- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: MLB owners should cancel season
Posted on 5/29/20 at 10:45 am to CottonWasKing
Posted on 5/29/20 at 10:45 am to CottonWasKing
quote:
I’d rather get paid zero this year and make 20mil next year than make 7mil for the next two years.
So yea. frick you, pay me.
It’s this attitude that pisses everybody off.
1
Posted on 5/29/20 at 10:47 am to CottonWasKing
quote:
And if they agree to a pay cut right now that gives owners precedent to base player pay on attendance which will lower their potential career earnings.
It gives the owners "precedent" to try and negotiate that in the next CBA. It doesn't force the players to agree to it.
frick, I can make a pretty damn good argument that the players choosing NOT to work with the owners would force the owners hands to negotiate based on attendance.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 10:51 am to moneyg
quote:
Under the assumption that you agree, can we agree that the prorated salary plan would affect the owners much more negatively than it affects the players?
These are the risks of ownership. If the owners don’t like that they have downside risk in certain business conditions, they should sell their franchises.
If MLB was having a boom time and the players tried to negotiate more money for themselves before the current CBA was up, owners would tell them to go pound sand (and you would support them in that, I’d wager).
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander
This post was edited on 5/29/20 at 10:53 am
Posted on 5/29/20 at 10:51 am to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
It’s this attitude that pisses everybody off.
I agree that it doesn't look good and it makes average joes side with the billionaires forcing this rather than the employees getting screwed, because they employees are going to get life changing money either way. (Not really, but that's the perception)
The issue is that the owners are trying to win the next CBA negotiations right now. They are acting in bad faith. They even went as far as to leak terms that are contractually obligated to remain private in order to turn public sentiment against the players.
Everyone just keeps talking about how the players should make concession after concession. Why don't the owners start to make some concessions?
They aren't the cash-strapped paupers they're trying to make people believe they are. They are billionaires trying to use this situation to cut future expenses.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 10:56 am to moneyg
quote:then we are right back here and people are crying over the greedy players taking 2 million over 15
It gives the owners "precedent" to try and negotiate that in the next CBA. It doesn't force the players to agree to it.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 10:57 am to WestCoastAg
quote:You're asking a lot from the average idiot on this site.
not to people with the ability to thinking critically
Posted on 5/29/20 at 10:57 am to Cocotheape
quote:
These are the risks of ownership. If the owners don’t like that they have downside risk in certain business conditions, they should sell their franchises.
There is another option you know. They have some protections under force majeure. There is a solution that better for both parties if both parties are willing to negotiate.
If the players play hard ball, they are going to force the owners to play hard ball. If they are right that this is just owners negotiating the next CBA, they will probably end up getting what they want.
If they are wrong, the owners are going to not have a season, and they will hurt every bit as much as the owners.
quote:
If MLB was having a boom time and the players tried to negotiate more money for themselves before the current CBA was up, owners would tell them to go pound sand (and you would support them in that, I’d wager).
Under normal times, this makes sense. Under a scenario where a virus prevents stadiums from being filled, it doesn't.
quote:
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander
You guys who form opinions based on their "feelings" of what's fair vs. the realities of the situation that are present are going to end up supporting a less than optimal end.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:10 am to moneyg
quote:
Under normal times, this makes sense. Under a scenario where a virus prevents stadiums from being filled, it doesn't.
I’m sorry, this is the risk you undertake when you own a business. Normal times, extreme times, whatever. Owners can put a virus provision in the next CBA if it’s so crushing to their business.
They are free to try and renegotiate with the players, of course.
The owners are playing hardball already with their weak (IMO) offer. Even if the next CBA wasn’t a consideration there would be zero chance the players would take the current deal being offered.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:13 am to TexasTiger08
quote:
The games went on without Pippen. Baseball isn’t happening unless there’s an agreement.
Uh, there is an agreement. Both the players and owners signed it and no one disputes that it would solve this.
The owners just don't like it and are trying to hit reset because it would hurt their pocketbook, despite the fact they already agreed to it.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:14 am to moneyg
quote:
You guys who form opinions based on their "feelings" of what's fair vs. the realities of the situation that are present are going to end up supporting a less than optimal end
There is no less optimal end for me, I have no personal or financial stake in the popularity level of Major League Baseball.
