The W
Views: 99116629
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
21.9.14 2315
The W - Baseball - Restructuring
This thread has 25 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.89
Pages: 1
(1118 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (11 total)
DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 2 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.59
Even though it was mentioned in the Colon thread, I thought this deserved its own. A-Rod is willing to restructure his contract to defer money and allow the trade he WANTS to the BoSox to go through. Everyone agrees. But the damn players union has to approve ti and the idiot owners allowed a clause in thier agreement that they can do this. The only way the union approves is if the restructuring imporves the players lot in life.

Well the damn fools said no. If A-Rod agreed to defer his entire salary, he would be better off, IMO. Isn't going to a team that actually stands a chance of winning inproving the situation for A-Rod? Its this crap that really hurts the game and if the players union thought about it, this crap hurts the players. As an Indians fan for 40+ years, I would love to see A-Rod stay whee he is, but as a baseball fan I think these trades are good for the game.



Perception is reality
Promote this thread!
whatever
Lap cheong








Since: 12.2.02
From: Cleveland, Ohio

Since last post: 35 days
Last activity: 5 hours
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.74
On CBS Sportsline (http://www.cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/story/ 6932997), they propose a possible solution of having A-Rod leave the player's union in order to complete the deal without the union approval. Are there any rules in the bargaining agreement that only union players can play (barring a strike or such)?

As a fellow Indians fan, I am already bummed about the aborted Vizquel trade. To see this fall apart when all parties want it to happen is really discouraging. I can already imagine the Tribe saying, "Come see the hobbled guy we don't really want here!" Can you imagine the reactions for Ramirez, Garciaparra, and A-Rod if the trades *don't* go through?



I drove the Hummer. Sorry 'bout that.
Java
Goetta








Since: 2.1.02
From: Chandler, AZ

Since last post: 328 days
Last activity: 47 min.
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.00
I don't think there are rules saying you have to be in the union to play. I know that Damian Miller (and others, Rick Reed, I believe is one) is not part of the union because he was one of the replacement players during the lockout several years ago. It means they do not share in any of the licensing money, and cannot be on any licensed product.

An example would be the World Series T-Shirt from 2001 when the D-Backs won. Miller was not listed on any of the "licensed" apparel.
DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 2 days
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.59
    Originally posted by whatever
    On CBS Sportsline (http://www.cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/story/ 6932997), they propose a possible solution of having A-Rod leave the player's union in order to complete the deal without the union approval. Are there any rules in the bargaining agreement that only union players can play (barring a strike or such)?

    As a fellow Indians fan, I am already bummed about the aborted Vizquel trade. To see this fall apart when all parties want it to happen is really discouraging. I can already imagine the Tribe saying, "Come see the hobbled guy we don't really want here!" Can you imagine the reactions for Ramirez, Garciaparra, and A-Rod if the trades *don't* go through?


A-Rod has said he understands the concerns of the union and will not do anything to hurt the other players positions. Sounds good anyway.

Vizquel flunked his physical. Oh, Well. Would have helped the Tribe, although I have a soft spot for him as he gave us alot of good years, except for the stupid book.

I think the trades almost have to go through. Even if the rangers can't get hep with Manny's salary, they have to do this to free up money down the road. Hart isn't stupid and neither is management in Boston. The trouble is with the owners. The Rangers owner should just be glad someone is willing to pick up that idiotic contract.



Perception is reality
Big Bad
Scrapple








Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.54
Simple solution: the Rangers bite the damn bullet and deal A-Rod for Manny straight up. Hicks is trying to get greedy, when in reality he should be thanking his lucky stars that the Sox are willing to take that huge contract off his hands.



Rob asks Dave and Ric if they want to go backstage to play Hungry Hungry Hippos and Flair and Batista immediately bail. Flair wants to be Green. Man, EVERYBODY wants to be green. Except the girl in the commercials. She wanted to be pink. That either means that the ad agency was sexist or that she was communist. Of course Hungry Hungry Hippos is a rather capitalist game isnít it? No self respecting communist would play Hungry Hungry Hippos. Except Stalin. He LOVED Hungry Hungry Hippos. God, Iíve got no clue what the hell Iím rambling about anymore.-- Matt "Excalibur05" Hocking, Raw Satire writer extraordinaire

You know, I just can't call it the "WWE." I just can't. My body's rejecting it like a bad liver transplant.-- Bill Simmons, espn.com/page2
BigVitoMark
Lap cheong








Since: 10.8.02
From: Queen's University, Canada

Since last post: 3346 days
Last activity: 3255 days
ICQ:  
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.10
Without going off on a rant that would be better served on the politics board, this is just an example of organized labour throwing it's weight around for the aggrandizement of the union rather than protecting the interests of it's membership. Assuming Rodriguez is an intelligent person with competent representation, would he actually accept a deal that would make him, in his eyes, worse off? The fact that the union can say 'no, we know better than you, you can't change your own contract' is bogus.

As an aside, didn't Ryne Sandberg refuse to join the MLBPA back in the day?



The Toronto Maple Leafs are built for the playoffs. Of course they are. What Leafs fans don't realize, though, is "built for the playoffs" is just GM-speak for "short on skill, kinda slow, and can't score over an 80 game season".
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2798 days
Last activity: 2641 days
AIM:  
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.00
    Originally posted by Java
    I don't think there are rules saying you have to be in the union to play. I know that Damian Miller (and others, Rick Reed, I believe is one) is not part of the union because he was one of the replacement players during the lockout several years ago. It means they do not share in any of the licensing money, and cannot be on any licensed product.

    An example would be the World Series T-Shirt from 2001 when the D-Backs won. Miller was not listed on any of the "licensed" apparel.


I find that whole thing kinda fascinating. I recently learned that former Red Sox (and White Sox) Brian Daubach isn't in the union, either, and for the same reason. I'm sure guys like Miller and Daubach are just happy to have played professional baseball, given their relative talents.



Whitebacon
Boudin blanc








Since: 12.1.02
From: Fresno, CA

Since last post: 36 days
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.40
Hey now...Miller had the highest runners-caught percentage in the NL last year.



Retrovertigo
Tocino








Since: 20.12.03
From: Fairfield, OH

Since last post: 3753 days
Last activity: 3752 days
#9 Posted on
That would explain why guys like Miller, Daubach, most players imported from the Japanese leagues, and Framingham's own, Lou Merloni, usually have fictitious names in games like High Heat, then.

I guess I can understand not letting non-union players get a cut of the licensing haul, but why can't their names appear on the merch anyway? Is the union really that desperate for dues that they'd be that petty (and cause diehard gamers no end of frustration as they try to match up fake names to real stats so they can get the names right in their games)? Or is there some legal reason that anyone knows of?
Peter The Hegemon
Lap cheong








Since: 11.2.03
From: Hackettstown, NJ

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.20
    Originally posted by Retrovertigo


    I guess I can understand not letting non-union players get a cut of the licensing haul, but why can't their names appear on the merch anyway? Is the union really that desperate for dues that they'd be that petty (and cause diehard gamers no end of frustration as they try to match up fake names to real stats so they can get the names right in their games)? Or is there some legal reason that anyone knows of?


Let's put it this way...if I'm not giving you a cut of my next garage sale, can I still sell some of your stuff?

I don't think it's that the union won't let their names be used...I think it's that as long as the union isn't paying them, it doesn't have the rights to use their names.
BigVitoMark
Lap cheong








Since: 10.8.02
From: Queen's University, Canada

Since last post: 3346 days
Last activity: 3255 days
ICQ:  
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.10
I believe their non-inclusion in the union isn't simply a matter of not wanting to pay the union dues, but rather a case of the union specifically excluding those who undermined their efforts. Unionized workers tend to resent replacement workers in just about any walk of life. The union is in no hurry to extend the benefits that they "earned" over the years to those who worked against them.



The Toronto Maple Leafs are built for the playoffs. Of course they are. What Leafs fans don't realize, though, is "built for the playoffs" is just GM-speak for "short on skill, kinda slow, and can't score over an 80 game season".
Thread rated: 5.89
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: Ivan Calederon shot to death
Next thread: Darn Cubs
Previous thread: Report: J.Lopez agrees to terms with Orioles
(1118 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Apparently they did:
Related threads: Foulke to sign with Red Sox - Yikes - Schilling Traded To BoSox, Can Veto - More...
The W - Baseball - RestructuringRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.101 seconds.