Ajay
7.5K posts
The MLBPA's response, in part, to today's proposal: "The owners responded today with a demand for a salary cap system, something generations of players have fought against. The last time the owners made such an explicit push for a cap—over 30 years ago—it led to the longest work stoppage in MLB history. For generations, our members have fought against cap systems because they harm players at all levels, erode or eliminate contractual guarantees, pit player against player, lead to more work stoppages, not less, and get worse for players over time. Caps don’t lower ticket prices for fans, eliminate tanking or ensure teams are run with equal competence. They suffocate competition by offering owners an all-purpose excuse for inaction and mediocrity."
Already seeing media members come out saying this MLB salary cap is just a ploy for the owners to make more money, and it's clear they haven't read any of the details. This deal would effectively spread a greater amount of money among the players, and prevent teams from buying championships annually. Parity equals popularity. Just ask the NFL. More popularity means more collective money. This is basic economics, and every other sport in America has it figured out. MLBPA can kick rocks with this one.
@Awood45 Alex, the MLBPA anti-cap stance means they will invariably accept a deal that equates to less than 50% of league revenue for the players (this includes the current proposal by the union). Why?
