Honestly, though this disagreement was more about Big Market Owners vs. the Small Market Owners. The players got drawn into the whole thing after the big market owners went to the players and told them that the small market owners are out to take their money. Granted, I do think they're over-paid and spoiled, but the players were just pretty much pawns that guys like George Steinbrenner pulled into the argument in order to make the players look more like the bad guys than the big market owners.
And, as strongly as I dislike the Yankees, George did kinda have a point when he pointed out that is it really his fault that he spends his own money, pays his own players, hires his own ballpark employees, hires his own staff and coaches and makes his own profit out of the quality of play that goes on on the field and the sellout crowds that go to his games? Then, the smaller market guys that will spend a lot of money to buy a team but then won't spend much money to bring good Free Agents to their team wants George to give them some money that's supposed to buy players to make the team more competitive, but the money could just as easily be pocketed. Steinbrenner said he doesn't mind giving the smaller market teams money to get better competition going on, but he does mind when the owners will just take the money he gives them and pocket it as profit with the same low-paid sorry team going out there.
Now, the A's and Twins have proven however that small market teams can be successful and play good quality ball. Since I'm a Rangers fan, I won't root for the A's, but go TWINS!!!!
Okay, I'm off my soapbox now -- y'all can string me up and hang me for slightly agreeing with George if you want.
In Him,
† <>< Stephen