I don't really think that is going to happen....

Another issue here is if it affects the cap going up like teams prepped for there could be massive problems. If the cap were to stay the same or barely rise or even fall a team like the Falcons is going to be 60 million dollars over the cap.
[Reply]

If the players take less, they're screwed forever
[Reply]

I have never understood anyone siding with a rich and spoiled and overpaid athlete (sic) over a freaking billionaire.

Maybe it's just hard to comprehend what being a billionaire is like? But being an athlete who is poor suddenly getting tens of millions of dollars is more relatable?

Anyway the idea that players should take less but take on all the physical risk is asinine.
[Reply]

Make a temporary bargaining agreement. I know the owners are rich, but there is no reason to expect them to break even or make very little (for them).

Everyone should expect to earn less money if no fans are in the stands. Owners, coaches, players, networks. Everyone.
[Reply]

They won't have a choice. The salary cap is based on revenue, so it's either gonna be "everyone agrees to take a pay cut" or "teams are gonna have to cut players like crazy" to get under the cap.
[Reply]

This doesn’t have to be long term. Many businesses have asked employees to take a pay cut to get through. All players giving up 10 or 20 percent and the owners still losing a chunk is the way to keep everyone happy. They are all in this together.
[Reply]

Then they shouldn't play.

If they succumb to the owner's wishes this time around, what's to stop the owners next time?

If a player's salary is $5 million per season but it's reduced to $2.5 million, why would any owner pay more than $2.5 million for that player in the future?

These guys need to band together and follow their agent's and MLBPA's leadership, not kowtow to people that will only take advantage of them for their own benefit.
[Reply]

Baseball contracts are fully guaranteed so teams can't cut players to increase their available "cap space", which isn't really a salary cap but a Luxury Tax.

MLB is completely different than the NFL.
[Reply]

The CBA is already in place for the next decade, so revenue sharing between the owners and players isn't going to change. Again, the money is gone. The only choice the players have is whether they want to all take a paycut and bear the brunt collectively or let teams decide who is going to be hit hard.
[Reply]

Replying to someone else? I'm not sure what my comment has to do with the MLB.
[Reply]

Major League Baseball contracts are guaranteed, so cutting players will not reduce team payrolls.

MLB doesn't have a salary cap, they have a Competitive Balance Tax or Luxury Tax, so teams can spend as much money as they'd like on players but once they surpass the 2020's Luxury Tax number of $208 million, those teams pay a penalty.

Those teams that carry payrolls above that threshold are taxed on each dollar above the threshold, with the tax rate increasing based on the number of consecutive years a club has exceeded the threshold. A team's Competitive Balance Tax figure is determined using the average annual value of each player's contract on the 40-man roster, plus any additional player benefits.
[Reply]

If MLB players thought they took a PR nuclear hit after the 1994 strike, the PR hit they would take by not playing this season would be apocalyptic by comparison.

It took four years and a (ultimately tainted) home run chase + the sports’ premiere team (the Yankees) becoming a dynasty to get fans back after the 1994 strike.
[Reply]

I don't know anything about the MLB, so I'm just focusing on the NFL. :-)
[Reply]

Kind of a use it or lose it deal. When it call comes down to it, all things being equal (fame, notoriety, getting to do something they love), players would agree to play for an avg US salary if they just HAD TO.

This is different than a normal year in well we want x, y and z in the future. This is a different beast. But sure, if they don't want to play they don't have to. But it would be pretty selfish. Just like it would be selfish for owners to shut it down if they weren't going to have fans because they wouldn't "make as much".

But any person is free to do as they wish.
[Reply]

#BREAKING NEWS: Only 50 percent of individual 2020 Steelers game tickets will be sold to the public because of social distancing guidelines, the team's director of communications says. https://t.co/dnlAT4OmiR

— KDKA (@KDKA) May 22, 2020

[Reply]