What are they thinkong???

[2drfischer@gmail.c]

4D555750504756514C4D5B3E0 wrote: I don't normally pick sides between millionaires and billionaires squabbling over money, but in this case, I side with the MLBPA.



E.G., they were approached in March about pro-rated salaries, which they agreed to. Now, the shifty billionaire owners see that when the game opens back up, they will be out the revenues they normally got from attendance.



So, they proposed revenue sharing, which the MLBPA rejected because it is a form of a salary cap, which they are opposed to.



Then they offered a sliding scale pro-rated salary, which would affect the higher paid players more than the lower end guys (insert Pirates related sarcasm here) - The players flat out rejected that one too.



Now, they have offered multiple scenarios of reduced games with different percentages of pro-rated salaries, which all equate to the about the same numbers dollar-wise for the players. The union saw through that as well, and countered with a higher total of in-season games. The owners don't want that because it is more cash out of pocket for salaries. They want to get to the post-season as fast as possible because the majority of the money goes to MLB, and not the players.



Now comes word of a multi-billion dollar deal with TBS for televised games - none of which goes to the players.



So the owners want their cake and want to not only eat it too, but have the players feed it to them.



Like I stated before, I'm not in the habit of supporting multi-million dollar players when a lot of this country is standing in unemployment lines, but the owners greed is shining through here. They are the ones who give the 20-30 million dollar salaries, and now they want the hired help to protect them from themselves.



I wouldn't make any wagers on there not being a work stoppage after the 2021 season.


Good stuff, Javy.  The owners have been screw-ups since way back in the 1800s, starting with both the Reserve Clause and the Gentleman's Agreement.  They've rarely gotten it right when it comes to the treatment of the players and the consideration of the fans.  They've consistently placed their greed above all else.  And they've never seemed to learn from their mistakes.  It's hard to side with them, ever.
It's impossible to choose between these 2 skunks.  I'm so tired of the lack of loyalty of players, and owners to the fans.  I have no use for a player who blackmail the team who took a chance on them invested in the player and jumps ship for a few dollars more how much money do you really need.  I also have no use for owners who pay real star players peanuts because they haven't reached free agency.  If owners would be more fair with the younger players they might feel some loyalty.  I realize you would have to be careful here and might do it according to whose their agent.  I wouldn't trust any player who used Boras period.


The players only have a few years to make their money, whereas you and I had 40+ years in our careers. I don't blame them for trying to get as much as they can, while they can. Neither players nor owners have any loyalty to each other under the current situation. It would be nice if both did have some sense of that but those days are gone, if they were ever here to begin with.



As for the owners paying the least they can to the youngest players, I can see their point because they know they'll have to pay much more than they want as those players accrue service time. The important thing to me is that neither side can complain about the current contract because they all agreed to it.

[2drfischer@gmail.c]

033D3830233B3B3010352231540 wrote: I don't normally pick sides between millionaires and billionaires squabbling over money, but in this case, I side with the MLBPA.



E.G., they were approached in March about pro-rated salaries, which they agreed to. Now, the shifty billionaire owners see that when the game opens back up, they will be out the revenues they normally got from attendance.



So, they proposed revenue sharing, which the MLBPA rejected because it is a form of a salary cap, which they are opposed to.



Then they offered a sliding scale pro-rated salary, which would affect the higher paid players more than the lower end guys (insert Pirates related sarcasm here) - The players flat out rejected that one too.



Now, they have offered multiple scenarios of reduced games with different percentages of pro-rated salaries, which all equate to the about the same numbers dollar-wise for the players. The union saw through that as well, and countered with a higher total of in-season games. The owners don't want that because it is more cash out of pocket for salaries. They want to get to the post-season as fast as possible because the majority of the money goes to MLB, and not the players.



Now comes word of a multi-billion dollar deal with TBS for televised games - none of which goes to the players.



So the owners want their cake and want to not only eat it too, but have the players feed it to them.



Like I stated before, I'm not in the habit of supporting multi-million dollar players when a lot of this country is standing in unemployment lines, but the owners greed is shining through here. They are the ones who give the 20-30 million dollar salaries, and now they want the hired help to protect them from themselves.



I wouldn't make any wagers on there not being a work stoppage after the 2021 season.


Good stuff, Javy.  The owners have been screw-ups since way back in the 1800s, starting with both the Reserve Clause and the Gentleman's Agreement.  They've rarely gotten it right when it comes to the treatment of the players and the consideration of the fans.  They've consistently placed their greed above all else.  And they've never seemed to learn from their mistakes.  It's hard to side with them, ever.
Now Manfred is talking about a 50 game season. Hardly worth it


A 50-game season is going to seem so weird. We might see strategies we've never seen before, or will again. As long as no one makes a farce of the game, and MLB doesn't implement rules that have a negative impact on the game, the season might end up being really exciting. I'd rather have at least 81 games but it looks to be too late for that.

[2drfischer@gmail.c]

I still like the idea former Pitsburgh Press writer, Bruce Keidan, had when he suggested the owners giving the players 70% of the revenues MLB earns and then letting them decide how to divide it among themselves.  The networks could make a fortune televising those meetings.

[GreenWeenie]

Sorry. Misunderstood. I see your point now.



Tabata had requested permission from the Clemente family to wear it, but I don't think it went very far. My guess is that the Pirates organization wasn't keen on the idea.



As things turned out, they weren't keen on Jose Tabata, either.

[GreenWeenie]

Now Manfred is talking about a 50 game season. Hardly worth it


Anything fewer than 81, and I won't recognize the World Champion. It would be an absolute meaningless championship to me. To say that a 50-game "champion" has earned it as much as teams that played 162 is as silly as it is assinine.



If they can't agree on a way to get 81 games in, then just call it a day and look to next year.

[JollyRoger]

Interesting to note that there has been a flurry of non drafted players who have now signed with ML teams.

The Pirates are one of only 6 teams who have not signed a single player.

[Javy]

56737070654E737B796E1C0 wrote: Interesting to note that there has been a flurry of non drafted players who have now signed with ML teams.

[highlight]The Pirates are one of only 6 teams who have not signed a single player[/highlight].


Kind of makes you wonder how that happens in an organization that says it has to build from the amateur ranks to be competitive.



Also makes you believe that Nutting is one of the owners who does NOT want the season to be played this year.

[WildwoodDave]

052E39364F0 wrote: Interesting to note that there has been a flurry of non drafted players who have now signed with ML teams.

[highlight]The Pirates are one of only 6 teams who have not signed a single player[/highlight].


Kind of makes you wonder how that happens in an organization that says it has to build from the amateur ranks to be competitive.



Also makes you believe that Nutting is one of the owners who does NOT want the season to be played this year.


Gotta agree with you on Nutting, Javy. Makes you wonder if Cherrington knows what he got himself into

[mouse]

Talk now is management and the players are close on a 60 game schedule, starting July 19/20 - 60 games in 70 days.



https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

P2 also has an article on it.

[Javy]

That's good to hear....despite all of the vitriol back and forth