Here's something that's been bothering me concerning the lack of free agent movement by not only the Brewers, but all of MLB. I'm wondering if the owners are conveniently using the downturn in the economy as a cover for reinstating collusion back into Baseball
"Collusion in baseball happens when the owners work together to suppress the salaries of the players."
Can we assume that the economic recession is affecting all of the owners?
Does the Recession explain the Yankees not offering Abreu arbitration? Or the Diamondbacks not offering it to Adam Dunn? CC Sabathia's $160 million offer from the Yankees means we're clearly not operating in a market like the ones in the 80s, but if a majority of owners together, decide not to offer arbitration to players for the same reason, what's to say the same thing won't happen with free agency?
Actually, this whole situation brings up the question ...
Are MLB owners using the depressed economy as an opening to force MLB Free Agents to accept smaller contracts?
Explain the Yankees not offering Abreu arbitration? Or the Diamondbacks not offering it to Dunn?
Sabathia's $160 million offer from the Yankees means we're clearly not operating in a market like the ones in the 80s, but if a majority of owners simultaneously decide not to offer arbitration to people for the same reason, what's to say the same thing won't happen with free agency?
It seems to me that owners are claiming that it is the economy and the economic downturn that is why the free agent market is so slow.
But if one makes a public statement about not offering arbitration, or backs out of a negotiations citing a similar concerns, isn't that a veiled message to other owners to keep the salaries down?
It's way early to accuse anyone of collusion, but there are early signs worth watching as the off-season wears on through the recession.
OBTW...I'm Digging the New MLB 24/7 Network
Frank