mlb floating "arizona plan" | Page 4 | Syracusefan.com

mlb floating "arizona plan"

The owners are so garbage trying to bully the players without opening their books. If you are going to claim economics as a reason for their offer then open your books and prove it or just eat the loss if you want the players come back.

I am totally on the players side in this affair. If Blake Snell wasn’t a moron the owners couldn’t play their standard PR game. Oh well no baseball this year.
 
Alsacs said:
The owners are so garbage trying to bully the players without opening their books. If you are going to claim economics as a reason for their offer then open your books and prove it or just eat the loss if you want the players come back.

I am totally on the players side in this affair. If Blake Snell wasn’t a moron the owners couldn’t play their standard PR game. Oh well no baseball this year.
Expand...
Maybe because I'm a Mets fan and I have despised the wilpons ever since I've been a fan but I side with the players too. What kind of bs opening offer is asking them to take a 70pct cut in pay.
 
I still am in the owners court.. i dont care what owners make, but players making too much hurts the sport more than owners making profits does..
 
Alsacs said:
Baseball owners are the worst.

www.cbssports.com

Some MLB owners 'perfectly willing' to cancel 2020 season to save money, per report

Commissioner Rob Manfred has the ability to cancel the season
www.cbssports.com www.cbssports.com

Enjoy your sport burning to the ground.
Expand...


No one is really a winner here. Scherzer can say what he wants, he's made multi-generational wealth. The best player on his team makes 1/65th of his salary. Not the time to fire a shot in the next labor deal.

The owners who don't field a competitive team with marginal TV deals have no incentive to start. A lot different than the NFL.
 
The Dodgers, on paper, are as loaded as they’ve ever been. We gotta have a season of some sort.
 
Bayside44 said:
No one is really a winner here. Scherzer can say what he wants, he's made multi-generational wealth. The best player on his team makes 1/65th of his salary. Not the time to fire a shot in the next labor deal.

The owners who don't field a competitive team with marginal TV deals have no incentive to start. A lot different than the NFL.
Expand...
Owners value of their franchises haven gone up 300% the last decade while players salaries have stayed stagnant.

The owners don’t want to lose money during a pandemic. Which is their right but they should open their books if they want players to take the hit.
 
Collective bargaining agreement expires in 2021 anyway. I just say figure it all out now and call this season a wash if necessary and I'm a Braves fan who was hoping to watch a decent team this year.
 
Alsacs said:
Owners value of their franchises haven gone up 300% the last decade while players salaries have stayed stagnant.

The owners don’t want to lose money during a pandemic. Which is their right but they should open their books if they want players to take the hit.
Expand...

Yeah and half the owners have nothing to play for. I want them to play but it’s sorta 3 sided dice, owners and players and what the owners draw on regional tv.
 
Both sides need to get their heads out of their a$$es and get a deal done. We have never needed a distraction more than we do now. If they don't 94 will be nothing compared to the backlash they will get.
 
I'm chapped. My Yankees have a world series favorite team this year and with the season being delayed the injured players Judge Hicks Stanton Paxton would all be healthy and not missed any games.
 

Owners PR game didn’t work. This time public support in the majority was with the players because it wasn’t a strike by the players.
 
donniesyracuse said:
I am anxious to hear why player greed is worse than owner greed.
Expand...
go back any look at the history of sports... Owners were always the one with control, almost every sport had a price point and the the players started out making avg people wages, over time it evolved to where some players made decent money and then another set made avg people wages.. for the first 75 yrs of baseball thats how it worked and the people had a ticket price and a food/concession price that hardly change over that time period. It was a very accessible sport for the fan.. Once the "Flood" gates opened up the owners still made their shares but suddenly the players made dramatically more, many many times more.. The price point for the fans changed. Look at the NBA/NHL it was even worse.

Now instead of one owner making his millions after spending millions to buy in, he makes his money and then the players make many millions too and in many cases multiple players making those millions.. So not o go to a NBA game its $1000 for what was $10. In baseball tickets are $500 for what was $2. Avg fans cant even afford the nice seats any more in any of the sports.
 
upperdeck said:
go back any look at the history of sports... Owners were always the one with control, almost every sport had a price point and the the players started out making avg people wages, over time it evolved to where some players made decent money and then another set made avg people wages.. for the first 75 yrs of baseball thats how it worked and the people had a ticket price and a food/concession price that hardly change over that time period. It was a very accessible sport for the fan.. Once the "Flood" gates opened up the owners still made their shares but suddenly the players made dramatically more, many many times more.. The price point for the fans changed. Look at the NBA/NHL it was even worse.

Now instead of one owner making his millions after spending millions to buy in, he makes his money and then the players make many millions too and in many cases multiple players making those millions.. So not o go to a NBA game its $1000 for what was $10. In baseball tickets are $500 for what was $2. Avg fans cant even afford the nice seats any more in any of the sports.
Expand...
Prices would be lower if owners chose to profit less. That will never happen. You want players to sacrifice? Players have a short window to maximize their earnings. There are already several artificial limits already on the player salary marketplace. Because of service time, players can’t even test the market when they are most valuable.

Sports were not better when players were barely paid a living wage.
More people can afford sneakers when they are manufactured in sweatshops too.
 
upperdeck said:
go back any look at the history of sports... Owners were always the one with control, almost every sport had a price point and the the players started out making avg people wages, over time it evolved to where some players made decent money and then another set made avg people wages.. for the first 75 yrs of baseball thats how it worked and the people had a ticket price and a food/concession price that hardly change over that time period. It was a very accessible sport for the fan.. Once the "Flood" gates opened up the owners still made their shares but suddenly the players made dramatically more, many many times more.. The price point for the fans changed. Look at the NBA/NHL it was even worse.

Now instead of one owner making his millions after spending millions to buy in, he makes his money and then the players make many millions too and in many cases multiple players making those millions.. So not o go to a NBA game its $1000 for what was $10. In baseball tickets are $500 for what was $2. Avg fans cant even afford the nice seats any more in any of the sports.
Expand...
When baseball teams aren’t trying to win they still charge full price for tickets.

The price of tickets is how much an owner can convince fans to pay to attend.

Owners making a killing on concessions and merchandise. The players don’t share in that unless it’s a part of their jersey being sold.

Owners aren’t losing money. Their franchises are going thru the roof in value.

The owner of the Royals bought the team in 2000 for 108 million dollars he sold the team last year for a billion dollars.

I never side with billionaires over millionaires unless the millionaires are breaking their contract which they aren’t.
 
lol the owners went from an 82 game season with players making 30% of their pro rated salaries to a 50 game season with players making full pro rated salaries.

Owners don’t want to lose money for even just one year.
Players should say 82 games full pro rated salaries.

The owners are going to get killed in the public if it’s a 50 game season.
That isn’t even close to a legitimate season. Any team could win a 50 game season.
 
CuseRunner said:
I'm chapped. My Yankees have a world series favorite team this year and with the season being delayed the injured players Judge Hicks Stanton Paxton would all be healthy and not missed any games.
Expand...

Watch out for the Toronto Blue Jays.
 
OrangeDW said:
Watch out for the Toronto Blue Jays.
Expand...

Yeah Toronto is loaded with young talent and we always have battle with them never seems like we can win a series especially in Roger's Centre. So they won't be a pushover.
 
OrangeDW said:
Watch out for the Toronto Blue Jays.
Expand...
Their bullpen is a little shaky but I love their lineup and sp. They could make the playoffs in a shortened year.
 
Alsacs said:
lol the owners went from an 82 game season with players making 30% of their pro rated salaries to a 50 game season with players making full pro rated salaries.

Owners don’t want to lose money for even just one year.
Players should say 82 games full pro rated salaries.

The owners are going to get killed in the public if it’s a 50 game season.
That isn’t even close to a legitimate season. Any team could win a 50 game season.
Expand...

What I didn't realize when I first heard this story, is that ownership is under the impression (thats as far as I'll go since I can't say for sure) that they can unilaterally implement this plan; they don't need to propose it to the PA. So maybe it's still more of a bargaining tool?
 
Knicks411 said:
What I didn't realize when I first heard this story, is that ownership is under the impression (thats as far as I'll go since I can't say for sure) that they can unilaterally implement this plan; they don't need to propose it to the PA. So maybe it's still more of a bargaining tool?
Expand...
What the owners are saying is yeah MLbPa you are right in your assessment that we made a deal earlie about pay which gives us the ability to start whatever length of a season we want as long as you players get your full prorated salary for whatever we decide.
So we owners are going to decide a really short season so we don’t have to lose a lot of money and you players don’t make much money since it’s prorated and we don’t care.
Since the bulk of the TV money comes from postseason games the owners think they can recoup more.
It’s so transparent how pathetic the ownership is being penny pinch wise
They will save money but it’s such a slap at fans.
A 50 game season wouldn’t be a real season.
 
Alsacs said:
What the owners are saying is yeah MLbPa you are right in your assessment that we made a deal earlie about pay which gives us the ability to start whatever length of a season we want as long as you players get your full prorated salary for whatever we decide.
So we owners are going to decide a really short season so we don’t have to lose a lot of money and you players don’t make much money since it’s prorated and we don’t care.
Since the bulk of the TV money comes from postseason games the owners think they can recoup more.
It’s so transparent how pathetic the ownership is being penny pinch wise
They will save money but it’s such a slap at fans.
A 50 game season wouldn’t be a real season.
Expand...

The thing is, how much difference exactly is there in revenue paid out to players?

Using this plan, 50 game season, prorated salary, so 50/162=about 31% of what they would normally make.

For their initial proposal, from Jeff Passan


For Mike Trout, the highest paid player, he would get about $5.7 million in their initial proposal, and $11 million in this current one.

If I am doing the math right (????), anyone making up to $20 million a year would be making more money in this proposal than in the initial one; a $20 million guy would be making about $3.9 million in the first proposal, and about $6 million in the second one


If my math is wrong, blame Jeff Passan. He's dumb. Where did he go to school anyway?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BillSU
    • Like
Kyle McCord QB...
Replies
22
Views
2K
shu 49
S
kcsu
    • Like
my two cents
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Zelda Zonk
Zelda Zonk
kcsu
    • Like
    • Love
my two cents
2 3
Replies
57
Views
3K
Newhouser
N
SWC75
    • Like
My 2025 SU Basketball Preview - Part 1 - The Situation
Replies
9
Views
1K
IthacaMatt
IthacaMatt
SWC75
    • Like
The Coach Fran Brown Show - before Ohio U.
Replies
16
Views
2K
SWC75
SWC75

Forum statistics

Threads
170,355
Messages
4,886,689
Members
5,996
Latest member
meierscreek

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
41
Guests online
693
Total visitors
734
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom