Will a possible MLB lockout in 2027 matter to you?
 

With the current MLB-MLBPA Collective Bargaining Agreement expiring at the end of the 2026 season, there has been a lot of chatter about a likely lockout of the 2027 season. This will have potentially grave consequences for those who work in the industry. But if you're a fan of the sport or a dealer of MLB-licensed trading cards -- as most on Blowout are -- will it ultimately matter to you if most or all of the 2027 is lost?

I feel like the answer should be no, in general, for dealers. Most could fairly easily pivot to other kinds of cards, whether it be other sports or Pokemon. But obviously, for those who rely exclusively on new baseball product or the annual hype cycles of MLB rookies and MVP candidates to sell cards, a lockout would probably be very impactful to their sales.

If you're coming at this issue from the perspective of fan, I also think a lockout shouldn't be a big deal. We lost 102 games during the 2020 season and it ultimately didn't seem to impact fans long-term. It would suck to not have a season to watch, but knowing there will be games the following season would be reassuring. And seeing the big-spending Dodgers dominating the rest of the league the last couple of seasons maybe shows it's time for the economics of the sport to be restructured so there can be more competitive balance.

So, am I way off in my assessment and a lockout would be a huge deal for you? Or am I right, and it will won't be a big deal and most everyone in the hobby will be able to adjust?

Yes. It looks like it will be inevitable and I think it’s going to hurt the sport.

Will you post here less if there’s a lockout?

Eh, it’s all just entertainment. I’ll live.

[QUOTE=BostonNut;20061231]Eh, it’s all just entertainment. I’ll live.[/QUOTE]

And unlike 1994, there are so many other forms of entertainment to pass the time. Losing a season won't be the end of the world -- people will adjust and anticipate the return of games the following year.

[QUOTE=NYBBFAN;20061230]Will you post here less if there’s a lockout?[/QUOTE]

I feel like I would post more, at least initially -- it would be a big shake-up of things and something worth discussing. I post in other sections of the site, so I don't need MLB games or new baseball card releases to have something to talk about on BO.

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061238]I feel like I would post more, at least initially -- it would be a big shake-up of things and something worth discussing. I post in other sections of the site, so I don't need MLB games or new baseball card releases to have something to talk about on BO.[/QUOTE]

Is a lockout going to prevent new baseball card releases?

[QUOTE=Twalk1975;20061244]Is a lockout going to prevent new baseball card releases?[/QUOTE]

I think so, no? Aren't the rights tied up with the CBA?

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061236]And unlike 1994, there are so many other forms of entertainment to pass the time. Losing a season won't be the end of the world -- people will adjust and anticipate the return of games the following year.[/QUOTE]

People adjusted in 1994. I don’t think the suicide rate went up too much during the strike. People deal with parents and children dying, doesn’t mean it doesn’t suck.
Can you arrive at some kinda point?

[QUOTE=carlo16;20061251]Can you arrive at some kinda point?[/QUOTE]

My point ultimately is, even though many fans and dealers are fretting a possible lockout, it may not be a big deal. They will be able to adjust to the new circumstances. Losing 102 games during the 2020 season showed the game can survive a loss of a big chunk of a season -- maybe a full season. Fans and hobbyists will be ready to welcome the league back the following year, if it comes to that.

I’ll still be collecting!

[QUOTE=hermanotarjeta;20061260]I’ll still be collecting![/QUOTE]

Right? There are so many cards in existence to chase -- one year of no new releases isn't going to kill the baseball card hobby.

Depends on the final outcome to me. If progress is made to make the economics of the game more equitable through a re-negotiated CBA then I am fine with it.

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061261]Right? There are so many cards in existence to chase -- one year of no new releases isn't going to kill the baseball card hobby.[/QUOTE]

Maybe fanatics will finally catch up!

They can release all the remaining 2025 and 2026 products during the 2027 lockout, then start 2028 from scratch but on schedule again.

[QUOTE=sheetskout;20061262]Depends on the final outcome to me. If progress is made to make the economics of the game more equitable through a re-negotiated CBA then I am fine with it.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, if the end result makes the loss of games worth it, most fans will be understanding. If it's just the owners and players bickering and playing a game of chicken, but ultimately the status quo remains and there is not much improvement to the sport, fans will be bitter and resentful.

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061259]My point ultimately is, even though many fans and dealers are fretting a possible lockout, it may not be a big deal. They will be able to adjust to the new circumstances. Losing 102 games during the 2020 season showed the game can survive a loss of a big chunk of a season -- maybe a full season. Fans and hobbyists will be ready to welcome the league back the following year, if it comes to that.[/QUOTE]

Yeah because people had a lot of other entertainment options in 2020. I loved staring out my window and going for walks around the block trying to avoid other people.

[QUOTE=hermanotarjeta;20061264]Maybe fanatics will finally catch up!

They can release all the remaining 2025 and 2026 products during the 2027 lockout, then start 2028 from scratch but on schedule again.[/QUOTE]

I like it; I like it. A restart might be just what Topps and this hobby need.

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061238][B]I feel like I would post more[/B], at least initially -- it would be a big shake-up of things and something worth discussing. I post in other sections of the site, so I don't need MLB games or new baseball card releases to have something to talk about on BO.[/QUOTE]


I am very much in the anti-strike camp. The players and owners must come to an agreement.

At the same time, I hope you revisit your other interests more frequently.

[QUOTE=carlo16;20061271]Yeah because people had a lot of other entertainment options in 2020. I loved staring out my window and going for walks around the block trying to avoid other people.[/QUOTE]

Streaming services exploded during that time. The lockdowns were bad for everyone -- especially children -- but we still found a way to pass the time. The hobby also exploded in popularity during that time, if you remember.

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061277]Streaming services exploded during that time. The lockdowns were bad for everyone -- especially children -- but we still found a way to pass the time. The hobby also exploded in popularity during that time, if you remember.[/QUOTE]

Yeah because people were trapped in their homes.

Going grocery shopping was like going on vacation. You’re strange.

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061248]I think so, no? Aren't the rights tied up with the CBA?[/QUOTE]

I do not know. I'm guessing there are separate agreements with both MLB and the MLBPA. Not sure if its tied to the CBA or not.

I would hope both sides learned from 1994.

Yes. I want to see Juanny and judge get to 500 homers.

[QUOTE=Twalk1975;20061285]I do not know. I'm guessing there are separate agreements with both MLB and the MLBPA. Not sure if its tied to the CBA or not.[/QUOTE]

I think you're right -- it won't impact new releases. It will obviously prevent any new players from having cards made, though, as there won't be any debuts during the lockout. So, any new releases will be based on the previous season's players.

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061314]I think you're right -- it won't impact new releases. It will obviously prevent any new players from having cards made, though, as there won't be any debuts during the lockout. So, any new releases will be based on the previous season's players.[/QUOTE]

I suppose it will be interesting to watch next year if Topps plays with the rookie/call up thing in anticipation of a lockout.

[QUOTE=bmattioli;20061291]I would hope both sides learned from 1994.[/QUOTE]

That was practically a lifetime ago when circumstances were very different. Also, that was a players strike in the middle of season, which the owners will prevent by having a lockout before the season -- the players won't be able to leverage a playoff race in their negotiations; no rug pull.

I think fans will be a lot more understanding this time around -- they'll know the owners and players will need to hash out their differences so the sport can be better in the long run.

If you love baseball, how could it not matter?

[QUOTE=bmattioli;20061291]I would hope both sides learned from 1994.[/QUOTE]

If we as humans are great at anything, it's forgetting history and reliving it. That was 30+ years ago -- there's probably very few people in baseball that even remember that.

[QUOTE=JohnnyHatesJazz;20061294]Yes. I want to see Juanny and judge get to 500 homers.[/QUOTE]

This is the biggest thing for me, the counting stats that will be lost.

[QUOTE=finfangfan;20061228]Yes. It looks like it will be inevitable and I think it’s going to hurt the sport.[/QUOTE]


How is it looking like it’s inevitable?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[QUOTE=SaveMeTheGum;20061352]If you love baseball, how could it not matter?[/QUOTE]

But is your love of the game unconditional? Are you fine with the large competitive imbalance in the game between the big market teams and the smaller market teams? I think a lot of fans want to see changes to the economics of the game and are willing to sacrifice games to do it.

It seems like now is the time to push for big changes to the economics of the game. And now is the time for fans to be understanding about what needs to be done.

I'm dreading the lockout but it seems inevitable at this point which is tragic considering the time they've had to figure everything out

[QUOTE=sheetskout;20061262]Depends on the final outcome to me. If progress is made to make the economics of the game more equitable through a re-negotiated CBA then I am fine with it.[/QUOTE]

This x100. If getting the Yankees, Dodgers and Mets on a more level playing field with the rest of the teams, then I am all for it.

[QUOTE=itsbaytime;20061484]This x100. If getting the Yankees, Dodgers and Mets on a more level playing field with the rest of the teams, then I am all for it.[/QUOTE]

More level playing field? 4 playoff teams this year are in 23-26 place in terms of revenue contributed to payroll. Two of those teams are Boston and Chicago, big markets. Teams are making money and not spending it. Brewers are about to trade Freddy Peralta, after just making the NLCS.

I’m a Yankee fan, they haven’t won anything in 16 years, next year will be 40 for the Mets. The cheap owners need to spend more money. A salary floor is needed more than a salary cap.

As a baseball I would hate it. But as a collector it could drop the price of cards I am looking for in the short term. But COVID really messed up a few prospects in delaying the career starts and development. So overall I would not want a strike or lockout.

[QUOTE=NickyCards;20061562]More level playing field? 4 playoff teams this year are in 23-26 place in terms of revenue contributed to payroll. Two of those teams are Boston and Chicago, big markets. Teams are making money and not spending it. Brewers are about to trade Freddy Peralta, after just making the NLCS.

I’m a Yankee fan, they haven’t won anything in 16 years, next year will be 40 for the Mets. The cheap owners need to spend more money. A salary floor is needed more than a salary cap.[/QUOTE]

Both are essential as well as revenue sharing. Making the playoffs doesn't matter, it is winning championships. Last year the World Series was the #1 and #2 markets. This year it is #2 and #6. Milwaukee is about to trade their best pitcher because they can't afford to keep him without a cap and revenue sharing.

Was the 2022 lockout thread deleted? I can't find it. I was just gonna copy all the replies and save everyone time. Spoiler alert: they didn't lose any games.

[QUOTE=rats60;20061594]Both are essential as well as revenue sharing. Making the playoffs doesn't matter, it is winning championships. Last year the World Series was the #1 and #2 markets. This year it is #2 and #6. Milwaukee is about to trade their best pitcher because they can't afford to keep him without a cap and revenue sharing.[/QUOTE]

The NBA seems to have more championship parity than MLB now:

NBA champion -- market size ([URL="https://hoop-social.com/nba-team-market-size-rankings/"]source[/URL]):

2021: Milwaukee Bucks -- 25th
2022: Golden State Warriors -- 7th
2023: Denver Nuggets -- 15th
2024: Boston Celtics -- 11th
2025: Oklahoma City Thunder -- 26th


MLB champion -- market size ([URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/17h9byq/mlbs_official_market_score_for_each_team_and_the/"]source[/URL]):

2021: Atlanta Braves -- 14th
2022: Houston Astros -- 15th
2023: Texas Rangers -- 13th
2024: Los Angeles Dodgers -- 3rd
2025: Los Angeles Dodgers or Toronto Blue Jays -- 3rd or 7th

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061617]The NBA seems to have more championship parity than MLB now:

NBA champion -- market size ([URL="https://hoop-social.com/nba-team-market-size-rankings/"]source[/URL]):

2021: Milwaukee Bucks -- 25th
2022: Golden State Warriors -- 7th
2023: Denver Nuggets -- 15th
2024: Boston Celtics -- 11th
2025: Oklahoma City Thunder -- 26th


MLB champion -- market size ([URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/17h9byq/mlbs_official_market_score_for_each_team_and_the/"]source[/URL]):

2021: Atlanta Braves -- 14th
2022: Houston Astros -- 15th
2023: Texas Rangers -- 13th
2024: Los Angeles Dodgers -- 3rd
2025: Los Angeles Dodgers or Toronto Blue Jays -- 3rd or 7th[/QUOTE]

Since 1980 I think 14 different nba teams have won titles. Sounds like parity.

I just can't wait for all of the comments on here about millionaires fighting with billionaires. :D

It would suck to have no baseball games for a while to watch on TV. It would really sick for those players that will be close to milestones.

But life will go on.

[QUOTE=auctionjmm;20061612]Was the 2022 lockout thread deleted? I can't find it. I was just gonna copy all the replies and save everyone time. Spoiler alert: they didn't lose any games.[/QUOTE]

That was a classic Mwash thread, and he just kept posting everywhere about how there would be no baseball at all that year. Then he was wrong - and disappeared

*******[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061617]The NBA seems to have more championship parity than MLB now:

NBA champion -- market size ([URL="https://hoop-social.com/nba-team-market-size-rankings/"]source[/URL]):

2021: Milwaukee Bucks -- 25th
2022: Golden State Warriors -- 7th
2023: Denver Nuggets -- 15th
2024: Boston Celtics -- 11th
2025: Oklahoma City Thunder -- 26th


MLB champion -- market size ([URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/17h9byq/mlbs_official_market_score_for_each_team_and_the/"]source[/URL]):

2021: Atlanta Braves -- 14th
2022: Houston Astros -- 15th
2023: Texas Rangers -- 13th
2024: Los Angeles Dodgers -- 3rd
2025: Los Angeles Dodgers or Toronto Blue Jays -- 3rd or 7th[/QUOTE]

Using population in their Metro area, Braves 8th, Astros 5th, Rangers 4th, Dodgers 2nd, Blue Jays 6th. The Braves with 6.4 million are the smallest champion market for MLB. Compare that with Milwaukee with 1.6 million people in their Metro area. One WS Champion in the last 35 years from the bottom 10 markets. That is why small markets don't spend.

[QUOTE=livfreely;20061440]How is it looking like it’s inevitable?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]

[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/Ox6aw2q_d.webp?maxwidth=760&fidelity=grand[/IMG]

[QUOTE=NickyCards;20061562]More level playing field? 4 playoff teams this year are in 23-26 place in terms of revenue contributed to payroll. Two of those teams are Boston and Chicago, big markets. Teams are making money and not spending it. Brewers are about to trade Freddy Peralta, after just making the NLCS.

I’m a Yankee fan, they haven’t won anything in 16 years, next year will be 40 for the Mets. The cheap owners need to spend more money. A salary floor is needed more than a salary cap.[/QUOTE]

ALL THIS!

[QUOTE=NickyCards;20061562]More level playing field? 4 playoff teams this year are in 23-26 place in terms of revenue contributed to payroll. Two of those teams are Boston and Chicago, big markets. Teams are making money and not spending it. Brewers are about to trade Freddy Peralta, after just making the NLCS.

I’m a Yankee fan, they haven’t won anything in 16 years, next year will be 40 for the Mets. The cheap owners need to spend more money. A salary floor is needed more than a salary cap.[/QUOTE]

There needs to be both a salary cap and a salary floor for either to really be effective. Neither is needed more than the other. Both are necessary equally.

And showing that the big market teams don't win all the time and that some small market teams do well isn't proof that a salary cap isn't needed to fix the economic disparity in the league. It's just an indictment of the big market teams' ability to do well with the advantages they have (and a little about the random nature of baseball). Give that same Brewers front office the resources of the Yankees and you wouldn't see postseason flameouts. :coffee:

It would prevent a dodgers 4 peat after they up their payroll to 900M.

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061270]Yeah, if the end result makes the loss of games worth it, most fans will be understanding. If it's just the owners and players bickering and playing a game of chicken, but ultimately the status quo remains and there is not much improvement to the sport, fans will be bitter and resentful.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=sheetskout;20061262]Depends on the final outcome to me. If progress is made to make the economics of the game more equitable through a re-negotiated CBA then I am fine with it.[/QUOTE]

Agreed with this, depends on what is decided. If we get 2 expansion teams with it (hopefully one in NC so I can go when Cleveland comes to town) along with forcing clubs to spend more. I could careless on what the bigger markets do. However I think how the NFL does it (NBA is too driven by players forcing trades to bigger markets), if MLB can get closer to that then it would be great.

I think you still need the regional broadcasting however they need to make more primetime games on FOX, ESPN, ABC, and other platforms. The one thing they have going for them is the streaming app in how it is pretty easy to watch all your teams games. Once they remove the blackout restrictions, even increasing the price $50 to do it, then that will be huge. They could easily have dedicated timeslots for games, like:

Monday night: ESPN
Tuesday night: ABC
Wednesday night: FOX
Thursday night: Netflix
Friday night: Apple TV
Saturday night: NBC
Sunday night: FOX

Throw in some day games too for the networks, rotate the teams and still allow the ability to stream through the app for those games, even if you force the broadcast to be that network. That all needs to be shared so then they can force a salary floor for teams and they can't cry on lack of revenue.

If it doesn't result in floor, cap, shared tv revenue, and international draft its a waste of time. Oh and more games on network tv, nobody watches scripted shows anymore.

Also need to get older owners out too, the issue is there are quite a few who bought the team for like $100M range and in the 1990s-early 2000s. The issue is those were just multi-millionaires who are only billionaires due to the value of the franchise vs. these newer owners.


[url]https://www.afootinthebox.com/peter/every-mlb-teams-purchase-price-and-value-today[/url]

I don’t care.

For a cards and stat perspective, I collect older ones, so it won't affect me and there were many players in their prime going to war that lost years of counting stats. I feel like there is something that always affects these players from accumulating stats with lockouts, wars, pandemics, even injuries back 50+ years ago that players now can take a year or less to bounce back when it would have been career ending.

[QUOTE=Raleigh504;20061713]Also need to get older owners out too, the issue is there are quite a few who bought the team for like $100M range and in the 1990s-early 2000s. The issue is those were just multi-millionaires who are only billionaires due to the value of the franchise vs. these newer owners.


[url]https://www.afootinthebox.com/peter/every-mlb-teams-purchase-price-and-value-today[/url][/QUOTE]

You're not going get rid of owners, but if the media money was more evenly distributed in conjunction with a cap and floor like the nfl you'll have more parity. They could also have some version of bird rites in mlb where you can sign guys you drafted to higher amounts and not have it count vs the cap or something.

Not fan of it and will be sad if games are missed

[QUOTE=JRX;20061722]You're not going get rid of owners, but if the media money was more evenly distributed in conjunction with a cap and floor like the nfl you'll have more parity. They could also have some version of bird rites in mlb where you can sign guys you drafted to higher amounts and not have it count vs the cap or something.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, maybe with years and not $ amount. I do hate the NBA has structured pay. Also would immediately start the clock on drafted players and it will depend on where they are drafted for the years (high school, vs. college and even the year in college too).

Nope Covid was worse even leagues playing felt like it had been cancelled.

They should be negotiating now behind the scenes and spare us of the drama to come. When owners and labor leaders start running to the mics just stick a pitchfork through my brain.

[QUOTE=OhioLawyerF5;20061685]There needs to be both a salary cap and a salary floor for either to really be effective. Neither is needed more than the other. Both are necessary equally.

And showing that the big market teams don't win all the time and that some small market teams do well isn't proof that a salary cap isn't needed to fix the economic disparity in the league. It's just an indictment of the big market teams' ability to do well with the advantages they have (and a little about the random nature of baseball). Give that same Brewers front office the resources of the Yankees and you wouldn't see postseason flameouts. :coffee:[/QUOTE]

This. Whatever team ends up winning, you can not say the teams that spend the most don't have a huge advantage going into the season. How many of those years did the Yankees and Dodgers make the playoffs? The teams that spend the most have a luxury that smaller payroll teams don't have. I do think we need a salary floor as well. In the NBA and NFL teams spend very similar amounts all the way around because they, basically, share a lot of the money. The MLB needs to figure out a way to make this happen. Small market teams can not continue to just be a feeder system for the big market teams. I know some owners are cheap, but the system is way beyond broken when the Dodgers are spending 8x of the smallest team. Are they proud of themselves for winning it all when they have such a huge payroll? Congrats.

[QUOTE=itsbaytime;20061778]This. Whatever team ends up winning, you can not say the teams that spend the most don't have a huge advantage going into the season. How many of those years did the Yankees and Dodgers make the playoffs? The teams that spend the most have a luxury that smaller payroll teams don't have. I do think we need a salary floor as well. In the NBA and NFL teams spend very similar amounts all the way around because they, basically, share a lot of the money. The MLB needs to figure out a way to make this happen. Small market teams can not continue to just be a feeder system for the big market teams. I know some owners are cheap, but the system is way beyond broken when the Dodgers are spending 8x of the smallest team. Are they proud of themselves for winning it all when they have such a huge payroll? Congrats.[/QUOTE]

You're actually really close with the 8x. i think it ended up just under 7x, but Dodgers total tax bill is about 500M more than Marlins. Remove the deferrals and they're probably at round 700M which would get you to 8x lol.

I understand the positions of all involved. I also think taking another season away from Sho, Judge, Soto, Acuna, Skenes, et al. would be a small tragedy. I'd probably pour my attention into the NPB season if there is a prolonged MLB outage.

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20061462]But is your love of the game unconditional? Are you fine with the large competitive imbalance in the game between the big market teams and the smaller market teams? I think a lot of fans want to see changes to the economics of the game and are willing to sacrifice games to do it.

It seems like now is the time to push for big changes to the economics of the game. And now is the time for fans to be understanding about what needs to be done.[/QUOTE]

I'm a capitalist. Competitive imbalance is the nature of the world. I don't think a lot of people outside of (and inside of) these markets want to see the Dbacks play the Rays in the World Series. And it's not always a big market/small market issue. Some owners will do anything to win, and some would just rather milk their cash cow. You can't legislate that. They probably shouldn't put teams in cities that can't/won't compete.

[QUOTE=finfangfan;20061676][IMG]https://i.imgur.com/Ox6aw2q_d.webp?maxwidth=760&fidelity=grand[/IMG][/QUOTE]


They are literally their own worst enemies!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah… I do think this could potentially tank the sport for a couple years. It took Ripken 2131 and McGwire/Sosa to bring back fans after the 1994 debacle.

The other issue on the horizon is what Banana Ball changes will they end up agreeing to in order to make the game more “exciting” after the lockout ends. We will probably end up getting a golden batter rule.

[QUOTE=BabaORiley;20061788]I understand the positions of all involved. I also think taking another season away from Sho, Judge, Soto, Acuna, Skenes, et al. would be a small tragedy. [B]I'd probably pour my attention into the NPB season if there is a prolonged MLB outage[/B].[/QUOTE]

I think you're the one who turned me on to Murakami...

Would they still have minor league baseball?
If yes I'd live
If no I'd die.

[QUOTE=Tarvan;20062206]Would they still have minor league baseball?
If yes I'd live
If no I'd die.[/QUOTE]

Here is the Google AI answer for the 1994 lockout. Not sure if things changed 30 years later…

“Yes, minor league baseball continued to play during the 1994 MLB lockout. The strike did not affect the minor leagues because it started after their season had ended, and it did not involve the players' union in the same way that the MLB Players Association was involved. Minor league games were not canceled, and minor leaguers were not impacted by the MLB work stoppage.
Minor League Baseball was not affected by the 1994 MLB lockout: The strike began on August 11, 1994, which was after the regular minor league season had concluded for most teams.
No MLB replacement players: The strike did not lead to the cancellation of any minor league games or the need for MLB replacement players in the minors.
Minor leaguers were not on strike: The MLB Players Association did not have jurisdiction over minor league players, so the strike had no impact on their playing status. ”

[QUOTE=finfangfan;20062214]Here is the Google AI answer for the 1994 lockout. Not sure if things changed 30 years later…

”[/QUOTE]

The reason I wonder if it has changed is MILB is now unionized. Not sure if that would make a difference..

[QUOTE=SaveMeTheGum;20061832]I'm a capitalist. Competitive imbalance is the nature of the world. I don't think a lot of people outside of (and inside of) these markets want to see the Dbacks play the Rays in the World Series. And it's not always a big market/small market issue. Some owners will do anything to win, and some would just rather milk their cash cow. You can't legislate that. They probably shouldn't put teams in cities that can't/won't compete.[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying there shouldn't be a natural competitive imbalance. I think fans generally understand that big market teams have a financial advantage over smaller market teams and that advantage should afford them the ability to spend more on their payroll. The problem is the degree of the financial imbalance -- it's stark.

Capitalism needs regulation to ensure the common good -- we don't want a dystopian society where wealth is concentrated within a small percentage of the population and business is concentrated within a small number of businesses. We want equality of opportunity. We want healthy competition. Otherwise, why even try?

I think MLB needs both a hard cap and floor. I think big market teams like the Dodgers need to be prevented from spending as much on their Competitive Balance Tax as the Brewers do on payroll. On the flip side, I think teams like the A's and Pirates need to spend a lot more on their payrolls so their fans can believe they have a chance to compete with bigger market teams. That will require more revenue sharing, but it will also require a payroll floor.

The competitive balance in MLB doesn't need to be flat, but it needs to be more balanced than it is. We don't need socialism, but we need proper regulation to ensure the common good of the sport -- the fans who support the league deserve it.

[QUOTE=JRX;20061709]If it doesn't result in floor, cap, shared tv revenue, and international draft its a waste of time. Oh and more games on network tv, nobody watches scripted shows anymore.[/QUOTE]

Yup -- totally agree. The league needs a complete restructuring -- the collapse of the RSN model necessitates it.

[QUOTE=ThatGuyPal;20061755]Nope Covid was worse even leagues playing felt like it had been cancelled.[/QUOTE]

Hmm -- this is a good point; fans weren't allowed to attend games.

In many ways it was a lost season.

[QUOTE=ottobord;20061769]They should be negotiating now behind the scenes and spare us of the drama to come. When owners and labor leaders start running to the mics just stick a pitchfork through my brain.[/QUOTE]

I think the only way a deal will get done is with a lockout or strike, otherwise, there will be no urgency to get a deal done.

Neither the owners or players are going to have the sympathy of the fans, so it's best that they avoid the turning to the media.

In 2021 people were crying their eyes out about a n impending long work stoppage, and although there was an offseason lockout, zero regular season games were missed. Here we go again.

This far in advance, both sides are posturing, and they will do that for a long while to come. But an agreement will get done and most likely zero regular season games will be missed. There's too much money to be made on all sides for them to let it get into the season.

As long as the minor leagues are still playing, I won't be concerned. A salary cap of some kind needs to happen

I was talking about this with a friend the other day. Would MLB play a full season with replacement players?

[QUOTE=fabiani12333;20062390]I think the only way a deal will get done is with a lockout or strike, otherwise, there will be no urgency to get a deal done.

Neither the owners or players are going to have the sympathy of the fans, so it's best that they avoid the turning to the media.[/QUOTE]

You're right. Most likely scenario is we miss a week of Spring Training.

[QUOTE=ottobord;20062673]You're right. Most likely scenario is we miss a week of Spring Training.[/QUOTE]

Most likely scenario is we miss the whole season. The owners want a cap like the other sports. I don't see the small market owners taking less than that. The players are going to fight hard against it.

[QUOTE=ottobord;20062673]You're right. Most likely scenario is we miss a week of Spring Training.[/QUOTE]

For how much drama there is for this lockout in particular I think this is brewing up to be a much longer one. Hope I am wrong.