Play Ball! After months of idiocy, schedule is in place & camps open July 1st

NJDevs26

Once upon a time...
Mar 21, 2007
67,377
31,642
For the money and risk they face? No, they should definitely not be playing.

Yet they're stomping their feet in the mud because owners wouldn't deign to give them an extra ten games' worth of paychecks. They look silly, and the owners look silly for trying to bluff the union with a 60-game offer for the exchange of no grievance when they're going to impose a 60-game season anyway.
 

BKIslandersFan

F*** off
Sep 29, 2017
11,500
5,106
Brooklyn
Yet they're stomping their feet in the mud because owners wouldn't deign to give them an extra ten games' worth of paychecks. They look silly, and the owners look silly for trying to bluff the union with a 60-game offer for the exchange of no grievance when they're going to impose a 60-game season anyway.
Players look silly for standing up for themselves? Owners are not going broke, believe me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scandale du Jour

kanuck87

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
7,167
1,460
Players look silly for standing up for themselves? Owners are not going broke, believe me.

Right. I think both sides look kinda silly here, but the owners have made so much money at the expense of the players that it doesn't bother me that the players are holding their ground for what appears to be a rather small amount.
 

NJDevs26

Once upon a time...
Mar 21, 2007
67,377
31,642
Players look silly for standing up for themselves? Owners are not going broke, believe me.

They look silly because after using the rallying cry of just tell us when and where they negotiated again, Clark went back on a handshake agreement then declined a deal for more pro-rated games than the one they were complaining the owners were about to impose. Although he's not my favorite player in the world Trevor Bauer actually summed it up well here.





It feels like to me a lot of this from the players side is being driven by Boras. And the owners are their usual slimy selves, but that doesn't mean the players should get to abdicate all responsibility on this mess.
 

NJDevs26

Once upon a time...
Mar 21, 2007
67,377
31,642
Right. I think both sides look kinda silly here, but the owners have made so much money at the expense of the players that it doesn't bother me that the players are holding their ground for what appears to be a rather small amount.

They're holding their ground on ten extra games when they might not even be able to play 60 at this point anyway. They're haggling over 60 games and 70 games and fighting old and future labor wars when people are testing positive left and right in every sport and they haven't even agreed to safety protocols.
 
Last edited:

Marc the Habs Fan

Moderator
Nov 30, 2002
98,481
10,534
Longueuil
At least it would be 60 and not 50 games...

Still gotta believe it's at best a coin flip whether it even happens with the virus situation in the USA. I wouldn't be thrilled as a player to have a 7 day Miami-Tampa Bay trip right now.
 

LeHab

Registered User
Aug 31, 2005
15,957
6,259
At least it would be 60 and not 50 games...

Still gotta believe it's at best a coin flip whether it even happens with the virus situation in the USA. I wouldn't be thrilled as a player to have a 7 day Miami-Tampa Bay trip right now.

Will be interesting to see if they opt now to go with a bubble concept or stick with riskier default home stadiums.
 

Terry Yake

Registered User
Aug 5, 2013
26,824
15,308
60 games lol

just cancel the season. the WS champion won't be seen as legitimate anyways. with the terrible shape we're in with the pandemic i'll be surprised if this season is even played to be honest
 

IU Hawks fan

They call me IU
Dec 30, 2008
28,595
2,918
NW Burbs
"and there’s a desire to avoid 15-inning games and longer."

Then start the rule in the 12th or 13th! At least give the teams 2-3 innings to try to decide the game normally.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad