The collective bargaining agreement between Major League Baseball and the Players Association expires December 1st. Many in the industry expect a lockout and some even worry about the potential for lost games in 2027. Jon Heyman and Joel Sherman of The New York Post report that the league has put aside a war chest of about $2 billion, roughly $75MM per team, from a central fund to help weather a potentially lengthy stoppage. The MLBPA has made similar preparations but the report doesn’t provide specifics for that side.
At first blush, it may seem ominous that such measures are being taken, especially when the rhetoric around the negotiations has been contentious. However, the piece from The Post points out that these kinds of steps are standard procedure when a CBA is expiring, both for MLB and the MLBPA.
When the previous CBA expired, the owners immediately locked out the players. That lockout lasted 99 days and was resolved just in time for a full 162-game season to be played in 2022. Another lockout is expected after the upcoming season. That’s both due to tensions seeming high and because MLB commissioner Rob Manfred has spoken positively about how a lockout affects negotiations. In the wake of those comments, then-executive director of the MLBPA Tony Clark said the union expects to be locked out. Clark recently resigned under the shroud of scandal with deputy director Bruce Meyer taking over on an interim basis.
For those pessimistic about a speedy resolution, there are things to point to. The economic imbalances of the game have seemingly grown more extreme. The Dodgers have been consistently in the playoffs for more than a decade and have won the past two titles, while running historically high payrolls. That has led to many fans to call for a salary cap, something many owners want as well. Ownership has historically favored a cap with the union opposed. The ownership side often cites competitive balance as a justification for a cap while the player side will say the owners simply want to control labor costs and increase franchise values.
An optimist could point to other factors. Manfred’s contract runs through January of 2029 and he has said he doesn’t plan to seek another term. He may not want to have a lengthy work stoppage as his parting legacy. He also intends for the league to seek a massive payday from broadcast rights after the 2028 season, when a large number of the current contracts will expire. Baseball’s popularity is currently on the rise but could drop if a large number of games are cancelled, which would hurt the value of the broadcast rights.
Time will tell how it all plays out. For now, both sides are getting prepared, as they always do. The Post says that negotiations are expected to begin once the regular season commences in late March.
Photo courtesy of Susan Tompor, Imagn Images
“Manfred’s contract runs through January of 2029 and he has said he doesn’t plan to seek another term”
thank goodness.
january 2029 is gonna be a busy month for the conclusion of terms
You don’t need to repeat what the article says.
Yeah and you don’t need to bang a garbage can cheater.
Don’t know what people are so excited about with Manfred retiring in 29. They’re just going to appoint Dan Halem as commish.
Might as well jump
Any real union should be run for the benefit of the overwhelming majority of members, not just the top 2% or 3% of Scott Boras clients.
You should change your moniker to MLB Employee. At least that part would then be honest.
A problem with sports player unions is that most of the players expect to reach that top 2 or 3%, and so they look out for their expected future interests.
That shows a complete lack of understanding of the situation. In the current CBA minor league players got more than a 100% increase in compensation and benefits. Pre-arbitration and arbitration eligible players got more than 33% increase in compensation. FA players got the smallest % increase in compensation of any group of players over the last 5 years.
“Lack of understanding”..Shouldn’t EVERY CBA(not just the ones under congressional pressure)put the interests of the majority ahead of the interests of it’s highly paid minority?
The current CBA is probably the first time in decades that the MLBPA actually addressed (some) needs of it’s majority and only did so under threat of USA congressional intervention.
The last time I looked the owners were the ones that set the team’s budget, and approved the $100M+ offers to FAs, not the union.
Thank you for pointing out so clearly that you have no clue what you are commenting about.
What part of the vast majority of players got the largest increases in compensation was it that went right over your head?
I would like to see a salary cap and floor instituted. Owners consciously fielding non-competitive teams because of penny pinching is just as bad as the teams that are overspending beyond what seems to be (albeit, subjectively) reasonable spending thresholds.
It may be bad for the sport, but it’s 100% rational for several reasons. For one, low revenue teams can’t compete with the big boys so why try. For another, even if the low revenue teams want to spend, they will get outbid on the best free agents and end up having to spend massive percentages of their budgets on mid-level players that don’t help that much (the Pirates found that out this off-season). And finally, the Rays, Guardians, and Brewers prove over and over that you don’t have to spend to be good.
The incentives are the problem.
Of course a bootlicker like you wants a lockout to happen, seamaholic / seamaholic 2. Thank goodness you don’t run an MLB team.
They wrote they want a cap. Said nothing about a lockout. But odds are high a lockout will happen as it’s a known standard practice.
Cap sounds good to me. Giving fans 1 less thing to complain about can’t be a bad idea. Players will get a guaranteed portion of $. More teams will contend more often and longer. Franchise values will increase.
I can’t blame NY TOR LA etc for wanting to keep their $.
I think ownwrs and players are losing a ton of $ not having a cap. Rebuilds destroy attendance. Losing star players to NY LA makes fans stop being fans. Not my $ though so I don’t care.
I think if owners do nothing it will be the players wanting a cap. We lost our TV $. You don’t want to share your revenue. Want LA in world series every year. We will just do the bare minimum. Already seeing it. Think it will only get worse. If I was a small market owner thats what I would do. Why fight it out with the union. Next cba they could be the ones wanting a cap. If not just keep grabbing up your revenue sharing.
Players only lose money WITH a cap.
Only if they negotiate poorly. A cap means more $ for owners. If players can’t get their piece it’s on them.
yeah, because a salary cap and floor work so well in other leagues… like the NBA where they have no tanking problems at all
Tanking problems are not salary cap problems, are they? Why so hard to stay on topic?
There is no salary cap problem. There is a revenue distribution problem. That cannot be solved by the players. It can only be solved by the owners sharing the revenue of the sport evenly between teams.
That’s the point of the cap. Distribution of revenue fairly so it’s a level playing field.
NBA MLB different? Like does NBA have where you can draft no higher than 10th or whatever like MLB does? I would guess not because there would be less reason to tank in NBA with that rule. MLB you can still get a great talent. NBA good luck.
The problem cannot be solved by a cap or floor unless it is preceded by 100% revenue sharing by the teams. The player compensation is not the problem. The problem is that there are teams that have revenue around $300 million and other teams that have revenue of $700 million or much more. Putting in a cap would only serve to put a greater share of MLB revenue into the pockets of the large market teams. The small market teams would still not be able to compete,
Again revenue sharing is the point of the cap. If you cap it at 300 million but a third of your teams can only spend 150m there is no point other than to allow large markets to pocket more $.
No floor, no ceiling, Howie, it’s time to sink or swim. Patity schmatity, long live the dynasties 🤣
Sounds like the teams are completely united on a cap of some sort, which has definitely not been the case before. That includes the Dodgers at least, and possibly the Mets. I don’t think we get through this without something in that category just to save face, even if it’s just a couple more up-ratchets of penalties to include removal from the waiver priority list, complete wipeout of entire drafts, and zeroing out international signing bonus budgets.
I hope that even if the season gets canceled, they still do the draft and international signing pools, the kids deserve a chance to play. I’ve already said it, they should start negotiations now. I’m going to add that even if they can’t save MLB games, they should try to say minor league games.
Nothing will work short of a cap like the other sports. They could and probably will agree to some compromise. It won’t make them anymore $. Fans who want a cap want it close so ability to spend $ on players isn’t a reason for not being able to win.
Other sports have 100% revenue sharing, open books with the union, and a guaranteed share of revenue going to the players. MLB owners won’t discuss any of that.
The problem is not player compensation.
The problem is the difference in revenue between teams.
That is not something that is the players responsibility to solve. That is the owners problem. They can solve it with the same 100% revenue sharing every other major sport in the US already has in place.
Astros, where would they play? The minor league players are now part of the MLBPA.
What I’m saying is that try to save at least some games.
Astros,that is on the owners.
There is no problem on the players side other than as a whole players are not being paid enough. Their share of revenue is still far below 50%.
The problem is revenue distribution between the teams. Some teams make far more than others. Until the OWNERS solve that problem between themselves, there is nothing the players can do to help.
A salary cap doesn’t help. All that does is lower the percentage of revenue that players receive and put more money in the pockets of the owners of a handful of large market teams.
Salary cap makes the owners more $. If the players make less because of it they just negotiated poorly. If owners make more the players have opportunity to make more. Pretty simple concept.
They’re not united. This is probably the least united group of owners ever. Which does not bode well for negotiations
If you are spending 300 400 500 on payroll why would you want to give half of that to the other teams? If you wanted a cap you would treat the luxury tax like a cap.
300, 400, 500 what’s?
Seashells? Rubber duckies?
(I know you mean payroll in millions, I’m just joking)
Good joke
It’s not a united front for a salary cap. Some orgs are perfectly fine paying the luxury tax because they’re still profiting handsomely and increasing team valuation. I think we know who those teams are if you look at the year-over-yeat Forbes lists.
Billionaires and Millionaires fighting and care little about the fans who supplement their bank accounts. Only in America
Welcome to life.
“Only in America”…You mean you’ve lived “only in America”, because the last time I checked, Billionaires battling millionaires and exploiting the majority of people is a worldwide phenomenon and definitely NOT “only in America”.
Relax. Its just a statement about how their our bigger issues in the world than these 2 arguing over $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
DiMN
“Billionaires and Millionaires fighting”
Ownership and labor fighting. Happens everywhere in the world.
Think about who you are rooting for
Dolemite: Similar situation with soccer in Europe. Not “only in America”.
If people think mlb and America is so horrible just look at these European and Saudi soccer club situations
There are 35 countries spread over 2 continents in America. Most of us commenting here live in the United States of America, just ONE of those nations.
People care more about salary caps than where their taxes go. Bread and circus.
We can choose to spend our money on what we want. We can’t choose to pay taxes or what is done with it.
I would trade the 2027 season for modernized TV broadcasts.
It’s insane that I have to think twice about how and when I watch my team’s games on TV.
I cut the cord in 2008. I’ve been able to watch games for one year since then. One year.
It’s broken and sick. The NFL figured this out years and years ago. Do not talk to me about one game a week. If MLB wanted viewership they could get it.
With the collapse of Mainstreet Sports, this may be more likely. Right now, though, with certain teams making a boatload of cash off their RSNs (Dodgers = 330 m/yr), you’re not gonna get complete change.
You chose not to pay to watch the team you claim to cheer for. That is on you. Today you either pay for the cable/satellite provider or the streaming service that carries their games. That is the reality of the situation.
Or just watch anything you want for free
IMO Big difference because NFL did it before the big TV deals so wasnt as much disparity. Also one of the teams that was pushing it was the big dollar team in the Giants. Do you think the Steinbrenners and the Gugenheim are going to do the same thing? Not only take in less money but also lose their biggest advantage?
Basically what you are wanting is take a billion dollar lottery you won and instead of collecting your winnings you are handing out 5 bucks to everyone. Or instead of giving everyone bonuses/raises lets have a pizza party for everyone.
The Dodgers broadcasting fee alone covers pretty much their league leading salary last season. Which means they basically profitted on concession, seating, advertising, etc etc. They also benefit still from the bankruptcy years ago with mccourt as they pay less into the national broadcast pool. They have 0 reason to push for cap. I believe the Yankees are in the same boat minus the bankruptcy part. You might get Cohen to lead the charge as he is fan first but none of the owners seem to like him as he pushed this envelope.
I would go the other way instead of a cap and floor consolidate teams and increase market share per team and increase the fund available to the team. Maybe as an example one Florida team, one ohio team, one pennsylvania team, etc etc. Will never happen though. Just like the players will never allow a hard cap and the owners probably wont give a floor.
A vote of 23 owners and what Gugenheim or the Steinbrenners want is academic.
The bottom line is the problem is not one that the players caused nor can a cap solve it.
The problem is one the owners created and only they can solve it. The only way to solve the revenue distribution issue between teams is by MLB teams sharing revenue at or close to 100%. There is no other solution.
The owners have already offered truly ridiculous floors. While revenue averages $433 million per team, the owners offered a floor of $100 million that was tied to a cap of $180 million. A legitimate floor would guarantee players close to 50% of revenue or about $216.5 million. Do you see how ridiculous offering $100 million was? How much of an insult to the players?
You cut the cord. That was your choice. And now you’r e griping about it?
I will tell you what, if the players do not negotiate a salary cap, then fans are going to support the owners in this long drawn out mess. Every other professional sports league has one, and it’s time baseball followed suit.
LOL ah shut up. Go watch the Ilitch Family instead of baseball then.
Correction some fans will support the owners
Most fans will support the owners. When players go to another team most fans don’t follow that player they stick with their team. If all the players went to China or Saudi Arabia fans would just root for the new players.
Correction, stupid fans will support the owners,
The problem cannot be solved by a cap. Player compensation is not the problem.
The problem is the lack of parity in the revenue the teams get. That disparity is the problem.
Until there is 100% revenue sharing in MLB like there is in every other major sport in the US, that will continue to be the problem.
It is not the players responsibility to solve that problem. The owners created the problem. ONLY the owners can or should be expected to solve that problem.
The problem cannot be solved by a salary cap. Player compensation is not the problem in the first place. The problem is revenue distribution between the teams. The only way that can be solved is for the team’s, meaning the owners of the teams, to share revenue 100%,
Every other major sport in the US has 100% revenue sharing, They also all have open books with the union and a guaranteed percentage of revenue going to players.
ALL of those must happen before a salary cap is discussed.
Every other major sport in the US has 100% revenue sharing
Don’t think that is true but it’s close enough
The MLBPA have their own war chest too. It existed even before the 1994 strike.
It doesn’t matter.
The MLBPA has been preparing for this since 1994, setting aside money from both merchandising and player contributions and investing it to create what they originally called a Strike Fund. Since 2018 they have increased the funding going into that fund. They have built up a war chest, to use Darragh’s words, that can pay most or all of the salaries of the players during a lost season.
The $2 billion the owners have put aside won’t cover their debt service, let alone make up for their massive loss of revenue. If the owners are thinking the players will back down and give them a cap because of a lockout, they should be prepared to lose all $13 billion in revenue plus pay all their other expenses for the season while not having any games being played.
As has been pointed out over and over, the fact is that the problem is not player compensation, it is the difference in revenue between the teams. The owners have to solve that before anything else can be addressed other than minor tweaks to the CBA.
Fund is irrelevant
Anything you comment is irrelevant. It is also invisible now.
Well said. A handful of teams make more from their television deal, alone, than many others make from all sources of revenue combined, and now can’t even find a carrier it says a lot about the state of the game.
This is not new news, been going on a while.
So the teams can set aside $75mil apiece as a “war chest” but they can’t use that money to subsidize small market payrolls?
Would 7-111 subsidize AM-PM?
The lockout is 100% coming. The question is, if and how many games get missed.
They’ll likely start the lockout in December and could have a new CPA before the season begins so no missed games. I think that’s the owners plan.. They will also lately freeze FA signings and trades during the lockout.
Hmm, yes, so glad the billionaires are setting aside money for each other.
Settle it, folks, Negotiate, posture if you need to,,but settle. Too much crazy in the world–I need a distraction, and few things work better than the crack of the bat.
Whoever okayed the Dodgers revenue sharing exception 20 years ago (MLB and bankruptcy court?) is to blame for this lockout.
For all of you that want a salary cap in mlb, don’t like the NBA? Because that’s exactly what mlb will look like. Salary cap with 100% guaranteed contracts. Do the owners really want to pay 50% of baseball revenue on player salaries?
correction…..”Do you like the NBA…..”
Already guarantee contracts in mlb and they already spend what % on players? And the % is negotiable.
The owners control the situation entirely. The question is: Collectively, are they stupid enough to risk significantly disrupting the flow of content in the face of those upcoming broadcast right negotiations? The vast majority have to understand that compromising that would not be good.
It is those rights that give the Dodgers, and others, their edge financially so anything that helps level that playing field would be best for the game, regardless of any cap or floor considerations.
Owners continue to be the worst thing about the game. No amount of profit will ever be enough for them. It says a lot when the person who did the least is the first to touch the trophy at the end of the season.