ptatc

Striking would be the worst thing the players could do. Currently the have public opinion on their side. There is an agreement to not strike/lockout. If they strike, legally they will be found breaking the agreement and they will lose some of that public opinion.

The deal both parties agreed to also said that the players had to negotiate the prorated salary if it was determined that fans would not be allowed in stadiums to generate revenue. I saw absolutely no willingness by the players to negotiate off of their full prorated salary. This isn't just on the owners, the union isn't innocent in not playing already either.

Dang, good luck.

That's what will make it fun.

Until the CBA negotiations.

Yep.

I dont think so as it wasnt part of the agreement.

Maybe but now they have a negotiating specifically directed at the union for not bargaining. If they players give in some the players could come back and say that we gave what you wanted. The rhetoric for the next CBA will be fun to watch.

It will be intersting to see how the owners react. Do they stick to the 54 or so games and hold the line on that's where or break even is. Or do they add more games and say see the players wouldnt compromise but for the good of the game we will and take a loss. Next season they can offer no big free agent deals and claim too many teams lost money.

True. I forgot about that part.

Nice move to put the focus on the owners. Good set up for the CBA negotiations.

At least they are agreeing to play, that's all that matters.

There isnt a salary cap that requires the exact percentage of revenues such as the NBA or NHL. How can you begrudge paying a player whatever he can get.

Agreed. Most people won't believe it even if they were. The billionaires are always trying to screw everyone. Boras was satisfied with the numbers to make his statements but people won't believe the guy who makes his money negotiating against the owners.

It never happens in union negotiations. Never. If the players want to see the books and not just parts. Be open to a salary cap where the numbers truly matter. They gain nothing but opening the books other than trying to appease people who won't believe them anyway.

It is bad optics. However the counter point is that there is a chance there won't be playoffs this year so its moot.

The owners will not share their financials. It's just not going to happen. I've been at the same university for over 20 years and we have never seen the entire financial documents. The only way this will happen is if the union is in negotiations for a salary cap. I believe the financials to be somewhat accurate based on the boras interview where he didn't dispute the owners numbers just the fact that he doesn't think the players should bail the owners out of financial issues that they created themselves. This is more about the philosophy of who bears the burden of financial loss more than a dispute about the numbers.

I'm sure it is. Either side wants to set a precedent for the CBA negotiations.

I know they are under no obligation. But these extraordinary circumstances. Under normal circumstances I would agree with everything you said. However, as their situation has changed in the order of billions of dollars, I think they should go back to the table. We have never seen these types of of drastic changes so no previous situations apply here. Our union did the same thing.

Sorry rambling while trying to reply while mowing. Essentially, you're comment is what all union stewards and hardliners say. In this case it's the players not negotiating in good faith because they wont alter the deal due to exceptional circumstances.

I disagree . Both parties are acting like complete idiots allowing their on agendas to get in the way of what's good for the game.

It true that opening the books would help. However, let's deal in reality. It's not going to happen. The union has some information and they arent going to share with the public either. Even if the owners opened the books to the union, the public wouldnt see it. You can disagree all you want but we'll never know the actual numbers. So the next best are the estimates and the numbers I gave are logical assumptions for around a 2/3 revenue decrease.

Of course these are all estimates but its not going to be far off. As for the others they are still paying for staff. They are still paying benefits to all those still employed and those people make much more than the security and such. You're talking the marketing, player development, medical an d such. With one revenue. The food they bring in actually makes a profit so that is actually a negative. You are right that their costs are lower but those are insignificant compared to the players and others I mentioned. So the numbers will be in the ballpark.

I was referring to the players not negotiating in good faith because they wont change the agreement. I dont know if you've ever been part of union negotiations but the owners act like any other management group. Your comment is what every union steward and negotiator says. Are reading about the nurses strike in Joliet. Same rhetoric from both sides. Hospital we dont have the money to sustain this Nurses we arent getting therapy and benefits we deserve Hospital we are losing money and need to change Nurses you arent bargaining we call for a strike vote Vote called and approved by 90% Hospital we cant afford to go on like this The only difference with MLB is its public and everyone is passionate about it. Who cares about a hospital in joliet.

You dont need to listen to the owners figure it out for yourself. Revenues last year were 10 billion. Fans brought in roughly 3 billion. That leaves 6 billion from all other revenue likeTV, advertising, etc. If they play 1/2 of the games that another 3 billion loss. Hence the 2/3 loss. Its not hard. The big wildcard is the playoffs. That's why the owners have different scenarios for if the playoffs happen or not.