KeithStone53151

From what I read, I thought this was agreed to as well. A number of players have said the owners don't care about losing some games in April to get a better deal because they don't make as much money on April games. This certainly doesn't help any argument against. I don't know that I agree with this. I thought looking at the slot bonuses that overall there would be a fair amount more money in an international draft than the current system. And if they players issue is with the middle bonuses, that seems like a relatively easy fix to shift the money around. The international draft problem isn't something that can have t's crossed and i's dotted in a matter of hours, but over 8 months if both sides actually work on it regularly...it should be pretty darn easy to sort out for a 2024 start date. I suspect the primary reason many current players that came up through that system don't want to change it, is change is an unknown and the system worked for them. Or, maybe whatever corrupt agent/trainer that helped get them a big signing bonus as a 16 year old is in their ear telling them to adamantly oppose it.

CBT - 232, 234, 236, 240, 245 Prearb pool - 50m with 2m increases each year Boom, done, I effectively split up the last 0.000001% of your annual 10b. Let's play baseball.

Figures, Bob Nightengale adjusted his figures and actually the players moved a lot closer than he noted originally. With the CBT we're talking about hundredths of a percent of annual revenue at most, at some point literally split the difference and be done.

I'll add of the 2 most significant financial hurdles, the players will have much better luck getting an increase in the 0-3 pool than CBT. I love the idea of a guy like Burnes getting a big chunk of that bonus pool for having a monster season. If it's 70 million and based on something like WAR, he could easily get a few million bucks which is so much better for him than 600k obviously.

With this international draft piece, they need to basically just agree they are going to have conversations and mutually agree on something starting no earlier than 2024. Get an agreement on dollars, but the "how it works" piece needs to be kicked down the road. And from my understanding, I don't think the disagreement involves the dollars at all, it's the "how it works" part. I honestly believe both sides want to do something about the corrupt system currently in place but there are no shortage of opinions on how to do that and resolving that in a matter of hours is wildly unrealistic. It looks like MLBPA sent over a counter offer that moved maybe a smidgen from their previous offer. So while MLB moved almost halfway from the previous standstill, MLBPA closed the gap an additional couple percentage points. Not a great look honestly, and I'm generally in favor of the players here. I'm sure the most recent counter pissed off the owners a great deal and I suspect is going to result in multiple missed weeks and 150 games or less this season. That's my hot take/wildly uneducated guess.

"MLB basically treats deadlines like you're telling a five-year-old you're going to count to three until they'll be in trouble. One...two...two and a half....two and three quarter.....two and seven eighths...two and" I've always found this guy pretty funny...

So many who are comparing Rodgers/Love to Favre/Rodgers fail to remember that Rodgers actually sat for THREE years, and didn't really show franchise QB potential until his 3rd season. If the Packers choose to hang on to Love, we could very well have a very different perspective on this at this time next year. Also factor in year 1 was basically a lost development season due to COVID. I did not realize how darn young Jordan Love was until reading this today. Going into his 3rd year and he's only 23.

Based on details being reported by evan drellich, I think the deal might actually happen this time. The sides are so darn close now

Hey look at that, apple tv already found one. Excuse me, are you calling me stupid? That doesn't seem in line with what this forum is about. It's a conversation man, try to be an adult. Again, it's $5. A movie rental. Sorry if you unwisely spend every last dime on your cable subscription that you can't afford a one time cost of $5 to watch a game. Or it's just not as big a deal as you're making it out to be since you apparently don't mind missing a game. Maybe i could have changed my wording to "isn't smart with their money". Regardless, I wasn't calling you stupid but that comment seems like someone who maybe doesn't make the best use of their money. One step in this direction is certainly annoying, but it won't be as bad as when 5 years down the line we have 162 games split up among 6 different streaming services. Or 10 years down the line when it's split up among 12. That to me feels like where this is headed. Apple tv+ got their piece, I'm sure netflix and amazon and youtube and peacock and paramount plus and espn plus and disney plus and hulu and discovery and whoever else is going to want their little sliver as well. Eventually it will get annoying just figuring out what subscription service is carrying the game on a day to day basis. I think you'll see a lot more people complaining than just me in the gameday thread(assuming games happen) when the Brewers first friday game is being broadcast exclusively by apple tv+...which will be when people start getting impacted by this stupidity. I just realize already how principally wrong and just slimy this business deal is and called it out right away.

Hey look at that, apple tv already found one.

I have no problem with pivoting to streaming services. I would pay $20/month just to get all the Brewer games on one streaming service, literally for Brewer games and nothing else. What i have a problem with is having to have 6 different subscription services to get all the games, which seemingly is where live sports are headed. Everyone wants their sliver, because people are stupid with their money as i outlined above and it's a smart albeit slimy business decision for streaming services providers. MLB is never going to attract casual fans to watch games with this strategy. It's fine as a short term strategy but in due time baseball will get passed in revenue by NBA and NFL and these stupid decisions will be exactly why.

ESPN is still a subscription if you just got basic cable and it doesn't come with ESPN are you still able to watch? Majority of people in the US have multiple streaming services. Yes older people will have a harder time but this is obviously not being geared towards older people. MLB is trying to capture a younger audience who are going to be around for a lot longer than the older audience. MLB already has this older audience and the inconvenience of the older audience doesn't matter to MLB. The few games that it will impact on this audience is going to be minimal but the possible increase in new and younger fans from these services far out weights the negative from a dying off older audience. This is the reality here younger people tend to not carry cable and instead carry streaming services. This is all about getting to that younger audience. Couldn't disagree more, the only part i agree with is the bolded part. What matters to MLB is getting max dollars. They don't care about alienating fans, which is absolutely what they are doing with each stupid decision they make. Watching the Brewers play shouldn't be that complicated and shouldn't require 4-5 subscription services to get them all. For me personally, I plan on creating 4-5 phony emails and signing up for free trials and then cancelling after the game with a very nasty note in the "why did you cancel". So for me it's a minor inconvenience at best, I just find this principally wrong and very gross by both MLB and apple. The worst part honestly is that it'll probably work as intended for apple. So many people are so stupid with their money, there will be quite a bit of "it's only 5 bucks" and then sign up and then forget to cancel and the credit card keeps getting charged while they never use the service. Apple has probably run studies that enough people will begrudgingly sign up solely to watch their favorite team play 4 times(knowing that plenty will forget to cancel) that it's worth the whatever millions they paid to broadcast the games.

The subscription service part is the problem. ESPN is still cable, so tuning into espn instead of ballys is whatever for people with cable. Needing an app and then having to pay an extra subscription on top of cable to get the game is why it's gross. The closest similarity in major sports is amazon carrying thursday night football(which i also don't like but not as strongly as this new apple tv deal), but with that said if Packers play on Thursday the game is still carried locally. You're going to have a lot of older people confused with how to watch or why they have to pay extra for it when they have cable already. And again, it's becoming a trend. How annoying will it be when in 5 years, bally's is covering 50 Brewers games with apple tv getting 4, youtube tv getting 4, amazon getting 6, espn taking 3, paramount plus gets 2 Brewers vs Cubs games...it shouldn't be this complicated to watch a damn brewer game.

It's been really fun watching Mcafee dunk on ian rapaport and others people with "sources" on his show today. Check out his twitter for the best clips if interested.

It never fails to amaze me how difficult a supposed "spectator sport" makes it for the average person to "spectate". Right? My father in law still has regular cable and watches the Brewers consistently. It was quite the undertaking teaching him how to get games on youtube tv with the youtube app...that were free. So at least once he could figure out the technology aspect, hey he could still watch. It's going to be that much more interesting explaining to him he can't get Brewer games certain Fridays unless he pays for a service that he would literally only use to watch maybe 4-5 games a year. I blame both MLB and companies like apple tv for this. MLB is further alienating their fanbase, like do they wonder why nfl and nba revenues are growing so incredibly much faster than mlb? And then apple tv and other subscription only providers, thinking they can screw people into getting their garbage subscription service by paying the minimum amount for a small sliver of live events...it's a super toxic business strategy.

Rob Manfred just sounds like a putz at this point. No baseball, oh and if it happens we'll make it as hard to consistently watch your team as we can...

I'm sure we'll inevitably run into a discussion of which providers are carrying ballys sports...assuming the season actually happens of course. That said, I also noticed this tidbit from Jeff Passan today. Apparently Apple TV will be exclusively carrying 2 games on Friday nights. This is becoming a wildly annoying trend to not be able to watch certain games because of stupid tv deals. Imagine planning to watch a Brewers Cubs game on Friday but can't because you don't have apple tv. On a general sidenote, I've been running into the exact same thing trying to watch US men's soccer world cup qualifying. One game is exclusively on espn+, then three days later a game exclusively on paramount plus, then three days later on peacock. The trend is super gross and wildly frustrating for people that don't want to pay $200/month for every streaming service that exists.

Also, can we please sign desean jackson? If we're going to have Rodgers, we might as well have the right deep threat that can correctly utilize his best weapon.

I think about 90% feel this way. Nobody wants to watch the Jordan Love/journeyman vet show, but I think most feel like this team isn't winning a Super Bowl as constructed. It sort of feels like everybody wants to move on but not live through the painful part. It feels more shortsighted than most of what this team has done for the last decade. I completely agree with this, while adding that I personally am more than willing to go through the painful part right now. I wanted us to trade Rodgers last year for 3 1st rounders if we could get it. This move probably gets us the division, a top 3 playoff seed, and 0 NFC championship game appearances for each of the next 2 seasons.

Right, cap friendly i would assume means we aren't totally screwed for a year or 2 but the price will be catastrophic in years 3 and 4.

J/K he's back on a 4 year $200 million deal. https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/hes-back-233?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter Pat Mcafee tweeted out that he is indeed returning to GB on a cap friendly deal, but the 4/200 is not accurate. Despite the overwhelming numbers of reports, I'm inclined to believe that Mcafee isn't wrong.

MLB owners are reeeeeeally good at manipulating the media to their benefit.

Comparing leagues honestly isn't super relevant. What really matters is how much did revenue increase from 2012 to 2021 and did the players get a fair share of that increase. I was able to find an estimate of $7.5B revenue in 2012 and $10.7B in 2019. 2020 was an odd year and i can't find a 2021 estimate, and regardless it's unlikely revenues in 2021 are greater than 2019 considering partially filled stadiums. That's still a $3.2B increase in revenue of which the players got $0.9B or ballpark 30%. That's low considering NFL players get 48% of revenue and NBA players get 50%. MLB players get a lower percentage of revenue than every other major sport and it appears to be shrinking. I think part of the owners belligerence is each franchise probably lost money in 2020 and they aren't happy about it.

If this is how the community feels about that, great, I never even considered that aspect of it. And if the community wants it changed to "Yikes", consider it done. Definitely appreciate the willingness to make changes the community wants, that said I would probably not make a change like that because one or two people voice objection. Maybe take a poll or something. I for example would prefer it how you had it, but I don't want to derail your thread with a back and forth so I'll leave my reasoning out of the post. I know you've addressed plush's comments pretty thoroughly, but I just want to echo my agreement with them especially his comments on the mobile platform. Dealing with ads as you scroll is whatever, it's the popup stuff that is especially annoying and frankly is enough for me to not bother using it...especially considering how tough they make it to close them with their X placement.

Are you assuming they don't spend any money on parking/concessions? My guess is that it's probably at least $1 in concessions/parking per $1 in ticket price...probably more like 3:1. Don't forget merch...the stuff in the store is wildly expensive in my opinion, but considering it's always packed and there's constantly a line to buy stuff...most people don't agree and are happy to pay the wild prices.