mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 12:50 pm
rockondlouie wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 12:45 pm
mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 12:16 pm
rockondlouie wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 12:11 pm
mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 12:02 pm
rockondlouie wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 11:58 am
mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 11:12 am
rockondlouie wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 11:10 am
mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 11:07 am
rockondlouie wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 11:03 am
Until they change their stance that's been in place since 1966 it won't matter since the MLBPA won't accept a salary cap.
(But like most in here I wish they would too)
What the owners have to do is straightforward, if not easy.
Ignore the superstar players and their superstar agents. Ignore the MLBPA leadership if they continue to be in the pockets of the superstar players and agents.
Speak directly to the 500-600 players who would directly benefit from a transformation in the way ML players are paid in their first six years.
That matt would violate collective bargaining rules and open them up to massive lawsuits.
No, I mean the owners need to develop and make a transformative proposal public. They need to show concrete examples of where (in proposals I've sketched) productive players could make maybe double what they are making under current system over their first 5-6 years.
Put that message out to put pressure on the MLBPA to address it with the players.
The Public would do nothing since the "public" has no say in management/union negotiations.
Not sure Billionaire owners, not the most popular class of people in todays society, are going to win any public opinion polls.
And it's a bad strategy (IMO) to try an negotiate thru the media.
You're not going to put nay pressure on the MLBPA's or the players by doing that, in fact you would likely just strengthen their resolve.
Best negotiations are done behind closed doors.
If the MLBPA refuses to present a proposal to the players that is objectively better for 500 or 600 of them, then do what you have to do.
As soon as a rookie hits MLB matt their immediately indoctrinated into the MLBPA and become union members.
Veteran players let them know the "game plan" when it comes to contact negotiations and not accepting a salary cap has always been RULE #1 set down by their founder Marvin Miller.
I know this as a fact matt.
I get that.
That is why is it essential that the players hear - however is has to happen - that the owners should be putting a proposal on the table which is significantly better for many of them and how it is better, even with a salary cap.
500-600 players need to be shown how: (1) a $1.25 million ML minimum; (2) a new ARB system starting after 1 year of ML experience; (3) FA after five years is much, much more significant than any salary cap which really will not affect them much.
The owners have to give them an obvious, significant "win" to break the indoctrination.
And they would hear it as well as any offer from their player reps who would either be in the negotiating room or informed by the union.
But the owners would NOT be allowed to speak directly to any players about a potential deal, that would be in violation of the collective bargain agreement.
Even w/your suggested "proposal" the vote would still be for no salary cap.
While that $1.25M ML minimum would be attractive to a young rookie,
that same player would be costing himself multi-millions if he goes on to become the next J. Soto or G. Cole should the MLBPA accept a salary cap.
Much better to "suffer
" making only $780,000 than it would be to potentially lose $100,000,000 if the player becomes the next great superstar but his earnings are held down by a salary cap.
The union and players know this, why they'll never accept a salary cap.
But rational players know that only a few percent of them ever turn into Soto or Cole.
Again, the owners need to make it OBVIOUS how big a win this would be for most players.
And superstars are still going to get paid, they just might get 2/3 or 3/4 of what they might get now. But that would be more in line with the actual value of their production.
You can think that anything that hasn't happened is impossible, until it happens.
Of course, but hasn't happened for 60 years so why would it change this time?
BUT
Even just a very good player (not Hall of Fame material but multiple time all-star) can now make $100-200-300+M!
RE:
Corey Seager, $325 million
Xander Bogaerts, $280 million
Giancarlo Stanton, $325,000,000
Rafael Devers, $313,500,000
Stephen Strasburg, $245,000,000
Anthony Rendon, $245,000,000
and the list goes on and on of players who won't be in the Hall of Fame but who have made fortunes, fortunes that shrink dramatically under a salary cap and players know it.
Here's the mountain you're climbing matt and the MLBPA is well aware of it:
2025 MLB REVENUES-----------$12,100,000,000
The MONEY IS THERE
