Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 234
  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    48,356
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    man..... the horror.... now imagine being a player making under 20 million and getting corona and i dont know... being dead O.o .... what would these guys do with just 2 billion and making so much more once the sport comes back completely wiping out what you lost in those few months by 10 fold?


    also note... i have argued for the owners always... got **** on for it... i still said and stick by in all sports they have all the risk..................................... UNTIL they are trying to get players to go back for less during this insane outbreak.
    Calm down, buddy. That tweet was completely sarcastic.

    PSD: Where the moderators consistently cave to crybaby tattletales and it's a lot safer to be openly racist, hateful, and ignorant than to be a little rude to the racist, hateful, and ignorant

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    I'm Gonna Walk Hell Track, So Cal
    Posts
    1,528
    Not sure which ones, but definitely seems some owners are not looking big picture here. People are dying for real live sports. Baseball could have been on track to start in just about a month. Before the NBA continued, maybe could've gained more casual fans, now they could lose some current casual fans.

    Probably tons of marketing, advertising, and gimmick opportunities in this unique time. Could get creative to boost revenue.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    A Firehouse
    Posts
    34,949
    The MLBPA delivered a proposal to MLB on Sunday afternoon, a source familiar with it tells ESPN. It includes 114-game season that would end October 31, the right to opt out of the season for all players and potential deferral of salaries if 2020 the postseason were canceled.

    For the players opting out: those who are considered "high-risk" would receive salary, whereas others would receive service time only.

    Further, players would receive $100 million total advance during the new spring training.

    Also: MLBPA proposes two years of playoff expansion.The inclusion of potential deferrals by players is an olive branch, even if it does apply just to a canceled postseason.

    It would defer $100M total, applied to players making $10M+ before proration, and would do so with interest to make players whole. It opens the door to more.
    - Jeff Passan

    Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
    He is talking about the one and only, pure trash: Ereck Flowers

    Quote Originally Posted by cowboyskilla View Post
    His stern face can give that impression but I don't feel that's the case. New York isn't an easy place to play at, so honestly I can see his confidence at an all-time low for him.

    I don't think he's a bust. I think he just needs the right motivation to pick himself up & play harder.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Annapolis MD
    Posts
    17,288
    Quote Originally Posted by Rad_Racing View Post
    Not sure which ones, but definitely seems some owners are not looking big picture here. People are dying for real live sports. Baseball could have been on track to start in just about a month. Before the NBA continued, maybe could've gained more casual fans, now they could lose some current casual fans.

    Probably tons of marketing, advertising, and gimmick opportunities in this unique time. Could get creative to boost revenue.
    If Angelos was still active, the players would at least have a voice in the owners discussion. Sadly I don't think that's the case right now. Angelos was the only owner during the strike in 1994 to say that he wasn't going to hire replacements players, and the other owners discussed a massive fine per game missed to forcing him the sell the team. Sadly, rumors have him in poor health right now with his sons running the team, and they won't have the clout to make the players heard.

    Few owners are going to speak out and move against the entrenched ones and the commissioner.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    111,934
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    Calm down, buddy. That tweet was completely sarcastic.
    my bad... thought that person was serious lol

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    100
    This seems to be heading to not having the season. Almost like a strike without it officially being one.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Metroplex
    Posts
    2,676
    Listened to an awesome Spotrac podcast the other day where he lambasted the owners for short sighted attempt to renegotiate the CBA under the political coverage of the Covid crisis. Somehow sports owners are the only businessmen in America that believe it is there constitutional right to never suffer a loss in a given year as if there has been a law passed deeming that they can never have a negative year like any other business. Pay the players their prorated per game salary and move on.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,950
    But the corporate America comps aren't really all that great though either. I mean, unemployment is at a post great depression high. A ton of companies have done layoffs and furloughs.

    The point is, baseball owners aren't the only ones who want the upside without the downside. That's basically every company in the nation. I know the players are now proposing a 114 game season, but if we go back to the 82 game season, that already cuts revenue in half. Now we know many, if not all, of the games will be played with little to no fans in the stands. It's not crazy to say baseballs revenue could be 40% of what it would have been. If that's any corporation, they are making massive cuts, espeically if their business model is similar to baseball where there isn't neccesarily an increase in future demand to make up for current losses. This isnt just a baseball owner thing, any Corp would do the same thing, right or wrong.

