Shaikin: MLB’s wild pitch: Using fan-despised TV blackouts as leverage against players

by

Four years ago, MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred said he wished fans could easily watch any game, on any device, without restrictions. He described this as his biggest goal for improving the viewing experience.

Being truly fan-friendly means being able to watch your team anywhere – on TV or streaming – without frustrating blackouts or needing to subscribe to a dozen different services, many of which you won’t even use or can’t easily access.

Manfred, baseball’s commissioner, can solve this. The major league owners can solve this.

Does Shohei Ohtani have to solve this too?

That’s right. It started with the proposal the team owners gave to the players’ union last week.

The union presented its first proposal for negotiations last week, kicking off what could be a lengthy process with the potential to disrupt the 2027 season. Currently, management and the union don’t even agree on whether baseball is facing a serious problem, much less whether a salary cap is the solution.

Voices

Shaikin: As MLB proposes salary cap, Sacramento pursues team it might not be able to afford

Sacramento is hoping to get a new Major League Baseball team after the Athletics move, but the potential $4 billion cost could be a problem.

In a statement released last week, MLB spokesperson Glen Caplin acknowledged that many fans don’t believe their teams have a realistic shot at winning a championship.

During a press call on Monday, union director Bruce Meyer stated that the idea of a major crisis is not something they agree with.

Honestly, it’s frustrating seeing both sides dig in like this. The league claims a salary cap would actually increase overall player earnings, while our union firmly believes it would cost us hundreds of millions. And it’s the same with competitive balance – they cherry-pick stats to prove things are broken, and we do the same to show they’re not. It just feels like everyone’s arguing with numbers instead of actually trying to find common ground.

This discussion could drag on for months, so let’s table it and focus on the issue with the television coverage. The league and team owners handle broadcast deals with TV networks, so it’s unclear why the players need to be part of this conversation.

If team owners suggest fixing the issue of competitive imbalance by combining all broadcast money and dividing it equally, why not simply implement that plan?

Because the current contract with the players includes how revenue is shared, any adjustments to that arrangement need to be discussed and agreed upon with them.

The Dodgers currently share around $100 million from their SportsNet LA broadcast deal with other teams. If they were required to share all of it – which is about three times the current amount – what would motivate them to do so?

Look, the team owners are in a tough spot financially, and they’re clearly worried about the Dodgers – and teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, and Cubs – spending so much. Instead of scrambling for new income streams, which is a long shot, why don’t they just address the immediate problem? Let’s start by figuring out how to make the Dodgers whole after those payroll cuts – that feels like a more practical first step, honestly.

The proposed salary cap could allow the Dodgers to save roughly as much money through payroll reductions as they might lose from decreased local television revenue.

Caplin explained that the revenue sharing plan would help the twelve teams with payrolls currently below the proposed $171 million minimum reach that level.

“You have to give small market teams the resources to get to the floor,” Caplin said.

Meyer finds comments like that frustrating. He points to the San Diego Padres as an example: they once received money from baseball’s revenue-sharing program, but now contribute to it. Thanks to the leadership of the late Peter Seidler, the Padres invested in winning, and it paid off. They now have the second-highest attendance in baseball (after the Dodgers) and were recently sold for a record-breaking $3.9 billion.

“We want to encourage more San Diegos,” Meyer said.

The way the league tells it, not every owner currently has the ability to compete.

“Every team does have that ability, whether they concede that or not,” Meyer said.

As we said, the back and forth is going to go on for months. The blackouts should not.

Meyer explained that the goal is to make games accessible to as many fans as possible. They’re hoping for an end to broadcast restrictions so everyone can watch and the league can increase its earnings.

Voices
For Subscribers

Plaschke: Ryan Ward becomes an unlikely star in memorable Dodger Stadium debut

Ryan Ward finally got his chance with the Dodgers after seven years in the minor leagues, and he celebrated by hitting a home run in a 9-1 victory against the Phillies.

MLB blackout rules aren’t discussed with the players’ union. Instead, they’re worked out with TV and streaming companies. These rules were originally created to maintain the worth of deals with cable and satellite providers, but many of those providers are now struggling or disappearing.

According to Caplin, the league won’t lift blackout restrictions for individual teams, even if those teams no longer have cable or satellite broadcasting deals. The league is hoping to fix the blackout issue by selling a national media package that would remove the need to protect local broadcasting rights.

It’s still uncertain if a salary cap will be implemented, or if a dedicated media channel covering all teams will happen. However, after years of promising fans improvements, the league needs a better solution than a situation where commissioner Manfred might have to explain that blackouts will continue because star players like Mike Trout and Aaron Judge are unwilling to agree to a salary cap.

Read More

2026-06-02 13:31