Dick Allen

Seems to me we don't have any of those things even as the owners take has grown and grown. Lets face it, both parties want as much of our money as possible, and the only "reward" we really get is hearing from time to time how much they both "appreciate" us. Like the old Seinfeld scene with the rental car, they know how to say they appreciate us, they just don't know how to show they appreciate us, which, if you think about it, is the most important part of the appreciation. Being a baseball fan is like having a dead end job.

If some owners like the guy who owns the Rockies are having problems making ends meet, why must all the players, no matter what ream chip in? Why can't the owners share the revenue a bit more equally? The players taking less of the pie won't change the divide between the haves and the have not. If anything it will make it bigger.

The Atlanta Braves whose revenue is publicly reported and whose revenues most likely dwarf a team fromNYC, make well over $400 million a year in revenue. And with salary caps the Bulls print money. Why would they not be worth tons more that baseball teams just scraping by trying to be sold? And if the only reason to own a team andthe way to make money is to sell, why is JR holding on? Cohen gets a huge tax deduction on his purchase price. $167 million rediction in taxable income a year for 15 years

If you and I had the things the owners have to make their profits look smaller we would all have incomes that wouldn't require paying tax. If you really think franchise values keep going up even though owners only generate enough revenue to keep the lights on (JR doesn't even have to pay the light bill), you have drunk the kool-aid. It's funny, the pro teams that have to publicly report their incomes serm to have no problem paying the bills.

But you get it both ways. Take the White Sox. They tank for a few years bring payroll down to nothing, make huge profits that supposedly will be spent when the rebuild is over. The rebuild is over and prices go up to pay for the increased payroll. While I agree with you any concession to the union will ultimately be paid for by paying customers, don't think for a second they won't try to bleed every available cent out of you even if players gave them everything they wanted.

They used a federal mediator during the 1994 strike. It didn't work out so well. In fact, it rarely does with professional sports. The NBA and NHL have used them without much success. Do you really think it matters to the owners if a mediator tells them the unions proposal is fair, and vice versa? This was a ploy by the owners to try to win some public support. They showed their hand when they refused counter proposals. Isn't that what negotiating is?

One thing they can do that is never mentioned with the draft is make it like a fantasy draft for at least the first 2 or 4 rounds. You have the first pick overall, you get the last pick in round 2. in the NFL, that would be a huge deal.

Yes but public sentiment is what is going to make this a big story. Flores wasn't the first coach asked to do this, and probably wasn't in the first 20. This coming out, might help make him the last. Like in the NBA when they sit good players for weeks and months before they get traded so they won't get hurt. Is it that, or playing them might help them win games?

On the other hand, gamblers probably have to know, and have either started the process themselves or know how to find out , that the fix is in.

I don't disagree with you, but there are many people who do. Posters here were mad the Sox won some games. If they knew Renteria put a reliever in because he knew he was tired and would get lit up, I think there are a lot of White Sox fans that would have been OK with that.

People on this board where praying the Sox would lose many games when they were rebuilding. It was all about the draft picks. There are a lot of people that would rather have the Sox go 55-107 than 83-79 and just miss the playoffs, and not trying to win by manipulating how the game is run by the manager is encouraged in these parts when the team is not a contender, even if not a contender by choice. In the NBA they call it hell when you are good enough to have a decent record, but not good enough to win it all. And NBA games and NFL games are IMO far easier to tank by coaching than a MLB game. Tanking is not just having a shitty roster. Not trying to win games probably happens a lot more than we all realize. But as long as the system rewards you for being bad, teams are going to try and be bad in more ways than one.

No but they did mention opening day tickets will be available.

Of course, but throwing a game is throwing a game. but like was pointed out, tanking has been excepted by many fanbases in baseball, including the White Sox. In the NFL, with only 17 games, and as quickly as fortunes can change, and as quickly as players careers can end, not so much. This is going to be a huge black eye for the NFL. Gambling and fantasy football is what makes it the most popular of sports IMO.

There's gambling in baseball too. They will probably have a sports book at GRF in the next year or 2.. Already building one at Wrigley and the United Center.

Many fanbases almost demand it at some point. But actually paying a coach a bounty to lose is something a bit out there. The Sox sent out emails today reminding everyone on their list that individual tickets go on sale next week. OK.

Unlike other sports, preseason or spring training is a ritual for a lot of people. Messing with that is going to turn some of their biggest fans off.

Very possible, but I also think people need to realize that once the lockout occurred, there was no way this deal would be done until the very last second.

Braves infield in 2021 Freeman 159 games Albies 156 games Swanson 160 games Riley 160 games

A year ago, Harbaugh had his salary cut in half because of bad results. His brother gifted him a DC that changed everything, now is taking that gift back. To me, the advantage he had is he had proven Henan win in the NFL with good players. Whether or not he is truly any better of a coach than what else is out there, to me, is a crapshoot. Also, I would be stunned if the Bears didn't kick the tires with him. I'm also sure they checked on Ryan Day. Teams keep the contact with the college guys low so if they aren't hired, it doesn't give their players and recruits the impression they are looking to leave. The fact that this Harbaugh/Vikings thing leak either means he's taking the job or was to gethis extension in gear.

I didn’t realize Gio was the Union rep. No way JR is going to break the bank for him.

The "unanimous" thing was for show. All the scouts were supposedly the same way with Trubisky.

There is a decent reason to be a little concerned, but all the great ones had no experience at one time as well.

I was listening to Wannstedt a couple of weeks ago. He is a Harbaugh guy. But what was interesting, considering he was the hot assistant at one time, was he said the key to hiring the head coach was an outline for how he would utilize Fields to his full potential and who he was bringing in as his coordinators. So, Poles must be impressed. I do agree with an earlier post, these hires are all crapshoots. It's almost impossible to really know how a guy will coach and lead a team based on an interview. Some people really suck at interviews, and are awesome employees. Football isn't rocket science. How to get through to a football player and what buttons to push is a lot different than getting through to George McCaskey. Wanne also stated a lot of times the candidates, who were prepped by their buddies, say what they think the interviewer wants to hear, like "we are going to run the ball", and when they get the job, they don't run the ball. Bill Lazor was fired twice for not running enough. It shouldn't shock people on 4th and 1 he continually called pass plays.

His AA stats looked like my little league stats on the mound.

After the way he started out, who would have thought perfomance was the reason he never made it to AAA?