Major League Baseball and its players have begun discussing a way to restart the 2020 season following the coronavirus delay. The owners approved a plan that would restart baseball in July and include a contentious revenue sharing salary system. Negotiations with the Major League Baseball Players Association began with a meeting last week.
Among the many complicated questions that need to be answered: How will players be paid? When and where will games be played? When will the season start and how many games will be scheduled? What will rosters look like? How will the postseason work?
The most crucial and perhaps most difficult roadblocks involve the safety measures needed to prevent the further spread of the coronavirus: What precautions would be in place to keep players and their families from being exposed? What happens if a player falls ill?
Here are the latest updates.
MLB rejects 114-game proposal, signals willingness to implement short season
On Wednesday, the league rejected the union’s 114-game proposal and made it clear that it would not send a counterproposal. MLB reportedly remains open to conversations with the union about how to restart a season without fans but it has also made it clear owners and commissioner Rob Manfred are prepared to move forward with unilaterally implementing a schedule as short as 50 games.
In not making a counterproposal, the league is essentially saying it is done negotiating unless the MLBPA is willing to move off its demand for receiving full salaries for games played. The same March 26 agreement that the players are citing for prorated salaries also gives the commissioner power to determine season start and length. Thus, the league could cut player salary costs while still honoring the terms of that agreement by simply playing fewer games.
A 50-game season allows the owners to pay roughly 30 percent of a typical season’s agreed-upon salaries, without having to successfully renegotiate how players are paid.
It's unclear how seriously MLB is considering such a short season or if it's primarily a tactic to demonstrate the ability to extract economic concessions without the union's sign-off, but it is at least posturing at moving ahead with a plan that doesn't involve a successful negotiation. - Hannah Keyser
MLB could impose a 50-60 game season
Major League Baseball appears to have another plan it could use to restart games while tamping down salaries. Under this plan, according to ESPN’s Jeff Passan, the league would pay players their prorated salaries, but limit the number of games to 50 or 60.
The union said it has not received as of Monday afternoon, but here are the details, as reported by Passan:
Major League Baseball intends to propose a shorter season in which they would pay players a full prorated share of their salaries, sources told ESPN. The league believes the late March agreement allows it to set the schedule, and that this would fulfill players’ pro rata desire.— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) June 1, 2020
The potential season Major League Baseball envisions would run somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 regular-season games, sources told ESPN. The exact number is being considered, but the aim would be to return in July. It would be less than half of players’ proposed season length.— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) June 1, 2020
An important clarification to this news: MLB will continue discussing alternatives to the shorter season with players but believes that its March agreement with players allows it to mandate a shorter season and is prepared to use that option in the absence of a deal with MLBPA.— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) June 1, 2020
The biggest issue remains money, and a shorter season allows owners another way to control costs. The players would keep the prorated contracts they agreed to in March, which has been a sticking point in negotiations, but the league would schedule fewer games.
In a 50-game season, for instance, players would get about 31 percent of their salaries. The previous proposal from the league, which players universally panned, called for a sliding scale of pay. Under that plan, players who made less money would get closer to a prorated salary while the game’s highest earners would make between 20-40 percent of their salaries.
Passan says the league will still consider other plans with the MLBPA, but could use the March agreement to mandate a short season if no other middle ground is found. That makes this seem like MLB’s nuclear option in negotiations with players, that if the two sides can’t agree to something else, the league can force these terms on players.
If or when this comes to the players as a formal proposal, it will surely spur another round of back-and-forth between the two sides, like we saw last week. The question is whether players will see it as meeting in the middle or another proposal that tilts too far toward the interest of ownership.
Union delivers economic counterproposal to MLB
The MLBPA delivered a proposal to restart the season to the league on Sunday afternoon suggesting a longer, 114-game regular season that would begin in late June and run until Oct. 31. The union’s proposal also included the potential for salary deferrals in the case of a canceled postseason, Yahoo Sports confirmed.
Players expressed extreme disappointment with a Tuesday proposal from MLB that sought to play a 78- to 82-game season with players taking pay cuts on a sliding scale that went beyond prorating their salaries. The union proposal instead seeks prorated salaries, as it contends was agreed upon in a March deal between the two parties.
The union proposal also includes these stipulations:
Deferrals of $100 million should the postseason get canceled. That would reportedly apply to contracts of $10 million or more.
Opt-outs for any players who do not wish to play amid the coronavirus pandemic, with “high-risk” players receiving their salaries while others would continue to receive service time.
A $100 million advance to players during the “spring training” that would lead up to the shortened season.
Two years of postseason expansion.
According to MLB Network’s Jon Heyman, ownership reaction to this proposal echoed the union’s negative reaction to earlier ideas, with a source calling it a “non-starter.”
MLBPA weighing response to MLB, awaiting key documents
The players association will take its time before deciding how or when to respond to MLB’s economic proposal, The Athletic’s Ken Rosenthal reported Friday.
Rosenthal says the MLBPA sent a memo to the players outlining its thought process. The memo says the MLBPA is awaiting “key documents” from MLB that would support their call for more salary concessions from the players.
In an memo to players today, the MLBPA said it is weighing the timing and substance of a potential response to MLB’s proposal that “sought additional paycuts of more than $800M that it contends are necessary to make it economically feasible to play games without fans.” 1/2— Ken Rosenthal (@Ken_Rosenthal) May 29, 2020
The MLBPA’s memo to players also states, “Importantly, the union still awaits key documents from MLB that would support the dubious financial distress claims the league has made in its attempt to force the additional givebacks from players.” 2/2— Ken Rosenthal (@Ken_Rosenthal) May 29, 2020
Previous reports indicated the players were preparing a counter proposal that would seek a longer season schedule and full prorated salaries. The expectation was that offer would reach the table by week’s end.
Now though, it seems the players won’t budge until the owners open their books or back off their sliding scale proposal that would pay lower-paid players closer to their half-season prorated salaries and force top-paid players to accept 20-40 percent of their normal salary.
To say there’s no momentum toward a resolution heading into the weekend would be an understatement.
Players to propose longer season, full prorated salaries
After expressing disappointment in response to MLB’s economic proposal, the players are preparing to make a counter proposal, The Athletic’s Ken Rosenthal reported late Wednesday.
Once finalized, the players are expected to propose a schedule of longer than 82 games, according to Rosenthal’s sources. In addition, the players will seek their full prorated salaries.
The union wants the league to honor the March agreement stipulating that players would be paid on a prorated, per-game basis, a collective cut that already would exceed $2 billion if only half of a 162-game schedule is played.
The additional cuts the league proposed in an 82-game schedule would increase that amount by 33 percent. The players prefer a regular season in the 100-game range because they would make more money by playing additional games.
The players were clearly disappointed by the league’s economic proposal submitted on Tuesday. Insulted might be a better term based on how some players responded. How the league responds now will be telling. Chances are they won’t find a longer season too appealing, but the hope for baseball fans is that it does spur more direct conversation rather than the back and forth we’ve seen through the media.
Max Scherzer slams MLB’s economic proposal
The gap between MLB and the MLB players association seemed to grow even wider Wednesday.
One day after MLB proposed a sliding-scale economic plan, the players huddled to express disappointment and disdain for the offer, MLB Network’s Jon Heyman reported.
Leading the charge publicly was Washington Nationals pitcher and MLBPA player executive subcommittee member Max Scherzer. In a strong statement posted to Twitter, Scherzer shredded the league’s proposal while noting there’s no reason why players should "accept a second pay cut" to play a truncated 2020 season.
Scherzer’s words echo the tenor of the union’s formal response on Tuesday. In a released statement, the MLBPA said it was “extremely disappointed” in the economic proposal, while also stating the sides remain far apart of health and safety issues as well.
As Heyman notes, some have viewed the economic proposal simply as part of the negotiating process. Others see it as a league mission to divide the players. If the latter is more on point, the plan seems to be failing so far. Perhaps it’s even pushing us further away from a 2020 season.
