Looming Work Stoppage?

[jad]

Is it possible the season will not play out?  I'm sure the owners are salivating at the news that Tony Clark had an 'inappropriate relationship', as we KNOW that owners of sports franchises have absolutely spotless ethical histories.  There is also, of course, the matter of 'misappropriation' of union funds; and again, the owners, having completely transparent finances, are beyond reproach.  If it gets ugly (and how can it not?), I'm kinda curious as to how many (more) franchise owners are going to find themselves in the Epstein files.  If we can't have baseball, we might as well have scandal.  I'm hoping both sides realize if they don't settle, it's basically no holds barred.  I'm not shedding any tears for Tony Clark, but it will be amusing to see how many owners are willing to go down (maybe not the right phrase!) with him.

[mvp 78]

It's 2027 that people are anticipating a work stoppage as that's when the CBA expires. This season is not in jeopardy. 

[jad]

But wasn't that the case years ago with the cancelled WS?  That the strike/lockout occurred before the expiration?  Can't remember.  

REVISE:  just looked it up.  You're right.  That season they were essentially playing without a new CBA in place. So no fears for this year, unless the world ends and all humans perish.  If that happens, I doubt we'll miss them much.

[mvp 78]

13 minutes ago, jad said:

But wasn't that the case years ago with the cancelled WS?  That the strike/lockout occurred before the expiration?  Can't remember.  

REVISE:  just looked it up.  You're right.  That season they were essentially playing without a new CBA in place. So no fears for this year, unless the world ends and all humans perish.  If that happens, I doubt we'll miss them much.

If the world is ending, I'll make sure to do one last post for everyone on here.

🤯💀

[JoeBrady]

56 minutes ago, jad said:

But wasn't that the case years ago with the cancelled WS?  That the strike/lockout occurred before the expiration?  Can't remember.  

REVISE:  just looked it up.  You're right.  That season they were essentially playing without a new CBA in place. So no fears for this year, unless the world ends and all humans perish.  If that happens, I doubt we'll miss them much.

The recent lockout was a result of the players strike.  Leaving the WS decision up to the players was incredibly stupid.  With a lockout, the owners won't mind losing a 1/2 season, so long as they have a WS.

[Hitch]

I think an extended lockout is all but a guarantee at this point. This has been building since about 20 minutes after the previous collective bargain. I'd go as far as saying I'd be quite surprised if we don't lose at least a quarter of the season. 

I imagine quite a few of the owners are hopeful the Dodgers win again this year, so they can further hold them up as the reason why a cap is needed.

[JoeBrady]

IMO, we won't lose a single game.

• We have 8 teams that will definitely go over, and maybe 3 teams that might go over.  Will those 11 teams vote for a cap?
• We have 11 teams that don't spend much.  Will any of those teams vote for a floor?
• Of the 8 in the middle, some have fairly successful results.

I'm not seeing it.  The union just kicked the crap out of the owners on the 3rd year arbitration change.  That was a huge win, after a huge loss 10 years ago.  I think we'll see the usual whinging about how the owners will go broke if they have to pay one more dollar, and the players whinging about feeding their kids, but they will settle one week before the start of the season.  IMHO.

[moonslav59]

I doubt we get any kind of cap ceiling or floor. 

I think the owners can get the players to a yes, if they significantly raise the min wage and maybe further tweak the arb years. I'm thinking the majority of players are making min wage or in year 1 or 2 of arbs.

[mvp 78]

59 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I doubt we get any kind of cap ceiling or floor. 

I think the owners can get the players to a yes, if they significantly raise the min wage and maybe further tweak the arb years. I'm thinking the majority of players are making min wage or in year 1 or 2 of arbs.

Players don't want a cap, owners don't want a floor. 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

Players don't want a cap, owners don't want a floor. 

If everything ends, we're six feet under the floor. The cap is heaven... unless above us is only sky.

Then it's fun stoppage.

[moonslav59]

12 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Players don't want a cap, owners don't want a floor. 

There won't be either.

They could restrict the revenue sharing for teams that are far below the average team budget, of encourage them to spend more by offering higher revenue shares when they increase their budgets, but I doubt the rich owners go along with that idea.

 

[jad]

I am beginning to suspect the owners are planting stories in the media.  Today i read that "the fans" are deeply concerned about "payroll disparity."   Say what?  The fans don't give a crap about that! any more than they care that the star of a movie makes millions and an extra barely makes a day's pay.   Find me one fan who says "I'm damned if I'm going to the game, as Ohtani makes 700 bazillion but Joey Schmuck makes the rookie minimum."    I will believe the b.s. the owners say as soon as they open the books for public inspection.  Until they do that, i'm with the players union all the way.  (Despite the sexual scandal, which of course rich f*ck owners NEVER get involved in.)

[Hugh2]

IDK......I think the players are going to get blamed more for this one. 

Maybe I'm reading your post wrong, but if not I think you're totally off the mark on this one.  I think A LOT of people have a problem having to take a second mortgage to take their family to a game while players get 40 million plus a year.  

I think a lot of fan bases are also sick and tired of seeing the same two teams soak up almost all the elite free agency talent year after year. 

The biggest demands from ownership appear to be a cap, and baseball is the only sport without one.  

I do take this away from your post.......a stoppage is 100% coming.  So enjoy this season folks. 

[Hugh2]

Heyman is reporting that clubs have "never been more united" on wanting a salary cap. 

Every other sport has a salary cap.  

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

How to resolve? Just ask The Godfather. 

Brando of course had the biggest payday in the original. But Clemenza made more dough than a then-unknown Al Pacino.

When that became a family controversy, the Corleones just made Clemenza disappear. He was replaced by Frankie Five Angels in Godfather II.

[mvp 78]

32 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Heyman is reporting that clubs have "never been more united" on wanting a salary cap. 

Every other sport has a salary cap.  

 

They've never been more united and the poor, poor owners who can't afford the players have stocked away $2.25B in a strike fund. 

They NEED a cap though because they don't have enough cash. Where'd that $2.25B come from? Who knows? The reporters don't care because if they make too many waves they'll lose access. 

[JoeBrady]

3 hours ago, jad said:

Today i read that "the fans" are deeply concerned about "payroll disparity."   Say what?  The fans don't give a crap about that! any more than they care that the star of a movie makes millions

But those two are not the same issues.

• The first is a concern that your team will never finish 1st.
• The second is a concern about players being overpaid.

As a RS fan, the system works.  If I were an O's fan or a Rays fan, I'd be annoyed that the EE and TO have double the spending money.

[mvp 78]

4 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

But those two are not the same issues.

• The first is a concern that your team will never finish 1st.
• The second is a concern about players being overpaid.

As a RS fan, the system works.  If I were an O's fan or a Rays fan, I'd be annoyed that the EE and TO have double the spending money.

The O's and Rays have brand new ownership. We have no idea what those groups can truly spend.

[JoeBrady]

3 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

I think A LOT of people have a problem having to take a second mortgage to take their family to a game while players get 40 million plus a year.  

I think a lot of fan bases are also sick and tired of seeing the same two teams soak up almost all the elite free agency talent year after year. 

Just impo:

• Go to a mid-week Yankee game and the tickets cost very little on-line.  And you can bring in a sandwich and soda.
• It was an unusual year, but the top-12 FAs listed by MLB-R went to 12 different teams.

[jad]

3 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

IDK......I think the players are going to get blamed more for this one. 

Maybe I'm reading your post wrong, but if not I think you're totally off the mark on this one.  I think A LOT of people have a problem having to take a second mortgage to take their family to a game while players get 40 million plus a year.  

I think a lot of fan bases are also sick and tired of seeing the same two teams soak up almost all the elite free agency talent year after year. 

The biggest demands from ownership appear to be a cap, and baseball is the only sport without one.  

I do take this away from your post.......a stoppage is 100% coming.  So enjoy this season folks. 

Yes, but as has been pointed out repeatedly, there is no direct relation between player salaries and ticket prices .  Ticket prices are set by one consideration:  how to price in order to get the maximum gate.  That's it.  It would be the same calculation whether the average player makes 50 million or 50 cents.    But the owners are very good about blaming players for everything--ticket prices, salary discrepancies, even w/l averages.  And fans are very good at the mental gymnastics required to think the plantation owners are somehow the good guys.

 

[Hugh2]

9 minutes ago, jad said:

Yes, but as has been pointed out repeatedly, there is no direct relation between player salaries and ticket prices .  Ticket prices are set by one consideration:  how to price in order to get the maximum gate.  That's it.  It would be the same calculation whether the average player makes 50 million or 50 cents.    But the owners are very good about blaming players for everything--ticket prices, salary discrepancies, even w/l averages.  And fans are very good at the mental gymnastics required to think the plantation owners are somehow the good guys.

 

Not my personal take, just how I see things. 

[Hugh2]

1 hour ago, JoeBrady said:

Just impo:

• Go to a mid-week Yankee game and the tickets cost very little on-line.  And you can bring in a sandwich and soda.
• It was an unusual year, but the top-12 FAs listed by MLB-R went to 12 different teams.

It was an unusual year.  There was no Juan Soto, Ohtani, Sasaki,  etc.  Not anyone close. 

There a difference between what I think, what other people think, and what the consensus thinks.  

The way I see it is the players will get blamed, actually It might end up being closer to both sides being equally blamed but I seriously doubt the players will get any sympathy from the general public when teams are spending over 500-600 million in payrolls (high end I know)

[Hugh2]

24 minutes ago, jad said:

Yes, but as has been pointed out repeatedly, there is no direct relation between player salaries and ticket prices .  Ticket prices are set by one consideration:  how to price in order to get the maximum gate.  That's it.  It would be the same calculation whether the average player makes 50 million or 50 cents.    But the owners are very good about blaming players for everything--ticket prices, salary discrepancies, even w/l averages.  And fans are very good at the mental gymnastics required to think the plantation owners are somehow the good guys.

 

It's all about the optics my man, do you really think the fans performing all their mental gymnastics really decide to have more sympathy for millionaires because they're not billionares?

[UtahSox]

Ohtani and Soto will be richer than some of the owners in the next 15 years. Players not wanting cap to limit top end salaries, and use of verbiage like “plantation owners”. Is gaslighting and tone deaf. It feels like a bunch of “hundred millionaires”  fighting with billionaires—we can’t relate.

IF having more semblance of parity is the angle of major league baseball. Not just putting more money in owner’s pockets. Then I have to say, I side with the owners. But the salary cap is the red herring. The true number they are arguing is % of revenue…. maybe even as granular as what is constituted as revenue. 

“’my take”  Give the owners the salary cap, but move the floor to an extremely obtainable sustainable number. The owners will never agree to something that will put their franchise values in jeopardy, so it needs to be realistic… Like 150 million for example. That would require nine teams to invest an additional combine $200 million per year into salaries. Move the luxury tax number without any penalties to 325 million. And then allow teams to go over that #, just with substantial penalties attached that compound for years over. 
 

The truth is Major league baseball does not want to see the Kansas City Royals versus the Colorado Rockies in the World Series. This would still allow the big market teams to flex a roster and star advantage over the smaller or midmarket teams.
But it wouldn’t be egregious like it is now— the Dodgers and the Miami Marlins have no business being on the same baseball field. Shohei Ohtani makes as much as 90% of the entire marlin players combined.

[mvp 78]

10 minutes ago, UtahSox said:

Ohtani and Soto will be richer than some of the owners in the next 15 years.

But it wouldn’t be egregious like it is now— the Dodgers and the Miami Marlins have no business being on the same baseball field. Shohei Ohtani makes as much as 90% of the entire marlin players combined.

The "poorest" owner is Bob Castellini (Reds) with a net worth of approximately 400M. However, he could sell the Reds valued at reportedly 1.2B if he's worried about players being paid too much. I hope that'd be enough for him to retire on.

[Duran Is The Man]

2 hours ago, jad said:

Yes, but as has been pointed out repeatedly, there is no direct relation between player salaries and ticket prices .  Ticket prices are set by one consideration:  how to price in order to get the maximum gate.  That's it.  It would be the same calculation whether the average player makes 50 million or 50 cents.    But the owners are very good about blaming players for everything--ticket prices, salary discrepancies, even w/l averages.  And fans are very good at the mental gymnastics required to think the plantation owners are somehow the good guys.

 

dude....they're all greedy. the only ones i have any sympathy for are the minor league guys making peanuts. 

[jad]

When I was growing up, I admired the players and dreamed (vainly) of being one of them.  That's likely why I support them.  I never once thought (as apparently some fans do today)  'Damn, i'd like to be  like Tom Yawkey'.

But on more important matters:  watching games, even NE vs. RS, totally rocks.

[mvp 78]

Games good. No games bad.

[davidrw]

If there’s a stoppage, it’s going to be tied to the next CBA fight, not this season the Tony Clark mess just gives owners more ammo. I don’t trust either side here, but fans will lose patience fast if it turns into a public mud slinging contest while ticket prices keep climbing. Hopefully they read the room and get serious before it blows up.

[notin]

On 2/18/2026 at 1:52 PM, mvp 78 said:

Players don't want a cap, owners don't want a floor. 

… and MLB doesn’t want anyone to watch games, as they are moving the Sunday national broadcast from ESPN and the postseason from FOX both over to Peacock.

ESPN also did some midweek games that will also be heading to Peacock.  I assume Apple gets more games this year as well…