Well, at this point, things seem to be going from bad to worse.
Bruce Meyer, the MLBPA interim executive director, wasn't a happy puppy after reading the owner's initial salvo in these negotiations.
Meyer said that owner's "effectively managed to cobble together the worse system for players in any major sport and it's not even close. "
(that's bad, right?)
"I thought they would try harder to make it look good and they didn't even do that. "
The current agreement expires in six months (December 1st).
In 2002, the percentage of MLB salary ranged of baseball-related revenues was 63%. In 2024, per Rob Manfield, it was 47%. The current offer is 50/50.
The player's union rejected this offer from the owners, saying that it represents a $500 million pay cut, with portions of their contracts being non-guaranteed. The union has fought against such clauses for decades. In addition, Meyers said that the players have always been united and will never agree with a salary cap.
Topics still up in the wind include expansion and participation in the Olympics.
4 comments:
balls and STRIKES
Billionares fighting millionares how exciting I can't wait.
Let’s one season of crappy contracts expire without having to watch bad to mediocre baseball.
A lock-out (by the owners) and a strike (by the players) are two different things and the exact opposite (in terms of blame). With no new CBA in place, I'm not even sure what you've got, but it was my understanding early on that we were talking about a lock out. Does that imply that the players are willing to report without an agreement, and are prevented from doing so? Does the CBA have a default position after it expires?
Post a Comment