Jump to content

Major League Baseball work stoppage almost certain on Dec. 2


Useful Idiot
 Share

Recommended Posts

https://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/major-league-baseball-work-stoppage-dec-80759056

 

Interesting how the first thing they expect to be adversely affected  is the demand for free agents.  Woo HOO! a buyer's market!! (sarcasm)

 

You just know what this is gonna do as far as a ready made excuse.

 

Also noteworthy that it is management pushing for a lower luxury tax threshold.  I've felt for years that  some teams have used the threshold as an apron to hide behind to shield themselves from fan animosity over frugal spending,... now I'm sure of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Baseball Owners and Players need to understand that they don't hold as much power over the American public that they once did.   People like us will miss baseball if they strike or lockout, but most of America won't give a damn, which means all  you may accomplish is pissing off your "P1" fans.   Not good.  

I would hope they remember that MLB never truly bounced back from the work stoppage in 1994-95. Nor has the NHL from the work stoppage in 2004-2005. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Motor City Sonics said:

  People like us will miss baseball if they strike or lockout, but most of America won't give a damn, which means all  you may accomplish is pissing off your "P1" fans.   Not good.  

I agree with you.  Something I was thinking about last night, but in context with baseball's declining market....I first developed an interest in baseball watching it on TV. Then I wanted to play.

But, if I was doing it all over but in the current environment, I probably wouldn't have the patience to wait it out through all the commercial breaks. I'd be like "what a disconnected line of garbage"...and the interest to try it myself simply would not be there.

My point being that I think the folks running MLB are deluding themselves, believing the changes they are making are enhancing the game.... because they aren't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I would hope they remember that MLB never truly

7 hours ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I would hope they remember that MLB never truly bounced back from the work stoppage in 1994-95. Nor has the NHL from the work stoppage in 2004-2005. 

 

They don't see that.   The billionaire owners cry poverty.  The millionaire players act like baseball is at it's peak and both sides are firm in those beliefs and I don't think either has any intention of budging.   They are out of touch.   And it's not the length of games so much as it's  A - so many other things to get your attention now  and B - the cost of going to games obliterated a generation from making going to games a ritual.  Now it's just an occasional thing.  Now that generation has their own kids and baseball is not a love being passed down to them.       Another thing that hurts is that little league baseball of any quality is something many families can't really afford anymore.   Have you noticed the cost of gloves and bats these days?   (Best glove I ever had was a K-Mart glove and I got teased because it was a K-Mart glove, but I caught everything that went near it).     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I would hope they remember that MLB never truly bounced back from the work stoppage in 1994-95. Nor has the NHL from the work stoppage in 2004-2005. 

 

why do you think the nhl hasnt?  i think nhl ratings are pretty steady from the 90s until now.  and they've successfully expanded multiple times since then.

i dont think people even remember those stoppages anymore.  baseball has inherent problems to the game that prevent it from gaining tv viewers (imo) and younger fans, but the work stoppage 25 years ago has very little to do with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i couldnt care less if baseball goes on strike.  i suppose i would care in july and august after the nba finals/stanley cup and before football starts.  but soccer starts in august and the nfl in september.  it wont be a big loss.

the owners have such a sweet deal right now, i can see why the players would strike.  baseball players get totally screwed by the system theyre in now that the owners have figured out how to use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, theroundsquare said:

This.  I'm generally on the players' side and I think this is a terrible idea.  It will ensure only that some team pays some guys who don't deserve it.

its a chip to get a hard cap.  no more of this luxury tax stuff, they want a hard cap that guarantees them profits.  thats all a salary cap really does.

that said, without some sort of cap-ish thing on top youre going to end up like european soccer teams and have teams owned by jeff bezos and elon musk spending $600 million on payroll to buy all the best young players, no more old free agents, they'll be getting the young guys in their primes for top dollar.

which, good for those guys getting paid, but it will lead to big time stratification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

European soccer has no draft, and as far as I can tell no salary or roster restrictions, except maybe nationality restrictions, which is why they have that kind of stratification. Theirs is a dog-eat-dog capitalist system where if a team can't keep up, they'll wind up.

Since baseball has a draft and numerous rules on just how players can get compensated, all within a socialist revenue-share system ensuring not only their survival, but guaranteed profits, there will not be that kind of stratification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, buddha said:

i couldnt care less if baseball goes on strike.  i suppose i would care in july and august after the nba finals/stanley cup and before football starts.  but soccer starts in august and the nfl in september.  it wont be a big loss.

the owners have such a sweet deal right now, i can see why the players would strike.  baseball players get totally screwed by the system theyre in now that the owners have figured out how to use it.

both sides are missing the obvious way to peace - hard cap and % of revenues. The players won't trust the owners to work on % of revenues but I think they are dumb not to- because once you do, the hard cap can follow and now it's no big deal because the total salary payout is already fixed. Even if the owners fudge around the edges on the revenue numbers the union always has a hard number and %increases will still accrue to it for total salary to be paid and that is what matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, chasfh said:

European soccer has no draft, and as far as I can tell no salary or roster restrictions, except maybe nationality restrictions, which is why they have that kind of stratification. Theirs is a dog-eat-dog capitalist system where if a team can't keep up, they'll wind up.

Since baseball has a draft and numerous rules on just how players can get compensated, all within a socialist revenue-share system ensuring not only their survival, but guaranteed profits, there will not be that kind of stratification.

i think the only reason mlb hasnt become like euro soccer is because of the roster requirements that the players (quite rightly, imo) want to get rid of.  not the draft per se, but the eligibility rules and 6 years before you hit free agency.

if they get rid of that or significantly pare it back and allow players to hit free agency at a much younger age, then without a salary cap you'll see all the young players bought up by the big clubs.  and if that happens i think you'll see more stratification because the rays and other such teams wont be able to control players long enough to compete.  that's my thinking.  even with a draft, if you only control a guy for one or two years and then you have to pay him, only the big clubs will be paying.

baseball free agency is fool's gold now because youre buying guys at the end of their primes for the most part.  and dumping 10 year deals on 32 year old players will kill you.

if you have a cap, those deals will dry up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

both sides are missing the obvious way to peace - hard cap and % of revenues. The players won't trust the owners to work on % of revenues but I think they are dumb not to- because once you do, the hard cap can follow and now it's no big deal because the total salary payout is already fixed. Even if the owners fudge around the edges on the revenue numbers the union always has a hard number and %increases will still accrue to it for total salary to be paid and that is what matters.

the owners are going to have to give on the arb and free agency eligibility issue.  maybe make it 4 or 5 years in exchange for a harder luxury tax?  maybe a restriction on contract length?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, buddha said:

why do you think the nhl hasnt?  i think nhl ratings are pretty steady from the 90s until now.  and they've successfully expanded multiple times since then.

i dont think people even remember those stoppages anymore.  baseball has inherent problems to the game that prevent it from gaining tv viewers (imo) and younger fans, but the work stoppage 25 years ago has very little to do with it.

I think the work stoppage and the nonsensical decision around the same time for the NHL to not ensure the renewal of their contract with ESPN (in addition to the last 15 years of doubling down on this stupidity) all combined to set the sport back. When ESPN stopped caring about hockey (what little they did then), it caused the sport to stagnate. When they said “we want games on Versus instead of ESPN2”, they may as well have been saying they’re not even going to try to expand their fanbase.

Back in the late 90s to early 00s, hockey had the opportunity to overtake basketball. Now I think it’s more likely for soccer to overtake hockey. The league may be expanding, but on the whole it’s not adding new viewers (or all that much money), just the same viewers in new areas. Hopefully that changes with the new ESPN contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I think the work stoppage and the nonsensical decision around the same time for the NHL to not ensure the renewal of their contract with ESPN (in addition to the last 15 years of doubling down on this stupidity) all combined to set the sport back. When ESPN stopped caring about hockey (what little they did then), it caused the sport to stagnate. When they said “we want games on Versus instead of ESPN2”, they may as well have been saying they’re not even going to try to expand their fanbase.

Back in the late 90s to early 00s, hockey had the opportunity to overtake basketball. Now I think it’s more likely for soccer to overtake hockey. The league may be expanding, but on the whole it’s not adding new viewers (or all that much money), just the same viewers in new areas. Hopefully that changes with the new ESPN contract.

hockey was never going to overtake basketball.  half the country couldnt care less about hockey and college basketball is still big on the east coast and in the south and midwest.  that was never, ever going to happen.

and hockey eventually got to nbc, which was decent for it, while the nba went to tnt/tbs.

it would have been better on espn, but im not sure that was because of the work stoppage.  hockey is - and will likely alway be - a niche sport.  the nba is the second most popular sport in the world behind soccer and (maybe) formula 1.  that wasnt because of hockey not being on espn, its because of michael jordan and the dream team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, buddha said:

hockey was never going to overtake basketball.  half the country couldnt care less about hockey and college basketball is still big on the east coast and in the south and midwest.  that was never, ever going to happen.

and hockey eventually got to nbc, which was decent for it, while the nba went to tnt/tbs.

it would have been better on espn, but im not sure that was because of the work stoppage.  hockey is - and will likely alway be - a niche sport.  the nba is the second most popular sport in the world behind soccer and (maybe) formula 1.  that wasnt because of hockey not being on espn, its because of michael jordan and the dream team.

Formula 1 is extremely popular around the world and is gaining fans in the US.  They raced in Texas yesterday and had huge crowds not only for the race yesterday but for support races and qualifying on Friday and Saturday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, buddha said:

its because of michael jordan and the dream team.

It's also because hundreds of millions of girls and boys all over the world play it on every driveway and corner park and elementary school with nothing but a hoop and an oversize soccer ball. Speaking of which, Soccer is the only other sport worldwide that probably beats the level of youth participation of basketball.

Edited by gehringer_2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, buddha said:

hockey was never going to overtake basketball.  half the country couldnt care less about hockey and college basketball is still big on the east coast and in the south and midwest.  that was never, ever going to happen.

and hockey eventually got to nbc, which was decent for it, while the nba went to tnt/tbs.

it would have been better on espn, but im not sure that was because of the work stoppage.  hockey is - and will likely alway be - a niche sport.  the nba is the second most popular sport in the world behind soccer and (maybe) formula 1.  that wasnt because of hockey not being on espn, its because of michael jordan and the dream team.

I had originally typed that hockey was never going to become the #3 sport in the US and then backtracked and put that it could have in its hay-day. I tend to agree with you, I think my hopes for the sport were more personal than practical, as I really don't like basketball much, particularly the NBA, and I think that playoff hockey is one of the best offerings of any sport.

Hockey is working from behind as it is given that half the country can't easily access it, the half of the country that can is only able to easily access it 4-6 months of the year, and it's a sport of immense privilege given the exorbitant costs associated with playing even recreational hockey (let alone travel). My point is I don't think the NHL in the last 10-15 years has done enough (or much of anything) to broaden their horizons to kids and families that wouldn't otherwise blink twice about hockey. If I am a family in suburban Phoenix or Miami, what about the NHL makes me want to spend a couple hundred bucks after tickets, parking, and food to go to a Coyotes or Panthers game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      185
    • Most Online
      119

    Newest Member
    roarintiger1
    Joined
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...