A's may face Contraction?
by athleticsBB4life on Mar 2, 2009 9:56 AM PST
48 comments
The rumblings already have started. With three years to go in the basic agreement, baseball's owners are once again sounding the flashpoint "c" word - as in salary cap. But this past week, events in Oakland and Miami - where a new stadium plan for the A's was pronounced dead and one for the Marlins once again put on life support - may leave the owners no choice but to revisit another ominous "c" word: contraction.
Bill Madden continues...
baseball can't afford to keep dumping revenue-sharing money into hopeless franchises. Like just about every other industry in this country right now, baseball is going to have to take stock of its situation and downsize. There are too many teams in baseball anyway and it makes no sense to continue operating them in places that can't or won't support them.
0 recs |
48 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Empty threat alert!
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 2, 2009 10:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Seriously
1. Players union would never allow contraction; 50 fewer MLB jobs and hundreds less minor-leage jobs. Not a chance.
2. Owners trot contraction out every 10-15 years to get cities to agree to finance new stadiums; cities just need to hold their ground and not give professional sports teams anymore money. Bud Selig got paid $17+ million last year; MLB has a new money-generating network; I’m pretty sure there’s enough money floating around in MLB Land for them to help finance a new stadium…
"It is the mark of an educated mind to expect that amount of exactness which the nature of the particular subject admits." - The Not Big Aristotle
by Uncle Charlie on Mar 2, 2009 10:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In labor law jargon
a business decision to cease operations is almost always within the realm of “management rights” and management (in this case MLB) does NOT have to negotiate with the Union regarding the decision to terminate all or part of a business. However, MLB does need to negotiate with the Union over any “effects” its business decision has on employees (i.e. players). This means negotiating over transfers, benefits, recalls, etc. But even if there is “negotiation” once there is an impasse, MLB can implement its last proposal without the Union’s consent. So even though the MLB/Union relationship is unlike other Business/Union relationships, I don’t agree with your statement that “players union would never allow contraction” because legally the Union has no say in a final business decision.
Now whether the Union could put other types of pressure on management is a different story, but I’m just saying when it comes down to it, the Union cannot force continued operations just as much as the UAW can’t force Ford or GM to continue operating if it didn’t have the capital to do so.
As to the truth of the C word, I defntly. agree that’s it’s just a PR/bargaining ploy by management and a bunch of bs.
I got lost in cyberspace.
by oaktownmario on Mar 2, 2009 4:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The real C-word is Cash
Baseball is flush with cash and revenues are excellent. It’s not really analogous to the car industry or the greater manufacturing sector, where companies are living hand-to-mouth. Should revenues drop significantly MLB could make a claim, but most national revenue is locked in through the end of the CBA and beyond. It would take a precipitous drop in attendance and other stadium revenue to really affect the ledger. Even if revenues were flat through 2011, that still puts MLB at $6.5 billion. Hard to cry poor with that kind of performance.
The union and the league appear to have recognized this, enough to include a semi-acknowledgment in the CBA (PDF). In Attachment 8 of the CBA, both parties say that they haven’t resolved whether contraction is a “mandatory” or “permissive” bargaining item when the next CBA negotiations roll around. It’s yet another item to negotiate, though I agree that MLB will likely win out in the end if only on technical terms.
I don’t think the union’s the likely litigant. It’s a municipality threatening MLB’s antitrust exemption. Last time this came up, Minnesota’s Attorney General threatened a lawsuit and the combination of Paul Wellstone and John Conyers tried to push legislation through. It failed because of the Republican-dominated Congress. That’s not to say MLB doesn’t lobby Dems equally hard, but those looking for an antitrust challenge are more likely to have sympathetic ears on the left side of the aisle.
by vertig0 on Mar 2, 2009 7:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Saw this elsewhere yesterday, almost posted it, then...
…decided it was just a guy with no proof or evidence of anything who’s only looking to make a story.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Mar 2, 2009 10:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
While it's an outside possibility
I don’t see it happening, especially since neither the A’s nor the Marlins are in anywhere near as bad shape that the Expos were.
by athletics68 on Mar 2, 2009 10:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Aw, Stade Olympique, how I miss you
I think we paid like $25 for those seats… damn.
A's Strategy 2009: "Whoever is not hurt plays" - Syphon, 11/10/08
by schmifty on Mar 2, 2009 11:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And that was probably one of the highest attended games that season
I still have a photo saved on my other computer of a game from the last season where attendance was in 3 figures.
Also I love the nice line of folks around the expensive seats.
by athletics68 on Mar 2, 2009 11:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL! Good eye.
Also I love the nice line of folks around the expensive seats.
I could prove God statistically. Take the human body alone - the chances that all the functions of an individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity.
~George Gallup
by UncleLeo on Mar 2, 2009 1:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"Damn"? Don't you mean "zut!"?
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
by Nick on Mar 2, 2009 12:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was an Expos fan until the bitter end...
…and the A’s situation is not even remotely the same. Yes, both the current A’s and the early 00’s Expos play(ed) in dumps and have let a laundry list of very talented players coming into their primes go, and attendance could be better in Oakland, but where the A’s have strengthened their hand with broadcast arrangements over the last few years and are legitimately and fairly competently looking to compete, the Expos went entire seasons with no TV deal, had minimal TV exposure even when they had a deal, went an entire season with no English language radio, and completely threw up their hands in terms of competing on the field.
The ownership situation is also completely different. The Expos were owned during the 90’s and 00’s by three groups: 1) a gigantic and unwieldy consortium of local corporations, followed by 2) the same consortium with their interests diluted in favor of a new managing partner who proactively tried to kill the team and move it (Jeff Loria) and 3) MLB, who didn’t really much care what the baseball people did, but who were also totally intent on moving the team from day 1.
Given all of that, who can blame the people in Montreal for not showing up the last few years? There was a time when people showed up in Montreal. In the 80s, they had some of the highest gate figures in MLB and a nationwide broadcast deal on CBC in Canada. The consortium owners overplayed their hand on the TV deal, leaving them with scraps. But attendance stayed OK for a good long time after and despite that, and was even OK after the 1994 debacle. Just think about this – as recently as 1996, the Expos outdrew the Mets. The situation around the turn of the century just wasn’t as dire as it is made out to be now after the fact. They try to say that the attendance situation was untenable before ownership started actively trying to kill the Montreal market so that it looks like their actions were justified. It’s BS. Baseball quit on Montreal, not the other way around.
Montreal being a hockey town didn’t kill the Expos, the crappy stadium didn’t kill the Expos, it certainly wasn’t the people in Montreal who did it (although that’s who the media ALWAYS blames). It was incompetent and eventually downright hostile ownership that first inadvertently and then quite deliberately killed the team.
Contrast that with the A’s, and you don’t see the signs of an ownership group going out of its way to poison the water. The new TV deal is the best example that, whatever you think of Lew/Fishers and their motives, they are making a decent go of it. Contraction is NOT a possibility here.
by DickWilliams on Mar 2, 2009 4:12 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Excellent recap and info... thanks.
I could prove God statistically. Take the human body alone - the chances that all the functions of an individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity.
~George Gallup
by UncleLeo on Mar 2, 2009 7:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent post, thanks much
"There is a sense of tragic destiny associated with people who have large noses." --Bucky Wunderlick
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Mar 2, 2009 9:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, you should know
Mr. Williams. After all, you managed both the A’s and Expos. ;)
And isn’t it just like you to blame ownership. I bet you felt the same about Finley. Oh.
All kidding aside, very nice post and a great name to boot.
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Mar 3, 2009 1:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"Allow me to irresponsibly speculate"
“Now let me justify that speculation with arbitrary opinion.”
Your 21st Century reporters: Hey, it might be true.
Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.
by Joey C. on Mar 2, 2009 10:49 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Hey -- newspapers may be slower and cost more than the web -- but at least they write stupid shyte like this.
Dear Madden — if you’re so eager to be dead and buried, pls bring a shovel to your next column.
The meaning of life is not so much 'found,' as it is 'made.' --Opus
by The Dogfather on Mar 2, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bill Madden,
MLB propaganda mouthpiece. What a joke.
Attn: Madden: nobody believes you.
Cust is the new Jaha.
by johnjahafanclub on Mar 2, 2009 11:03 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
The worst-run franchises in baseball
make a TON of money. I’m so tired of this bull****.
I needed a team so I wouldn’t turn into one of the eighty million pink hat-wearing Bud Light-drinking mulleted idiots at Fenway.
by Vacafan on Mar 2, 2009 11:33 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
This Just In
“A’s face contraction.. wait a minute— there’s been a change….. Bobby Crosby faces contraction.”
by windyfelix on Mar 2, 2009 11:41 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
QOTY (so far)
"The magical goblins who live in my shower told me that Bobby Crosby's gonna have a good year this year" - The Reverend Billy Lard
by Gaijin_Suketto on Mar 2, 2009 2:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In favor
I’m in favor of contraction but the A’s should be the very last team to face that threat. Attendance is bad and there doesn’t seem to be a new stadium on the horizon anytime soon, but the A’s was a founding member of the MLB. To “contract” the A’s is sacrilegious to the game.
by batterbatter on Mar 2, 2009 12:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I think the powers that be know better...
I’m sure that they remember what happened last time they pissed off the ghost of Connie Mack… He came back as a zombie and bombed out six blocks of South Street.
This was a damn shame, because by that time, the A’s were in Kansas City… But try telling Zombie Connie Mack that!
"The magical goblins who live in my shower told me that Bobby Crosby's gonna have a good year this year" - The Reverend Billy Lard
by Gaijin_Suketto on Mar 2, 2009 2:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Correct me if I am wrong
But haven’t the A’s turned a profit in all or most of the last several seasons?
by MaineAthletic on Mar 2, 2009 1:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Rob Neyer says its a bunch of bunk . . .
. . . it’s a massive leap from “needing” a new ballpark to the c-word. For one thing, both the A’s and the Marlins have, in recent years, been competitive. We’re not talking about the St. Louis Browns here. We’re talking about one franchise that won 93 games three seasons ago and another that won 84 games just last year. I mean, seriously: these are the two teams that might disappear?
by EddieVegas_NRAF on Mar 2, 2009 1:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Neyer pretty much verbally bitchslapped Bill Madden
And Neyer is right too. There is little chance there will ever be contraction.
by athletics68 on Mar 2, 2009 3:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But, Bud Selig said...
…several years ago when contraction was first talked about… that on-the-field success was not a factor. He stopped there, but the implication was clear… the financial bottom line was all that mattered.
I could prove God statistically. Take the human body alone - the chances that all the functions of an individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity.
~George Gallup
by UncleLeo on Mar 2, 2009 3:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The A's were 24th in revenue in 2007 ... (2008 figures not yet available)
out earning six teams, including one with a new stadium (Pittsburgh)
Curiously, the top six in revenue were playing in stadiums built in the 60s or earlier …
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on Mar 2, 2009 4:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Let me guess. Cubs, Red Sox, Yankees, Mets, Dodgers and...
…Angels?
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Mar 2, 2009 5:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ding, ding ding ...
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on Mar 2, 2009 9:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did those off the top of my head
The first five all have fanbases that are always going to be there no matter what, and we know how much those teams are out there in terms of people wearing their hats, jerseys and so on.
The Angels were the only other team I could think of still playing in an older (though renovated) stadium and their recent success has led to more fans down there.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Mar 2, 2009 9:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, I don't doubt that....
…I’m just countering Mr Neyer’s point that the W-L record might be a saving factor.
Presuming Selig was telling the truth, of course. He’s always suspect in that regard.
I could prove God statistically. Take the human body alone - the chances that all the functions of an individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity.
~George Gallup
by UncleLeo on Mar 2, 2009 7:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL. Wear it Madden.
Rob Neyer 1, Madden 0.
Cust is the new Jaha.
by johnjahafanclub on Mar 2, 2009 5:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Reports of these A's' contractions are still years apart.
It could be decades before anything emerges from this process.
The meaning of life is not so much 'found,' as it is 'made.' --Opus
by The Dogfather on Mar 2, 2009 2:25 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
***giggles helplessly***
Of course, I watched Knocked Up for the first time last night.
Well played, sir.
by EddieVegas_NRAF on Mar 2, 2009 4:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank god – I was WAITING for somebody to make a pregnancy joke already.
A's Strategy 2009: "Whoever is not hurt plays" - Syphon, 11/10/08
by schmifty on Mar 2, 2009 4:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If these Contractions keep going on
who’s going to hold the baby?
Chicago. Where the Dead can Vote. Where the Voters of Tomorrow are found in the Obituaries of Today.
by Zonis on Mar 2, 2009 4:59 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
The relevant contraction here is ....
“won’t”.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Mar 2, 2009 6:57 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
My reaction?
FU Bill Madden. NY talking head.
by IM4Oakgal on Mar 2, 2009 7:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
The question that will not die.
And speaking of dead, I suspect I’ll be such in about 30 years, and the day I turn my toes up, the A’s will still be trying to figure out an option for leaving Oakland.
by gregorymark on Mar 2, 2009 8:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
This is absolute rubbish.
No way in hell the A’s get contracted….too rich of a history and to much good stuff coming through the system….not to mention billy Beane will save the planet!
Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox
by mrod on Mar 3, 2009 12:35 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Why on earth would they contract?!
That just doesn’t make any sense. Why just 80 miles up the road from Oakland is California’s capital city of Sacramento, which has a major league ready field and has led all minor leagues in attendance every single year since the River Cats moved here from Vancouver. In fact, Portland, Oregon and Vancouver have strong interest in major league baseball as do Charlotte and Nashville on the other side of the country. So, with so many cities wanting a team, why would they even think about shrinking the league? If you want my two cents on a more financially viable arrangement, move the A’s to Sacramento (hey, at least they are still in Northern California), move the Marlins and Rays to Portland and Charlotte.
by may7 on Mar 3, 2009 3:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Where does Sac have a major league ready field?
Last I checked they don’t have anything of the sort. Not unless they’re really good at hiding 32-34,000 seat stadiums up there in SacTown.
by athletics68 on Mar 3, 2009 4:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
More like
“A’s may eat Crosby’s contract”
which pretty much looks like it now
by fruitattack on Mar 3, 2009 7:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