    Kudos to the players for trying to step up and get their dues. I appreciate their attempts for sure. But I also think the truly prorated salary isn't all that realistic either. We know revenue isn't just prorated because their won't be fans in the stands. The players are absolutely taking on more risk than owners because they are risking their physical well being, so they do deserve more than they are currently getting, but I don't know that a true proration of contracts is realistic.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    The players are absolutely taking on more risk than owners because they are risking their physical well being,
    I think this is an interesting question. Are the players taking on more risk? True there are probably zero owners that couldn't go a full year without earning a single dollar from baseball but there are probably hundreds of players with zero savings that this is affecting to some degree. On the other hand, players won't lose any money where owners certainly will.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,950
    I mean, physical well being is a much higher risk. Debate the merits of the disease all you want, but we truly dont know all of the long term implications of Covid-19, so if say the health risk is much higher than a net worth loss for the owners, most of whom won't be that hurt by it.

    I still don't expect the owners to give in to all concessions, but I think even the owners would agree that players deserve a bit more due to the extra risk. But the question is whats a bit more.

    This is the biggest issue with the mlb's collective bargaining agreement. Other leagues have a revenue split that's pre-determined. It's not fancy accountimg, it's players get this percentage of this defined revenue. The other leagues can try to argue extra risk and in the short term negotiate that percentage up slightly, but everyone is starting from the same launching point. Mlb isn't. Owners can say they lose money unless they get this or that, but no one can prove it one way or the other.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    I mean, physical well being is a much higher risk. Debate the merits of the disease all you want, but we truly dont know all of the long term implications of Covid-19, so if say the health risk is much higher than a net worth loss for the owners, most of whom won't be that hurt by it.

    I still don't expect the owners to give in to all concessions, but I think even the owners would agree that players deserve a bit more due to the extra risk. But the question is whats a bit more.
    Is it an extra risk? I mean not a single gas station has closed down from this. Nor has the grocery stores. Not the liquor stores. Why would playing a baseball game be more risk than other jobs?

  12. #42
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    48,356
    You really need to ask if playing a game where you're traveling to different cities and closely interacting with different groups of players that are doing the same is more risky than being an owner who can easily avoid all that?

    PSD: Where the moderators consistently cave to crybaby tattletales and it's a lot safer to be openly racist, hateful, and ignorant than to be a little rude to the racist, hateful, and ignorant

  13. #43
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    You really need to ask if playing a game where you're traveling to different cities and closely interacting with different groups of players that are doing the same is more risky than being an owner who can easily avoid all that?
    Minimal at the most. You think the owners interact with less people and visit more? Highly unlikely.

    The point being made I believe is that the players are at more risk/higher risk and thus deserve more money. That case has not been shown I believe.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    48,356
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    Minimal at the most. You think the owners interact with less people and visit more? Highly unlikely.

    The point being made I believe is that the players are at more risk/higher risk and thus deserve more money. That case has not been shown I believe.
    I don't know how the owners choose to spend their time but if they are concerned about contracting a deadly virus it'd be infinitely more easy for them to avoid direct human contact than it would be for a pro baseball player playing through a partial season of games. Seems quite odd that anyone would argue otherwise.

    The players are absolutely at more risk and shouldn't have to take a massive pay cut to help the owners continue to make money hand over fist in a time like this.

    PSD: Where the moderators consistently cave to crybaby tattletales and it's a lot safer to be openly racist, hateful, and ignorant than to be a little rude to the racist, hateful, and ignorant

  15. #45
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    I don't know how the owners choose to spend their time but if they are concerned about contracting a deadly virus it'd be infinitely more easy for them to avoid direct human contact than it would be for a pro baseball player playing through a partial season of games. Seems quite odd that anyone would argue otherwise.

    The players are absolutely at more risk and shouldn't have to take a massive pay cut to help the owners continue to make money hand over fist in a time like this.
    The players can stay home. Simple as that. The owners can sell the club or close the league down with enough votes.

    The very wealthy are always interacting with folks. They work twice as hard as anyone else. They have so many interests divested in so many places, their interactions are way more than you are giving them credit for.

    Think of your own job. Think of how many folks you see. Now think of the boss at your company and how many folks they interact with during the same day. In the majority of instances it's more, much more, and a heck of a lot more than you or I.

    But again, the grocery store worker, the gas station attendant. Sorry, the players don't have the strength to stand on that leg at this point.

    I do like the "hidden" message in your last line. Open books is a topic I think should get discussed more.

Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •