Impending CBA negotiations

[RockieBill]

As I've posted elsewhere, I'm hoping that there will be no work stoppage for MLB. In a way, it may be the best thing to happen - just blow the whole thing up and start over. Every since the owners figured out they could get a few pennies out of people to watch the games, the driving force behind the game has been greed. Increasingly corporate ownership and a flat-out militant players union are taking this greed to new and unprecedented levels.

These CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement) negotiations could become very ugly. Virtually every sticking point from the 1994 strike remains in play, and some new items, such as drug (steroid) testing and contraction, could become huge obstacles to an agreement.

Some of the main issues sure to come up are:

Salary caps
Luxury taxes or revenue sharing
The anti-trust exemption
Arbitration
Drug testing
Contraction

Other items that usually raise their ugly head:

Free agency
The amateur draft

Key issues:

Revenue Sharing:

Ownership is pushing a jump from 20 percent to 50 percent in the local revenue shared (local broadcast revenues, gate receipts and concession/merchandise sales). The union proposes an increase to 22.5 percent.

The owners propose a so-called straight pool, which evenly splits the shared revenue (currently about $253 million) equally among all teams. The union favors a split-pool, with the fiscally weakest clubs receiving a greater share.

Luxury Tax:

Ownership proposed a 50 percent tax on payroll dollars teams spend in excess of $98 million annually, but they're now suggesting a lower percentage that would escalate to their target 50 percent. The union remains opposed to what it perceives as a salary cap.

This is just a starting point - I'll post some links that you may find helpful.

Frequently asked questions about the 1994 strike (http://www.baseball1.com/bb-data/q-strike.html) This is almost a must-read, especially for guys like me with bad memories, or some of the younger posters here that may not be aware of what the issues were eight years ago.

The Strike That Will Kill Baseball (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26301-2002Jul4.html) A great article in the Washington Post

Ballpark attendance figures (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/attendance)

MLB Fan Cost Index (http://www.teammarketing.com/fci.cfm?page=fci_mlb2002.cfm)

Market area figures (http://www.nielsenmedia.com/DMAs.html)
3.2 million people in the greater Montreal area (similar to the Phoenix area).
2.48 million people in the greater Toronto area (similar to the St. Louis area).

Edit - just adding links...

[PissedPrincess]

You know Bill, I've been thinking the same thing. I don't WANT a strike, BUT, if a strike would BLOW UP baseball and it would have to start from scratch, I'd be happy.

The game is an absolute mess.:ohno:

[PissedPrincess]

OMG! Those attendance figures are SCARY! Only 3 out of 30 teams have a 90+% attendance rate.

Boston-97.7

San Fran 97.1

Seattle 91.7


:crying2:

[RockieBill]

I agree 100%, PP. A fresh start may be the only thing that could fix baseball.

On the attendance figures - Boston's numbers would no doubt be higher if there were more seats. Cinci's numbers are artificially way down, due to the new park construction.

[Tigers#1]

Could you imagine 9 work stoppages in the last 30 years? Thats almost 1 every 3 years!

[GiveHyzduashot]

I'd probably also take the side to just take some time off and blow it all up.

Honestly, if it meant striking in August plus missing most of next season in order to make this game fair for all the teams (however you'd do that), I'd prefer that over not striking at all and going on as if nothing went wrong.

A few points on what you mentioned, Bill.

Salary cap

In favor of this as long as there is a salary floor as well. Say a $40 million floor and a $100 million cap. Since teams like the Yankees won't be able to get under the cap, institute a luxury tax heavy enough the Yankees care they're over $100 million.

revenue sharing

In favor of this 100%. Pool all the money from a game into one large pool. Maybe the home team gets 60%, the visiting team gets 30%, and the rest is put into a fund to build stadiums so fans don't need to pay for some of the stadium.

I'd also put all the TV deals and radio deals into one large sum and then distribute it equally among however many teams.

Anti-Trust exemption

Can't really comment on this as I don't know much about it.

Drug testing

Definitely a must. The players are in favor of it, a lot of the other sports have it, and steroids are illegal in the US. What else is there to debate?

Contraction

Neutral on this unless other changes are made. Why have a team draft Vlad if they'll just lose him at the end of the season in free agency? Seems pointless to me.

However, if a team does have the resources to retain the player drafted for many seasons unless they choose to trade him, then I'd be for it. Teams like Tampa, Montreal, and Florida just can't support baseball in the current market.

Free agency

Changes needed here, too. Teams just have to be able to produce their own talent and then resign that talent.

I don't know what the answer is though. This needs to be overhauled and started over again from the bare beginning. What do the Expos have to show for the enormous talent they've lost through this system?

The draft

This has been beaten to death before. To put it short and sweet: International draft, draft system like the NBA, teams retaining the rights to college players even during school. If a contract is signed, he forfeits the rest of the scholarship.

[Trots]

I'll only add one thing for the moment. The potential salary floor has to be much higher the $40 million. That figure is not one that would put a competitive team on the field nor would it allow you to re-sign superstars.

To make matters worse, if additional revenue sharing is accepted, those teams that spend only $40 million can pocket the increased revenue. That doesn't improve the situation imo.

Okay, I'm going to add two things. How about instead of a general contraction of teams, why not a merger or two? I think James suggested something like this in the "commissioner" thread. Why not combine Tampa and Florida? Maybe Montreal and Toronto could form one solid franchise. I'm not necessarily against contraction, a draft of players would help the Tigers, but couldn't combining the FLA and Canadian teams keep those clubs reasonably close to their fan base and make for a stronger franchise? Just a thought.

[RockieBill]

I've been trying to get us more information to work with - I should have had this together before starting the topic. Anyway...this is what I was able to find -

Revenue Sharing

Owner's stance:
Local revenue sharing, currently 20%, to rise to 50% during next CBA; revenue sharing money divided equally among all teams, except for $85 million reserved for a discretionary fund administered by the Commissioner

Player's stance:
22.5% of all local revenues to be shared; revenue sharing money to be divided according to current formula, which gives more to lower-revenue clubs; accepts concept of up to a $40 million discretionary fund

Luxury Tax

Owners:
50% on portion of payrolls over $98 million, phased in over the first three years of the agreement

Players:
Opposed in principle to any luxury tax

Minimum Payroll

Owners:
$45 million minimum payroll, possibly computed on a multi-year rolling average; enforcement mechanism unclear

Players:
Unclear

Minimum Salary

Owners:
$285,000 to start, with cost of living increases every two years

Players:
Unclear

Amateur Draft

Owners:
Expanded to cover all amateurs worldwide; draft reduced from 50 to 38 rounds; college players eligible only after fourth year; draft picks tradable; teams which don't sign a player taken in the first three rounds get the same pick next year; playoff teams in the top half of total payroll lose their first-round draft picks

Players:
Draft picks tradable; highest-revenue and most successful teams lose first round draft picks; separate 8-round drafts for U.S. and foreign players

Competitive balance draft

Owners:
8 clubs with worst records over a three-year period allowed to choose players from the roster of 8 postseason qualifiers. Exceptions: clubs in the top half of local revenues can't pick, clubs in the bottom half can't lose players.

Players:
Suggested an unspecified variant of this proposal

Contraction

Owners:
Can unilaterally eliminate teams, but must bargain over the effects of contraction. Want to eliminate two teams for 2003.

Players:
Cannot unilaterally eliminate teams; has filed grievance over aborted attempt to eliminate the Expos and Twins

Discipline

Owners:
Players suspended for on-field misconduct not to be paid during their suspensions (lost grievances on this issue in 1996 and 1997)

Players:
Status quo: suspended players receive full salary

Automatic punishment

Owners:
Automatic fines and suspensions for players who charge the mound, throw punches or leave the bench or bullpen to participate in a brawl

Players:
Opposed

Salary arbitration

Owners:
Eliminated for "Super Two" players (the 17% of players with the most service time, among those with between two and three years in the majors)

Players:
Status quo

Freedom to release arbitration filers

Owners:
Right to release a player, without owing severance, within five days after arbitration figures are exchanged

Players:
Opposed

60/40 rule

Owners:
Clubs forbidden from carrying "debt" equal to more than 40% of their "value," with "debt" defined to include stadium debts and the present value of long-term contracts and "value" presumptively defined as twice the club's revenues minus any revenue sharing payments

Players:
Opposed

Drug testing

Owners:
Mandatory random testing, up to 3x/year, for all federally controlled substances, plus steroids and androstenedione

Players:
Opposed in the past; may reconsider, depending on player sentiment

[rockin500]

In chicagos case the attendance figures are down (88.2%) cuz the weather has been atrocious in april may and parts of june.

sometimes i wish baseball as it is would be blown up, but i dont want to see a stoppage.

[RockieBill]

http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2002/0712/1405135.html

In Friday's negotiating session, the union said for the first time it would agree to a single worldwide draft of amateur players, proposing that it be 16 rounds. In the past, the union advocated a separate draft of players from outside the United States and Canada.

The draft currently is 50 rounds. Owners originally offered to cut it to 40 rounds, then proposed to limit it to 38 rounds.

This is definitely a step in the right direction, I think...many, many more steps to be taken.

[Trots]

Bill, I think I'm about ready for revolutionary thoughts. Like creating a Premier League with the twelve or so teams that can pay out the big money and a "B" League for the others.

How about a partnership between players and owners? Owners actually reveal the books, players salaries are, in part, based on the health of the league (attendance, tv ratings, merchandise sales, etc...). If the league falters, the players take the hit along with the owners.

Maybe just allow MLB to self implode and see if some new owners come along. Or hope the labor stoppage is long enough for a new league to form. Somebody want to start up a new Federal League? (I've got about six dollars and a Big Game lottery ticket.)

As much as I hate the saying, it is time to think outside the box. Baseball needs a plan to fix the labor problems long term, even if it completely redefines the game as we know it. I think the two parties are trying too hard to put a band-aid on the issues. I'm afraid that even a settlement would only serve to put off another confrontation.

[RockieBill]

I agree whole-heartedly, Trots. I like the idea of a Premier League. I've always thought we have 14 teams too many, anyway. Go back to two eight-team leagues, and with the rest, create a AAAA division of minor league ball.

The two eight-team leagues would have their own leadership, officials, and different work rules. Players would not be able to move from league to league, and inter-league play would be prohibited, except for All-Star and World Series play. Make the players indentured servants, so that they'll remain with one team forever. that way, we can truely root for our team, and not just for the logo. Man, I have got to stop living in the past.

When Congress repeals baseball's anti-trust exemption (which I think they will), all teams could go public. That way, players would have a real incentive to see their team succeed, as owners would pay them in stock options. But then again, this probably would backfire, as everyone would invest in the Yankees, and they would still have all the money. Maybe we could move all 30 teams to NYC.

As far as a new league, that shouldn't be a problem if MLB goes under. There'll be about 200 baseball venues out there looking for tenants. I don't think it would take long to get a new league going. Get rid of corporate ownership and cheapskate owners - return baseball to what it was meant to be: a pissing contest between rich guys that was all about "My team can beat your team!"

You're right on about the fact baseball needs a long term solution to all of the issues tearing up the game. If they patch it up just to limp along for a few more years, they'll be right back at it, and the fans will be the ones that have to put up with the consequences.