The next CBA and the future of MLB

[GreenWeenie]

Things HAVE changed. Nowadays, the Rays use uh oh.... j/k.

[skinnyhorse]

1B2E3939320B39393235395C0 wrote: We have more access to MLB today than at any previous time in our lifetime.



I'm 63.



Just yesterday, we had a Game Of The Week on one network.



That's one game.  A week.



We had This Week In Baseball.



Today? 



We can enjoy EVERY game, every DAY if we want.  We don't need This Week In baseball anymore because of it.  We can watch the DAY'S highlights.  Don't need the newspaper.  Don't need the radio.  Don't need the television.



We can click a mouse.  No!  We can watch on our PHONES these days!  We have all those options, 24 hours a day.



All we need to do is pay for it.  If people aren't willing to pay for something, then they don't deserve it.



Let's live in the past and watch 29 teams wave while they pass.  What's bad for baseball is rogue owners who drag the others down.



"Owners need to stick together" is collusion.  The owners have already lost three collusion suits.  To "save" cheap owners in small markets, you want them to lose a fourth collusions lawsuit?  That's not living in reality.



Those owners need to change or leave.  The other owners will not lose another court battle for them.
Any court that says owners are colluding when the Players have a Union which is the definition of collusion. It's time to stand up against any judge that says Unions can collude but owners can't. That is not a judge that is a moron and I would appeal any ruling like that to the supreme court with the best lawyers in the land. We the people need to stand up against idiot courts and if that doesn't do it appeal to Congress. Unions were established to protect workers from abuse from owners. Does anyone really think the poor old Super Star making $35 million a year really need protection from owners. It's we the fans who needs protection from Players and Owners. Any court that finds these players are being abused by owners is a joke. Send them back and make them work to work it out. When they both start losing mega bucks they'll come to their senses. I would say the players making $1-3 million a year will start putting pressure on the jerks braking the bank for all.

[GreenWeenie]

It's time for owners to follow the law.  It's always time for that.  They won't break it again for two, three, or four owners.



The last time they did, it cost them many millions of dollars, and- after paying corporate attorneys- they would have been much better off following the law in the first place.



It's time for BOB to man up.  Either provide a payroll for a competitive roster or sell to someone who will.  That's what it's time for.



Continue to talk smack about the others.  The problem's right at home.  If someone wants the highest level of baseball entertainment, there's a cost for it.  If someone's unwilling to pay that price, that's OK.  Just don't expect something that isn't available.



You may have missed Doc's point that tells you- the issue is that some owners are more heck-bent on winning, so they're willing to pay more for players whom they think can help them win. Other owners, for different reasons, think that they can win by going other routes. The first group is what drives the market. The players don't "collude" to force higher salaries. The owners happily- maybe not happily- pay it.

[skinnyhorse]

271205050E3705050E0905600 wrote: It's time for owners to follow the law.  It's always time for that.  They won't break it again for two, three, or four owners.



The last time they did, it cost them many millions of dollars, and- after paying corporate attorneys- they would have been much better off following the law in the first place.



It's time for BOB to man up.  Either provide a payroll for a competitive roster or sell to someone who will.  That's what it's time for.



Continue to talk smack about the others.  The problem's right at home.  If someone wants the highest level of baseball entertainment, there's a cost for it.  If someone's unwilling to pay that price, that's OK.  Just don't expect something that isn't available.



You may have missed Doc's point that tells you- the issue is that some owners are more heck-bent on winning, so they're willing to pay more for players whom they think can help them win.  Other owners, for different reasons, think that they can win by going other routes.  The first group is what drives the market.  The players don't "collude" to force higher salaries.  The owners happily- maybe not happily- pay it. 
I think the real solution here is for guys like Doc and you buy the team and show us how to do it. You could just give these poor old Super Stars whatever their agent wants and problem solved. It's so easy for you and Doc to spend someone else's money. Can't believe you hadn't thought of that.

[GreenWeenie]

Comments like that do little to make your case.

[skinnyhorse]

261304040F3604040F0804610 wrote: Comments like that do little to make your case. 
It's obvious some fans have no problem with spending money like drunken sailors especially someone else's money. That's a sign of the time with a country that's $30 trillion in debt. Basketball, football, baseball, college coaches, CEO's making many million dollars a year. I'm not the only one in this country who sees' the insanity. I'm just one of the few to say the emperor has no close. Stop the insanity.

[2drfischer@gmail.c]

31292B2C2C3B2A2D303127420 wrote: Comments like that do little to make your case. 
It's obvious some fans have no problem with spending money like drunken sailors especially someone else's money.  That's a sign of the time with a country that's $30 trillion in debt.  Basketball, football, baseball, college coaches, CEO's making many million dollars a year.  I'm not the only one in this country who sees' the insanity.  I'm just one of the few to say the emperor has no close.  Stop the insanity.


What’s obvious is that you don’t understand markets, and that it takes two people to agree on a price or, in this case, a wage. The only time I care how much money a person spends, or agrees to pay another person, is when I’m one of those two people. Otherwise, it’s none of my business.



I assume the people involved in major league contracts have done their homework and are fully aware of what they can spend or what the market currently suggests. With that information, they can decide whether or not they’re willing and able to reach an agreement. If they can, they will, knowing they’ll both benefit. If one of them thinks it’s a bad idea, no deal will be reached. It’s no more complicated than that.

[GreenWeenie]

342C2E29293E2F28353422470 wrote: Comments like that do little to make your case. 
It's obvious some fans have no problem with spending money like drunken sailors especially someone else's money.  That's a sign of the time with a country that's $30 trillion in debt.  Basketball, football, baseball, college coaches, CEO's making many million dollars a year.  I'm not the only one in this country who sees' the insanity.  I'm just one of the few to say the emperor has no close.  Stop the insanity.


And, we have so many more people, more businesses who are finding ways to make MLB prosper, which it is doing.



It's hard to convince me that the sky is falling when all signs point otherwise. Crying poverty tells me that maybe one should leave and let the others go about life.

[skinnyhorse]

645146464D7446464D4A46230 wrote: Comments like that do little to make your case. 
It's obvious some fans have no problem with spending money like drunken sailors especially someone else's money.  That's a sign of the time with a country that's $30 trillion in debt.  Basketball, football, baseball, college coaches, CEO's making many million dollars a year.  I'm not the only one in this country who sees' the insanity.  I'm just one of the few to say the emperor has no close.  Stop the insanity.


And, we have so many more people, more businesses who are finding ways to make MLB prosper, which it is doing.



It's hard to convince me that the sky is falling when all signs point otherwise.  Crying poverty tells me that maybe one should leave and let the others go about life.


One should be able to reason and have some sense of history. Keep drinking the kool-aid.

[GreenWeenie]

I have a sense of history.  I also have a sense of the present.



I have a sense of the history of the relationship between the owners and the players, too.  I have a sense of what drives markets.



When it comes to "drinking Kool Aid," there is no shortage of that from both sides. 

Regardless, hurling insults is what one does when they have nothing else to go on. 



Why has BOB bought a higher percentage of ownership into the franchise over the years?



Why has he continued to own it?



Why has he rejected potential suitors?



What is he doing with the money that other owners have already given him and from the media deals that MLB shares with teams? 



Have you even wondered?



Those actions don't sound to me like a business owner who's hurting.  I doubt the business is hurting, either.