For the money and risk they face? No, they should definitely not be playing.I used to think baseball players actually liked playing baseball, that was pretty stupid of me.
For the money and risk they face? No, they should definitely not be playing.
Players look silly for standing up for themselves? Owners are not going broke, believe me.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.
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.
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.
Billionaires and millionaires can't agree on who deserves more of their loyal fans' money.
Will be interesting to see if they opt now to go with a bubble concept or stick with riskier default home stadiums.
You think the owners care about you? The players aren’t the ones making it expensive to go watch games.“If your dad ever can't pay the rent and needs money, go ask Mickey Mantle. See what happens. Mickey Mantle don't care about you. Why should you care about him?”