CONTRACTION??

[jtownie]

Not sure if a post exists to discuss this but at The Cub Reporter there is an article about the owners having a 3-month window from April 1st thru July 1st to contract 2 teams without the MLBPA.

 

You can read it here: http://www.all-baseball.com/cubreporter/archives/021825.html

 

Very interesting stuff and somewhat surprising in that the media hasn't picked this up yet. April 1st is right around the corner. The Nats have no funding and the Marlins just had a huge fire-sale while talking to the remaining large markets that exist without a MLB team.

[imb]

The Twinkies are higher up on the contraction list than the Nats.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

The Twinkies are higher up on the contraction list than the Nats.

 

I think I started a thread maybe a week ago with an good article about the possible contraction of the Twins.

[jtownie]

The Twinkies are higher up on the contraction list than the Nats.

 

I think I started a thread maybe a week ago with an good article about the possible contraction of the Twins.

 

Yeah, totally missed that thread. Sorry about that. I was also wrong in that the media does seem to know about it, at least some in the media.

 

Hopefully we'll start to hear more about this issue. It could have a huge impact on 2007.

[Guest]

I remember the contraction stipulation was one of the more interesting points to come out of the last CBA. While it's true a lot of owners wouldn't mind ridding themselves of the likes of Loria and Pohald I doubt they'll contract any teams even though it's within their rights. It'll be time for a new CBA after this season, and if the owners decide to get rid of 50 MLB jobs you can be sure the players won't make the labor discussions fun for the owners. (Such as getting rid of the luxury tax and expanding team rosters to make up for the jobs lost on the dissolved teams.) If two teams are contracted expect the ugliest labor war since the '94-'95 strike.