MLB teams are well-positioned to absorb losses, even substantial ones, during this emergencyGETTY IMAGES
The "general level of optimism that baseball will have an opportunity to proceed this year is growing in some corners," but the "more vexing issue surrounds the financial split of the billions of dollars that playing games would generate, and the talks about that are stagnant," according to Buster Olney of ESPN.com. MLB and the MLBPA are "currently at loggerheads about the financial terms of a possible return." This is where MLB "stands at the moment behind the scenes, with some of the rancor beginning to drift into public view, with folks on both sides increasingly concerned." At a time when MLB is "trying to find ways to connect with the youngest generation of fans, it would risk losing generations of fans, many of whom would never forgive them" if games are not played because of a fight over money (ESPN.com, 4/26). In Minneapolis, Phil Miller writes ending the first extended disruption of MLB that "wasn't about money might be even more difficult than it once appeared -- because of money." MLB teams are "well-positioned to absorb losses, even substantial ones, during this emergency." Both sides "have an argument to make about how much players should be paid." Still, it is "difficult to imagine, given how much the nation craves pro sports during this coronavirus pandemic, that the players or owners would risk a public-relations nightmare that a dispute over money would be" (Minneapolis STAR TRIBUNE, 4/27).
LEARN FROM THE PAST: In Cleveland, Terry Pluto wrote MLB should "turn their game into a made-for-TV sport with no fans in the stands." It is "important to have even a 70-game season." It can "run all the way through October with playoffs in November." The games "would be in Arizona, Florida or maybe a dome in Texas." Pluto: "No rush." Baseball "needs to make its sport as safe as possible" (Cleveland PLAIN DEALER, 4/26).
