is also quite condescending. The point once again is baseball needs to fix its labor management problem and the two sides very obviously are not capable of doing so by themselves. So whatever words you choose to throw at it, bringing in a third party to meditate provides a possible way out of this perpetual wilderness that is slowly but surely destroying the game. Some people will not care what happens, one way or another. I get that. But they aren’t baseball fans.

          What one player said or didn’t say is completely irrelevant to the point.

          Reply
        • HatlessPete

          1 month ago

          If you take it as condescending imo that’s an ego issue for you. I have several years of first hand irl experience actually operating in a union and engaging in these processes so you can choose to learn from that or not here. Mediation is a tool that some unions and employers may agree to utilize depending on circumstances but the two sides ultimately have to reach an agreement through actual bargaining. The union membership has to vote to ratify a new cba and the governing body of the employer has to do the same so using mediation in itself is not going to magically bridge the gap here. Every time mlbpa and ownership have bargained they have produced a cba eventually and work stoppages are not inevitable. If you want to point a finger at anyone here, I suggest you recall that it has been ownership that has been raising the idea of a lockout since this past offseason rather than this nonsensical, ahistorical can’t we just all get along magical thinking you’re indulging in here. If you actually want to learn more about the history of the mlbpa I highly recommend Marvin Miller’s memoir A whole different ballgame.

          Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          1 month ago

          If condescension is an ego issue, it is one for the person doing the condescending, not for the target. So cut that out, please.

          Once again, you talk around the issue. You admit (finally!) on the one hand that labor and management can indeed engage in mediation, but on the other hand that somehow they can’t reach any agreement by this method. Fundamentally, this argument makes no sense. Moving the sides towards an agreement is the entire purpose of mediation. Further, the sides can agree to binding arbitration. But as I said at the very start of this, if one side believes they can grind the other down into submission, they will not sacrifice any of their ability to do so.

          One obvious way arbitration (binding or otherwise) could help this situation is with financials. The players demand financial disclosures that ownership will never allow. It’s a non-starter for them in the same way that a salary cap is beyond the pale for the players. A solution: MLB’s books could be evaluated by a neutral third party.

          Calling another work stoppage not “inevitable” is a perfect example of magical thinking, and to use your word, ahistorical. Quite a few fans commenting here are actually rooting for another one that effectively destroys the union. Maybe you should focus your attention on responding to them.

          Some come here to bash the union, others to bash the owners. I don’t come here to do either. I come here entirely with the interests of a fan, and not to take sides. I guess this confuses some. I can see that baseball has recurring labor-management problems that the other pro sports do not. This is a sign that something is wrong, not that all is well. It also tells me the problem could be fixed, if only the two sides wanted it to be fixed.

          Reply
        • HatlessPete

          1 month ago

          You keep saying I’m “talking around the issue” which at this point feels to me like you’re not interested in considering anything which contradicts or broadens your view of the situation. I’m bored with you at this point so have a good day.

          Reply
        • Pads Fans

          1 month ago

          You really need to do research as to what happens if the two sides do not come to an agreement in mediation. It was not in the MLBPA’s or the players interest to agree to mediation.

          1
          Reply
      • Chicago Expat

        2 months ago

        @BlueSkies
        The way I’m interpreting the action- and, obviously, I don’t have a window into the mind of Bryce Harper- is that he was so blunt in his statement because Manfred was taking that talk *into the clubhouse* for an event the players were required to be at.

        If this had been some neutral site and a meeting that was intended to be about the CBA, then Harper would’ve reacted differently. He wouldn’t be receptive to the salary cap idea, but he would’ve found a different way to express that objection.

        But the fact it happened in the clubhouse- the players territory- that was why he stood up and said what he said.

        6
        Reply
      • larkraxm

        2 months ago

        I think that GTFO helps the negotiating because the cap is a non-starter. There will be no negotiations around a cap, so GTFO with that crap. Come back with a reasonable negotiation so that we can actually get somewhere.

        1
        Reply
      • Pads Fans

        1 month ago

        Harper told the owners through Manfred in no uncertain terms that if they continue to push a cap that there will be not 2027 season. he told the owners through Manfred that the players are ready for that, they have taken the steps to survive financially. Can the owners survive the loss of a season? Lets see who blinks.

        Reply
    • stymeedone

      2 months ago

      @expat
      If the union actually cared about the rookies and lower learning players, they would be represented on the negotiating committee. An agreement will never be reached if neither side is willing to listen to proposals. The idea of a salary cap cannot be considered good or bad without knowing the details of the proposal. Will the owners open their books? What is the amount on the cap. Is it capping the max salary, or just the team total? Is a floor involved, and at what level. Too many unknowns to discard the idea on its face.

      2
      Reply
      • cman

        1 month ago

        Exactly. They are paid peanuts compared to Harper yet he isn’t advocating for them is he? He just wants more money for his own pockets not his rookie fellow teammates. He’s not sharing is he? The epitome of hypocrisy

        1
        Reply
        • HatlessPete

          1 month ago

          The salary cap is for total payroll, not individual players. Harper already has a long term contract with guaranteed salary deep into his latter 30s. A salary cap wouldn’t have much impact on his individual financial future since he quite literally already got his.

          So if anything Harper’s contract situation contradicts your take. A salary cap impacts guys coming up the ranks far more than guys like harper who already got their long term free agent bag. Imo a salary cap would likely have the greatest impact on players in arb2/3 and lower end free agents.

          1
          Reply
        • bhambrave

          1 month ago

          A lot of the well-paid vet players do actually share their money with the less wellpaid players during lock-outs/strikes. I have no doubt that Harper is one of them.

          1
          Reply
        • HatlessPete

          1 month ago

          Yep, not to mention that unions typically establish relief funds in situations like that.

          1
          Reply
  22. Yepstein

    2 months ago

    The way he handled it was very silly, imo. There are clear merits to both sides, Im a Mets fan but even I have to say a cap might be a decent idea.
    But there is a need for dialogue to hammer out the details for it. Look at the NBA, the salary cap is not doing much to limit players salary, all it does is widen the cap between the max players and the minimum guys.
    So while I do understand how it’s on the surface, immediately taken as a way for the owners to cheap out, not necessarily. If instituted properly, it can be a great way to not only prevent teams like the Mets and dodgers from just inflating the average salaries of the mega stars, it can also have the same effect under the cap, look at players like KAT, he’s my boy but 53 million a year? Or Desmond bane, Rudy Govert, khris Middleton, Immanuel quickley, Jalen Johnson, jerami grant, Jordan Poole, those guys are making about 20/25% of the salary cap.
    Those equivalents in MLB would not be making as much if you were to rate it out.
    The salary cap is a good thing when done right, but it’s not easy to get it right, and Bruce Harper is a little bih who will get in the way of making It happen

    3
    Reply
  23. joew

    2 months ago

    player who has made ~220m and has another ~150m under contract is complaining about a salary cap. Top end performers don’t want a cap because they won’t get 30M+ contracts as often. Boo freaking hoo.

