Started By
Message

re: Snell of Tampa Bay will not play for a paltry $5 million this year

Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:16 pm to
Posted by WestCoastAg
Member since Oct 2012
149521 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:16 pm to
quote:

It's like you are purposely being ignorant here
If I misunderstood what you meant when you said 50% then I apologize. But you are using a totally hypothetical situation to blame the players when there is no indication that they are going to demand more than prorated salaries so ok
Posted by Louie T
Member since Dec 2006
36603 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:16 pm to
They aren’t bitching about 50% of the salary. Idk why you’ve brought it up yet again. How many beers have you had? Jesus
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161246 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:17 pm to
Players should only be looking at 50% I've stated I'm fine with that. I'm talking about players like Snell who are bitching about less than that. Like Snell saying he won't play for 5m when his salary is 7m for the season. So a prorated salary would be 3.5
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161246 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:19 pm to
Yet some are.... Not sure what you are struggling with or if you just want to argue.... Players union agreed to half season salary.... That is fine, some players complained.... Those are the ones I have a problem with
Posted by dhuck20
SCLSU Fan
Member since Oct 2012
23104 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:19 pm to
Lol the most ridiculous part to me is that he would be A-OK with playing for full salary with the same risks. So it’s not even about the health risk. Literally just a spoiled, greedy bastard.
Posted by WestCoastAg
Member since Oct 2012
149521 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:20 pm to
quote:

. The only thing I can say regarding that is that even at a prorated salary I doubt the owners are making near the revenue that funds said salaries for that amount of games
and I would bet you if we were ever given a chance to look at the owners books, we'd see how much they really make in revenue and that their claims of game day revenues making up 40% of total revenue is not incredibly accurate
quote:

Snell complains about making 3 million rather than 5 million.
and he definitely went about this in the worst way. I get how someone can look at what he said and view it as a disconnected dick. But players almost always make the headlines due to random biases against them. Ever wondered why we hear about player salaries but never hear about how much owners make off their teams? Cause they dont want you to know and they want you to get upset at a player for arguing over millions when they are doing the same exact thing
Posted by More beer please
Member since Feb 2010
46324 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:20 pm to
Exactly. He’s worried about “risking his life” for a mill or two less? Come the frick on
Posted by Louie T
Member since Dec 2006
36603 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:24 pm to
I couldn't care less about what a singular player said; there are a lot of players, and a lot of them aren't very intelligent. The players' union doesn't look bad because Snell popped off on Twitch unless you lack any ability to use logic and reason. They agreed to what you've stated you'd be ok with, so either the players shouldn't be the bad guys here or you're conflicting the opinion you've posted more than a few times in this thread.
This post was edited on 5/14/20 at 8:26 pm
Posted by SHOtime Tiger
Member since Aug 2019
1361 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:25 pm to
quote:

They have significant operating costs and it takes a billionaire to provide that start up funding. Hence why they are owned by the richest of the rich.


Start up costs? That’s your comeback?
Posted by WestCoastAg
Member since Oct 2012
149521 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:27 pm to
You are using one players comments from a twitch Q&A thing and thinking that is the stance that the players union is having
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161246 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:39 pm to
There is no conflicting opinions, I've stated the same thing over and over.
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161246 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:41 pm to
Nope, there are other players on Twitter and while I'm using Snell and his comments here because that is what the thread is about it has relevance.
Posted by WestCoastAg
Member since Oct 2012
149521 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:47 pm to
Maybe instead of bitching about the individual players who have a problem with this but are not representative of the entire player union, maybe we should focus on the owners who reneged on MLBPA when it came to the salaries the first chance they got
Posted by TexasTiger08
Member since Oct 2006
29244 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:48 pm to
It’s the “I’m not playing unless I get mine” quote that bothers me. This wasn’t about the virus, it’s about his money. He’s greedy, and he can’t even hide it. He’s trying to leverage for a full contract when there’s a pandemic. I think the whole premise behind baseball getting back to playing is for the fans.

Everyone is suffering. Players may have to take prorated deals. To me, it’s in the name of survival. If you make the owners go broke, then you essentially have no team.

If Snell wants to sit out because he’s not getting a full share, fine. But he has no business pretending like he’s saying this in the name of safety.
Posted by Louie T
Member since Dec 2006
36603 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:50 pm to
Oh, good. So we don’t have any issue with the players (collectively) then since they’ve met your demands?
Posted by Adam Banks
District 5
Member since Sep 2009
36564 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 8:51 pm to
quote:


Start up costs? That’s your comeback?



Way to ignore all but one sentence

My comeback is how there isn’t a single player owned team nor league. They care barnstorm if they want. If it was possible to make good money it would be done without the owners they aren’t doing anywhere close to what they are currently doing.
Posted by WestCoastAg
Member since Oct 2012
149521 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 9:02 pm to
And baseball is close to a 10 billion dollar industry if mike trout and clayton Kershaw and cody bellinger turn into some random minor leaguers
Posted by Adam Banks
District 5
Member since Sep 2009
36564 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 9:20 pm to
quote:

And baseball is close to a 10 billion dollar industry if mike trout and clayton Kershaw and cody bellinger turn into some random minor leaguers



It’s absolutely a mutually beneficial relationship on a normal basis and the players are obviously what it’s about, it’s just one side is dealing with a significantly better hand. The owners can walk away from it all and still be ungodly wealthy. It’s also much more difficult for journalists to get the necessary information to make a click generating article against the owners. It’s a much more abstract thing rather than “guy makes millions to play a game but still wants more.” Guys like snell just wrote the click bait millionaire demonizing article himself.
Posted by MeTarzanYouInsane
Lower Bucks
Member since Sep 2013
567 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 9:41 pm to
quote:

Not a good look


First thing I thought of when I heard his comments. I’m sure there could have been a better way of stating his case and I am also sure I don’t want to hear ex players like Mark T who made over $200MM in MLB contracts blasting him. But, he needs to think about the bigger picture.
Posted by MikeD
Baton Rouge
Member since Jan 2004
8181 posts
Posted on 5/14/20 at 10:26 pm to
quote:

If you can point me to a largely successful player co op league I’ll be happy to be proven wrong


A recent Russillo podcast had the owner/player that started the new lacrosse league discussing their startup in June.
Jump to page
Page First 6 7 8 9 10
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 8 of 10Next pagelast page

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

FacebookXInstagram