I see the point that MLBPA is making, but Snell went full retard with his argument. No one is going to be sympathetic on him having to pay taxes on his income.....
We know, in sports contracts, it all comes down to precedents set most times. As a kid I never understood the whole $$ aspect, and why wouldnt a player accept less to stay with a team he loves.
The unions dont want players to sign for anything less than top dollar, and it makes the players look extremely greedy, of which some are.
If ownership truly was trying to push this in the media then this is BS. They needed to have high level meetings with the union on the brevity of the situation. When it orginally came out I don tthink they expected to have zero fans in the stands for quite awhile.
This is a very weird time, and people need to sacrifice. I understand the owners point of view, and I understand the players being reluctant to accept it but this is unprecedented times.
There will have to be some compromise. BOth sides need to figure out their BATNA (best alternative to a negotiated agreement). Once they come to their determination, there is a thing called ZOPA, a Zone of Possible Agreement.
Both sides need to come up with their BATNA's, and then a mediator can loook at the possible ZOPA's and come to a conclusion, hopefully.