With time running short, progress needs to be made sooner than later. At this point, a quick resolution doesn’t seem possible.
MLB drops revenue sharing, proposes new model to pay players
Major League Baseball has dropped its divisive revenue-sharing model to pay players for a potential 2020 season, as the league and the players union try to make progress toward restarting baseball, but the new proposal doesn’t seem much more favorable to players.
The union has previously said the revenue-sharing compensation model was a non-starter, so in a proposal regarding player pay on Tuesday, the league went a different way.
The league is now proposing a sliding scale that would pay lower-paid players closer to their half-season prorated salaries while higher-paid players would take a larger pay cut. Some of the league’s top-paid players would make 20-40 percent of their normal salary, according to reports.
For example, according to ESPN.com’s Jesse Rogers: A player making $35 million in 2020 would make about $7.8 million. A $10 million salary would turn into $2.9 million and a player making $1 million would make about $434,000.
Couple more notes: About 65% of all players make a million or less. Minimum this year is $563, 500. That player would make $262K under proposal.— Jesse Rogers (@JesseRogersESPN) May 26, 2020
And, remember, players were advanced some salary whether they play or not.
The players union’s response? The MLBPA told Yahoo Sports it was “extremely disappointed” in the proposal. The sides also remain far apart on health and safety protocols, the union says, but will meet with players to determine next steps.
Major League Baseball told Yahoo Sports: “We made a proposal to the union that is completely consistent with the economic realities facing our sport. We look forward to a responsive proposal from the MLBPA.”
The two sides had already agreed to a prorated salary structure in March, and the union has said that should be the model. It would pay players slightly more than 50 percent of their normal salaries. But owners have tried to restructure salaries for the shortened season, first floating the revenue-sharing idea and now shifting to this sliding scale.
Players, such as New York Mets pitcher Marcus Stroman, took the league proposal as a sign there may not be baseball in 2020.
This season is not looking promising. Keeping the mind and body ready regardless. Time to dive into some life-after-baseball projects. Hope everyone is staying safe and healthy. Brighter times remain ahead!— Marcus Stroman (@STR0) May 26, 2020
As Jon Heyman of MLB Network reports, there’s also a belief from the players’ side that a sliding scale could be an attempt to divide the players union. Still, this remains the first proposal in what is expected to be a week of busy negotiations between the two sides.
MLB to deliver new economics proposal
Discussions between Major League Baseball and the MLBPA will be on hold throughout Memorial Day weekend. However, they will return with a potentially significant development on Tuesday.
According to The Athletic’s Evan Drellich, that’s when MLB plans to deliver a new economics proposal to the MLBPA.
Major League Baseball plans to deliver a new economics proposal to the Players Association on Tuesday, sources said.— Evan Drellich (@EvanDrellich) May 22, 2020
The players already agreed to prorate their salaries based on the number of games played when the sides negotiated in March. Now MLB is looking for further concessions, which would include a 50-50 revenue sharing plan or essentially a salary cap.
So far, the players have bulked at any such suggestion. If MLB moves forward with the 50-50 revenue sharing proposal, things could get even more contentious.
Union sends notes on MLB health and safety plan
The MLBPA sent the league its response to the health and safety plan for restarting baseball. We don’t much about what exactly is in the union’s notes, but know that they cover the following topics, per Evan Drellich of The Athletic:
MLBPA has delivered its response to MLB’s health protocols. Includes notes on:— Evan Drellich (@EvanDrellich) May 21, 2020
• Testing frequency
• Protocols for positive tests
• In-stadium medical personnel
• Protections for high-risk players and family
• Access to pre-, postgame therapies
• Sanitization protocols
The league sent players a 67-page proposed health and safety manual previously, so this amounts to the players union’s feedback. Some of the tidbits in the MLB plan included banning high-fives and spitting, keeping lockers six feet part, various testing and temperature-taking protocols and stopping players from showering at the ballpark.
