12/17/2003 6:15 pm
I thought this was interesting since we were just talking about the Baseball Union at the last Page 3 board meeting.
|Jon - 2934 Posts|
Yeah I think it's safe to say that the Page 3 writers are a good step or so ahead of the sports scene.
Interestingly, the whole free agency/union thing was more or less started so that the players could control where they played and so they wouldn't be at the complete mercy of others in making that decision and others like it. So now the union tells a-rod that they are going to stop him from restructuring his contract and make it tough for him to play where he apparently wants to? Tell me how this makes sense!
I know the rationale behind it from their point of view, they want to keep market value high, but it seems to go against so much of what the union seemed to be based on.
|Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it.|
To me it seems fitting for a player who felt the need to sign for $250 MILLION. Maybe it is an attempt to prevent players being paid too much and then not being able to move to a different team.
Also, what happened to players playing for the same team their whole careers? I mean come one, Robin Yount played 19 years for the Brewers!!! 19 years. These days if you're with a team for 6 years or so you seem to be sticking around for a long time. Maybe I'm old school, but that's how I feel about that.
|Jeremy - 9040 Posts|
|Where talking about the players union here, there is no "get paid too much"|
|Scott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!|
|Aaah yes, my mind was clogged with the way things SHOULD be.|