    Four teams are projected to be over 300m on their 40man with LAD being over 400m. there are three teams under 100m projected on their 40man with the marlins being ~85m.

    Many teams just cannot match the Free Agent salary to bring in semi super stars. the Pirates for example shouldn’t commit 800m to a single player. that is half of their estimated team value. Sure they probably could with some creative contract work but they probably shouldn’t.

    Add a hard cap and a soft floor while increasing the league minimum would benefit most everyone except the super-stars. why a soft floor? rookie contracts. If you are going through a rebuild you may have a team of mostly rookie contracts that may not get you to the floor and signing a players for inflated value just to get to the floor could cause more problems. there kinda already is a soft floor and it is causing low revenue teams some problems already.

    What I would rather see is a more performance based salary system. many ways it could work with taking into account service time and recent performance numbers. regardless of the team you play on you get similar pay. Does leave room for some teams to manipulate the performance by simply not playing though so something would need to be done to keep that in check

    Dramatically reducing the Tax cap with harsher penalties at the cap and floor would be probably the easiest to push through.

    3
    Reply
    • cman

      1 month ago

      Bingo

      Reply
  24. Sabermetric Acolyte

    2 months ago

    At this point a lockout/strike almost inevitable.

    1
    Reply
    • ChuckyNJ

      2 months ago

      Lockout, not strike. Would occur in December 2026 when the union contract expires.

      Reply
      • BlueSkies_LA

        2 months ago

        For all intents and purposes a lockout and strike are one in the same. The owners lock out the players to avoid the strike being called closer to the start of the season.

        Reply
        • ChuckyNJ

          1 month ago

          A lockout is carried out by management.
          A strike is called by labor.
          Maybe you better take a course in fact-checking and accuracy.

          3
          Reply
        • HatlessPete

          1 month ago

          They are not at all the same except in the very broadest sense that they are work stoppages.

          5
          Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          1 month ago

          And in the narrower sense, as already explained. The last lockout was preemptive measures by ownership against an all but certain strike. You could look it up.

          1
          Reply
        • HatlessPete

          1 month ago

          Lol I remember it quite well thanks. That’s quite a bootlicking take on how that went down though. A lock-out is always an attempt to pressure the union to make concessions and thats all they ever are, not some noble maneuver on ownership’s part to save some early season games for fans as you seem to imagine. And there would not have been a strike if ownership had bargained equitably and in good faith with mlbpa in the first place regardless of ownerships ham-fisted and largely ineffectual lock-out.

          1
          Reply
  25. Al Hirschen

    2 months ago

    NO CAP YES FLOOR

    Reply
  26. bravesnation nc

    2 months ago

    If possible, attend as many games as possible the rest of 25 and the 26 seasons y’all. There will be no MLB in 27. Remember too, Manfred’s contract is up soon and he got one foot out the door because he has no interest in continuing to be the commissioner in 27.

    1
    Reply
    • cdchi

      2 months ago

      If an MLB owner doesn’t have the $$$ to compete at an average level, they should not be allowed to own a team. These teams are owned by billionaires. If you don’t want to play the game, don’t get in .

      2
      Reply
      • JuanUribeJazzHands

        1 month ago

        “If an MLB owner doesn’t have the $$$ to compete at an average level, they should not be allowed to own a team.”

        Mathematically, that is impossible. I hope it’s obvious why

        1
        Reply
  27. DarrenDreifortsContract

    2 months ago

    Everyone wants a cap because of small market teams but the small market teams owners won’t even vote for one because in the end they would be forced to spend more money.

    Spend 100 million a season with the chance of drafting and signing busts or spend 200 million with the same exact chance….

    Reply
    • Old York

      2 months ago

      @DarrenDreifortsContract

      Then time to downsize those teams. Tired of trash teams in what is supposed to be the top league in the world of baseball. I’d rather a few competitive teams than a bunch of mediocre teams.

      3
      Reply
      • Big Poison

        2 months ago

        Won’t it be fun to watch the Yankees and Mets play 100 games a year vs each other?

        3
        Reply
  28. cwsOverhaul

    2 months ago

    Avg payroll among 30 teams about $172.6 mil
    *Perhaps make that a “floor”-the misers like Fisher/Reinsdorf/Nutting too bad if comfortable as a rather profitable feeder team. Owners can fight amongst themselves over revenue sharing. Neither owners nor players want contraction.
    *So called “cap” charitable advantage of 50% greater ($259mil). Only 4 teams currently exceed LAD/NYM/NYY/Philly. Entitlement to make playoffs is a joke and saying there are more WS winners is silly when you know a team can easily outspend mistakes based on benefit of population to at least make playoffs nearly every year. Their fans understandably love that status quo, but there is no perpetual Yankee/Dodger (now Mets) in other pro sports. The FOs will just have to develop players better rather than buying best FAs/easily writing off those who flop that others can’t afford to gamble on and still keep their jobs/remain competitive.
    *No worries, as neither owners nor union care about a more competitive landscape on the field. It is pure greed on both sides…..they could adjust #s annually and share in any revenue windfalls or downturns where all do incredibly well.

    1
    Reply
    • joew

      2 months ago

      More numbers… but you know statistics can lie.. Keeping in mind its 8/2/25 and the numbers are projections.

      40man projected salaries total around 5.9billion with about 197m average.

      The dodgers 40man is projected over 400m. The Marlins projected around 84m.

      The 5 teams that spend the most, Dodgers, Mets, Yankees, Phillies and Blue Jays spend about 1.6b all 5 have 60+ wins.

      The 13 teams that spend the least in order, Marlins, White Sox, Rays, Pirates, As, Indians, Nationals, Twins, Reds, Rockies, Brewers, Cardinals and Orioles spend about a combined 1.6b. Only one (the brewers) has 60+ wins.

      The 11=20th spenders spend an average of 188m and two of them have 60+Wins.

      there are 11 teams with 60+ wins, the top 8 spenders are in that group. with the red sox being the cheapest of the bunch at 244m.

      Out of the teams that have 60+ wins the Dodgers pay the most per win at ~6.3m and the brewers pay the least at ~2.2m so far.

      There are a few teams that are reported to be losing money despite record revenues across baseball. Two of those teams are the Pirates and Twins. Two big reasons are the COVID years and the new CBA.

      The next CBA needs a Dramatic change so that these big spenders cant push the smaller clubs around so much.

      2
      Reply
      • Steinbrenner2728

        1 month ago

        In the past 20 years, the White Sox won a World Series, the Rays have made 2 World Series appearances, the Indians made a World Series appearance, Nationals won a World Series, Rockies made a World Series appearance, and the Cardinals have won 2 World Series rings. While the Dodgers have won 2 rings and 2 World Series appearances, the Mets have had 1 World Series appearance, the Yankees won 1 ring and had 1 appearance, and the Phillies also have had 1 ring and 1 appearance.

        Those clubs you listed as being “pushed around” account for 4 World Series rings and 4 World Series appearances.

        The big spenders account for 4 rings and 5 appearances.

        The only thing being pushed around is an extra WS appearance.

        1
        Reply
        • joew

          1 month ago

          aye, there are three types of Lies. Lies, Dam ned Lies and Statistics.

          CBAs and rule changes make a difference too.

          In general with out getting more fine grained.. 14 out of the past 20 WS teams were in the top 10 in spending. Two where in the bottom 10. Four where in between. Could probably take it even further into the play off teams and you will likely find similar where the top half of spenders dominate but with the rule changes it allows more teams to squeak in and push through the playoffs

          Every team regardless of the payroll has a shot to make it to the WS. The bigger spenders are able to work through any setbacks easier

          reference: year team spending rank src: spotrac
          2024 Dodgers (3) – Yankees (2)
          2023 Rangers (4) – Diamondbacks (21)
          2022 Astros (8) – Phillies (4)
          2021 Braves (10) – Astros (5)
          2020 Dodgers (1) – Rays (28)
          2019 Nationals (7) – Astros (8)
          2018 Red Sox (1) – Dodgers (3)
          2017 Astros (17) – Dodgers (1)
          2016 Cubs (5) – Indians (18)
          2015 Royals(13) – Mets (18)

          Reply
        • Pads Fans

          1 month ago

          Rings are not the way to judge it. Playoff appearances are.

          Since 2013 of the teams you mentioned

          Large Revenue Teams
          Dodgers – 12 playoff appearances in 12 years
          Yankees – 8 playoff appearances in 12 years
          Red Sox – 5 playoff appearances (2 WS wins)
          Phillies – 3 playoff appearances
          Cardinals – 7 playoff appearances

          Rays – 6 playoff appearances
          Indians – 7 playoff appearances
          Rockies – 2 playoff appearances

          The Mets were a low revenue, low payroll team until Cohen took over, so they are a different case. – 4 playoff appearances

          If you carry this out to the top 15 revenue teams vs the bottom 15 revenue teams as judged by who paid revenue sharing in MLB by year, you will find that 96 of the playoff series played during that time period are by the top 15 revenue teams, or roughly 70%.

          1
          Reply
    • Pads Fans

      1 month ago

      There can be no floor without several things. #1 – 100% revenue sharing with all media and sponsorship contracts running through MLB. #2 – open books by all teams, not just those owned by a publicly held corporation. #3 – a guarantee of 50% of total revenue to the players.

      There can be no cap without, wait for it, 100% revenue sharing, open books by all teams, and a guarantee of 50% of revenue sharing for players.

      Those 3 things are the basis for a floor and cap in all other major sports in the US.

      Teams like the Dodgers, Yankees, and Red sox would not want to see a huge cut in the revenue they keep by having 100% revenue sharing.

      Teams can’t buy a WS ring, but they can buy players that will place them in the playoffs most years. Continually being in the playoffs even without winning the WS is a huge financial advantage.

      1
      Reply
      • bhambrave

        1 month ago

        Well said, Pads. Until MLB gives the lower revenue teams the money to sign high-priced players, there will be no parity. It would be interesting to see how the Pirates or the Marlins did if they had the same resources as the Mets and the Dodgers.

        1
        Reply
  29. My Strawman > Your Strawman

    2 months ago

    I’ll get on board with a salary cap when it comes with a cap on ticket prices and a willingness to pay for their own new stadiums

    7
    Reply
  30. Lou Sassoll

    2 months ago

    I’m so sick of these baby MLB players crying over more money. Many of them are making 10s-100s of millions of dollars while most of the country is struggling to feed their families. This all comes off as cringe AF and if it continues I’d much rather have a long work stoppage than to continue to support the game. Also, I’m not pro-owners either.

    4
    Reply
    • ChuckyNJ

      2 months ago

      You’ll love the federal budget bill signed on the 4th of July. Tax cuts for the filthy rich, less money for Medicaid, crumbs for everything except ICE.

      8
      Reply
      • joew

        1 month ago

        Please take your politics off the sports site. Thank you.

        Reply
    • JuanUribeJazzHands

      1 month ago

      Lou

      “Many of them are making 10s-100s of millions of dollars ”

      Now do the owners

      2
      Reply
  31. swissvale

    2 months ago

    If I’m the players and the owners want a salary cap I tell them:

    1. All revenue goes in a common pot (media deals, merchandise, etc.)
    2. Open the books – 50/50 split every year – owner revenue and player salaries
    3. If the owners agree then they are telling the truth about wanting the league to be more competitive.

    If not, welcome to watching playoff baseball on Apple TV and Hulu

    2
    Reply
  32. Chicago Expat

    2 months ago

    Totally unrelated to the topic at hand, but one of the things I love about the posts that generate a lot of comments is getting to see all of the clever usernames some of you have adopted. Getting a chuckle today from some of them. Cheers.

    1
    Reply
  33. Dash 2

    2 months ago

    Both a salary cap and floor are needed. In the current system, a player can put up great numbers in a walk year, then justify why is is worth more than player X, who gets $30 million/ year. Once the money’s in the bag, that player has little incentive to perform. Whole pay structure in MLB needs an overhaul.

    1
    Reply
  34. Lefty_Orioles_Fan

    2 months ago

    Harper was upset witb Manfred couldn’t help him with his weekly Kielbasa delivery that was not only late….but short of standard and quantity….if Manfred really wants to stand up and face the peril…tell Harper to sit on it and that Manfred will oversee the effort to get rid of guaranteed contracts!!!!

    2
    Reply
  35. The Saber-toothed Superfife

    2 months ago

    Bryce Harper might make a good manager someday….
    IF ONLY…he could figure out a way to get ejected multiple times per game…….he’d be the greatest.

    Reply
  36. sunsetkev1

    2 months ago

    Salary cap time Harper. None of you players are worth the money no matter how much you cry that you are entitled.

    2
    Reply
    • JuanUribeJazzHands

      1 month ago

      SSK

      “None of you players are worth the money”

      Are the owners worth even more money than they are currently making?

      If fans spend $12 billion on MLB a year, how do you want it divied up if you want the players to get less?

      2
      Reply
    • Steinbrenner2728

      1 month ago

      Cricket players in Bangladesh, Afghanistan, South Africa and Zimbabwe are currently struggling with being paid on-time, sometimes not even being paid at all despite their occupations listed as professional athletes. Maybe that would be your new sport. Try that.

      1
      Reply
    • MuleorAstroMule

      1 month ago

      So America is a capitalist economy. In a capitalist economy pricing is based on market scarcity. Exceptional ball-players are very rare. Therefore they command a high price. A person’s opinion on value doesn’t matter because we know concretely their actual value from the market. If a player wasn’t worth the money they wouldn’t be paid it. No one forces the owners to offer the contracts they do.

