Jan 21, 2013, 9:43 AM EST
Barry Jackson of the Miami Herald spoke to a source within the MLB Players Association who says that if Marlins owner Jeff Loria doesn’t increase team payroll in the coming months, the union plans to pursue the issue with commissioner Bud Selig.
This would not be the first time this has happened. You’ll recall a couple of years ago the Marlins, the league and the union entered a settlement in which the team agreed to jack up payroll after the union complained that it was pocketing copious amounts of revenue sharing money rather than spending it on players. With the latest fire sale bringing their payroll down to $35 million or so, the union believes the time is ripe to lodge such complaints again.
Jackson says, however, that the team would fight it and that it’s quite possible the league would side with the Marlins this time around. Mostly because they’re getting way less in revenue sharing now than they were a couple of years ago and because they stand to see revenue and attendance plummet going forward. Of course that’s because they’ve mismanaged themselves to the nth degree, but that’s neither here nor there for these purposes.
- THE YEAR IN REVIEW: HBT’s most commented-upon stories of the year 64
- The Yankees are treating Alex Rodriguez differently than they treated Derek Jeter. So what? 32
- Braves sign setup man Jason Grilli to two-year contract 13
- My Imaginary Hall of Fame Ballot 119
- Phil Hughes signs a three-year extension with the Twins 27
- The Padres have talked to the Phillies about Cole Hamels 23
- Why is John Smoltz a shoo-in for the Hall of Fame? 63
- Phillies GM told Ryan Howard they’d be better off “not with him but without him” 85
- Bud Selig will get a $6 million a year pension. Which is obscene. (145)
- My Imaginary Hall of Fame Ballot (119)
- Today’s specious anti-Mike Piazza-for-the-Hall-Fame argument (93)
- St. Petersburg City Council votes down deal to allow Rays to look for new stadium site (90)
- Phillies GM told Ryan Howard they’d be better off “not with him but without him” (85)