Players Reportedly Reject the 60-Game Proposal (UPDATES) | Bleacher Nation

Social Navigation


Players Reportedly Reject the 60-Game Proposal (UPDATES)

Chicago Cubs
[See Updates Below]

I no longer feel like I have a reasonable enough handle on all of the inputs – and all the constituencies – to say whether accepting the owners’ 60-game proposal, complete with giving up the right to a grievance, expanded playoffs, uniform ads, etc., is a good idea for the players. I think the way the negotiations have gone, I certainly have my opinions on how certain parties have proceeded, but now that we sit here today, I can’t say I know what’s best for the players.

So, they vote. And they vote right now:

Your guess is as good as mine, but I wouldn’t expect the players to accept this proposal, given everything that preceded it, unless there were fundamental changes to the offer over the weekend. We heard about very minor changes, but not significant ones.

If the players reject this proposal, then the ball is in the Commissioner’s court to mandate a season under the March Agreement. Doing so would come at prorated pay for the players, but without them giving up the right to a grievance, and without expanded playoffs. Everybody gets less than they want, everybody is even angrier, and everything is uglier.

It remains possible that, if the players reject the 60-game proposal, that the Commissioner actually won’t have enough support to go the mandated route – he reportedly needs to get 23 owners on board, and there are at least six to eight owners who may not want to go that route. If it’s eight, they could sink the entire season. That is still on the table at this moment.

And none of that even touches on the health and safety planning and management that would have to be dealt with in either case where a season is attempted.

UPDATE: The vote once again got bumped back slightly, though I don’t think anyone expects the outcome to be any different:

If the players vote this proposal down, I don’t quite see how the league mandates a short season and also thereafter gets player cooperation on health and safety (and also gets enough owners on board with a mandated season).

UPDATE 2: It’s pushed back again. They’re trying:

It’s crystal clear that the league knows the vote was going to fail, and they really, really don’t want that to happen (because of the ugliness that follows). But if you want the players to approve this deal and give up the grievance, then you have to have some more flexibility on the financial side of things:

UPDATE 3:  Teams are rounding up votes to give to their representatives at the moment, and the Cubs may wind up one of the few(?) yes votes:

UPDATE 4: Vote taking place now. I suppose something I should do a little better job about describing more precisely: although a NEW agreement has always been extremely, extremely preferable, it is true that the “mandated” season would, in fact, also be taking place under an agreement with the players:

UPDATE 5: There it is. As expected, players vote no:

Now we see what happens next.

UPDATE 6: The players have released a statement, essentially saying they didn’t want to proceed on this proposal and will instead accept whatever MLB decides to do under the March Agreement:



Author: Brett Taylor

Brett Taylor is the Editor and Lead Cubs Writer at Bleacher Nation, and you can find him on Twitter at @BleacherNation and @Brett_A_Taylor.