Scott Autenreith
Dr. Brown
English 306
April 27, 2016
Major League Baseball Strike of 1994
Baseball: America’s pastime, the
game that brought families, cities, and America together. Everyone hears the
amazing stories of the Great Bambino, of Lou Gehrig, and of Ted Williams. They
hear of the “Shot heard round the world”, the curse of the Red Sox (ended in
2004), and Randy Johnson’s fastball vs. a rogue bird. Who knew that one season,
one disagreement, and one issue could change the outlook of the game forever?
The MLB (Major League Baseball) strike of 1994, not only involved the players
and owners, but the fans had a larger impact after than the contract settlement
itself. The strike of 1994 affected the loyalty of fans to baseball, the United
States (economically), and the image of the players.
Baseball lockouts were nothing out
of the ordinary. Since 1972, there had been five strikes and three lockouts
prior to the 1994 season (CNN). Two strikes resulted in games being missed but
neither had the magnitude of the 1994 strike (CNN). The players stood against
the owners as long as they could until a judge resolved the issue, but the
lasting effect of the fans viewpoints of the players was drastically changed
(BLS). The players went from heroes to zeroes in the eyes of the spectator
within a matter of months. The game of baseball was different, it was not
valued, and the fans did not respect the players.
This
situation has been very common in other sports leagues such as the National
Football League (NFL), when owners proposed lower salaries, as well as increase
the number of games played in the regular season. This created tension and
caused a lockout from the NFL Players Association. Lockouts between players
unions and owners have been a very common occurrence. In sports, there are
three parties that must all be satisfied with the business plan: the owners,
the players, and the fans. When one of those parties is not satisfied, they
will protest until what they believe is the best situation for them. In 1998, the
National Basketball League team owners locked out the players. This had to do
with losses in profits from more than half of the organizations. The owners and
players reworked contracts that pleased both sides. In 1995, it was the MLB
fans that protested. The way that fans protested was by not attending as many
games, as well as through emotion. Through the signs, constant boos, and lack
of interest, the fans made it clear how they stood about the lockout. This was
a rare occurrence when the fans were so against a strike (CMC).
The strike arose by a proposition of
incorporating a salary cap by the owners (BLS). Cambridge defines a salary cap
in any institution as a limit that any one person can be paid. In baseball, the
owners would be given a ceiling on the amount of money that they could give to
their players. As a result, it would limit the value of a player. The players
Union did not agree with the proposal so they decided to walk out on the
organization, the fans, and the chance at hoisting the World Series trophy into
the air.
In
1994, the Montreal Expos looked like the next great baseball dynasty. They were
loaded with young talent: Moises Alou, Larry Walker, Pedro Martinez, and
Marquis Grissom. They posed a serious threat to the Atlanta Braves, the best
team in the National League. By the end of July, the Expos seemed unstoppable.
They were developed through their minor league system, eager, young, and could
play stellar defense. Montreal was not the only city that was playing great
baseball that summer. In San Francisco, Matt Williams was hitting home runs at
a furious pace. Possibly on track of breaking Roger Marris’ record of sixty-one
home runs in a single season. In San Diego, Tony Gwynn, the Padres great right
fielder had been hitting so consistently that he had been able to keep his
batting average above .390. By August, it seemed that he might do what no one
had since Ted Williams in 1941; hit .400 in a season (PBS). But then,
developments off the field stole the spotlight.
Ever since the players had developed
a union in 1966, tensions with the owners had steadily escalated. There had
been a strike or a lockout every time they had had to negotiate a new contract.
Over the years, court rulings had given the players more and more power (CNN).
Now in the middle of the 1994 season, the two adversaries were embroiled in
their bitterest contract dispute yet. Desperate to unify their own ranks, the
owners, who had also been squabbling among themselves over revenue, had ousted
commissioner Fay Vincent, replacing him with one of their own, Milwaukee
Brewers owner, Bud Selig. Selig was certain that if baseball was going to
thrive, the owners had to work in concert (PBS). During the 1994 season, the
owners made a proposal they knew the Players Union would never accept. They
offered to share revenue with each other, but only if the Union agreed to a
limit on a total amount each team could pay its players; a salary cap. Tom
Glavine, a start pitcher for the Atlanta Braves said that, “We are ready to
play, but we are not going to play under the terms of a salary cap.”
(Billionaires vs. Millionaires). On August 12th, the players walked
out (PBS).
The baseball season was suspended indefinitely. The
owners were prepared to wait them out, confident that the Union would give in.
At this time, the players’ average compensation was $1.2 million dollars (BLS).
The owners Chief Negotiator, Richard Ravitch said, “all the owners are trying
to find out are how much more they want.” (Billionaires vs. Millionaires). Don
Fehr of the Players Association said, “this dispute arises because the clubs
could not get their own internal house in order and redefine their revenue
sharing rules” (Billionaires vs. Millionaires). Soon after, Bug Selig
officially stated that the remainder of the season and postseason were going to
be suspended. When the season ended after 117 games, Tony Gwynn’s batting
average was .394. George Will talked to Tony Gwynn and he said, “Tony did not
hesitate about striking. Tony the he was a Union guy, people sacrificed for me
and he will sacrifice for the future generation of baseball players. The
Montreal Expos were in first place in their division, with a six game lead over
the powerful Atlanta Braves (BLS). They would never find out if they were in
fact, the greatest team in baseball. That was the beginning of the end for the
Expos. The Expos would never play that well again. Their fans never came back.
Twelve years later, the city of Montreal would lose its baseball team.
During the offseason, the owners declared that
negotiation had reached an impasse, and that they would therefore implement a
salary cap unilaterally. They also outraged fans by starting to hire
replacement to put on the field in place of the striking major leaguers. In
March of 1995, federal judge Sonia Sotomayor found the owners guilty of
negotiating in bad faith. The players then agreed to go back to work under the
contract that been in effect before the strike began (BLS). In the end, the
owners had lost more than $700 million without winning a single concession. The
players had lost the respect of the fans did not understand why they had walked
out in the first place since many of the players were earning more in one week
than the average American made in a year. When stadiums opened back up in 1995,
many stadiums were half empty (Billionaires vs. Millionaires). The fans that
did come out seemed more interested in booing their hometown teams than
cheering them on. At Shea Stadium in New York City, fans ran onto the field and
tossed dollar bills at the feet of Mets players. In Detroit, they threw
bottles, cans baseballs, and lighters. All across the country, the games
biggest stars were met with choruses of boos. The loudest taunts were reserved
for players that had spoke for the Union, like Atlanta’s Tom Glavine (PBS). A
month into the season, attendance was down 20% (Cornell). Pedro Martinez, an
outstanding pitcher for the Expos at the time, understood why fans were upset
but he said that, “Baseball has an ugly face, and it’s the business part.
Negotiations are not pretty, but fans need to remember that we love to play for
them” (Billionaires vs. Millionaires).
The cause of the strike was an emotional roller
coaster for the owners and players, but mainly for the fans. For the players,
baseball was their job and they, as employees, were seeking more value.
Baseball was a way of life for some fans, and if baseball was not going to be
played, it was an issue. The players and owners use of logos carried throughout
their standstill. Meanwhile, the fans focused on the use of pathos during and
after the strike occurred.
When the owners and players went head to head against
each other, they both had their reasoning. For the owners, they sought the idea
of a salary cap for a number of reasons (BLS). First, it would evenly
distribute the competition. At the time, teams could spend as much as the owner
was willing. This meant that some teams spent way more than others did and in a
way, was a bit unfair. For example, ten years prior to the 1994 season, only
one team (Minnesota Twins) had a lower payroll ($25,000,000) than half of the
MLB teams and won the World Series (BR). The owners made it clear that they
wanted to spread out the competition. They were using the strategy of logos
because it was a cheaper expense to impalement a salary cap, and the cap would generate
more excitement for fans knowing that their team had an equal shot at a
championship.
The players also used logos in their stance against
the owners proposed salary cap. The idea of the salary cap would even out the
playing field but it would limit the value of the players’ income. As
employees, if the boss said they were going to limit how much a worker was
paid, chances are the employees would not react positively. Also, the Players
Union explained the lack of a chance for an “underdog” in the game if the
salary cap was implemented (BLS). For example, the Atlanta Braves had the
second highest payroll, only behind the New York Yankees, and Atlanta had an
amazing roster containing at least two Hall of Fame pitchers in John Smoltz and
Greg Maddux (BC). Their payroll exceeded $44,000,000. That was an average of
$1,800,000 per player. The team finished 2nd in the National East
and was destined to make a World Series attempt prior to the strike (BR). On
the other hand, the Montreal Expos were leading the NL East standings by a
landslide. What was the big deal behind this? Their team payroll was south of
$19,000,000 (BR). That was an average of $750,000 per player. This was a
Cinderella story. No one expected the Expos to be winning, let alone be ahead
of the talented Braves team by a landslide. The Expos were good for baseball,
and they were an inspiration. With a salary cap in place, the players argued
that a Cinderella run would not be significant in the game. When the strike
occurred, many fans were upset because the Expos had a chance to win a World
Series when few teams with such a low payroll could barely make it to the
eight-team playoffs.
The fans expressed a great deal of
pathos when responding to the strike. In a news story told by a station in
Virginia, they interviewed kids and adults and asked about the strike. When
they talked to kids, they simply asked them, “Should the players play for
free?” One kid responded with, “Yes. It’s just a game. It should not matter how
much you get paid”. Another boy said, “They should play for free because if
they love it, then they should want to do it without worrying about money”. Then,
the news station interviewed adults. The adults responded with negativity
against the owners and players. One person talked about the owners and players
expressing interest in more money and he said, “The question is, what is enough
money?” Another man was interviewed and he responded saying, “There’s something
about the business of baseball that takes out the pleasure of baseball” (WAVY-TV 10). This
directly pulled from the emotion of the fans. The strike created heartbreak for
some, and anger for others.
President
Clinton met with the press following negotiations prior to the start of spring
training in 1995 between players and owners that did not result in a contract
solution. He started off by saying that the real losers in the situation were
the spectators. The president ordered that they give back “our” national
pastime. Clinton then explained that he would send a bill to congress that
would contribute to resolving the strike. Also, this legislation would allow
the American people to be heard (WHTV). The entire speech was filled with
pathos. Explaining instances where it hurts the American people and that
baseball has become “who we are”. President Clinton then called on both sides
to reach an agreement. He hoped that they would work “expeditiously” in finding
a middle ground so that the American people, “do not lose another World Series”
and so the country can make up the “millions and millions of dollars lost”
(WHTV). When the President of the United States spoke he spoke more so as a fan
rather than a partner of the sides. He honed in on the emotion of the American
people that missed the game of baseball. He too wanted baseball back. Soon
after, congress did not pass the legislation that Clinton proposed, but because
the Players Union board sought injunction, the fight then went to court. Judge
Sotomayor ruled that the Players Union calls off the strike and that the owners
call of the lockout. Baseball was to resume in the near future.
In 1995, baseball was back. Because
of government action, the old collective bargaining agreement was put back in
place and legal action against the owners began. Players returned to playing
again, owners went back to making money again, but the fans did not come back.
Stadiums had 20% less people, boos were heard throughout from spectators, and
fans felt betrayed (BLS). The players made a decision to go on a strike for
reasons of their own. Little did the players and owners know, that the strike
of 1994 would be remembered as a time where respect for professional baseball players
was lost from the fans. This event changed the way that players were seen in
the eyes of the fans.
In the weeks leading
up to the 1994-95 MLB strike, fans let players and owners know they might not
return following the work stoppage. (AP file photo)
The fans made it very clear to the
players of their disapproval of the strike. In the image above, a fan wrote how
they felt about the strike in baseball terminology, “NO BALLS… ONE STRIKE…
WE’RE OUT!” (AP). The term, “NO BALLS… ONE STRIKE” refers to the pitch count in
an at-bat between the pitcher and the batter. The sign is a direct pun, related
from the game of baseball, to the players from the fans. The term, “NO BALLS”
meant the fans thought the players showed a lack of courage or valor. On the
sign, “ONE STRIKE” resembled that strike that happened between the players and
owners. The term, “WE’RE OUT”, referred to the fans as a whole were going to
stop supporting Major League Baseball. Those words resembled so much more than
fan-made sign at a game. It spoke about the emotions that fans felt when the strike
occurred. Threatening to leave, as fans, was a clear message to the MLB that
although a strike may have been beneficial for the players and owners, it was
not beneficial for the fans.
Lifetime Topps Project. January 25, 2012.
The sign above was directed towards the players on
the field. Growing up, being a baseball player was along the lines of being an
astronaut or being the President of the United States. It was a dream that many
strived to do. For those that accomplished that goal, it was a tremendous feat.
For those that did not, they became spectators of the sport. They became the
fans and most of them and always dreamed of the opportunity to play
professionally. After the strike occurred, the sign shown above represented
that the fans viewpoint of the players changed completely. In the fans minds,
the players went from childhood heroes to athletes solely seeking more and more
money. To dedicated fans, the game of baseball was more than a “game”. It was a
way of life. Many fans talked about it, read about it, and watched baseball as
if it were their religion. For fans, to watch their favorite players support
the strike would have been a slap in the face.
The players
went on strike, asking for more money. The fans made a point that if the
players were going to be greedy, then the fans were not going to be there for
them either. For the players who saw this sign, did it make them think about
the strike? Were the players going on strike because they wanted more money?
Or, was it because they did not want the owners to profit so much?
The fans negativity of the strike challenges the
identity of players as laborers within baseball.
The
data above, from ESPN Sports Business, is a clear understanding of the impact
that the strike had on the fans. Prior to the strike in June 1994, baseball was
just as popular as the National Football League (NFL). It was also clearly
above the National Basketball Association (NBA) and the National Hockey
Association (NHL), which had the lowest fan base in June. Not only did the
strike displease baseball lovers, but also about half identified as no longer
being fans of the sport. In fact, the percentage of fans was so low, that there
were less baseball fans than NHL fans (ESPN). America’s pastime had fewer fans than
Canadian culture in the United States of America. Shortly after the 1994
season, the fans picked up quite a bit hut it was not where it was in June, and
the NFL pulled far ahead when it came to fan percentage (ESPN).
The players took a hard hit from the fans for
standing up for themselves against the MLB team owners. The spectators booed,
yelled, and made signs directed at the players for being people that seemed to
only play for the money. Fans argued that baseball players should not worry
about salary issues because they “love the game”.
The
MLBPA went on strike in 1994 and although the fans responded negatively, it was
best for themselves as players. Major League players in 1994 signed contracts
to work for a team for a certain amount of time. They were being paid under the
agreements of that contract. For owners, their entire goal was to make the team
as profitable as possible. As a result, an opportunity to incorporate a salary
cap was a clear business plan that would make the organizations much more
money. The players realized that although the team would make money, themselves
as individuals would not see an extra dime of the new proposed collective
bargaining agreement. As laborers, they understood this and took a stand
against the owners. They played a sport that generated billions of dollars in
cash flow. Without the players, there would have been no interest for fans, and
without fans, the sport of baseball would not still be around. The players and
owners learned their lesson when it came to handling collective bargaining
agreements and have been more prepared when negotiating new deals. The players
were looking out for themselves as well making sure that they were being paid
fairly. When they realized they were not, they took a stand against the owners
and fought for what they thought was right.
Baseball
is America’s pastime for a reason. It has always been there for people. In the
movie, “Field of Dreams” J.D. Salinger’s character Terrance Mann says, “The one constant through all the
years, Ray, has been baseball. America has rolled by like an army of
steamrollers. It's been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt, and erased again.
But baseball has marked the time. This field, this game, is a part of our past,
Ray. It reminds us of all that once was good, and that could be again. Oh
people will come, Ray. People will most definitely come" (Umpire).
Baseball has gone through many ups and downs. In 1994, baseball had a severe
low point but since then, the fans came back, low payroll teams have won
multiple World Series’ and the value of the average MLB players has risen
exponentially (BLS). They were employees within an industry and they were
fighting for their rights. Inside the clubhouse may not be pretty, but baseball
is still baseball. Stories are still going to be told, kids will grow up
learning how to play catch, and magic will always occur in October. America
would not be the same without baseball. That is why it is our pastime.
Works Cited
"Salary Cap Definition
in the Cambridge English Dictionary." Salary Cap Definition in the
Cambridge English Dictionary. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2016.
"Pro Sports Lockouts
and Strikes Fast Facts." CNN. Cable News Network, 28 Jan. 2015. Web. 29
Apr. 2016.
"1994 Baseball
Payrolls." Baseball Chronology. Google, n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2016.
"1994 Atlanta Braves
Roster by Baseball Almanac." 1994 Atlanta Braves Roster by Baseball
Almanac. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2016.
"1994 Atlanta Braves
Batting, Pitching, & Fielding Statistics | Baseball-Reference.com."
Baseball-Reference.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2016.
Sometimeandplace. "The
1994 Baseball Strike." YouTube. YouTube, 26 Oct. 2009. Web. 29 Apr. 2016.
Luker, Rich. "Survey
Says: Twenty Insights from Poll's 20 Years." - SportsBusiness Daily. N.p.,
6 Jan. 2014. Web. 29 Apr. 2016.
Clintonlibrary42.
"Pres. Clinton's Remarks Regarding the 1994-1995 MLB Strike."
YouTube. YouTube, 28 Jan. 2013. Web. 29 Apr. 2016.
Di Pietro, Joe. "The
One Constant through All the Years, Ray, Has Been Baseball." The One
Constant through All the Years, Ray, Has Been Baseball. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Apr.
2016.
Burns, Ken.
"Millionaires vs. Billionaires." Dark Days. PBS, n.d. Web. 5
Apr. 2016.
Staudohar, Paul D.
"The Baseball Strike of 1994-95 : Monthly Labor Review: U.S. Bureau
ofLabor Statistics." U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. U.S. Bureau
of Labor Statistics, Mar.1997. Web. 05 Apr. 2016.
Yankwitt, Russell M.
"Buy Me Some Peanuts and Ownership: Major League Baseball and the Need for
Employee Ownership. CornellJournal of Law, Apr. 1996. Web. 5 Apr. 2016.
Caldwell, Terrence. "An
Overview and Comparative Analysis of the Collective Bargaining Agreements in
the NBA, NFL, and MLB." Claremont Colleges. CMC Student Scholarship,
2010. Web. 14 Apr. 2016.
Shapiro, Nina, and Jim
Brunner. "No School Monday for Seattle as Talks Continue in Teachers
Strike." The Seattle Times. Local News, 13 Sept. 2015. Web. 15
Apr. 2016.