      If you’d prefer to live in a society based on lies there are still a few failing communist states that believe they can determine the price of commodities off of whims.

      1
      Reply
      • JuanUribeJazzHands

        1 month ago

        MAM

        Except MLB isn’t a free market for a number of reasons.

        The most obvious is that player salaries are restricted through things like the draft, team control years and arbitration.

        You might also want to do a little bit of reading up on current events

        Reply
  37. TheTripleLindy

    2 months ago

    If a salary cap “evens the playing field” will MLB eliminate all the other extra subsidies certain welfare teams receive like Revenue Sharing, Competitive balance draft picks, Increased international bonus pool money, etc? Or will certain markets continue to be coddled?

    Reply
    • Big Poison

      2 months ago

      That’s a fair question. I’d expect the competitive balance picks to be eliminated, and the international system should be overhauled too. No reason all new players shouldn’t enter through draft, like every other league.

      Reply
      • MuleorAstroMule

        1 month ago

        An international draft means MLB poaching all the best talent from every other league so it’s hard to see any other league/country agreeing to it. Why would they give up the talent or the posting fees? The problem with an international draft is its completely one-sided in its benefits.

        Reply
  38. Whyme

    2 months ago

    Salary caps are dumb just make the luxury tax more prohibitive when you go over multiple years in a row. Ie go over 2 years in a row you lose all international signings for the next year. A floor is more needed than cap.

    Reply
  39. IndianaBraves85

    2 months ago

    Well, get prepared for no baseball in 2027.

    Reply
  40. Astros West Texas

    2 months ago

    I LIKE the current system, and think it is working very well for all parties, including fans. How ’bout next agreement just tweaking luxury tax thresholds and major league minimum salaries, inflation-adjusted upward for next 5 years (through 2031), and call it a day?

    2
    Reply
  41. brucenewton

    2 months ago

    Umm the Yankees can’t compete with a level salary structure. A salary cap can’t ever happen and probably wont.
    A cap ceiling comes with a floor, always within 20% of each other. Baseball has massive payroll discrepancies among the teams. Something like 160/200 might work, where the penny pinchers would have to double or more their payroll, and the habitual spenders would have to scale back 30% or so. Salaries would still rise, probably more than normal.
    Under Cashman, I don’t think the Yankees are capable of this and avoid annual 100 loss seasons. The league simply won’t allow that to happen. We know the PA won’t allow it. For all that, a hard salary cap in baseball will never happen.

    Reply
  42. Shackleton

    2 months ago

    If one can prove a salary cap will, dramatically, lower the cost of a game for an average group.of 4 then there needs to be a salary cap.

    1
    Reply
    • HatlessPete

      1 month ago

      Lol it will not stop owners from raising prices. Oh my sweet summer child…

      6
      Reply
      • Halo11Fan

        1 month ago

        Ticket prices are based on what people will pay. It has less to do with salaries than you think.

        5
        Reply
    • Shackleton

      1 month ago

      Then there’s my answer, no, it can’t in fact be proven a salary cap will lower anything without the owners agreeing to lose capital as well.

      That being said, a salary cap should end teams from buying championships so I’m all for it.

      Reply
  43. hiflew

    2 months ago

    The players need to realize that they will lose a LOT more than 162 games if they strike over this. They will lose a LOT of fans permanently, myself included, if ANY games are cancelled, let alone a whole season. I walked away from the game after the 1994 strike for almost 4 years before the McGwire / Sosa summer brought me back in slightly. But at the time I was still young and far more willing to forgive. I am old and cranky now. If $300 million is not enough for Bryce Harper, then I don’t know what to tell him.

    You just have to look at it realistically. Players have FAR more to lose than owners. Take away baseball and the owners are still very wealthy. Take away baseball and the players are suddenly guys in their 20s with a high school education and no real job skills. Who do you think would do better without baseball?

    2
    Reply
  44. Mistake

    2 months ago

    Please everyone be ready to cancel your MLB.TV subscriptions. MLB wants a salary cap to create better financial forecasts longer into the future, but their models get blown up if the revenue from MLB.TV disappears. Fans have the power to prevent a lockout. We just need to be louder than last CBA.

    2
    Reply
  45. Astros_fan_in_Aus

    2 months ago

    ” it would be in Manfred’s best interests to downplay his altercation with one of the most influential players in the league”
    The biggest man-child in the league you mean, don’t you ? He thinks the way to get his point across is to shout in somebody’s face.

    Reply
  46. Informed Sportsball Discussion

    2 months ago

    If I were Bryce Harper, instead of blowing up and making Manfred look like the reasonable person in the room, I would simply ask him the following:

    1) It looks and sounds like Manfred is here to sell the players on the idea of a salary cap. Why is he not using the words “salary cap”?

    2) Are the owners intending to push for a salary cap in the next round of CBA negotiations? Yes or no?

    When Manfred doesn’t answer those questions, tell him the meeting is a waste of time without those questions being answered, and leave the room.

    1
    Reply
    • GASoxFan

      2 months ago

      The commissioner represents the owners, and yet, sometimes doesn’t.

      Makes you trying to have him speak for the owners as difficult as having harper speak for every player.

      If the commissioner was a pure rubber stamp for anything any owner wanted to do, you wouldn’t have rejections and approvals of trades by the commissioner for example

      Reply
      • Informed Sportsball Discussion

        1 month ago

        @GASoxFan

        Manfred wouldn’t answer either question. The point would be to get him, and by extension the owners, on record as not having answered the questions, and for the players to continue pressing the matter until Manfred/they do.

        Reply
  47. paule

    2 months ago

    How about the owners of the small market teams putting their teams up for sale? There are billionaires out there that would love to buy a team to sooth their egos And I bet every small market owner would make much more than he paid for the team originally. It’s a win-win for the owners and the players and fans of those teams.

    2
    Reply
    • ChuckyNJ

      2 months ago

      Were you following Trade Deadline Day? Minnesota shed a lot of ballplayers because the Twins are up for sale and wanted to get the wage bill down before new owners come in.

      Reply
  48. Tim Sullivan

    2 months ago

    Rob Manfred may be the worse commissioner in professional sports. One thing I want EVERYONE to remember is work stoppages are when workers (players in this instance) put the tools of their trade down and go on strike. Lockouts are when the owners tell the workers to stop taking the money they’re being paid and give some back to the owners. If the owners lock out the players, remember that EVERY sportswriter or sportscaster who describes that as a work stoppage is a tool for ownership. If there is a baseball lockout after the 2026 season, it’s because the owners are saying too much is not enough.

    And Bryce Harper was way too easy on Manfred. If Manfred wanted to actually help the game, they would require a total salary minimum before a team was eligible for any “competitive balance” money. I think they could start with a team minimum of $80,000,000 (26-man roster) before competitive balance money is let out.

    3
    Reply
  49. coldgoldenfalstaff

    2 months ago

    IMO NBA style cap and floor with exemptions and sign and trade would be better for players and owners. More money towards salaries, cheap teams have to spend, best players still can be paid, teams can get something for departing players. Only ones losing under such a scheme are agents.

    Reply
    • coldgoldenfalstaff

      2 months ago

      By exemptions that can mean something different for baseball, such as top 5 earners exempt from cap, doesn’t have to be literally like the NBA.

      Reply
  50. bucsfan0004

    2 months ago

    An unrelated note…. Harper signed his contract so long ago that Seth Lugo now makes more AAV

    1
    Reply
  51. Big Poison

    2 months ago

    Any fan who thinks the MLB doesn’t need a salary cap is simply unwilling to sacrifice their team’s obvious advantage. There is an almost 300% spending gap between top 10 and bottom 10. Perhaps these same fans will enjoy MLB becoming a league of 10 teams?

    1
    Reply
    • BlueSkies_LA

      2 months ago

      Or isn’t shilling for the owners.

      2
      Reply
    • JuanUribeJazzHands

      1 month ago

      “Any fan who thinks the MLB doesn’t need a salary cap is simply unwilling to sacrifice their team’s obvious advantage.”

      What if I’m for massively increased revenue sharing to equal the playing field?

      Am I still unwilling to sacrifice my team’s advantage?

      Reply
  52. Not the real Sports Pope

    2 months ago

    Manfred vs Harper at Summerslam tonight

    2
    Reply
  53. yamsi1912

    2 months ago

    Harper is such a baby back b*tch.

    Reply
  54. LernersWallet

    2 months ago

    Up at MLB headquarters their calling it the dodger cap

    1
    Reply
    • Sparky1000

      2 months ago

      They love their precious Dodgers (and Yankees).

      1
      Reply
      • Steinbrenner2728

        1 month ago

        3 World Series rings in the last 20 years is enough to warrant the league to unconditionally love both teams?

        Reply
  55. Sparky1000

    2 months ago

    It’s fun seeing two people I’m not crazy about going at it. I also think we need a cap/floor.

    1
    Reply
  56. Sadface

    2 months ago

    I get tired of players crying collusion all the time. A lot of those players don’t deserve to get paid more than 20 million a year. But if a team wants to pay them that than more power to them.

    Reply
  57. cheesemanforever

    2 months ago

    Both sides need to give something, because the competitive balance of the game is unsustainable. Players need to accept some sort of cap and owners need to be held to a minimum payroll too. Broadcast revenue sharing is another area where owners need to give, especially as the TV model changes from regional cable to streaming.

    Reply
  58. juggernaut

    1 month ago

    Manfraud works for the owners and ONLY cares about what they want. The owners pay his salary, and the players deserve everything that they can get. I definitely 100% agree with Harper’s views, and I commend him for speaking up to Manfraud! NO SALARY CAP in MLB!!!

    2
    Reply
  59. Citizen1

    1 month ago

    Wasn’t Harper trying to renegotiate his contract on the heels of boras during spring training or he’d sit out the season? On the other hand some owners scream for a salary cap while other owners were willing to give Soto a large sum. And Soto hasnt been the $60 million 5 tool impact player.

    Reply
  60. Rsox

    1 month ago

    MLB doesn’t need a cap, it needs a floor. Any cap is going to be set at a number that still allows the Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, Phillies to spend big money so what are we even talking about? A floor would at least get the nickel cleanchers to have to spend some kind of money on player payroll whether it’s signing free agents or extending their own players

    3
    Reply
  61. Redstitch108* 2

    1 month ago

    There needs to be an elimination of the guaranteed contract. All contracts should have at least minimum performance mandates embedded. Has it been the owners’ fault that they have given out long guaranteed contracts?YES. But when a guy signs a 7 year $300 million contract and doesn’t play 250 games in those 7 years—and on top of it plays well below expectations or even replacement level when he does play, then there needs to be remedies to recover a percentage of that contract for owners. That money could be spent on other performing players.

    1
    Reply
    • yankee tough guy

      1 month ago

      if so Then you need to eliminate the years of team control. where Players like Skenes-soto-harper etc are paid well below their value during these years.

      Reply
  62. cman

    1 month ago

    Let them lockout. Baseball is spinning the drain already.

    Reply
  63. bjhaas1977

    1 month ago

    LIV Baseball will happen if they try a cap.

    Reply
  64. Jason29

    1 month ago

    I can’t believe I’m defending owners but should they loose money to try and keep up with the dodgers and other large market teams? The reality is ticket prices and advertising rates go up meaning the consumer actually pays the increased salaries.

    1
    Reply
    • JuanUribeJazzHands

      1 month ago

      Jason

      “The reality is ticket prices and advertising rates go up ”

      Can we please start teaching basic economics.

      Supply and demand.

      Prices go up because people are willing to spend more on baseball.

      Because MLB gets more money, player salaries go up.

      4
      Reply
      • its_happening

        1 month ago

        Then fans need to send a message or else they will suffer.

        2
        Reply
    • yankee tough guy

      1 month ago

      If Manfred wants a salary cap, it must be good news for the owners of large-market teams — after all, he works for them. Do you really think he cares about small-market teams or players and fanbase?

      2
      Reply
  65. CarvelAndrews

    1 month ago

    Manfred chugs dongs by the bowl.

    MLBTR will support the league without a doubt. Because the league will give them some money in hopes of skewing public opinion.

    Reply
  66. hoof hearted

    1 month ago

    “what Manfred has ever done “to benefit the players”?? Hmmm, increase revenue and revenue streams allowing players to get more $$. If Harper is OK with that, he should sit down. Manfred has exponentially expanded revenue for the game-period

    Reply
  67. NMK 2

    1 month ago

    If you haven’t watched this yet, retired reliever Trevor May has not been shy about breaking down the beginning of negotiations and his takes on the matter. Obviously an interesting and frank perspective to which we may not always have access. youtube.com/watch?v=ehEMkbggBiA

    2
    Reply
  68. Dumpster Divin Theo

    1 month ago

    Must not be a big deal, since he downplays it every 8 hours

    2
    Reply
  69. Shawnpe

    1 month ago

    The level at which Harper is out of touch with economics is astounding.

    The game needs a salary cap. Not every team has individual cable contracts and 25 million population markets to operate from. Creating a level playing field is only good for the game. And it needs to be a reasonable cap for even the smallest market in the league.

    It’s been proven over decades that limiting team aggregate salaries creates more competition for the post season & that is the life blood of any professional sports league.

    The players and owners? Each are just as tunnel visioned as the other. There is an equitable compromise to be had between, no cap and a hard cap. (See the NBA CBA) Find it and shut the hell up. Nothing stinks more to a fan than filthy rich players fighting about money with filthy rich owners, while ticket prices skyrocket to level no one can afford anymore.

    Read the room! Seriously! you can’t alienate a baseball fan any more than the subject matter of this article does.

    Reply
    • Steinbrenner2728

      1 month ago

      “It’s been proven over decades that limiting team aggregate salaries creates more competition for the post season”

      Where’s the proof? I can say that in the past 20 years, the biggest of the biggest spending teams (the Dodgers, Yankees, and Mets) have accounted for 3 rings.

      Since you brought up the NBA, in the past 20 years, the Lakers won the Finals 4 times, the Warriors won 4 times, the Heat won 3 times, the Spurs won twice, Celtics won twice, and the Cavs/Mavericks/Bucks/Nuggets/Thunder won it all once.

      Reply
      • Macbeth

        1 month ago

        Mlb wants one thing players want another.

        What is missing in this conversation is what fans want.

        Not saying that fans should have final say, but they are an important piece.

        Most fans want a cap.

        Reply
        • ChuckyNJ

          1 month ago

          Anyone who brings up “fans” is guilty of Dumb Jock Thinking.

          The motion picture industry had an actors’ strike and a writers’ strike not so long ago. Did anyone shout “what about the ticket buyers”? Did anyone shout “what about the viewers”? HELL NO!

          Dumb Jocks are just as selfish as billionaire franchise operators that want taxpayer-funded sportsball palaces.

          1
          Reply
    • its_happening

      1 month ago

      The fans need to figure it out and choose fans. If that means not attending games, not watching games, not buying merch, all to drop costs, then it’s an uncomfortable decision fans must make to build a better future.

      1
      Reply
  70. emt126

    1 month ago

    Harper is worried he will be outed for not earning his huge salary. Over paid and overrated. He could care less about the low level players. He can afford to miss the rest of his career.

    2
    Reply
  71. Richard N

    1 month ago

    Sounds like Manfred it trying to use scare tactics to get what’s best for the owners not the players. This game is all about the players. Don’t let him and all the billionaire owners get their way so they can just make more profits.

    Reply
    • Poolhalljunkies

      1 month ago

      Maybe but taking Harper for example the major league min is 750k..hes making what 35mill. Its rich thinks he’s sticking up for players when hes earning 500x more than the next guy

      2
      Reply
  72. its_happening

    1 month ago

    He had to. But what is unfortunate is every person here picking a side. The wrong side.

    Owners vs Players. What’s the choice here? None of the above. Can fans finally choose fans for once? Do you really want to continue spending outrageous money just to attend a game? Cost for families going to games is ridiculous. Families matter; that 10 year old is the future fan of MLB. Keep escalating costs and that 10 year old will find something else to pay attention to.

    Want to make MLB better? Want MLB more affordable? It’s time to stop choosing players or owners. Choose fans. Otherwise the fans will pay the rising price.

    2
    Reply
  73. Bobby smac9

    1 month ago

    Who does Manfred work for? Charlie, we don’t want tuna with good taste. we want tuna that tastes good.

    1
    Reply
  74. ChuckyNJ

    1 month ago

    I’ve yet to see the Dumb Jocks jump all over baseball for that Saturday night game shoehorned inside that NASCAR track in Bristol. Rained for over 2 hours, game started, got to the bottom of the 1st before the rain came again. Game suspended until Sunday (8/3) at 1 PM Eastern on Fox.

    Reply
  75. tiger9

    1 month ago

    Balanced schedule….bull. It’s a schedule to make anyone who lives in New York, Chicago or LA happy. End of story. Otherwise it’s a rivalry destroyer.

    Reply
    • ChuckyNJ

      1 month ago

      Repeat after me: Balanced schedule downgrades traditional rivalries.
      Yankees-Red Sox is traditional. Yankees-Marlins is not.
      Cubs-Cardinals is traditional. Cubs-Rangers is not.
      Dodgers-Giants is traditional. Dodgers-Orioles is not.

      Reply
  76. Kikuchi is Gucci

    1 month ago

    I’m not too smart. IDK if a salary cap would be good or not for the MLB. I do think the pitch clock, schedule, changes, and bigger bases have been revolutionary in a good way.

    But I do think it’s commendable that Manfred is visiting every team’s players every year. Say what you will, but that’s really valuable in a big organization, for every person to have an opportunity to speak their mind and communicate. Goes both ways.

    I work for a big company, and I’ve never even met the regional boss, much less the big boss. A little effort goes a long way.

    Hopefully enough to avoid or mitigate a lockout, though from what I’ve heard, that’s overly optimistic

    2
    Reply
    • YankeesBleacherCreature

      1 month ago

      Manfred gets paid $25M/year by the owners. He’s going into every clubhouse to make a sales pitch of a salary cap to the players. Is that an easy job? No. But there’s nothing commendable about that assignment.

      Manfred already knows where vets like Harper stands and part of his agenda is to influence and sow discourse among the younger players. He is not there to reflectively seek opinions.

      Contrary to popular opinion here, I don’t have strong personal opinions of Manfred. He’s a puppet of the owners and his job is to generate ideas/strategies to make more money for them.

      4
      Reply
  77. Domingo111

    1 month ago

    Harper can be a jerk but i think it is pretty cool that he is fighting for future players even though he has likely already banked his final contract so that a SC wouldn’t financially affect him.

    Reply
    • carlos15

      1 month ago

      Harper has so much contract regret over all the money he left on the table

      1
      Reply
  78. CarlosDelgado

    1 month ago

    As a fan I’ve been calling desperately for a salary cap since the ohtani signing. It needs to happen and this great of a push back from the players is disappointing to see

    Reply
  79. cplwhite

    1 month ago

    Both sides are greedy plain and simple.
    I get there is tension on the subject of salary caps on both sides I totally disagree with any player acting the way Harper allegedly responded. Im not saying you cant argue a point but fleing up in his face and telling him you can get the F out of here. That I dont agree with and I dont care if it was Manfred or Tony Clarke you dont address either side that way.

    As for the money in baseball well its out of hand on both sides. And they need to figure out a better system.

    1
    Reply
  80. carlos15

    1 month ago

    Manfred is the worst commissioner in the history of the game but Harper still has serious anger issues like he did as a young player in Washington.

    Reply
    • El Kabong

      1 month ago

      No. The worst commissioner in the history of the game is Kennesaw Mountain Landis, who fought tooth and nail to keep the game all-white. Landis refused to allow players and managers who disagreed with him to speak on the issue.

      1
      Reply
      • El Kabong

        1 month ago

        *Kenesaw

        Reply
      • ChuckyNJ

        1 month ago

        Judge Landis became commissioner with a mandate to clean up baseball after the Black Sox scandal. The ban on Black players existed long before Landis.
        Ford Frick has a legacy that has not held up well. Expansion began on his watch, but big league clubs also were moving from city to city while he was commissioner. He also prevented a Double-A league from bringing in a woman as a fill-in umpire.

        Reply
        • El Kabong

          1 month ago

          It doesn’t matter when the ban on black players began. What matters is that Landis went out of his way to uphold this bigoted policy. He was a weak leader. Here’s some background on Landis’s less-than-noble tenure.
          sabr.org/journal/article/can-you-read-judge-landis…

          1
          Reply
        • ChuckyNJ

          1 month ago

          In the wake of the Black Sox scandal, the US Government would have cleaned up baseball had there not been a commissioner. And the result would not have been pretty.

          Reply
    • BlueSkies_LA

      1 month ago

      And yet, the owners consider him to be one of the best — and they are his employer.

      Reply
  81. wvsteve

    1 month ago

    The players may want to look back at the work stoppage in the early 90s and when it did. Maybe they will be allowed to use steroids again to save the game. Seriously the lower players need to need to at least be making a million dollars a year

    Reply
  82. DakotaJoe

    1 month ago

    I can only guarantee one thing – the fans will come out as the biggest losers.

    3
    Reply
  83. rocknwell

    1 month ago

    So many people here assuming the worst about Manfred, the owners, and sometimes the players. Nobody knows what someone’s motivations ir desires are other than what is spoken. I find it so troubling that so many of you assume the worst about the character of these people! Business is business, and it is in both parties’ best interest to have mutually agreed upon contracts. And these are negotiations, which means there will always be compromise. Baseball has taken a back seat to the NFL and NBA. It’s not culturally as popular. Attendance is down. Trying to implement things that will help keep costs down (and down, I mean it’s not like the players will get fleeced) and hopefully keep the league more balanced isn’t inherently evil. The players don’t deserve ever-increasing salaries. They aren’t getting any better and the product on the field is often lousy to watch. The salary cap could also be set at a very high amount. There’s no reason to suggest that having a cap is bad for anyone. Many of the players are just as greedy as anyone, especially of thr owners most of you cry about. If you were the owner of a team, you’d also be looking to find ways to have the best product at the most economical price. None of these owners throw their own cash into their team simply for the enjoyment of it. It’s a business. Many of Y’all should look at this more objectively.

    1
    Reply
    • its_happening

      1 month ago

      They should be looking at it from the fan’s perspective rather than taking the side of either the owners or players. We the consumer need to to put the consumer first above any player or owner.

      1
      Reply
  84. Renotribefan

    1 month ago

    Here’s what I think is the makings of a fair deal.

    -Implement a salary cap. Make it so that small market teams can compete to resign their homegrown talent.

    -implement a salary floor. Have it move from year to year so that it’s not a stagnant number.

    -do away with the pre-arb/arbitration system. It’s hard enough to make the majors. Don’t make guys have to play for 6 years in the majors before they can cash in.

    -dramatically increase the salaries of minor leaguers. These guys shouldn’t be living off of minimum wage salaries.

    I think these are all fair things where both the owners and the players sacrifice.

    Reply
  85. chandlerbing

    1 month ago

    Any chance manfraud can retire before 2029?

    2
    Reply
  86. gary55wv

    1 month ago

    40 million is not enough, how in the world can they make ends meet!

    2
    Reply
  87. greenbaygiants

    1 month ago

    If the players can’t admit there’s a problem with a system where teams owned by hedge funds who are willing to lose a billion dollars to build a super roster are in the same league as teams owned by families who can’t afford to absorb negative cash flow for more than a couple years, Manfred won’t make any headway. You can cynically say the family owners should sell to others with deep pockets, but you wouldn’t feel that way if your family owned a team. Franchise values are meaningless if you can’t meet payroll because you lost your regional sports network TV contract. I can see the day when leagues get divided by revenue level so the mega teams fight it out for one WS spot while the smaller markets fight it out for the other. Is that a stupid idea? Yes. But would it give teams like the Reds, Pirates, Royals and Twins a fighting chance? Also yes.

    Reply
    • yankee tough guy

      1 month ago

      @greenbaygiants Please stop with the narrative that this is good for small market teams. Manfred works for the big market teams. If they want a salary cap, it’s because the owners will make more money. They don’t care about small market teams, players or fanbases.

      4
      Reply
      • BlueSkies_LA

        1 month ago

        Get your head out of the sand. The false narrative is that the owners care about competitive balance. They care only about the business of the game being profitable for all of the owners, which it is. That is why the sport has the financial system it’s got. It isn’t because the commissioner works only for the large market teams, but because he works for all of them.

        1
        Reply
  88. BaseballGuy1

    1 month ago

    Have little use for Manfred…. that being said, MLB is way ahead of MLBPA in any negotiation setting. Clark is weak as is the entire MLBPA group. Story is over-hyped just to get people talking and behind the players. Any player, including Harper, or any player rep for any team, does not tell any MLB Commissioner to leave a clubhouse. Say your peace Harper and take a seat.

    Reply
    • Pads Fans

      1 month ago

      That USED to be the case before Bruce Meyer took over as lead negotiator for the MLBPA prior to the last CBA. He got the players to pitch into a fund to help the lower salary players make it through a lockout, got huge concessions for younger players, got minor league players into the MLBPA and got them housing and a living wage, and got all players a raise overall. Since then he has continued to grow that fund to well over a billion to keep players afloat financially during a missed season.

      Clark is not the lead negotiator. That you are so misinformed about that fact tells us how little we should pay attention to your opinion.

      Harper put Manfred in his place. Well deserved.

      2
      Reply
  89. Michael Can Fart? Oh!

    1 month ago

    Another thing I am hating Manfred for, Corporate Sponsorship logos on uniforms.It has cheapend the look of the uniform, same with the NBA. Pretty soon uniforms are gonna look like nascar uniforms.

    4
    Reply
    • ChuckyNJ

      1 month ago

      Shirt sponsors are a practice that began in soccer.

      Reply
  90. algionfriddo

    1 month ago

    Can’t afford the parking, let alone a ticket to a game. Whatever.

    1
    Reply
  91. mike156

    1 month ago

    If this is the unalloyed good for the players that Manfred Insists it is, maybe he should be concrete in how it’s going to work and how it will benefit both the game and the player? Why threaten when you could persuade?

    Reply
  92. jeffreybecker77

    1 month ago

    please do something to prevent the uber rich teams from buying up all the players. this isn’t working. i hate manfred, but i would forgive a ton if he could somehow make baseball fair like other sports, cap or not.

    Reply
    • Michael Can Fart? Oh!

      1 month ago

      please do something to keep the uber rich teams BUYING UP as many players as they can afford to. This is working. Plenty of discrepancy. I hate Rob Manfred but realize he is just a puppet for the 30 owners. I would never forgive him if he implemented a salary cap, to let lazy owners who don’t wish to spend get more money. Not to mention salary cap leagues are unfair to big teams, as really four or five teams make money and have to distribute that to the other 31 teams. How is that fair? I guess everyone should get a participation trophy. Life is not fair, sports aren’t fair, that’s why people like to root for underdogs. but keep blaming the big markets, cause it fits your narrative.

      Reply
    • SoCalBrave

      1 month ago

      Baseball is fair. Teams like the Rays and Brewers are competitive despite low budgets. The problem with baseball is that not all teams are interested in being competitive. Look at the all star roster that the A’s could have if they had kept some of their players. Or the Pirates, or the Marlins. They could all compete if they choose to. But they often elect to not compete because they prefer to collect the shared revenue from the league instead.

      Reply
  93. 2020vision

    1 month ago

    Reduce the season to something in the 140 games range. In theory, good players might make a little less per year but extend their careers by a full season and make it up in the long run.

    Reply
  94. Dock_Elvis

    1 month ago

    I predict we might see the union try to crush the owners. Ive for awhile envisioned a future where MLB is employee owned. Theyre already roughly making 50% of the revenue generated. Collectively they are very wealthy. They can hold out forever. A large percentage of active rosters have made generational monetary wealth. I have to ask if the players NEED the owners

    Reply
  95. FOmeOLS

    1 month ago

    Manfred would say the sun set in the east and rose in the west if it suited him. He’s a sycophant for owners.
    No one has a more punchable face.

    3
    Reply
    • SoCalBrave

      1 month ago

      That is literally his job. To be a mouthpiece for the owners

      Reply
      • FOmeOLS

        1 month ago

        Yes, and?

        Reply
  96. Pads Fans

    1 month ago

    Manfred is trying to divide the players and it didn’t work. He got shut down. The leader in that clubhouse said in essence, “try that salary crap garbage and you won’t have a 2027 season. WE are ready for it. Are you?”

    2
    Reply
  97. Gyo02

    1 month ago

    A salary cap would give teams like the Brewers a chance to compete. Instead they are cellar dwellers year after year.

    Reply
    • Luis_Fazenda

      1 month ago

      They aren’t this year.

      Reply
    • SoCalBrave

      1 month ago

      A salary cap would only bring more disparity in players salaries. Just look at the NBA or NFL

      Reply
      • Gyo02

        1 month ago

        It was a bad joke. Low payrolls can compete if they develop players and not sell the farm for 1 or 2 big/biggish names to sell jerseys. Keep as much as the farm as you can. Don’t sell a potential superstar(s) for 1 year of a rental because you are slightly above .500 at the deadline.

        Reply
  98. Flags in the wind

    1 month ago

    Cots shows the 10 Central teams EOY player budgets will average 126mil. There is not a top 10 player budget in the Centrals.

    Fans, players and teams are split on the cap issue, mostly depending on their individual budgets. Of course Harper doesn’t want his clubs budget dropped by 50mil, just like Bucs fans want Nutting to have to spend 50mil more. Depends on where you sit.

    Btw, there is a salary floor. It’s 26 players times the minimum salary. What is likely intended is, each teams salary floor needs raised.

    Reply
  99. SoCalBrave

    1 month ago

    How I wish the altercation had gone:

    Harper: “What have you ever done to help the players?”

    Manfred: “That’s a clown question, bro”

    Reply
  100. fidrych76

    1 month ago

    Fascinating that a player would actually say out loud that throwing games is a thing. Literally for negotiation leverage. Wow.

    Still trying to figure out the math of every team losing 162, though.

    Reply
  101. Kenny Freakin Powers

    4 weeks ago

    Deport them!

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Please login to leave a reply.

Log in Register

    Top Stories

    Yordan Alvarez To Miss Time With “Pretty Significant” Ankle Sprain

    Giants To Promote Bryce Eldridge

    Mets Moving Sean Manaea To The Bullpen

    Blue Jays To Promote Trey Yesavage For MLB Debut

    Dodgers Place Will Smith On Injured List

    Dipoto: Mariners Interested In Re-Signing Josh Naylor

    Anthony Volpe Playing Through Partial Labrum Tear

    Orioles Promoted Mike Elias Prior To 2025 Season

    Anthony Rizzo Retires

    Cubs Place Kyle Tucker On Injured List

    Blue Jays Place Bo Bichette On Injured List

    Phillies Place Trea Turner, Alec Bohm On Injured List

    Sean Murphy To Undergo Hip Surgery

    Trea Turner To Undergo MRI Due To Hamstring Strain

    Davey Johnson Passes Away

    Mets Option Kodai Senga

    NPB’s Kazuma Okamoto, Tatsuya Imai Expected To Be Posted For MLB Teams

    Shelby Miller Likely Headed For Tommy John Surgery

    Red Sox To Place Roman Anthony On Injured List

    Lourdes Gurriel Jr. Diagnosed With Torn ACL

    Recent

    Phillies Select Rafael Lantigua

    Latest On Bo Bichette’s Knee Injury

    Blue Jays Release Orelvis Martinez

    Yordan Alvarez To Miss Time With “Pretty Significant” Ankle Sprain

    Angels Select Carter Kieboom, Place Zach Neto On Injured List

    Orioles Designate Emmanuel Rivera For Assignment

    Pirates Select Rafael Flores

    MLBTR Chat Transcript

    Royals To Activate Cole Ragans On Wednesday

    Braves Select Jose Suarez

    MLBTR Newsletter - Hot stove highlights in your inbox, five days a week

    Latest Rumors & News

    Latest Rumors & News

    • Every MLB Trade In July
    Trade Rumors App for iOS and Android App Store Google Play

    MLBTR Features

    MLBTR Features

    • Remove Ads, Support Our Writers
    • Front Office Originals
    • Front Office Fantasy Baseball
    • MLBTR Podcast
    • 2025-26 MLB Free Agent List
    • 2026-27 MLB Free Agent List
    • Contract Tracker
    • Transaction Tracker
    • Extension Tracker
    • Agency Database
    • MLBTR On Twitter
    • MLBTR On Facebook
    • Team Facebook Pages
    • How To Set Up Notifications For Breaking News
    • Hoops Rumors
    • Pro Football Rumors
    • Pro Hockey Rumors

    Rumors By Team

    • Angels Rumors
    • Astros Rumors
    • Athletics Rumors
    • Blue Jays Rumors
    • Braves Rumors
    • Brewers Rumors
    • Cardinals Rumors
    • Cubs Rumors
    • Diamondbacks Rumors
    • Dodgers Rumors
    • Giants Rumors
    • Guardians Rumors
    • Mariners Rumors
    • Marlins Rumors
    • Mets Rumors
    • Nationals Rumors
    • Orioles Rumors
    • Padres Rumors
    • Phillies Rumors
    • Pirates Rumors
    • Rangers Rumors
    • Rays Rumors
    • Red Sox Rumors
    • Reds Rumors
    • Rockies Rumors
    • Royals Rumors
    • Tigers Rumors
    • Twins Rumors
    • White Sox Rumors
    • Yankees Rumors

    Navigation

    • Sitemap
    • Archives
    • RSS/Twitter Feeds By Team

    MLBTR INFO

    • Advertise
    • About
    • Commenting Policy
    • Privacy Policy

    Connect

    • Contact Us
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • RSS Feed

    MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com

    Do not Sell or Share My Personal Information

    hide arrows scroll to top

    Register

    Desktop Version | Switch To Mobile Version