Is it a bad thing that the 2020 MLB season could wind up as short as 50 games?
Who in their right mind would want less baseball this year? Well… owners apparently wouldn’t mind, given there’s a very slim chance teams will earn any revenue from fan attendance during the 2020 MLB season, which according to the owners (though still mostly unproven, due to their unwillingness to open their books) makes paying full pro-rated player salaries essentially impossible.
However, regardless of your thoughts on that bit of reasoning, maybe less baseball is in fact… better?
Though there have been no formal proposals constructed specifically for a 50-game season, last week’s sliding scale model brought forth by MLB, and the 114-game plan that was countered by the Players Union this week has certainly left the two sides in a bit of a stalemate. And according to the March agreement between the league and the union, the league is indeed allowed to mandate a shortened season if it sees fit.
Basically — according to The Athletic‘s Jayson Stark — there’s a certain amount of money available to spend on player salaries, leaving the 2020 season with two potential options: a severely shortened season (perhaps 50-60 games) featuring full pro-rated salaries, or a much less shortened season (82 or 114 games) with additional pay cuts. Obviously MLB and the MLBPA will still need to determine which way they want to go, but here are a few reasons why shorter could be better: