Started By
Message

re: MLB owners should cancel season

Posted on 5/28/20 at 8:50 pm to
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
70542 posts
Posted on 5/28/20 at 8:50 pm to
I don’t really understand being on the owners side on this.

If they wanted contingencies based on no fans they should have put that in the contract. Which is the same thing they would tell the players if they asked for something not in the contract.
Posted by CottonWasKing
4,8,15,16,23,42
Member since Jun 2011
28673 posts
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:56 pm to
quote:

they wanted contingencies based on no fans they should have put that in the contract. Which is the same thing they would tell the players if they asked for something not in the contract.



Exactly. If I’m a player right now I only have one sentence to speak to the owners. “frick you, pay me”
Posted by Nigel Farage
South of the Mason-Dixon
Member since Dec 2019
1211 posts
Posted on 5/29/20 at 6:57 am to
quote:

I don’t really understand being on the owners side on this.



Thank you I have been saying this for weeks now, I dont know why posters on this site are siding with the owners.
Posted by Horsemeat
Truckin' somewhere in the US
Member since Dec 2014
13561 posts
Posted on 5/29/20 at 7:55 am to
quote:

If they wanted contingencies based on no fans they should have put that in the contract.


Baseball is at a disadvantage in comparison to the NBA and NHL - the owners in those leagues had 75% of their season complete, revenue allocated, and a SALARY CAP. Baseball has had none. If the owners paid the players their regular pay for a short season with no fans, 90% of the league will be bankrupt. Not every team has their own sports networks to fall back on - the majority of their revenue comes from the gates and the $20 beers and $15 hot dogs thanks to the insane contracts that are being dished out to Scott BorASS.
Posted by SECFan1995
Member since Sep 2015
7880 posts
Posted on 5/29/20 at 9:00 am to
This deal would've been over with very quickly if they didn't put in wording in the initial deal that if we can't allow fans that we will need to renegotiate. Unfortunately they did despite the fact it wasn't looking great for fans to return for a very long time even then.

That being said, I do side with the players on this proposal being arse, although both sides seem to be making this into a shitshow.
Posted by moneyg
Member since Jun 2006
56687 posts
Posted on 5/29/20 at 10:27 am to
quote:

I don’t really understand being on the owners side on this.

If they wanted contingencies based on no fans they should have put that in the contract. Which is the same thing they would tell the players if they asked for something not in the contract.



This line of thinking is how you end up with no season.
Posted by Dr RC
The Money Pit
Member since Aug 2011
58128 posts
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:42 am to
quote:

I don’t really understand being on the owners side on this.


boot lickers, boot lickers everywhere

quote:

If they wanted contingencies based on no fans they should have put that in the contract. Which is the same thing they would tell the players if they asked for something not in the contract.


100% and it's what the people kissing owner arse right now ALWAYS say when players make noise about shite they didn't think to add to the CBA. Funny how they don't think it should go both ways.
This post was edited on 5/29/20 at 11:45 am
Posted by TigerintheNO
New Orleans
Member since Jan 2004
41234 posts
Posted on 5/31/20 at 2:07 pm to
quote:

A March 26 conversation between MLB and the union in which MLB portrays the union as acknowledging that a new negotiation was needed regarding how players would be paid this season could serve as an email version of a smoking gun.


quote:



The Post, however, has obtained a March 26 email from an MLB lawyer to top league officials that documents the substance of talks between two MLB officials and two MLBPA officials from earlier that morning. The email covers seven points, including that MLB explained to the union officials that MLB would need a second negotiation if games were not played in front of fans to determine pay and claims that union officials understood that concept.

Thus, the email seemingly offers evidence that the union was aware that further talks were potentially necessary.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram