Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Admittedly I haven't been keeping up.  The longer we go without, the more apathetic about a season this year becomes for me.  But for those that do follow...what is the sticking point?

I see the owners want to prorate salaries.  However if there is no season this year at all, do the players get paid?  

Think there is any chance there will be any sort of season this year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Admittedly I haven't been keeping up.  The longer we go without, the more apathetic about a season this year becomes for me.  But for those that do follow...what is the sticking point?

I see the owners want to prorate salaries.  However if there is no season this year at all, do the players get paid?  

Think there is any chance there will be any sort of season this year?

If you wanna read it

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-owners-propose-76-game-2020-season-but-still-want-players-to-take-another-pay-cut-per-report/

Not sure about if they get paid with no season, I don't think so.  Seems that compensation is the hold up, ow offering a 76 game season at 75% pro rate or 33% of sa;lary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Meglamaniac said:

If you wanna read it

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-owners-propose-76-game-2020-season-but-still-want-players-to-take-another-pay-cut-per-report/

Not sure about if they get paid with no season, I don't think so.  Seems that compensation is the hold up, ow offering a 76 game season at 75% salary

Yeah I saw that which kinda got me wondering about if they get paid with no season.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stopped following MLB in 1994 when they cancelled the World Series. If they don’t care how can I care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Baker Boy said:

I stopped following MLB in 1994 when they cancelled the World Series. If they don’t care how can I care.

Then get out of my thread usurper

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve followed this a little.

MLBPA agreed to prorated salaries based on games played.


The owners came back and said they wanted to pay players based on a % of revenue since they expect a down year due to lack of ticket revenue.

MLBPA said the players don’t get a bonus when the owners have an unusually good year. Why should they take a cut for a bad year? 

The Union also said they won’t know how the owners do financially unless they open their books, which they won’t do.

Owners now suggesting a 50-game season.

Millionaires arguing with billionaires.

I don’t think this gets worked out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stopped caring a couple weeks ago, MLB had a chance to unite and give us something to look forward to.  They failed.  I dont give a sh1t about any of them, like they dont care about us, I wont spend another $ on a professional sporting event again

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope MLB just folds, just goes away, and all the crybaby players have to get real jobs......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I hope MLB just folds, just goes away, and all the crybaby players have to get real jobs......

If I had a choice, I'd rather that happen to the NFL and not MLB.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont blame young players not wanting to risk never signing a big contract for prorated pay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Owners lose money without fans, so they want as few regular season games as possible. They make money from postseason TV revenue. So they want a short season and expanded playoffs. Players want a longer regular season if they are being pro-rated. That’s it in a nutshell. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a side note, our local AA team will start having 'No Game Thirsty Thursdays" starting 6/14.  $1 draft beers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're gonna fock it up and end up walking away.  Every other major sport is coming back or finalizing plans to do so.  Colossal stupidity from both sides. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

If I had a choice, I'd rather that happen to the NFL and not MLB.

I back you 100% on this...  The NFL wouldn't be missed...

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, posty said:

I back you 100% on this...  The NFL wouldn't be missed...

The gamblers will.  LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MLB can now fock off. My fantasy league isn’t going forward now. Nice job guys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

MLB can now fock off. My fantasy league isn’t going forward now. Nice job guys. 

Yeah, my league officially called the year off.  We'll be up and running next year though. :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Yeah, my league officially called the year off.  We'll be up and running next year though. :thumbsup:

We’ll see. Some unhappy campers.  Been around since 1997. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

We’ll see. Some unhappy campers.  Been around since 1997. 

Good luck.  Our league is still excited about next year.  There's still a chance we might do something this year, if there's something worth having.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

If I had a choice, I'd rather that happen to the NFL and not MLB.

At this stage, I am willing to give up the NFL too.....overpaid crybabies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RLLD said:

At this stage, I am willing to give up the NFL too.....overpaid crybabies

I can understand that sentiment, but my thoughts on this have been around since the day I was born.  I've always favored baseball over football.  Whenever there was a time conflict, I chose baseball 100% of the time over football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

 I've always favored baseball over football.  Whenever there was a time conflict, I chose baseball 100% of the time over football.

:pointstosky:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vuduchile said:

They're gonna fock it up and end up walking away.  Every other major sport is coming back or finalizing plans to do so.  Colossal stupidity from both sides. 

I put most of the blame on the owners. The players association agreed to prorated salaries months ago but the owners wanted to split revenue instead. The MLBPA correctly pointed out that unless the owners are willing to open their books (they aren’t), they’re negotiating in bad faith.

Fock em.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MDC said:

I put most of the blame on the owners. The players association agreed to prorated salaries months ago but the owners wanted to split revenue instead. The MLBPA correctly pointed out that unless the owners are willing to open their books (they aren’t), they’re negotiating in bad faith.

Fock em.

Blame whoever you want.  Both owners and players look bad to the fans.   They’ve already shown us they don’t care if they kill a season.  So, instead of taking working together to give fans something, they’ll just kill this one too.  
 

I guess doing something unique and special during these unprecedented times is too much to ask.  
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/9/2020 at 7:07 PM, vuduchile said:

Blame whoever you want.  Both owners and players look bad to the fans.   They’ve already shown us they don’t care if they kill a season.  So, instead of taking working together to give fans something, they’ll just kill this one too.  
 

I guess doing something unique and special during these unprecedented times is too much to ask.  
 

 

Plenty of blame to go around. Just saying, asking the players to take a pay cut beyond prorated salaries is a nonstarter and the owners know it. Both sides signed an agreement in March. Only the owners want to walk it back now. Fock then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So MLB owners and MLBPA have agreed since March that the players will accept prorated salaries ie pay for only the games they play. MLBPA says that offer still stands and they’ll play as many games as the owners want. Owners continue to ask MLBPA to play for less than 100% of their prorated salaries.

Link

Fock that. Good for the MLBPA rejecting this out of hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem MLB has is the lack of financial competitive balance.  Small market teams can't compete on the same financial level as the big markets if there's no gate.  Players are just as big of a part of the problem as the owners.  I don't congratulate either side on anything.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

The problem MLB has is the lack of financial competitive balance.  Small market teams can't compete on the same financial level as the big markets if there's no gate.  Players are just as big of a part of the problem as the owners.  I don't congratulate either side on anything.

Correct...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

The problem MLB has is the lack of financial competitive balance.  Small market teams can't compete on the same financial level as the big markets if there's no gate.  Players are just as big of a part of the problem as the owners.  I don't congratulate either side on anything.

Yup. This issue is what it always is. Small market vs Big market and as usual, the players dgaf   Why would they? They always win. Until they don’t   

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Players are just as big of a part of the problem as the owners.  

Why? They agreed to prorated salaries months ago. Is a 20% player pay cut on top of prorated salaries really supposed to make a difference, especially for the small market / low payroll teams?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Yup. This issue is what it always is. Small market vs Big market and as usual, the players dgaf   Why would they? They always win. Until they don’t   

 

I think the players are losing and always do.  If they would push for a salary cap, there would be a definitive pay increase every year.  Every team would be forced to hit a certain number. There'd be less players who think they're underpaid (well, that's not  true, they all think they're underpaid - but I think you get my point).  No team is going to give Sean Rodriguez $18M to hit a floor when they can give that money to guy who actually deserves it.  You'd see higher attendance numbers across the league, you'd see bigger tv contracts, you'd see baseball generating a lot more revenue and the salary cap would be based on that.  The players are losing every day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TBayXXXVII said:

I think the players are losing and always do.  If they would push for a salary cap, there would be a definitive pay increase every year.  Every team would be forced to hit a certain number. There'd be less players who think they're underpaid (well, that's not  true, they all think they're underpaid - but I think you get my point).  No team is going to give Sean Rodriguez $18M to hit a floor when they can give that money to guy who actually deserves it.  You'd see higher attendance numbers across the league, you'd see bigger tv contracts, you'd see baseball generating a lot more revenue and the salary cap would be based on that.  The players are losing every day.

They’re going to lose when some teams fold. And they will have caused it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, MDC said:

Why? They agreed to prorated salaries months ago. Is a 20% player pay cut on top of prorated salaries really supposed to make a difference, especially for the small market / low payroll teams?

Prorating the salaries is a given because it has to be.  No team is going to pay any player 100% of their salary when they're playing 50% of the season.  I know we talked about Blake Snell earlier.  He was set to make what, $13M this year?  The Rays aren't going to pay him $13M for only 15 starts when the contract (on both sides), was assumed to be based on 30+/- starts.

The reason for the the salary cut is because MLB doesn't have the same revenue sharing agreement that the other sports have.... because each team gets about 67% their own local market tv contract.  The Dodgers are an anomaly at $239M, but teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, White Sox, and Cubs are over $100M (keeping $67M of that [at least]).  Teams like the Pirates, Rays, Marlins, and Twins are getting about $45M (keeping about $30M).  The rest gets shared.  That's fine, but you can see where the major market teams have a distinct advantage.  That's literally 2 legit all-stars per team advantage.  On top of that teams make approximately 30% of their revenue from tickets sales (and the monies spent at the park from the fans there).  That's a LOT of money... considering the disparity of income between the market sized.  When you have reduced tv revenue (because networks aren't getting 162 local games and "x" amount national games... THEN no ticket sales, that's a HUGE burden for the teams, especially the smaller market teams.

Now, do I think the owners are probably wanting the pay cut to be bigger than what it should be?  Sure.  But that number can be negotiated.  If the players turn it down without even considering it, then you can't negotiate a different number.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

They’re going to lose when some teams fold. And they will have caused it. 

I don't think teams will fold, but I think it could lead to teams re-locating or just have smaller payrolls, since there's no floor and they have less money coming in.  I can see some teams... like the really smaller ones, maybe forfeit the season or choose not to play, this year.  I mean, some of these smaller market teams don't even have competitive teams.  Why field a team you'll have to pay $30M in payroll and bring in $40M?  The risk of injuries and health issue and what not are way more than $10M.  It's safer to just forfeit every game than to field the team.  Or, they could literally just make every "regular" have to require some sort of "season ending surgery" and field a minor league team full of guys making the prorated amount of a $440k base pay players.  That's really great for the fans! [sarcasm for those who don't see it]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Prorating the salaries is a given because it has to be.  No team is going to pay any player 100% of their salary when they're playing 50% of the season.  I know we talked about Blake Snell earlier.  He was set to make what, $13M this year?  The Rays aren't going to pay him $13M for only 15 starts when the contract (on both sides), was assumed to be based on 30+/- starts.

The reason for the the salary cut is because MLB doesn't have the same revenue sharing agreement that the other sports have.... because each team gets about 67% their own local market tv contract.  The Dodgers are an anomaly at $239M, but teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, White Sox, and Cubs are over $100M (keeping $67M of that [at least]).  Teams like the Pirates, Rays, Marlins, and Twins are getting about $45M (keeping about $30M).  The rest gets shared.  That's fine, but you can see where the major market teams have a distinct advantage.  That's literally 2 legit all-stars per team advantage.  On top of that teams make approximately 30% of their revenue from tickets sales (and the monies spent at the park from the fans there).  That's a LOT of money... considering the disparity of income between the market sized.  When you have reduced tv revenue (because networks aren't getting 162 local games and "x" amount national games... THEN no ticket sales, that's a HUGE burden for the teams, especially the smaller market teams.

Prorated salaries has been a given. The owners and MLBPA agreed to this in March. The owners now want to pay the players less than their prorated salary, 80%. Why should they agree to that?

While it sucks that MLB franchises will take a hit this year:

1. We have no idea what their profits and losses will be since they don’t open the books.

2. Why should the players agree to a bigger cut than prorated salaries? They don’t get bonuses when MLB has an unusually good year.

None of this is about small vs big market teams. Every franchise is asking for players to take an additional cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MDC said:

Prorated salaries has been a given. The owners and MLBPA agreed to this in March. The owners now want to pay the players less than their prorated salary, 80%. Why should they agree to that?

While it sucks that MLB franchises will take a hit this year:

1. We have no idea what their profits and losses will be since they don’t open the books.

2. Why should the players agree to a bigger cut than prorated salaries? They don’t get bonuses when MLB has an unusually good year.

None of this is about small vs big market teams. Every franchise is asking for players to take an additional cut.

Yes, I said the prorated salaries were agreed on... they had to be.  It didn't have to be negotiated as it was a given to being with.  That said, I explained why the cuts.  Yes, this is about the small and big market teams.  The owners got together to discuss this and the reason the owners are asking for the pay cuts are because the small market teams don't have the same revenue the big market teams have.  There isn't same revenue sharing MLB that exists in the other sports.  MLB shares a much lesser percentage than the other sports.  The bigger market teams can eat a lot of the losses, but the small market teams can't.  I'm willing to bet teams like Miami, Pittsburgh, Tampa, Oakland, and Cincinnati said to the owners of the Dodgers, Yankees, and Red Sox that they aren't playing with just prorated salaries.

I don't care that the owners don't open their books... my boss doesn't?  Why should they be privileged enough to get it?  They have a union and CBA.  They can NEGOTIATE anything they want.  Also, let's not make the players seem like they're the virtuous ones.  I've heard them and their union reps say that they're entitled to ALL monies earned by the owners.  Bull crap.  They're only owed based on their product to which they collectively bargain.

Again, on average, each team is losing 30% of their revenue, before the season starts, based on having no attendance.  Why is it that the owners are the only ones who have to foot that bill?  Can they eat the majority?  Sure.  Last year, teams made about $3.8B in revenue from ticket sale.  That's a lot of money.  The players just flat out expect the owners to eat ALL of that loss?  Why can't the players take a hit?  The owners are only asking the players to eat $800M while the owners eat $3B.  That's not reasonable?  It most assuredly is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Yes, I said the prorated salaries were agreed on... they had to be.  It didn't have to be negotiated as it was a given to being with.  That said, I explained why the cuts.  Yes, this is about the small and big market teams.  The owners got together to discuss this and the reason the owners are asking for the pay cuts are because the small market teams don't have the same revenue the big market teams have.  There isn't same revenue sharing MLB that exists in the other sports.  MLB shares a much lesser percentage than the other sports.  The bigger market teams can eat a lot of the losses, but the small market teams can't.  I'm willing to bet teams like Miami, Pittsburgh, Tampa, Oakland, and Cincinnati said to the owners of the Dodgers, Yankees, and Red Sox that they aren't playing with just prorated salaries.

I don't care that the owners don't open their books... my boss doesn't?  Why should they be privileged enough to get it?  They have a union and CBA.  They can NEGOTIATE anything they want.  Also, let's not make the players seem like they're the virtuous ones.  I've heard them and their union reps say that they're entitled to ALL monies earned by the owners.  Bull crap.  They're only owed based on their product to which they collectively bargain.

Again, on average, each team is losing 30% of their revenue, before the season starts, based on having no attendance.  Why is it that the owners are the only ones who have to foot that bill?  Can they eat the majority?  Sure.  Last year, teams made about $3.8B in revenue from ticket sale.  That's a lot of money.  The players just flat out expect the owners to eat ALL of that loss?  Why can't the players take a hit?  The owners are only asking the players to eat $800M while the owners eat $3B.  That's not reasonable?  It most assuredly is.

Like I said, the MLBPA and owners agreed to prorated salaries months ago. The owners are now reneging on that agreement. MLBPA also agreed to play as many or few games as the owners want and to negotiate proportionate pay cuts in addition to salaries provided the owners negotiate in good faith by opening their books. They won’t do it.

Fock them. Greedy billionaire bastiches trying to squeeze a few more coins out. They don’t want a season and don’t care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, MDC said:

Like I said, the MLBPA and owners agreed to prorated salaries months ago. The owners are now reneging on that agreement. MLBPA also agreed to play as many or few games as the owners want and to negotiate proportionate pay cuts in addition to salaries provided the owners negotiate in good faith by opening their books. They won’t do it.

Fock them. Greedy billionaire bastiches trying to squeeze a few more coins out. They don’t want a season and don’t care.

Back in March, the owners were thinking they'd be able to get in about 120+ games, that's why their position changed.  Also, they're not renegging on the original deal, they want to update and amend it.  It's obvious they're getting 80 games max... most likely less.  It's common sense that money is impacted by that and things world need to be altered.  I think the players are just as bad. Entitled millennial's.  All of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×