Thoughts on how to get the Atlanta Braves back on field

The Atlanta Braves, MLBPA, and MLB are all running short on time to get going.

The general plan called for seeing the Atlanta Braves re-open some sort of restarted Spring Training during the second week of June, with the regular season beginning on July 1st.

Right now, the two sides should be locked in a room, hammering out the details of an agreement.  Trouble is, they are further apart now than they were in March.  In fact, they can’t even agree on what it was they agreed to in March.

The parameters from the owner’s side of things seem clear:

• Baseball isn’t that much a profit-making enterprise for most teams under normal circumstances.
  • Note that the reason the Atlanta Braves moved to the suburbs was specifically to develop new revenue streams so that they could afford to raise payroll and compete with other clubs better.
  • On multiple occasions, former GM of the Mets Steve Phillips has stated on his Sirius/XM MLB Network show that their payroll started each year from a ‘break-even’ point. If they did well, they made money.  If not, they cut back during the season.
• Playing non-playoff games without fans loses money for them.  Playing more non-playoff games loses more money… though to have a respectable season, they are willing to offer an 82 game season.
• This is also why the MLB wants an extra playoff round:  that’s where their revenue stream really begins.
  • Playoff monies are also the source of the bonuses that MLB offered as a carrot… to those teams making each round.  That idea wasn’t accepted well, though.
• Both sides had agreed to a pro-rated salary structure.  The MLB and owners’ “sliding scale” plan from this week digs out another 33% on average, with the top wage-earners getting ‘taxed’ at rates around double of that.
  • This because ownership believes that they had a clause built into the March agreement supporting additional concession requests based on fanless games and/or other economic factors that might arise.

From the players’ side:

• They believe their ‘give back’ was the pro-rated 50% reduction already agreed to.  They don’t accept the codicil claimed by ownership.  In fact…
• They want more in-season games to play to boost their pro-rated salaries above the roughly 50% level that 82 games would provide.  As noted, that’s a problem for owners.
• The players are believing that owner losses may be mitigated as fans may be allowed to return to stadiums later this Summer.  For their part, ownership has no guarantees that this can happen, or that the season can be completed at all.

From the perspective of the entire sport:

• If fans learn they can live without baseball, there’s a fair chance they will do so if no season is played in 2020.
  • This is especially true if other sports (NHL/NBA/NFL) get their people back onto fields.
  • Heck, it’s embarrassing that Korean baseball is the only baseball being seen on American TV today.
• Damage to the sport could be irreparable in such a scenario.  As has been pointed out, both sides should thus worry less about setting precedents for the next Collective Bargaining Agreement and more about getting to that date (Dec. 2021) with the sport still functioning in some manner.
• The “Billionaire owners” are that largely on paper alone.  None of them, for instance, could go out and write a check for $200 million from their personal accounts.  Their assets are locked up in their companies, their investments, and more.  So the idea that they could just ‘suck it up’ and pay everybody normally truly isn’t realistic.
• That said, the value of these clubs — all over a billion dollars apiece — would be destroyed without a season played.  It does no good to own an empty franchise.
• Likewise, players need to play for their own financial health — now and in the future.

A Compromise

Call me naive if you will, but here’s a humble proposal that should be enough to at least get both sides talking:

1. Each team must develop plans for staged fan “densities” to watch games in person based on 10%, 12%, 15%, 20%, and 25% capacities.  These would be implemented for the entire regular season, subject to local civil restrictions.
   • Plans could include waiver-signing individuals to sit together, thus helping the density.
2. The season would consist of the currently proposed 82 games, plus the expanded playoffs as already on the table.
3. Players would receive their pro-rated pay, minus 10%.  This 10% would be repaid if:
   • The season and playoffs are completed successfully.
   • Certain fan-attendance thresholds are met in stages.
   • Revenue targets are met for the playoffs.

There are shared risks involved in all of these points.  Both sides would have an interest in trying to assist in getting all goals met.

From the owners’ point of view, this could limit their losses and perhaps allow for an off-season this Winter that’s at least closer to normal… along with the experience of knowing how things went.

From the players’ point of view, there’s a reasonable chance they could escape while losing nothing more than what they’d already expected.

The sides clearly have a long way to go… but they are rapidly running out of time.  The public is also getting unhappy with progress.  These are not good indicators.  We want our Atlanta Braves back.

Heck, we know the sides don’t like one another right now… but they don’t even have to shake hands when they meet.