There is too much money involved for it to be NONE. At least in my opinion.

Actually, I would choose none of the above and do an over and under. Over 80.

Who loses the most money if the answer is NONE?

Like to see a one paragraph summary of what the problem is.

Ok, here is the latest (cutting out the rhetoric) and I'll explain - but it ain't gonna be a paragraph :

The union rejected MLB's latest proposal for a 76-game season at 75 percent prorated pay and countered with an 89-game campaign that would include full prorated salary shares. The owners are expected to "swiftly reject" that idea, per Nightengale, and it doesn't seem like there is much willingness to budge on either side. It's about a $900 million gap, all told.

So the problem is, back a pretty good while ago the union and team owners agreed to pro-rate salaries on a per game basis.

But now that it's obvious there will be little or no fans - the owners don't want that. They want more. Hence you see the "76 game season at 75 percent prorated pay".

If the owners had said 76 game season with prorated pay, the union would accept. But the owners do not want full prorated pay. Back awhile ago the union proposed lots of games (114 at full prorated pay) to make up that money to the owners that way with the players getting full prorated pay - but the owners said no (they are afraid that they would end up not being able to get that many in).

Hey, I think I did pretty good keeping it THIS short.

Nice job, TFIR

So if there are no games, players receive zero. Are their contracts extended? Does it count towards service time?

If there are no games, owners receive zero from broadcast rights, ticket sales, concessions. They still have expenses such as staffing, insurance and facility maintenance.



Lose, lose.

seagull wrote:Nice job, TFIR

So if there are no games, players receive zero. Are their contracts extended? Does it count towards service time?

If there are no games, owners receive zero from broadcast rights, ticket sales, concessions. They still have expenses such as staffing, insurance and facility maintenance.



Lose, lose.

Service time is granted this year period. Bad news for us Lindor owners.

Now wish we would have traded him last winter!!

On a side note - read it and weep MLB!!

The Wimbledon tennis tournament had the foresight to buy around £1.5 million (US$1.9 million) per year in pandemic insurance following the SARS outbreak in 2003, said GlobalData in a recent bulletin.

Paying out roughly £25.5 million (US$31.7 million) in premiums over that 17-year period, Wimbledon is set to receive an insurance payout of around £114 million (US$142 million) for this year’s cancelled tournament, “making it a very sensible investment,” said Ben Carey-Evans, insurance analyst at GlobalData, the London-based platform that provides data analytics and expert analysis about the world’s largest industries.

Update on this one:


MLB commissioner Rob Manfred said in an interview on MLB Network Wednesday that "We're going to play baseball in 2020. 100 percent."


"The best thing for our sport is to reach a negotiated agreement with the MLBPA," Manfred said. The commissioner added that "if it has to be in that March 26 agreement, so be it."

The March 26 agreement he's referencing gives him the ability to schedule a season with a number of games of his choosing, a right he fully plans on exercising if MLB and the MLBPA aren't able to bridge the gap on economic issues.

Manfred noted that players' concerns around health have mostly been resolved, so it appears it will all come down to the financials at this point.

MLB's last offer was for 76 games at 75 percent prorated pay, which the MLBPA countered with an 89-game season with full prorated salaries. If Manfred implements a schedule himself, the season is expected to be around 50 games, with the players getting their full prorated pay.

can they possibly fit in 80 games? They can't start a season until mid July can they?

Of course that depends on how far they go into the autumn. And perhaps at some point you switch games to more southerly locations?

If you look at some of the ideas, as well as some of what the NBA is doing, just remember that this situation is just begging for innovations - so things may be quite different this time around.

If they're looking for innovation, they could include 7 inning double headers.

seagull wrote:If they're looking for innovation, they could include 7 inning double headers.

Yes, and I'm pretty sure that's been mentioned.

MLB's latest proposal to the players includes a guarantee of 70% of player's salaries that increases to 80% if there's a postseason.


One of the things the media has done poorly throughout the back and forth between the MLB and MLBPA is report MLB's proposals as if they're really guaranteeing the salaries they've proposed.

This new pact at least takes a step forward in that regard; the previous one guaranteed players only 50% of their prorated salaries if the postseason was cancelled. Still, this isn't the deal the MLBPA wants; the players believe they're owed a prorated 100% of the salaries they'd previously negotiated.

They'll probably need to back off that somewhat in order to avoid MLB mandating a 48-game season. They've yet to be supplied with any good reason why they should, however.

Today's reports seem to say a token 50=game season is what we're going to get.

Reason?

So that they can pay the players the least amount possible.

AND, still preserve the cash cow - the playoffs.

do you think much of anyone is going to watch?