That last part, according to Joel Sherman of the New York Post, illustrates the type of back-and-forth we can expect here. Players want to be able to shower at the stadium, especially before going on the road, Sherman reports, and want to use equipment like hydrotherapy pools.
None of that is the big issue, though. Money will be the sticking point. But Sherman says the two sides are hoping to agree on the health/safety side first, because if they can’t do that, then the money doesn’t matter.
Debating through media, but no next meeting set
Words are flying between MLB and the players association over the need to renegotiate financial terms for a shortened season, but the next step toward deciding whether baseball will actually return in early July is unclear.
As of Wednesday afternoon, there was no next meeting scheduled between the two parties.
Instead, any “negotiations” appear to be taking place through public statements. The New York Post’s Joel Sherman published an internal MLB email Tuesday that appeared to back up the league’s contention that it was understood that any attempt to play without fans in the stands would be cause to renegotiate the economic framework of the season.
Though the league presented detailed health protocols to the players association, any resumption of play would also need economic details hammered out. The league has indicated it will need to negotiate lower player salaries to make playing in empty ballparks economically feasible. The union contends that a March agreement, struck shortly after league activities were suspended for the coronavirus pandemic, decided the matter, setting prorated salaries based on games played.
As Yahoo Sports’ Hannah Keyser detailed last week, the conflicting interpretations of that document’s language could be a determining factor in whether baseball’s team owners (who stand to lose great sums of revenue) and the players (who would be playing through the pandemic’s risk) can forge a path toward playing this year at all.
Sherman’s report sparked a response from the union. In a statement to the Post, MLBPA senior director of collective bargaining Bruce Meyer dinged MLB for not making a formal economic proposal — despite reports it envisioned a revenue sharing model. He also questioned the owners’ need to reduce player salaries beyond the prorated pay and said MLB has not provided financial documents the union requested. Several public analysts have raised doubts about whether an MLB presentation, reported by the Associated Press, distorts or overstates the financial losses owners would suffer in the shortened, empty-stadium season.
MLB responded bitterly to Meyer’s statement, also through Sherman’s article, saying that the players association “publicly rejected a potential league proposal to share all revenues equally with players before such a proposal was made to it.”
MLB proposes medical protocols to players
The league has presented a 67-page document outlining its proposed medical protocols, The Athletic’s Ken Rosenthal reports. Here are some of the key points from the report, beginning with the testing guidelines.
Regular testing for all players, managers, coaches and umpires, plus a limited number of essential staff who come into close proximity with players.
MLB will monitor developments in testing and attempt to use the least invasive and fastest methods that are commercially available without adversely impacting public health needs.
All players must undergo “Intake Screening” upon arriving at spring training.
Individuals who are tested must self-quarantine at his or her spring-training residency until the results of the testing are reported. Any individual who tests positive is instructed to self-quarantine and gets treated accordingly.
Asymptomatic individuals are monitored daily through symptom screens, temperature checks and frequent testing.
Before entering a club facility, individuals will get their temperatures checked and complete a short symptom and exposure questionnaire.
Any individual who reports COVID-19 symptoms or a temperature above 100 during a home screening may not enter club facility, and instead must immediately self-isolate and be directed to team physician.
Each club must develop procedures for isolating, transporting, testing and treating individuals who display potential symptoms.
The document also touches on other key issues, which include as spring training and travel protocols. Here are the key takeaways there.
Spring training is limited to 50 players per club.
Workouts staggered throughout the day to avoid overcrowding.
Report dates will be staggered and the camp structure will be divided into three phases led by return of pitchers and catchers.
Minimum standards will be maintained for cleaning and disinfecting the clubhouse and other areas of the facility.
Communal water and sports drink coolers/jugs are prohibited.
Here’s a big one that’s been discussed a lot.
No spitting, using smokeless tobacco and sunflower seeds in restricted areas.
Meetings will take place virtually when possible.
Lockers should be six feet apart. For some facilities, that may require erecting a temporary clubhouse or locker facilities in unused stadium space.
Showering will be discouraged at club facilities.
Rather than an exchange of lineup cards, lineups will be placed into an application.
Non-playing personnel must wear masks at all times in dugout.
As for travel:
Ride-share services like Lyft and Uber are discouraged.
Whenever possible, teams will be expected to fly into smaller airports.
Members of the traveling party are not to leave the hotel unless they receive advance approval from team personnel.
On the road, the players should essentially isolate at hotels.
It’s also noted that MLB plans to develop a COVID-19 education program that the players, umpires and all team employees will be required to complete before receiving access to the facilities.
These are just a few brief snippets from the extensive proposal. The players have not yet given a formal response.
Players request financial documents from MLB
Lawyers for the MLB Players Association have asked Major League Baseball and its owners to submit financial documents as they seek more details into the industry’s finances, the Associated Press reported Thursday.
The players had previously agreed to accept prorated salaries based on the number of games played in 2020, but a new battle is brewing after the owners approved a new proposal that asks the players to accept a 50-50 split of revenues. Players union executive director Tony Clark quickly called the proposal a "non-starter" and labeled it the latest bid by the owners to slyly institute a salary cap.
Before agreeing to any deal, the players clearly want more information regarding the league’s revenue and whether the potential losses this season would make a significant reduction in salary necessary.
Tampa Bay Rays pitcher Blake Snell stated Wednesday night that playing for anything less than his full $7 million salary is “just not worth it.” The 2018 Cy Young award winner cited safety concerns amid the coronavirus pandemic and the previous agreement regarding prorated salaries.
Snell added: “For me to take a pay cut is not happening, because the risk is through the roof.”
Health and safety issues have been leading the negotiations so far, but based on the league’s proposal and the players’ response, the money issue may end up being the most complicated hurdle.
Owners propose non-rapid testing, limited quarantines, and no spitting when MLB returns
Health and safety measures were the primary topic of discussion when MLB and the MLB Players Association met on Tuesday, and now we have some idea of what measures MLB proposed to the union. According to Jared Diamond and Louise Radnofsky of The Wall Street Journal, MLB presented the union with proposals on testing, what would happen if someone tested positive, and other social distancing procedures that could be put into place.
Testing: According to The Wall Street Journal, MLB proposed that players, coaches, umpires, and other staff be tested more than weekly, but less than daily. MLB reportedly won’t use rapid-response tests for routine tests of game-involved personnel, since the rapid-response tests (which give results in 1-4 hours) are harder to come by. MLB would use those tests on those who are showing symptoms or have been exposed.
The bulk of the league’s routine tests would deliver results in about 24 hours. MLB believes it can execute these tests, which would be done on upwards of 1,000 people several times a week, without taking tests away from frontline workers, and would not continue with this plan if tests for frontline workers would be impacted. All personnel would also be expected to submit to frequent temperature checks and report any symptoms immediately.
Positive tests: Despite the risks in testing people less than daily with tests that take 24 hours to develop (which could lead to widespread exposure and an outbreak), MLB does not want a positive test to shut down the league once it restarts. The Wall Street Journal reported that a player who tests positive would be removed from the general population, but his teammates would not be required to quarantine. Instead they would be tested and “watched closely.”
Social distancing: Bullpens, locker rooms, training rooms, treatment rooms, and other team facilities would be rearranged to accommodate social distancing. Spitting in dugouts (or anywhere else) would no longer be allowed. High-fives and mound visits would also be banned. Relievers might sit in the otherwise empty stands when not warming up.
MLB is also reportedly exploring options for players, coaches, and umpires who are older, immunocompromised, or have pre-existing conditions, since that makes them more susceptible to contracting COVID-19. It’s possible that they would be allowed to sit out the season due to the elevated health risk.
First MLB, union meeting focuses on health and safety measures
In the first formal dialogue intended to address the details of opening the baseball season in early July, MLB and the players union spent much of Tuesday addressing health and safety protocols and contingencies as they relate to the coronavirus, according to sources.
While the league did present an economic status report, sources said, it did not propose a new salary structure for players. That proposal is expected to seek a 50-50 revenue-sharing agreement between owners and players. Union leaders have said they would reject such a proposal and instead abide by the terms of a late-March agreement, which they believe established a system of prorated salaries.
That showdown did not come to pass Tuesday.
Many players have publicly expressed concerns for themselves, their families and others — coaches, staffs and stadium workers among them — if they were to return ahead of the national curve for testing and care.
The league expressed its preference for playing regular season games in teams’ home ballparks. Alternative sites would be chosen in the event certain cities were not in a position to host those games.
Several active players, members of the union’s executive subcommittee, participated in Tuesday’s video conference. The timing for the next meeting has not been established. - Tim Brown
Owners approve proposal to restart MLB in July
Major League Baseball owners took the first step Monday in restarting games this summer. They voted to approve a proposed plan that would start “around Fourth of July weekend without fans,” according to the Associated Press, with spring training starting in mid-June.
Getting owners approval is only half the battle. The players union would also need to agree to this plan. MLB officials are scheduled to present their plan to the MLBPA on Tuesday. That part of the negotiations is expected to be more difficult, as a proposed revenue-sharing system is reportedly expected to be a sticking point between the union and ownership.
Other details in the proposed MLB plan, according to the AP:
• Each team would play about 82 games against teams in their own division and nearby interleague opponents.
• 14 teams would make the postseason, as there would be four wild card teams in each league.
• The All-Star Game in Los Angeles would likely be canceled.
• Teams would play at their home ballparks unless not allowed for medical or political reasons. Their back-up locations would be spring-training stadiums or neutral sites. The Blue Jays may have to play in Florida instead of Toronto, the AP reports.
• A universal DH is a possibility under the plan.
• MLB rosters would expand from 26 to 30 players and teams would likely have an NFL practice squad-like collection of minor leaguers to pull from.
Again, all this needs to be approved by the players union, so this is only the first step in a negotiation toward restarting MLB.
The biggest hurdle will be finding an agreement on player pay. The AP reports that owners want players to get a 50-50 split of revenues during the regular season and postseason. Such a revenue split would be new for baseball and could complicate negotiations.
How much MLB revenue comes from attendance?
Reports indicate that MLB will propose a revenue-sharing plan for the 2020 season, in which players would receive a certain cut of the league’s revenue in a one-year iteration similar to the NBA or NFL’s usual system.
A source told Yahoo Sports’ Tim Brown that Major League Baseball will enter the negotiations with numbers showing that fans attending games typically accounts for 51 percent of local revenue and 40 percent of the league’s total revenue.
Some numbers MLB will be wielding as it heads into negotiations with PA: Per source, gate and gate-related revenue accounts for 51 percent of local revenue and 40 percent of MLB's total revenue. That's regular season. So, that's where a lot of this will start.— Tim Brown (@TBrownYahoo) May 10, 2020
This would be used as evidence the league needs to alter a March agreement to pay players their salaries prorated for the number of regular season games that occur.
How we got here
The league canceled spring training and suspended its season on March 12 as the coronavirus crisis gripped the country. Later in March, MLB and the players association agreed to a series of stipulations to temporarily deal with the financial ramifications of the upended season. Players secured assurances about service time, which determines when a player reaches free agency. The league advanced portions of player salaries, a sum that won’t exceed $170 million, and that players will keep if there is no season. In return, the players agreed not to sue for full salaries in the event of a total cancellation.
That March agreement also laid out a plan for prorated player salaries in a shortened season, but reports indicate the league is seeking a different salary structure now that fans are unlikely to be permitted for the foreseeable future.
The 2020 MLB draft was cut to five rounds in another cost-cutting measure. The union rejected a proposal for a 10-round draft that capped the number of undrafted players teams could sign.
Multiple plans for restarting the season have been discussed internally and speculated about externally. Some ideas floated concepts for playing the season at spring training sites or in a small number of local hubs to limit travel and exposure, but the most recent reports on league thinking indicates it prefers to host games in home stadiums.
More from Yahoo Sports: