Exactly. THAT’S collective bargaining. Owners want a cap? Put something substantial on the table: real revenue sharing, a meaningful floor, higher minimums and better benefits. Players give something, owners give something, and hopefully the entire sport gets richer. That I can negotiate. 😂
@bftd_ed@DanClarkSports@MLB@MLBPA 😂 A salary cap doesn’t GIVE teams the same amount of money. It limits what they can SPEND on payroll. Those are completely different things. Revenue sharing addresses financial disparity. A cap restricts labor costs. Calling me dumb while confusing the two is spectacular.
@OhioFloridaAriz@DanClarkSports@MLB@MLBPA “You’re clueless” isn’t an argument. 😂 You compared driver pay to engine regulations, then invented my position on women’s sports. I answered both and you answered neither. “I’m out of hope for you” is just a dramatic way of saying “I’ve got nothing.” ⚾️
@CryBagDusty@JimCosta_ “Tanner Bibee is good but not God level…which is against us.” 😂😂 That might be the greatest accidental compliment from a Tigers fan ever. Don’t worry Dustin, I’m sure Bibee appreciates your confidence in him🤣
@BravoRange@DanClarkSports@MLB@MLBPA That’s the myth. Ticket prices aren’t calculated by adding up player salaries they’re priced at what fans will pay. If MLB capped payroll tomorrow, you really think owners would say “Great, let’s lower tickets and beer”? 😂 The savings go to ownership, not the turnstile.
@DadintheLand@GuardsJoey Now THAT’S a negotiation. 😂 If owners want a cap, players should demand a real floor, much stronger revenue sharing, higher minimums and better benefits in return. Nobody gets everything. A CBA is supposed to be a trade—not one side handing the other a blank check.
We already have a luxury tax. The problem is the penalties aren’t painful enough. Make repeat offenders lose meaningful revenue-sharing benefits and/or draft capital, with escalating penalties. Then add a real payroll floor. Put actual teeth on BOTH ends instead of jumping straight to a hard cap.
You just made my argument. 😂 The problem in your example is one BUSINESS has more money than the other not that the EMPLOYEES earn too much. Fix the financial disparity between the businesses. Capping what the workers can earn doesn’t magically give the smaller business more money.
@PaulCla07383591@WillErazo440@finkn23 Now THAT is the actual negotiation. A cap/apron isn’t something players should give away—it’s what owners have to BUY with a meaningful floor, substantially more revenue sharing and guarantees that grow the player pool. If owners want their carrot, the price better be enormous.
😂 IndyCar limits the CAR, not the driver’s earnings. MLB already regulates equipment and rules. And the “men in women’s sports” line? Thanks for proving you’re out of baseball arguments—you had to invent my position on an unrelated issue to keep swinging. That’s called striking out.
@DadintheLand@GuardsJoey Yep, “Fix the revenue disparity” is the easy answer. HOW you get 30 owners to agree on who gives up what is the billion-dollar question. This CBA has to deal with MLB as it actually exists, not the perfect revenue system we wish existed.
Possible? Anything’s possible. “Very plausible”? 😂 Now you need evidence that owners are intentionally sacrificing wins and revenue as part of a coordinated plan to manufacture support for a cap. That’s not an economic argument anymorethat’s a conspiracy theory looking for evidence.
NFL/NBA/NHL didn’t just slap a cap on players and call it competitive balance. Their systems tie caps to shared league revenue and collectively bargained economics. If MLB wants their cap, bring their revenue structure too. You don’t get to copy the ceiling and ignore everything underneath it.
Fair point sports already manipulate the “free market” for competitive balance. But that doesn’t automatically make a hard cap the answer. A real floor + stronger revenue sharing forces every owner to compete without artificially limiting what players can earn. Why not start there?
@tobyglanville@Smash_Johnson78@DanClarkSports@MLB@MLBPA Exactly. Nobody expects players to WANT a cap. 😂 The question is whether MLB needs one. If it does, then negotiate the trade: cap + meaningful floor + greater revenue sharing. Players give something, owners give something. That’s literally collective bargaining.
@DadintheLand@GuardsJoey That’s the billion-dollar question. 😂 “Fix the revenue disparity” sounds great HOW? You need the Dodgers, Yankees, etc. to voluntarily give up more local revenue while getting 30 owners AND the players to agree. If it were that simple, MLB would’ve fixed it years ago.
@tobyglanville@DanClarkSports@MLB@MLBPA 😂 You just proved my point with “$0M instead of 60M.” If the market says he’s worth $60M but a cap limits teams to 50M, you just suppressed his market value by 10M. Whether you “feel sorry” for him is irrelevant. Why should the owner keep it instead?
@Smash_Johnson78@DanClarkSports@MLB@MLBPA You’re describing a union wage scale. If your union literally prohibits EVERY employer from paying an exceptional worker above X, congratulations you’ve explained exactly why MLB players don’t want one. Why would they voluntarily cap their own market value?
That’s literally why the owners need the PLAYERS to agree to a cap. 😂 It doesn’t have to cap one player’s salary directly. Cap what every team can spend and you restrict the market bidding for his services. If it didn’t limit player earnings, why would the MLBPA have to agree to it?
@MooseTime@Paulsy01@DanClarkSports@MLB@MLBPA 😂 If MLB owners could secretly coordinate 30 billionaires that well, they wouldn’t need a salary cap. They’d already have solved every problem in baseball.