It’s just business, after all. Perhaps your feelings are the problem?
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:15 am to moneyg
quote:
If the players play hard ball, they are going to force the owners to play hard ball.
Are you under the impression that the owners didn't start this "hardball"? If you are, I suggest you read a little more on the situation, or pull your head out of your arse.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:18 am to moneyg
quote:
You guys who form opinions based on their "feelings" of what's fair vs. the realities of the situation that are present are going to end up supporting a less than optimal end.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:30 am to TigerFanInSouthland
I’d play this game for free every single day of the week if I could.
What's stopping you? Seriously.
This is the dumbest argument that gets thrown out all the time talking about the greedy pros, or the stupid college players who don't "appreciate" what they have.
You would play every day for free if you could, but if your ability had value and someone offered to pay you, you wouldn't turn it down. And if that same person then tried to negotiate less than equitable reduction in your salary, you'd fight it, too.
Fans tend to side with management over labor because at the end of the day, all they care about is the games being played. They could give a rats arse about the individual players. No matter how much the "greedy" players make, the owners make 10 times as much, but are somehow immune to criticism over being greedy.
What's stopping you? Seriously.
This is the dumbest argument that gets thrown out all the time talking about the greedy pros, or the stupid college players who don't "appreciate" what they have.
You would play every day for free if you could, but if your ability had value and someone offered to pay you, you wouldn't turn it down. And if that same person then tried to negotiate less than equitable reduction in your salary, you'd fight it, too.
Fans tend to side with management over labor because at the end of the day, all they care about is the games being played. They could give a rats arse about the individual players. No matter how much the "greedy" players make, the owners make 10 times as much, but are somehow immune to criticism over being greedy.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:31 am to moneyg
quote:
They have some protections under force majeure. There is a solution that better for both parties if both parties are willing to negotiate.
I think you're misunderstanding what force majeure is. That's when a party can't fulfill a contract.
The owners could fulfill the contract, it would just be damaging to their bottom line.
Force majeure is when I contract to mow your lawn at 10 am on Saturday, but I get hit by a bus and airlifted to the hospital on my way over to your place. I couldn't fulfill the deal.
Signing a deal then realizing it isn't a good deal for you after the fact is called buyers remorse.
I can understand why players wouldn't be willing to negotiate. They already did.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:42 am to ProjectP2294
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 on 5/29/20 at 11:44 am to ProjectP2294
quote:
because they employees are going to get life changing money either way. (Not really, but that's the perception)
I mean, they’re making a frickin shitload of dough.
quote:
They are acting in bad faith.
quote:
Everyone just keeps talking about how the players should make concession after concession. Why don't the owners start to make some concessions?
I agree with both statements.
quote:
They aren't the cash-strapped paupers they're trying to make people believe they are. They are billionaires trying to use this situation to cut future expenses.
They may not be as cash strapped as they are making it seem, but they didn’t become billionaires by paying people for work they didn’t do with profits they didn’t make.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:47 am to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
They may not be as cash strapped as they are making it seem, but they didn’t become billionaires by paying people for work they didn’t do with profits they didn’t make.
quote:I loooooove how this is framed
mean, they’re making a frickin shitload of dough
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:51 am to Wayne Campbell
quote:
Fans tend to side with management over labor because at the end of the day, all they care about is the games being played.
No, fans tend to side with management because at the end of the day, even the lowest paid goddamn player is making more than 95% of this nation make and then they turn around and act as if they’re not compensated well for what they do.
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:53 am to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
No, fans tend to side with management because at the end of the day, even the lowest paid goddamn player is making more than 95% of this nation make and then they turn around and act as if they’re not compensated well for what they do.
The least wealthy owner makes/is worth more than 99.99999 percent of the nation and they cry and fudge numbers to act like they are broke all the time, why would you pick their side
I mean frick some of y’all act like the players are negotiating with coal miners
This post was edited on 5/29/20 at 11:57 am
Posted on 5/29/20 at 11:57 am to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
then they turn around and act as if they’re not compensated well for what they do.
Are you saying that sticking to the contracts that were signed is equal to them complaining they aren't paid enough?
Page 4 of 15
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News