2020 Off-Season Rumors/News

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

If your going to lose more playing then vs canceling the season, then the smart play is canceling the season. Which hurts the players more. That’s why the players need to step up.

If you're more concerned with your own profit motive than sponsoring this season of baseball (Which is, you know, kinda the role you signed up for when purchasing the team) then by all means, you're within your rights to do so--but all your fans are well within their rights to call for your head and boycott you until you sell.

And if it's done to hurt the players, well now you're the man in the high castle with both the players and fans against you.

 

[Cavsfan1985]

If you're more concerned with your own profit motive than sponsoring this season of baseball (Which is, you know, kinda the role you signed up for when purchasing the team) then by all means, you're within your rights to do so--but all your fans are well within their rights to call for your head and boycott you until you sell.

And if it's done to hurt the players, well now you're the man in the high castle with both the players and fans against you.

I disagree. The owners are offering a plan for the season to go on, players are turning their nose to it. This is a player issue, if the season does not happen it will fall on the players. I think it is completely reasonable what the owners are asking for.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

I disagree. The owners are offering a plan for the season to go on, players are turning their nose to it. This is a player issue, if the season does not happen it will fall on the players. I think it is completely reasonable what the owners are asking for.

They're saying "If you want there to be a season, acquiesce to our demands"

To paint that as someone else's responsibility is pretty incredible.

It's like the villain in a movie holding someone hostage and saying "Do what I demand, or I kill the hostage" then blaming the people for not giving into the demand for the hostage's death. The action is the responsibility of the individual who does it. If the owners aren't going to hold up their end of the bargain (playing baseball under the previously agreed-upon conditions) then not having baseball is their fault. They are the ones choosing to not continue under the previous agreement. Full stop.

If you think their actions are warranted, then fine--but don't say someone else is at fault.

 

[Cavsfan1985]

They're saying "If you want there to be a season, acquiesce to our demands"

To paint that as someone else's responsibility is pretty incredible.

It's like the villain in a movie holding someone hostage and saying "Do what I demand, or I kill the hostage" then blaming the people for not giving into the demand for the hostage's death. The action is the responsibility of the individual who does it. If the owners aren't going to hold up their end of the bargain (playing baseball under the previously agreed-upon conditions) then not having baseball is their fault. They are the ones choosing to not continue under the previous agreement. Full stop.

If you think their actions are warranted, then fine--but don't say someone else is at fault.

What do you mean? The deal was to prorate based on fans being in the stadiums. That is not happening, so that’s why they are negotiating. If fans were at the stadiums then I would blame the owners. This is players being greedy and think it is ok for them to make their money, and not others. Pure greed on the players side.

IMO the players are the hostile takers in this case. They are the ones being completely unreasonable.

 

[BMAN]

They both look awful and only about the money.

 

[Cavsfan1985]

They both look awful and only about the money.

From the owners side why would it not be? It’s not a charity. The owners just don’t want to lose money. I think doing a split of revenue would be fair. Both sides then share in the success or failer.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

The Indians team shop at Progressive Field was looted last night. It was included in the violence that spread through downtown Cleveland and our nation.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

What do you mean? The deal was to prorate based on fans being in the stadiums. That is not happening, so that’s why they are negotiating. If fans were at the stadiums then I would blame the owners. This is players being greedy and think it is ok for them to make their money, and not others. Pure greed on the players side.

IMO the players are the hostile takers in this case. They are the ones being completely unreasonable.

Are you saying that every season, the agreement was to pay players based on fans being in the stadium?

Because, I don't believe that's the truth.

If one side is saying "Change the deal or no baseball" then that side is 100% at fault if there is no baseball.

The discussion (and opinion) should be focused around whether or not you agree they're justified, or correct, in their actions. But the fact would be, no baseball is their fault. Trying to paint it as anything else is disingenuous.

From the owners side why would it not be? It’s not a charity. The owners just don’t want to lose money. I think doing a split of revenue would be fair. Both sides then share in the success or failer.

Why isn't the profit split when teams do better? Why aren't the books open to the MLBPA?

If you claim the reason you're entitled to the profit is because you're the one taking the risk, then don't expect others to bail you out when the risk actually comes around. You chose to make this your burden. Shoulder it.

 

[UDcleveland]

It's like the villain in a movie holding someone hostage and saying "Do what I demand, or I kill the hostage" then blaming the people for not giving into the demand for the hostage's death.

Except in this case the season (and the fans) are the hostage, and both sides are greedy ass villains. Both sides looking pretty horrendous right now, but in my eyes, the players come out way worse. They have no leverage but are acting like they’re entitled to call the shots.

 

[Derek]

So that fact that the players have little to no leverage makes them look worse?

That doesn’t make sense to me.

 

[Otsego Mar]

The Indians team shop at Progressive Field was looted last night. It was included in the violence that spread through downtown Cleveland and our nation.

I thought all Chief Wahoo apparel was already removed?

 

[jup]

Except in this case the season (and the fans) are the hostage, and both sides are greedy ass villains. Both sides looking pretty horrendous right now, but in my eyes, the players come out way worse. They have no leverage but are acting like they’re entitled to call the shots.

Have more leverage than you might think.

Owners have big money at stake if the networks start clawing back. If cable subscriptions stay fairly constant (which is a fair assumption given the lockdown), regular season cable providers are most likely to just turn a blind eye. But if there is no postseason those networks that paid for the rights and the advertising $$$'s they bring are going to look at it much differently.

Owners need a post season, and that is the players leverage.

 

[Otsego Mar]

Have more leverage than you might think.

Owners have big money at stake if the networks start clawing back. If cable subscriptions stay fairly constant (which is a fair assumption given the lockdown), regular season cable providers are most likely to just turn a blind eye. But if there is no postseason those networks that paid for the rights and the advertising $$$'s they bring are going to look at it much differently.

Owners need a post season, and that is the players leverage.

IDGAF about all these millionaires.....I WANT BASEBALL DAMNIT! Play the game or get bent.

 

[daddywags]

Are you saying that every season, the agreement was to pay players based on fans being in the stadium?

Because, I don't believe that's the truth.

If one side is saying "Change the deal or no baseball" then that side is 100% at fault if there is no baseball.

Now I'm confused. I thought that after the season was delayed owners and players entered an agreement where if the season restarted players would be paid pro-rata their salaries based on the number of games played (players also got credit for a full year toward free agency no matter how many games are played and the league got the right to reduce the number draft rounds). I thought that the agreement also included language to the effect that if no, or only limited numbers of, fans were allowed at games the salary portion of the agreement could be renegotiated at the owners' request. In fact, I could swear the relevant language is quoted somewhere in this thread.

If that's correct, then what's happening now is simply a renegotiation that was built into the earlier agreement. IOW, it's neither the owners fault nor the players fault we are where we are. It's just a planned for contingency playing out pretty much as expected. There are no "bad guys" here, just a group of people with divergent interests trying to reach an agreement to split a large amount of money. Is it tone deaf? Of course it is! What else should we expect from these particular stakeholders?

 

[MadThinker88]

(The Players) Have more leverage than you might think.

Owners have big money at stake if the networks start clawing back. If cable subscriptions stay fairly constant (which is a fair assumption given the lockdown), regular season cable providers are most likely to just turn a blind eye. But if there is no postseason those networks that paid for the rights and the advertising $$$'s they bring are going to look at it much differently.

Owners need a post season, and that is the players leverage.

Very good points Jup.
I know your not defending either side, just trying to shed some light on aspects that others might have missed.