Replies

1. How can anyone criticize the players for wanting a free market system? I'm not aware of a single instance where an owner had a gun to his head forcing him to pay out the big bucks.
2. If the clubs were losing so much money, they woludn't be paying out the big bucks.
3. Any government that shelled out $$$ for building new stadiums did so at its' (taxpayers) own risk---to the stupid don't go the spoils.
4.Is there a single one of us that would turn down a huge salary, of course not.
5. These negotiations are the same, in concept, as before, the owners want the players to agree to limit their salaries to protect the owners of small market clubs from large market clubs.
6. Several of the small market teams took their luxary tax receipts and gave their executives raises and didn't spend a dime on players.
7.Since Henry Aaron was my favorite player from the time I was a little kid, I hope the players strike this year and next so Bonds, Sosa and ARod never reach 756.

This is a rare time when I agree with the players union. In reality, this mess is more about unsuccessful owners vs. successful owners, so that one of the biggest militants wanting to tax high payrolls is Tom Hicks of Texas, who has one of the highest payrolls in baseball but has spent his money so poorly that he feels the only way he can compete is by going after owners (mainly Steinbrenner) who have spent wisely, albeit abundantly. As much as some people whine about what the Yankees spend, it helps to remember that Steinbrenner is by no means the wealthiest owner -- Disney owns the Angels, Chicago Tribune owns the Cubs, Anheuser-Busch owns the Cardinals, Peter Angelos the Orioles, Ted Turner the Braves, Murdoch the Dodgers, etc. Steinbrenner is just willing to spend more on getting the right players because he wants to win, not just maximize his profits.

And by the way, I can't believe this article gives the old "Abner Doubleday invented baseball" fairy tale the time of day. Even the people who invented that story in the 1930s didn't believe in it.