Seems less restricted than free agency in the US leaguesīosman also said that teams couldn't use limits on foreign players against players from other EU countries. If players got to play for teams they actually wanted to play for the continuity would likely increase due to job satisfaction and you’d likely see healthier teams and higher fan loyalty.ĮU court ruling that soccer players can sign with a new team after their contract is up without the new team paying a fee to the old one (when moving between 2 teams in the EU), says it was extended to other sports. Some people are club fans and some people are player fans. Can you imagine playing the minors in a city you love then getting moved up and transplanting to a city you hate? Especially if your talent was good enough to land you a job almost anywhere?įans are fans of teams irregardless of who’s playing for the team. I think we should let the sport be what it is and stop holding players to contracts that obligate them to play for teams they don’t want to play for. Once those strikes happened it was an eye opener to me that it was all about money from both sides. As a kid from the 80’s collecting cards and knowing almost every roster by heart, I loved the game and believed that the players played for the love of the game as well. It was applied just a few years ago in a case challenging the MLB's decision to block the Athletics' move from Oakland to San Jose.ĭirtydan, I think we learned in the late 80’s that players and the league didn’t give two shits about the fans. But baseball's bizarre antitrust exemption lives on. The published version of the opinion names 83 legendary players.Ĭhief Justice Warren Burger joined the majority, but specifically and explicitly declined to join Justice Blackmun's several-page-long ode to baseball.Īnyway, despite Curt Flood's loss at the Supreme Court, the reserve system died. except to add more names his list of baseball greats. When the dissenters circulated their opinions for review, Justice Blackman did not adjust his majority opinion in any way. This paean listed off literally dozens of luminaries from the history of baseball. In writing the Flood opinion, Justice Blackmun began with a flowery ode to baseball. A year later, he would write the majority opinion in Roe v. Kuhn was written by Justice Blackmun, who had recently joined the Court as President Nixon's third pick for the seat and seemingly dealt with a load of insecurities. There was still enough interest to boost attendance in the years following the introduction of free agency.įlood took his case to the Supreme Court, only to lose on the basis of an obscure and much-criticized doctrine: that the antitrust laws do not apply to the business of baseball. But it's important to note that not all of them were upset.
And fans started paying tens of dollars to go to the games instead of dollars. Players were getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars instead of tens of thousands of dollars.
Owners that were terrified of losing money on free agent contracts found themselves running teams worth tens of millions of dollars instead of millions of dollars. A team that was perpetually out of contention because they didn't have the farm system to develop players could all of a sudden buy a couple stars and contend. So what happened? Baseball improved dramatically.
#Curt flood made agency pro for free#
Fans bonded with them when they were young only to have them bolt when they became eligible for free agency, or fans got a chance to see a developed player when their team signed him in the offseason. Free agency enabled teams to "buy" players, which not only meant players for your team might not have started there and vice versa, but also big market teams were going to have a built in advantage.Īfter free agency, fans were essentially rooting for laundry. Previously they could watch an player's entire career in one city watch him develop, succeed, and ultimately succumb to the sport. They were concerned that free agency would usher in an arms race that pushed athlete compensation through the roof (it did, sort of) and they would be left with less money at the end of the year (they weren't).įans were upset because they were fans of the teams, and the players that played on their teams. They were in a position where financial innovation meant cutting costs such that they could increase profits without sacrificing interest. Ownership was upset because there was no longer an artificial cap on player compensation.
0 kommentar(er)
