#MLB 2020 season is actually far from a done deal: Sherman

MLB and the players association are at the 1-yard line. So why do I see Malcolm Butler stepping in front of a Russell Wilson pass?

Because this is MLB. Because this is the players association. They tend to cooperate like oil and water. The Hatfields and McCoys were pals by comparison. When I heard Rob Manfred had flown Tuesday to Arizona to see Tony Clark, my first thought was, “My gosh, the commissioner went to have a fight with the head of the union.” Such is the environment that has been created.

Instead, Manfred went trying to put a personal touch on this, attempting to rekindle productive talks. Manfred left those meetings believing a framework was in place for a 60-game season in which players would receive full prorated pay. Optimism for a deal emerged from that, even a report of one in principle. That lasted in the air about as long as Wilson’s pass into Butler’s chest in Super Bowl 49 before the Players Association issued this terse statement: “Reports of an agreement are false.”

All that was missing were disclaimers about the existence of Santa, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy.

It is a reminder that the 1-yard line is not the end zone, especially when MLB and the players association are involved.

Later in the day, Manfred released a statement acknowledging the meeting with Clark and saying, “We left that meeting with a jointly developed framework that we agreed could form the basis of an agreement and subject to conversations with our respective constituents. I summarized that framework numerous times in the meeting and sent Tony a written summary today. Consistent with our conversations yesterday, I am encouraging the Clubs to move forward and I trust Tony is doing the same.”

Most folks saw that statement as a positive. I’ve seen this movie before. I went to work on that statement as if I were a character in “The Da Vinci Code.” There is the “could” before the “form the basis of an agreement.” There is the having to return to both constituencies, which are loaded with folks who see only the complete annihilation of the other side as victory. And there is the inclusion that the framework was summarized multiple times verbally and once in writing. That read like a clear allusion to the March 26 agreement in which MLB feels it had an understanding with the union that if games were played without fans that the players would take a pay cut.

The players association has disagreed with that interpretation. Thus, an actual agreement has been at the center of the nasty fight the two have waged since then about how the players would be paid.

And here is one other morsel for thought: Where was Clark’s statement about a framework that even “could form the basis of an agreement”? It is like that Tooth Fairy. It doesn’t exist.

So trust me, I want to cover baseball games. I badly want to stop using the word “prorated.” But a pandemic did not push these two sides to find common ground or temper their rhetoric. Neither did financial ruin across the country. Neither did wide protest against social injustice toward people of color. Neither did an actual agreement between the parties that is less than three months old.

Thus, forgive me if I need to see dried ink on a document before I begin to fully assess what 30-man rosters and 16-team playoffs might mean.

That MLB has moved to 60 games with full prorated pay rather than the 48-54 anticipated suggests that the two sides are closer to speaking the same language. But the total value of that deal, roughly $1.51 billion, equals what the players would have received in MLB’s last offer for 72 games at 83 percent if the playoffs were concluded.

The union’s last offer was for 89 games at full prorated pay. Will they accept 60 games because it met the principle of full prorated pay plus had additional financial perks including a $25 million postseason pool for the players and the universal DH? Would MLB agree to move more if that would get a deal or do they look at the framework as the deal? The distance between the two parties is not as great, especially when adding the benefit of turning off the spigot of negative public relations. Goodwill could close any remaining gap.

But these negotiations have left us good will hunting. Perhaps Manfred getting on the plane was a gesture that changes the narrative. After all, these sides really aren’t going to raise hopes of fans again and dash them just as quickly? Sometimes this feels like a zero-sum game designed to see what it will take to make even the most loyal baseball lover surrender.

Nevertheless, would you bet against 24 hours after reading these words you are reading others about the talks having ricocheted the wrong way again with rhetoric flying and grievances being threatened and the season in peril once more?

If you know the history — recent and long term — you know there is a big difference between the 1-yard line and the end zone. So everyone should hold off on the touchdown dance for right now.